Metropolitan Museum Confronts Legal Challenge Over Allegedly Nazi-Looted Van Gogh Masterpiece
The descendants of a Jewish spouses have brought a case against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, asserting that a the Dutch artist art piece was looted by Nazi forces.
Case History
Per the legal filing, Frederick and Hedwig Stern acquired the piece, titled Olive Picking, in 1935. The following year, they were forced to flee their home in Munich just before the Second World War.
The legal action contends that the Met, which acquired the masterpiece in the mid-1950s for a significant sum, ought to have been aware it was almost certainly stolen property. The family are now demanding the restitution of the artwork along with compensation.
Since the end of WWII, this Nazi-looted painting has been repeatedly and secretly trafficked, bought and sold in and through NYC, claims the court document.
The Sterns' Escape
The Stern family fled from Munich to California in 1936 with their offspring due to the oppressive Nazi regime. Nevertheless, they were barred from transporting the artwork, which was created by the Dutch post-impressionist in 1889.
Before they left, the Nazi government designated the artwork as property of the state and forbade the family from bringing it with them. Following authorization from a Nazi official, a representative assigned by the Nazis disposed of the artwork on the family's behalf. However, the proceeds from the auction were held in a frozen account, which the Nazis later confiscated.
Subsequent Ownership
By 1948, or not long after, the painting was brought to New York and was acquired by a wealthy American, one of America's wealthiest people. Eventually, it was sold through a commercial outlet to the Met, which then passed it on to Greek shipping magnate Goulandris and his wife, Elise Goulandris, in 1972.
The Greek couple set up the BEG in 1979, which operates a gallery in Athens, Greece where the painting is currently on display.
Claims and Defenses
BEG and a family member of the magnate are identified in the suit. The legal action claims that the defendants and its associated organizations have covered up the artwork's provenance and current place from the heirs.
To this day, the Goulandris Defendants continue to hide how and when the institution came into control of the piece; the Stern family's ownership of the masterpiece from the mid-1930s; and the truth that the regime confiscated the Painting from the family, coerced the Sterns into disposing of it via a Nazi-appointed agent, and seized the funds of the sale.
Prior Cases
The descendants submitted a comparable case in the state of California in 2022, but it was thrown out in 2024. An further action was also denied in May 2025.
Museum's Response
The lawsuit states that the Met's purchase of the artwork was sanctioned by a curator, the Met's authority of Old Masters and a renowned specialist on art theft during the Nazi era. The institution and its expert knew or should have known that the masterpiece had likely been stolen by Nazis.
The institution responded that it is committed to its historical dedication to resolve issues related to WWII.
A spokesperson stated: At no time during the institution's custody of the painting was there any evidence that it had once belonged to the Stern family – in fact, that information did not become available until several decades after the painting left the Museum's collection.
The Met's sale of Olive Picking met the Met's guidelines for deaccessioning – namely, it was recorded that the piece was considered to be of inferior standard than other works of the similar kind in the inventory. While the museum upholds its view that this work entered the holdings and was deaccessioned lawfully and well within all standards and procedures, the Met welcomes and will consider any additional details that emerges.
Goulandris Statement
Legal counsel on behalf of BEG commented: BEG is a esteemed foundation in the Greek capital. The action to take legal action against the institution and the Goulandris family in the United States upon misleadingly incomplete allegations was earlier rejected, twice. We are confident it will be a third time.