New York's Met Museum Responds to Lawsuit Over Reportedly Nazi-Stolen Van Gogh Artwork
The family members of a Jewish spouses have initiated legal proceedings against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, alleging that a Vincent van Gogh art piece was stolen by the Third Reich.
Historical Background
As stated in the legal filing, Frederick and Hedwig Stern purchased the painting, titled Gathering Olives, in the year 1935. Just one year later, they were obliged to escape their residence in Munich on the eve of the Second World War.
The complaint argues that the museum, which purchased the artwork in the 1950s for $125,000, ought to have been aware it was almost certainly looted property. The family are now demanding the restitution of the canvas along with damages.
Following WWII, this Nazi-looted painting has been repeatedly and secretly trafficked, bought and sold in and through New York, claims the legal filing.
Forced Emigration
The Stern family departed from their Munich home to California in 1936 with their six children due to the oppressive Nazi regime. However, they were barred from transporting the artwork, which was created by the Dutch post-impressionist in 1889.
Before they left, the regime declared the artwork as a German cultural asset and banned the couple from bringing it with them. Following authorization from a Nazi official, a representative assigned by the authorities disposed of the piece on the family's behalf. Yet, the proceeds from the auction were deposited in a restricted account, which the regime later confiscated.
Post-War History
By 1948, or not long after, the painting arrived in New York and was purchased by a wealthy American, among the richest individuals in the US. Eventually, it was exchanged through a art dealer to the museum, which then sold it to Greek shipping magnate Basil Goulandris and his spouse, Elise, in the early 1970s.
The Greek couple established the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in the late 1970s, which manages a gallery in the Greek capital where the artwork is currently exhibited.
Court Allegations
The institution and a family member of Goulandris are listed as respondents. The legal action states that the defendants and its related entities have hidden and obscured the artwork's provenance and whereabouts from the heirs.
Currently, the defendants continue to hide the circumstances the institution came into control of the piece; the couple's ownership of the artwork from the mid-1930s; and the facts that the Third Reich stole the artwork from the family, coerced the family into parting with it via a trustee, and confiscated the proceeds of the sale.
Earlier Lawsuits
The descendants initiated a similar complaint in the state of California in recently, but it was rejected in 2024. An appeal was also dismissed in May 2025.
The Met's Position
The legal action states that the Met's purchase of the piece was authorized by a curator, the institution's specialist of European paintings and a leading authority on art theft during the Nazi era. The curator and the museum were aware or ought to have been aware that the Painting had probably been seized by the regime.
The institution said in a statement that it is committed to its ongoing pledge to handle issues related to WWII.
A representative commented: At no time during the institution's custody of the painting was there any documentation that it had previously been owned to the heirs – indeed, that knowledge did not become known until a long time after the painting left the Museum's collection.
The institution's deaccessioning of the Van Gogh met the institution's rigorous standards for disposal – namely, it was noted that the work was deemed to be of inferior standard than other works of the same type in the collection. Although the museum maintains its view that this work entered the collection and was removed legally and well within all rules and regulations, the museum invites and will examine any further evidence that emerges.
Goulandris Statement
Legal counsel acting for the Goulandris Foundation said: BEG is a esteemed foundation in Greece. The effort to sue and smear the organization and the Goulandris family in the United States upon misleadingly incomplete allegations was already thrown out, twice. We are certain it will be a third time.
