🔗 Share this article

The descendants of a Jewish couple have brought a case against New York's Metropolitan Museum, claiming that a Vincent van Gogh art piece was looted by Nazi forces.

Case History

According to the court documents, Frederick and Hedwig Stern acquired the painting, titled Olive Picking, in the mid-1930s. A year after, they were obliged to escape their home in the German city of Munich on the eve of World War II.

The legal action states that the Met, which obtained the masterpiece in the 1950s for $125,000, should have known it was likely looted property. The family are now requesting the repatriation of the artwork along with financial restitution.

Since the end of World War II, this stolen artwork has been repeatedly and secretly trafficked, bought and sold in and through New York, alleges the lawsuit.

The Sterns' Escape

The Sterns fled from the city of Munich to America in the late 1930s with their large family due to Nazi persecution. Nevertheless, they were unable to bring the Van Gogh piece, which was created by the celebrated artist in the late 19th century.

Prior to their departure, Nazi authorities designated the masterpiece as property of the state and forbade the Sterns from bringing it with them. After obtaining permission from a Third Reich agent, a representative appointed by the regime disposed of the painting on the Sterns' behalf. Yet, the proceeds from the sale were deposited in a blocked account, which the authorities later confiscated.

Subsequent Ownership

By 1948, or soon after, the artwork arrived in NYC and was acquired by Vincent Astor, a member of the Astor family. Later, it was transferred through a art dealer to the museum, which then transferred it to prominent shipowner Basil Goulandris and his wife, Mrs. Goulandris, in the early 1970s.

The Goulandris pair set up the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which manages a gallery in Athens, Greece where the artwork is currently on display.

Court Allegations

The foundation and a family member of Basil Goulandris are named as defendants. The legal action alleges that the Goulandris family and its affiliates have concealed and disguised the artwork's provenance and current place from the plaintiffs.

Even now, the foundation continue to conceal the manner and time the institution came into possession of the piece; the Stern family's ownership of the artwork from the mid-1930s; and the reality that the regime confiscated the Painting from the family, coerced the family into selling it via a regime representative, and took the money of the deal.

Earlier Lawsuits

The Stern heirs filed a related lawsuit in the state of California in 2022, but it was thrown out in 2024. An appeal was also dismissed in May 2025.

Museum's Response

The lawsuit contends that the institution's buying of the artwork was authorized by the museum's expert, the Met's authority of European art and a renowned specialist on Nazi-era looted art. The curator and the museum must have known that the masterpiece had probably been looted by the regime.

The museum issued a statement that it prioritizes its longstanding commitment to address claims from the Nazi period.

An official remarked: At no time during the museum's possession of the painting was there any evidence that it had previously been owned to the heirs – actually, that data did not become accessible until several decades after the artwork left the Met's possession.

The institution's deaccessioning of the artwork met the institution's rigorous standards for deaccessioning – in particular, it was recorded that the work was deemed to be of lesser quality than additional artworks of the comparable nature in the collection. Even though the institution upholds its position that this artwork entered the collection and was sold lawfully and well within all guidelines and policies, the institution invites and will examine any new information that emerges.

Goulandris Statement

A lawyer representing BEG stated: The Goulandris Foundation is a renowned institution in Greece. The effort to take legal action against the institution and the family in the US upon inaccurate and partial claims was previously dismissed, on two occasions. We are confident it will be a third time.