New York's Met Museum Responds to Legal Challenge Over Supposedly Nazi-Plundered Van Gogh Artwork

The heirs of a Jewish couple have brought a case against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, alleging that a Vincent van Gogh canvas was looted by Nazi forces.

Historical Background

As stated in the court documents, Frederick and Hedwig Stern acquired the artwork, titled Olive Picking, in the mid-1930s. Just one year later, they were obliged to escape their home in Munich prior to WWII.

The suit argues that the museum, which purchased the artwork in the mid-1950s for a significant sum, must have realized it was probably looted property. The descendants are now requesting the return of the artwork along with financial restitution.

In the decades since World War II, this plundered piece has been often and discreetly exchanged, purchased and sold in and through NYC, claims the legal filing.

The Sterns' Escape

Hedwig and Frederick Stern departed from their Munich home to America in the late 1930s with their offspring due to persecution by the Nazis. However, they were unable to bring the artwork, which was created by the Dutch post-impressionist in the late 19th century.

Before they left, Nazi authorities classified the painting as German cultural property and prohibited the couple from exporting it. Following authorization from a Third Reich agent, a agent designated by the regime disposed of the artwork on the family's behalf. However, the proceeds from the auction were placed in a blocked account, which the Nazis later confiscated.

Post-War History

By 1948, or soon after, the artwork was brought to NYC and was purchased by Vincent Astor, one of America's wealthiest people. Eventually, it was sold through a art dealer to the institution, which then sold it to prominent shipowner Goulandris and his wife, Elise, in the early 1970s.

Basil and Elise founded the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which operates a institution in Athens, Greece where the painting is currently shown.

Court Allegations

The institution and a living relative of Basil Goulandris are named as defendants. The filing claims that the family and its associated organizations have concealed and disguised the artwork's provenance and whereabouts from the plaintiffs.

Currently, the defendants continue to conceal the manner and time the foundation came into control of the Painting; the family's possession of the Painting from 1935 to 1938; and the facts that the regime confiscated the Painting from the family, coerced the Sterns into selling it via a regime representative, and seized the funds of the transaction.

Previous Legal Action

The descendants filed a related lawsuit in California in the year 2022, but it was dismissed in 2024. An legal challenge was also denied in recently.

Institution's Statement

The complaint states that the Met's purchase of the painting was approved by a curator, the museum's curator of Old Masters and a leading authority on Nazi art looting. The institution and its expert knew or should have known that the masterpiece had probably been seized by the regime.

The institution responded that it prioritizes its historical dedication to handle claims from the Nazi period.

A representative commented: Never during the institution's custody of the artwork was there any record that it had once belonged to the heirs – actually, that data did not become known until many years after the artwork left the Museum's collection.

The museum's disposal of Olive Picking met the museum's strict criteria for disposal – in particular, it was noted that the artwork was deemed to be of inferior standard than other works of the same type in the inventory. Even though the institution respectfully stands by its view that this work entered the holdings and was sold legally and well within all rules and regulations, the museum is open to and will review any additional details that comes to light.

Goulandris Statement

Legal counsel representing the Goulandris Foundation stated: The institution is a highly prestigious organization in Greece. The action to take legal action against the organization and the family in the America upon inaccurate and partial claims was already thrown out, multiple times. We are convinced it will be again.