🔗 Share this article

The heirs of a Jewish pair have filed a lawsuit against The Met, claiming that a Van Gogh art piece was seized by the Third Reich.

Origins of the Dispute

According to the lawsuit, the Stern couple purchased the piece, titled Gathering Olives, in the year 1935. A year after, they were compelled to leave their residence in the German city of Munich prior to WWII.

The complaint states that the Met, which acquired the masterpiece in the mid-1950s for one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars, must have realized it was almost certainly looted property. The heirs are now demanding the restitution of the canvas along with financial restitution.

Since the end of the war, this Nazi-looted painting has been frequently and covertly traded, acquired and disposed of in and through NYC, states the court document.

The Sterns' Escape

The Sterns fled from Munich to the United States in 1936 with their large family due to Nazi persecution. Yet, they were unable to bring the artwork, which was created by the Dutch post-impressionist in the late 19th century.

Before the family's emigration, the Nazi government classified the painting as German cultural property and banned the Sterns from exporting it. Following authorization from a Third Reich agent, a representative assigned by the regime auctioned the piece on the couple's behalf. However, the money from the transaction were deposited in a frozen account, which the Nazis later seized.

Subsequent Ownership

By 1948, or soon after, the artwork arrived in NYC and was acquired by Vincent Astor, among the richest individuals in the US. Later, it was exchanged through a gallery to the institution, which then passed it on to wealthy Greek businessman Basil Goulandris and his spouse, Elise Goulandris, in the early 1970s.

The Greek couple established the Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which operates a museum in Athens, Greece where the painting is currently shown.

Claims and Defenses

The institution and a surviving nephew of Basil Goulandris are named as defendants. The legal action claims that the defendants and its associated organizations have covered up the painting's ownership and whereabouts from the family.

To this day, the Goulandris Defendants continue to hide the circumstances the institution came into ownership of the piece; the Stern family's ownership of the masterpiece from several years; and the facts that the Nazis looted the artwork from the family, forced the family into selling it via a regime representative, and seized the money of the sale.

Previous Legal Action

The family initiated a comparable case in California in 2022, but it was rejected in 2024. An further action was also denied in recently.

Institution's Statement

The lawsuit contends that the Met's purchase of the piece was authorized by the museum's expert, the institution's specialist of European art and a leading authority on Nazi-era looted art. The curator and the museum must have known that the masterpiece had likely been looted by the Nazis.

The institution said in a statement that it is committed to its longstanding commitment to address issues related to WWII.

A spokesperson stated: Never during the institution's custody of the painting was there any documentation that it had earlier been possessed to the Stern family – indeed, that knowledge did not become accessible until a long time after the masterpiece left the Met's possession.

The institution's deaccessioning of the Van Gogh met the institution's rigorous standards for removal from collection – in particular, it was noted that the piece was deemed to be of lower caliber than additional artworks of the same type in the holdings. Even though The Met maintains its position that this artwork entered the holdings and was sold lawfully and well within all guidelines and policies, the museum invites and will examine any new information that comes to light.

Goulandris Statement

William Charron representing the foundation said: The Goulandris Foundation is a highly prestigious organization in Athens. The effort to litigate and defame the institution and the defendants in the United States upon deceptive and insufficient accusations was earlier rejected, multiple times. We are certain it will be once more.