🔗 Share this article

The heirs of a Jewish spouses have brought a case against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, asserting that a Van Gogh oil painting was looted by Nazi forces.

Case History

As stated in the lawsuit, the Stern couple purchased the painting, titled Gathering Olives, in 1935. A year after, they were compelled to leave their home in Munich, Germany on the eve of the Second World War.

The suit argues that the institution, which purchased the masterpiece in the mid-1950s for $125,000, should have known it was likely looted property. The heirs are now demanding the return of the artwork along with compensation.

Following World War II, this Nazi-looted painting has been repeatedly and secretly trafficked, purchased and sold in and through New York, claims the legal filing.

Family's Flight

The Sterns departed from their Munich home to California in the late 1930s with their offspring due to the oppressive Nazi regime. Nevertheless, they were prevented from taking the artwork, which was painted by the renowned Dutch in the late 19th century.

Before they left, the regime designated the painting as a German cultural asset and banned the couple from taking it abroad. After obtaining permission from a regime representative, a representative assigned by the Nazis disposed of the artwork on the Sterns' behalf. But, the money from the transaction were deposited in a frozen account, which the authorities later took.

Subsequent Ownership

Around 1948, or soon after, the painting entered NYC and was bought by a prominent figure, among the richest individuals in the US. Eventually, it was transferred through a commercial outlet to the institution, which then sold it to Greek shipping magnate Goulandris and his spouse, Elise, in 1972.

The Greek couple set up the BEG in the late 1970s, which operates a gallery in Athens, Greece where the painting is currently on display.

Court Allegations

The foundation and a surviving nephew of Goulandris are identified in the suit. The legal action claims that the defendants and its related entities have hidden and obscured the masterpiece's history and location from the family.

Currently, the defendants continue to obscure the manner and time the BEG came into possession of the piece; the couple's ownership of the masterpiece from several years; and the reality that the Nazis confiscated the artwork from the heirs, coerced the Sterns into selling it via a Nazi-appointed agent, and confiscated the money of the transaction.

Previous Legal Action

The Stern heirs initiated a related lawsuit in California in 2022, but it was thrown out in 2024. An legal challenge was also rejected in spring 2025.

The Met's Position

The legal action states that the museum's acquisition of the piece was sanctioned by a curator, the museum's curator of Old Masters and a renowned specialist on Nazi art looting. Rousseau and the Met must have known that the masterpiece had almost certainly been looted by Nazis.

The museum said in a statement that it takes seriously its historical dedication to handle Nazi-era claims.

An official stated: Not once during the museum's possession of the painting was there any evidence that it had earlier been possessed to the Stern family – indeed, that data did not become known until many years after the masterpiece left the institution's holdings.

The institution's deaccessioning of the Van Gogh met the institution's rigorous standards for removal from collection – namely, it was documented that the artwork was considered to be of inferior standard than other pieces of the comparable nature in the collection. Even though the institution maintains its stance that this piece entered the inventory and was deaccessioned legally and well within all standards and procedures, the Met welcomes and will consider any additional details that comes to light.

Goulandris Statement

A lawyer acting for BEG said: The Goulandris Foundation is a highly prestigious organization in Athens. The action to take legal action against the institution and the defendants in the US upon deceptive and insufficient accusations was earlier rejected, on two occasions. We are confident it will be once more.