🔗 Share this article

The descendants of a Jewish pair have initiated legal proceedings against The Met, alleging that a Van Gogh canvas was seized by Nazi forces.

Historical Background

Per the court documents, Hedwig and Frederick Stern acquired the piece, titled Olive Harvest, in the year 1935. Just one year later, they were compelled to leave their home in the German city of Munich just before World War II.

The complaint states that the museum, which acquired the masterpiece in 1956 for one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars, must have realized it was probably confiscated property. The family are now requesting the return of the artwork along with compensation.

In the decades since the war, this plundered piece has been repeatedly and secretly trafficked, acquired and disposed of in and through NYC, claims the lawsuit.

The Sterns' Escape

Hedwig and Frederick Stern escaped from the city of Munich to the United States in the late 1930s with their offspring due to Nazi persecution. Yet, they were prevented from taking the painting, which was painted by the Dutch post-impressionist in 1889.

Prior to their departure, the Nazi government designated the artwork as a German cultural asset and prohibited the family from exporting it. Once approved from a Third Reich agent, a representative assigned by the authorities disposed of the painting on the family's behalf. But, the proceeds from the sale were placed in a restricted account, which the regime later seized.

Later Transactions

By 1948, or not long after, the artwork entered New York and was purchased by a wealthy American, one of America's wealthiest people. Eventually, it was exchanged through a gallery to the museum, which then passed it on to prominent shipowner Goulandris and his spouse, Elise, in 1972.

The Greek couple set up the Goulandris Foundation in the late 1970s, which manages a museum in Athens, Greece where the painting is currently exhibited.

Claims and Defenses

BEG and a living relative of Goulandris are identified in the suit. The legal action states that the Goulandris family and its affiliates have hidden and obscured the painting's ownership and current place from the family.

To this day, the foundation continue to obscure how and when the institution came into possession of the Painting; the family's possession of the masterpiece from 1935 to 1938; and the facts that the regime stole the Painting from the heirs, coerced the couple into parting with it via a trustee, and took the proceeds of the transaction.

Prior Cases

The Stern heirs submitted a related lawsuit in California in recently, but it was dismissed in the following years. An appeal was also denied in May 2025.

The Met's Position

The complaint argues that the institution's buying of the artwork was sanctioned by a curator, the institution's specialist of European art and a renowned specialist on Nazi-era looted art. The institution and its expert knew or should have known that the artwork had probably been seized by the Nazis.

The institution said in a statement that it prioritizes its ongoing pledge to address issues related to WWII.

An official commented: Not once during the museum's possession of the painting was there any documentation that it had once belonged to the heirs – indeed, that information did not become available until several decades after the artwork left the institution's holdings.

The institution's deaccessioning of Olive Picking met the Met's guidelines for deaccessioning – namely, it was documented that the work was deemed to be of inferior standard than other pieces of the comparable nature in the inventory. Although The Met maintains its stance that this piece entered the holdings and was sold legally and well within all guidelines and policies, the Met invites and will examine any further evidence that emerges.

Goulandris Statement

Legal counsel acting for the Goulandris Foundation commented: BEG is a renowned institution in Athens. The action to litigate and defame the organization and the defendants in the United States upon inaccurate and partial claims was previously dismissed, twice. We are certain it will be again.