🔗 Share this article

The family members of a Jewish couple have filed a lawsuit against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, claiming that a Vincent van Gogh canvas was seized by Nazi forces.

Origins of the Dispute

According to the court documents, the Stern couple bought the painting, titled Gathering Olives, in the year 1935. A year after, they were obliged to escape their dwelling in the German city of Munich prior to World War II.

The legal action argues that the institution, which acquired the masterpiece in the mid-1950s for a significant sum, ought to have been aware it was likely confiscated property. The heirs are now requesting the restitution of the artwork along with damages.

In the decades since the war, this Nazi-looted painting has been often and discreetly exchanged, purchased and sold in and through NYC, states the legal filing.

Family's Flight

The Sterns fled from the city of Munich to the United States in 1936 with their offspring due to persecution by the Nazis. Nevertheless, they were unable to bring the Van Gogh piece, which was painted by the renowned Dutch in 1889.

Before the family's emigration, the regime declared the artwork as a German cultural asset and forbade the Sterns from taking it abroad. Following authorization from a regime representative, a representative appointed by the authorities sold the piece on the family's behalf. However, the money from the sale were deposited in a blocked account, which the Nazis later seized.

Subsequent Ownership

Around 1948, or not long after, the artwork arrived in the United States and was acquired by Vincent Astor, one of America's wealthiest people. Later, it was exchanged through a gallery to the Met, which then sold it to wealthy Greek businessman Basil Goulandris and his spouse, Elise Goulandris, in 1972.

The Goulandris pair set up the Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which runs a gallery in Athens where the masterpiece is currently on display.

Claims and Defenses

The foundation and a living relative of the magnate are listed as respondents. The filing states that the defendants and its associated organizations have hidden and obscured the artwork's provenance and location from the plaintiffs.

To this day, the Goulandris Defendants continue to obscure the circumstances the BEG came into ownership of the Painting; the couple's ownership of the artwork from several years; and the facts that the Nazis looted the artwork from the Stern family, forced the Sterns into parting with it via a regime representative, and seized the money of the sale.

Previous Legal Action

The family initiated a similar complaint in California in the year 2022, but it was dismissed in the following years. An further action was also rejected in May 2025.

Museum's Response

The lawsuit states that the museum's acquisition of the painting was sanctioned by the museum's expert, the institution's specialist of European paintings and a leading authority on Nazi art looting. Rousseau and the Met were aware or ought to have been aware that the Painting had probably been looted by the regime.

The Met responded that it takes seriously its historical dedication to resolve claims from the Nazi period.

A spokesperson stated: Not once during The Met's ownership of the painting was there any evidence that it had previously been owned to the heirs – in fact, that knowledge did not become available until a long time after the painting left the institution's holdings.

The Met's sale of Olive Picking met the institution's rigorous standards for removal from collection – specifically, it was documented that the artwork was deemed to be of lesser quality than other pieces of the similar kind in the holdings. While the museum respectfully stands by its view that this artwork entered the holdings and was deaccessioned properly and well within all rules and regulations, the museum invites and will examine any new information that comes to light.

BEG's Response

William Charron acting for BEG commented: The institution is a renowned institution in Greece. The action to litigate and defame the Foundation and the defendants in the America upon inaccurate and partial claims was already thrown out, twice. We are convinced it will be once more.