🔗 Share this article

The descendants of a Jewish pair have initiated legal proceedings against New York's Metropolitan Museum, claiming that a the Dutch artist art piece was seized by the Nazis.

Origins of the Dispute

As stated in the court documents, the Stern couple purchased the painting, titled Olive Harvest, in the year 1935. Just one year later, they were compelled to leave their dwelling in Munich just before the Second World War.

The complaint argues that the museum, which purchased the artwork in the mid-1950s for $125,000, should have known it was probably confiscated property. The family are now requesting the restitution of the painting along with financial restitution.

Since the end of the war, this Nazi-looted painting has been often and discreetly exchanged, bought and sold in and through the city of New York, alleges the court document.

The Sterns' Escape

Hedwig and Frederick Stern departed from the city of Munich to America in the late 1930s with their offspring due to persecution by the Nazis. Nevertheless, they were unable to bring the Van Gogh piece, which was created by the renowned Dutch in the late 19th century.

Before the family's emigration, the regime designated the artwork as a German cultural asset and forbade the couple from bringing it with them. After obtaining permission from a Third Reich agent, a agent appointed by the Nazis auctioned the piece on the couple's behalf. Yet, the proceeds from the sale were deposited in a blocked account, which the regime later took.

Later Transactions

Around 1948, or shortly after, the artwork arrived in New York and was purchased by a prominent figure, a member of the Astor family. Eventually, it was sold through a art dealer to the institution, which then sold it to wealthy Greek businessman Basil Goulandris and his spouse, Elise, in the early 1970s.

The Goulandris pair established the Goulandris Foundation in the late 1970s, which operates a gallery in Athens, Greece where the painting is currently exhibited.

Court Allegations

The foundation and a surviving nephew of the magnate are identified in the suit. The filing states that the Goulandris family and its associated organizations have hidden and obscured the painting's ownership and current place from the heirs.

Even now, the defendants continue to conceal the circumstances the foundation came into control of the artwork; the Stern family's ownership of the artwork from 1935 to 1938; and the reality that the regime looted the canvas from the Stern family, coerced the couple into parting with it via a Nazi-appointed agent, and seized the proceeds of the sale.

Earlier Lawsuits

The Stern heirs submitted a comparable case in the state of California in recently, but it was rejected in 2024. An appeal was also rejected in spring 2025.

Museum's Response

The lawsuit states that the Met's purchase of the painting was approved by the museum's expert, the museum's curator of European art and one of the world's foremost experts on Nazi art looting. Rousseau and the Met must have known that the Painting had probably been stolen by the Nazis.

The institution responded that it prioritizes its ongoing pledge to handle Nazi-era claims.

A spokesperson commented: Never during the museum's possession of the piece was there any documentation that it had once belonged to the heirs – indeed, that data did not become known until many years after the painting left the Museum's collection.

The institution's deaccessioning of the Van Gogh met the Met's guidelines for removal from collection – in particular, it was recorded that the piece was judged to be of inferior standard than other pieces of the similar kind in the inventory. Although The Met respectfully stands by its view that this work entered the holdings and was deaccessioned lawfully and well within all rules and regulations, the Met invites and will examine any additional details that is discovered.

Foundation's Defense

Legal counsel acting for the foundation said: The institution is a highly prestigious organization in Athens. The effort to sue and smear the institution and the defendants in the America upon inaccurate and partial claims was already thrown out, multiple times. We are convinced it will be a third time.