Metropolitan Museum Confronts Lawsuit Over Allegedly Nazi-Stolen Van Gogh Painting

The heirs of a Jewish spouses have initiated legal proceedings against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, asserting that a Vincent van Gogh oil painting was stolen 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 mid-1930s. The following year, they were compelled to leave their home in the German city of Munich prior to World War II.

The legal action contends that the institution, which purchased the masterpiece in the 1950s for a significant sum, ought to have been aware it was probably stolen property. The family are now seeking the repatriation of the canvas along with damages.

In the decades since the war, this stolen artwork has been frequently and covertly traded, acquired and disposed of in and through New York, claims the lawsuit.

Family's Flight

Hedwig and Frederick Stern escaped from their Munich home to America in the late 1930s with their six children due to Nazi persecution. However, they were prevented from taking the artwork, which was painted by the renowned Dutch in 1889.

Prior to their departure, the regime classified the painting as a German cultural asset and banned the Sterns from bringing it with them. After obtaining permission from a Nazi official, a representative designated by the authorities sold the artwork on the Sterns' behalf. However, the funds from the sale were held in a blocked account, which the Nazis later took.

Later Transactions

Around 1948, or soon after, the canvas entered New York and was purchased by Vincent Astor, a member of the Astor family. Later, it was sold through a gallery to the Met, which then sold it to Greek shipping magnate Basil Goulandris and his spouse, Mrs. Goulandris, in 1972.

Basil and Elise founded the Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which runs a institution in the Greek capital where the artwork is currently shown.

Claims and Defenses

The foundation and a surviving nephew of Goulandris are identified in the suit. The legal action claims that the Goulandris family and its associated organizations have hidden and obscured the artwork's provenance and location from the heirs.

Even now, the Goulandris Defendants continue to conceal the circumstances the foundation came into control of the artwork; the family's possession of the Painting from the mid-1930s; and the facts that the Third Reich stole the Painting from the Stern family, coerced the couple into disposing of it via a trustee, and took the money of the deal.

Earlier Lawsuits

The family submitted a similar complaint in California in recently, but it was rejected in 2024. An further action was also denied in recently.

The Met's Position

The legal action argues that the Met's purchase of the piece was sanctioned by a curator, the museum's curator of Old Masters and a leading authority on Nazi art looting. The institution and its expert must have known that the masterpiece had almost certainly been stolen by Nazis.

The museum said in a statement that it is committed to its ongoing pledge to resolve claims from the Nazi period.

A representative commented: At no time during the institution's custody of the painting was there any evidence that it had earlier been possessed to the Stern family – actually, that data did not become known until a long time after the artwork left the Met's possession.

The institution's deaccessioning of Olive Picking met the institution's rigorous standards for disposal – in particular, it was recorded that the artwork was deemed to be of lower caliber than other pieces of the comparable nature in the holdings. Although The Met respectfully stands by its position that this work entered the collection and was removed legally and well within all standards and procedures, the institution invites and will examine any new information that is discovered.

BEG's Response

William Charron acting for BEG commented: BEG is a renowned institution in Athens. The attempt to take legal action against the organization and the defendants in the United States upon misleadingly incomplete allegations was already thrown out, twice. We are certain it will be a third time.