🔗 Share this article

The descendants of a Jewish spouses have filed a lawsuit against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, alleging that a Vincent van Gogh canvas was stolen by the Third Reich.

Origins of the Dispute

Per the legal filing, the Stern couple bought the piece, titled Olive Harvest, in 1935. The following year, they were compelled to leave their dwelling in Munich, Germany prior to WWII.

The complaint states that the institution, which acquired the painting in the mid-1950s for a significant sum, must have realized it was likely confiscated property. The heirs are now requesting the restitution of the painting along with financial restitution.

In the decades since the war, this stolen artwork has been repeatedly and secretly trafficked, bought and sold in and through NYC, alleges the legal filing.

Family's Flight

The Stern family fled from their Munich home to America in the late 1930s with their six children due to the oppressive Nazi regime. Yet, they were unable to bring the Van Gogh piece, which was created by the Dutch post-impressionist in the late 19th century.

Before they left, the Nazi government designated the artwork as a German cultural asset and banned the Sterns from bringing it with them. Once approved from a regime representative, a representative assigned by the authorities auctioned the piece on the couple's behalf. But, the proceeds from the auction were deposited in a frozen account, which the regime later took.

Subsequent Ownership

Around 1948, or shortly after, the painting entered NYC and was purchased by Vincent Astor, among the richest individuals in the US. Eventually, it was transferred through a gallery to the Met, which then transferred it to wealthy Greek businessman the magnate and his spouse, Elise Goulandris, in the early 1970s.

Basil and Elise established the Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which manages a museum in Athens, Greece where the painting is currently exhibited.

Claims and Defenses

BEG and a family member of Goulandris are identified in the suit. The lawsuit alleges that the Goulandris family and its related entities have covered up the painting's ownership and current place from the plaintiffs.

To this day, the defendants continue to obscure the manner and time the institution came into ownership of the Painting; the Stern family's ownership of the artwork from the mid-1930s; and the truth that the Third Reich looted the Painting from the heirs, forced the couple into parting with it via a Nazi-appointed agent, and took the proceeds of the transaction.

Earlier Lawsuits

The descendants submitted a comparable case in California in 2022, but it was thrown out in 2024. An legal challenge was also rejected in spring 2025.

Museum's Response

The lawsuit argues that the museum's acquisition of the painting was sanctioned by a curator, the institution's specialist of European paintings and one of the world's foremost experts on art theft during the Nazi era. The institution and its expert must have known that the Painting had probably been seized by the Nazis.

The institution responded that it prioritizes its historical dedication to resolve Nazi-era claims.

A representative commented: Not once during The Met's ownership of the piece was there any documentation that it had earlier been possessed to the Stern family – actually, that knowledge did not become known until many years after the masterpiece left the Met's possession.

The institution's deaccessioning of the Van Gogh met the institution's rigorous standards for deaccessioning – namely, it was noted that the work was considered to be of lesser quality than other works of the same type in the holdings. Even though The Met upholds its position that this artwork entered the holdings and was sold lawfully and well within all guidelines and policies, the museum is open to and will review any additional details that is discovered.

Foundation's Defense

Legal counsel on behalf of the Goulandris Foundation stated: The institution is a renowned institution in Greece. The attempt to take legal action against the organization and the defendants in the United States upon misleadingly incomplete allegations was previously dismissed, twice. We are confident it will be again.