The Met Responds to Lawsuit Over Supposedly Nazi-Looted Van Gogh Painting

The family members of a Jewish couple have filed a lawsuit against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, asserting that a Van Gogh canvas was stolen by the Third Reich.

Historical Background

As stated in the legal filing, Frederick and Hedwig Stern purchased the artwork, titled Olive Harvest, in 1935. A year after, they were forced to flee their dwelling in the German city of Munich on the eve of WWII.

The legal action states that the institution, which acquired the artwork in 1956 for a significant sum, must have realized it was probably confiscated property. The heirs are now requesting the repatriation of the canvas along with compensation.

Following WWII, this Nazi-looted painting has been repeatedly and secretly trafficked, purchased and sold in and through the city of New York, states the legal filing.

Forced Emigration

The Stern family fled from the city of Munich to California in 1936 with their large family due to Nazi persecution. However, they were prevented from taking the painting, which was painted by the renowned Dutch in 1889.

Prior to their departure, the regime designated the artwork as property of the state and prohibited the family from exporting it. Once approved from a regime representative, a representative designated by the Nazis sold the painting on the couple's behalf. Yet, the money from the auction were placed in a restricted account, which the authorities later confiscated.

Later Transactions

By 1948, or shortly after, the canvas entered New York and was purchased by Vincent Astor, one of America's wealthiest people. Eventually, it was transferred through a art dealer to the museum, which then passed it on to wealthy Greek businessman Basil Goulandris and his partner, Elise Goulandris, in 1972.

The Goulandris pair set up the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which operates a museum in Athens, Greece where the painting is currently exhibited.

Legal Arguments

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

Even now, the Goulandris Defendants continue to conceal how and when the foundation came into possession of the Painting; the couple's ownership of the Painting from the mid-1930s; and the truth that the Nazis stole the Painting from the heirs, pressured the couple into selling it via a regime representative, and confiscated the money of the transaction.

Earlier Lawsuits

The family submitted a comparable case in the state of California in the year 2022, but it was thrown out in the following years. An legal challenge was also denied in spring 2025.

Museum's Response

The lawsuit states that the Met's purchase of the artwork was sanctioned by the museum's expert, the Met's authority of European art and a leading authority on Nazi-era looted art. Rousseau and the Met must have known that the masterpiece had probably been seized by the Nazis.

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

An official commented: Not once during the institution's custody of the painting was there any evidence that it had once belonged to the Stern family – indeed, that data did not become known until many years after the artwork left the institution's holdings.

The museum's disposal of Olive Picking met the Met's guidelines for deaccessioning – in particular, it was noted that the work was deemed to be of lower caliber than other pieces of the same type in the inventory. While The Met maintains its position that this work entered the holdings and was removed legally and well within all guidelines and policies, the museum is open to and will review any further evidence that comes to light.

Foundation's Defense

A lawyer representing the foundation said: BEG is a esteemed foundation in the Greek capital. The action to litigate and defame the institution and the defendants in the America upon inaccurate and partial claims was earlier rejected, multiple times. We are convinced it will be again.