🔗 Share this article

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 seized by Nazi forces.

Case History

According to the lawsuit, Hedwig and Frederick Stern acquired the piece, titled Gathering Olives, in the mid-1930s. The following year, they were compelled to leave their residence in Munich, Germany prior to WWII.

The legal action argues that the institution, which obtained the artwork in the mid-1950s for one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars, should have known it was probably confiscated property. The heirs are now seeking the return of the canvas along with compensation.

Since the end of WWII, this Nazi-looted painting has been often and discreetly exchanged, purchased and sold in and through NYC, alleges the lawsuit.

Family's Flight

Hedwig and Frederick Stern departed from Munich to America in 1936 with their offspring due to the oppressive Nazi regime. Yet, they were prevented from taking the artwork, which was produced by the celebrated artist in 1889.

Before they left, the regime designated the painting as a German cultural asset and forbade the Sterns from bringing it with them. After obtaining permission from a regime representative, a trustee appointed by the regime disposed of the painting on the Sterns' behalf. Yet, the proceeds from the auction were held in a blocked account, which the Nazis later seized.

Subsequent Ownership

In 1948, or soon after, the painting arrived in the United States and was purchased by Vincent Astor, a member of the Astor family. Subsequently, it was exchanged through a art dealer to the institution, which then transferred it to Greek shipping magnate the magnate and his spouse, Elise Goulandris, in 1972.

Basil and Elise founded the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in the late 1970s, which operates a gallery in the Greek capital where the artwork is currently on display.

Court Allegations

The institution and a family member of Basil Goulandris are named as defendants. The filing states that the Goulandris family and its affiliates have concealed and disguised the masterpiece's history and whereabouts from the family.

Currently, the foundation continue to conceal how and when the institution came into ownership of the Painting; the family's possession of the artwork from the mid-1930s; and the reality that the Nazis stole the artwork from the heirs, pressured the Sterns into selling it via a regime representative, and took the funds of the sale.

Prior Cases

The descendants filed a comparable case in the state of California in the year 2022, but it was thrown out in 2024. An appeal was also dismissed in May 2025.

Institution's Statement

The complaint states that the museum's acquisition of the artwork was approved by the museum's expert, the institution's specialist of Old Masters and one of the world's foremost experts on art theft during the Nazi era. The curator and the museum knew or should have known that the Painting had almost certainly been stolen by the Nazis.

The institution responded that it prioritizes its longstanding commitment to resolve claims from the Nazi period.

A spokesperson commented: At no time during the museum's possession of the painting was there any documentation that it had once belonged to the heirs – in fact, that information did not become available until many years after the artwork left the Museum's collection.

The Met's sale of the artwork met the museum's strict criteria for deaccessioning – specifically, it was recorded that the piece was considered to be of lesser quality than additional artworks of the similar kind in the holdings. Even though The Met upholds its stance that this artwork entered the inventory and was removed properly and well within all standards and procedures, the Met invites and will examine any further evidence that emerges.

BEG's Response

A lawyer on behalf of BEG commented: BEG is a esteemed foundation in Greece. The attempt to sue and smear the Foundation and the defendants in the US upon deceptive and insufficient accusations was previously dismissed, multiple times. We are confident it will be a third time.