🔗 Share this article

The heirs of a Jewish spouses have initiated legal proceedings against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, claiming that a Vincent van Gogh canvas was looted by Nazi forces.

Historical Background

According to the lawsuit, Frederick and Hedwig Stern purchased the painting, titled Olive Harvest, in the year 1935. The following year, they were forced to flee their residence in Munich, Germany on the eve of the Second World War.

The suit argues that the institution, which obtained the masterpiece in the mid-1950s for one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars, must have realized it was likely stolen property. The descendants are now requesting the restitution of the painting along with compensation.

In the decades since World War II, this stolen artwork has been frequently and covertly traded, acquired and disposed of in and through New York, states the lawsuit.

Family's Flight

Hedwig and Frederick Stern fled from their Munich home to California in 1936 with their six children due to Nazi persecution. However, they were prevented from taking the painting, which was produced by the celebrated artist in 1889.

Prior to their departure, the regime classified the painting as German cultural property and banned the couple from exporting it. Once approved from a Nazi official, a representative designated by the authorities disposed of the painting on the Sterns' behalf. However, the funds from the sale were placed in a blocked account, which the Nazis later took.

Post-War History

In 1948, or shortly after, the artwork was brought to the United States and was acquired by a wealthy American, a member of the Astor family. Subsequently, it was sold through a art dealer to the Met, which then sold it to prominent shipowner Goulandris and his partner, Mrs. Goulandris, in the early 1970s.

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

Court Allegations

The institution and a surviving nephew of the magnate are named as defendants. The lawsuit states that the Goulandris family and its related entities have covered up the artwork's provenance and whereabouts from the heirs.

Even now, the defendants continue to conceal how and when the institution came into possession of the Painting; the family's possession of the Painting from the mid-1930s; and the facts that the Third Reich looted the artwork from the Stern family, pressured the Sterns into disposing of it via a Nazi-appointed agent, and confiscated the funds of the deal.

Previous Legal Action

The family initiated a comparable case in California in the year 2022, but it was rejected in 2024. An further action was also denied in May 2025.

The Met's Position

The legal action states that the Met's purchase of the piece was authorized by the museum's expert, the institution's specialist of Old Masters and one of the world's foremost experts on Nazi art looting. Rousseau and the Met must have known that the Painting had probably been looted by the Nazis.

The museum responded that it is committed to its ongoing pledge to address Nazi-era claims.

A representative commented: At no time during the institution's custody of the painting was there any record that it had previously been owned to the heirs – actually, that information did not become available until a long time after the painting left the institution's holdings.

The museum's disposal of the artwork met the Met's guidelines for deaccessioning – specifically, it was noted that the artwork was deemed to be of inferior standard than other pieces of the same type in the collection. While the institution upholds its position that this piece entered the collection and was removed lawfully and well within all rules and regulations, the museum welcomes and will consider any additional details that is discovered.

Goulandris Statement

A lawyer on behalf of BEG said: The institution is a renowned institution in Athens. The attempt to take legal action against the organization and the defendants in the US upon misleadingly incomplete allegations was previously dismissed, multiple times. We are convinced it will be again.