🔗 Share this article

The family members of a Jewish couple have brought a case against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, asserting that a Vincent van Gogh art piece was looted by the Nazis.

Origins of the Dispute

According to the lawsuit, the Stern couple bought the artwork, titled Olive Harvest, in the mid-1930s. The following year, they were forced to flee their home in the German city of Munich just before World War II.

The suit states that the museum, which purchased the artwork in 1956 for a significant sum, should have known it was likely stolen property. The descendants are now seeking the restitution of the painting along with financial restitution.

In the decades since WWII, this plundered piece has been often and discreetly exchanged, acquired and disposed of in and through New York, alleges the lawsuit.

Forced Emigration

The Sterns escaped from their Munich home to America in 1936 with their offspring due to Nazi persecution. However, they were prevented from taking the artwork, which was painted by the Dutch post-impressionist in the late 19th century.

Before they left, the Nazi government classified the artwork as German cultural property and prohibited the Sterns from bringing it with them. Once approved from a Nazi official, a agent appointed by the authorities disposed of the artwork on the couple's behalf. But, the money from the transaction were placed in a restricted account, which the regime later took.

Post-War History

Around 1948, or soon after, the painting entered the United States and was acquired by a wealthy American, a member of the Astor family. Eventually, it was exchanged through a commercial outlet to the Met, which then passed it on to prominent shipowner Basil Goulandris and his partner, Elise, in 1972.

The Goulandris pair founded the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which operates a gallery in Athens where the masterpiece is currently shown.

Claims and Defenses

The institution and a surviving nephew of the magnate are named as defendants. The lawsuit claims that the Goulandris family and its associated organizations have covered up the artwork's provenance and current place from the family.

Currently, the Goulandris Defendants continue to conceal how and when the institution came into possession of the Painting; the Stern family's ownership of the artwork from several years; and the reality that the Nazis looted the Painting from the heirs, coerced the couple into parting with it via a regime representative, and seized the proceeds of the deal.

Prior Cases

The descendants filed a related lawsuit in the state of California in the year 2022, but it was thrown out in the following years. An appeal was also rejected in spring 2025.

The Met's Position

The legal action argues that the Met's purchase of the painting was approved by Theodore Rousseau Jr, the Met's authority of Old Masters and a leading authority on Nazi-era looted art. The institution and its expert must have known that the masterpiece had likely been seized by Nazis.

The Met issued a statement that it prioritizes its ongoing pledge to handle claims from the Nazi period.

A spokesperson remarked: Not once during the institution's custody of the painting was there any evidence that it had once belonged to the heirs – indeed, that knowledge did not become accessible until many years after the artwork left the institution's holdings.

The museum's disposal of Olive Picking met the institution's rigorous standards for removal from collection – in particular, it was documented that the piece was deemed to be of lower caliber than other works of the same type in the collection. Even though The Met upholds its position that this artwork entered the holdings and was removed lawfully and well within all standards and procedures, the institution invites and will examine any further evidence that is discovered.

Foundation's Defense

William Charron representing BEG commented: BEG is a esteemed foundation in Athens. The effort to litigate and defame the Foundation and the defendants in the America upon misleadingly incomplete allegations was already thrown out, multiple times. We are confident it will be a third time.