🔗 Share this article

The family members of a Jewish pair have brought a case against New York's Metropolitan Museum, claiming that a Van Gogh oil painting was looted by the Third Reich.

Origins of the Dispute

As stated in the legal filing, the Stern couple acquired the piece, titled Olive Harvest, in the year 1935. A year after, they were forced to flee their home in Munich prior to World War II.

The complaint argues that the institution, which purchased the painting in 1956 for one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars, should have known it was almost certainly confiscated property. The family are now seeking the return of the canvas along with financial restitution.

In the decades since the war, this stolen artwork has been repeatedly and secretly trafficked, bought and sold in and through NYC, alleges the lawsuit.

Forced Emigration

The Stern family fled from Munich to the United States in 1936 with their six children due to the oppressive Nazi regime. Nevertheless, they were unable to bring the artwork, which was created by the celebrated artist in the late 19th century.

Before they left, the Nazi government designated the masterpiece as a German cultural asset and banned the couple from taking it abroad. Following authorization from a regime representative, a representative assigned by the authorities disposed of the piece on the Sterns' behalf. Yet, the money from the sale were held in a blocked account, which the Nazis later confiscated.

Subsequent Ownership

By 1948, or not long after, the painting arrived in the United States and was purchased by a wealthy American, a member of the Astor family. Eventually, it was transferred through a gallery to the museum, which then transferred it to wealthy Greek businessman the magnate and his wife, Elise Goulandris, in 1972.

Basil and Elise set up the BEG in the late 1970s, which runs a institution in the Greek capital where the artwork is currently on display.

Court Allegations

The foundation and a family member of Basil Goulandris are identified in the suit. The lawsuit alleges that the defendants and its related entities have hidden and obscured the masterpiece's history and whereabouts from the family.

Currently, the defendants continue to conceal how and when the institution came into control of the artwork; the couple's ownership of the masterpiece from 1935 to 1938; and the truth that the regime confiscated the artwork from the family, coerced the family into parting with it via a trustee, and took the money of the sale.

Previous Legal Action

The Stern heirs submitted a similar complaint in CA in recently, but it was dismissed in 2024. An appeal was also dismissed in May 2025.

Museum's Response

The legal action argues that the museum's acquisition of the artwork was sanctioned by the museum's expert, the museum's curator of European paintings and a renowned specialist on art theft during the Nazi era. Rousseau and the Met must have known that the artwork had likely been looted by the regime.

The museum responded that it is committed to its longstanding commitment to handle Nazi-era claims.

A spokesperson stated: Not once during the museum's possession of the artwork was there any evidence that it had earlier been possessed to the heirs – in fact, that information did not become accessible until a long time after the painting left the Met's possession.

The Met's sale of the artwork met the Met's guidelines for removal from collection – in particular, it was noted that the piece was judged to be of lesser quality than additional artworks of the comparable nature in the collection. While The Met respectfully stands by its view that this piece entered the holdings and was deaccessioned legally and well within all rules and regulations, the institution is open to and will review any additional details that emerges.

Goulandris Statement

A lawyer representing the foundation said: The Goulandris Foundation is a renowned institution in Athens. The effort to litigate and defame the organization and the Goulandris family in the United States upon misleadingly incomplete allegations was earlier rejected, multiple times. We are certain it will be a third time.