🔗 Share this article

The descendants of a Jewish spouses have brought a case against The Met, claiming that a the Dutch artist canvas was stolen by the Third Reich.

Historical Background

Per the lawsuit, the Stern couple purchased the artwork, titled Olive Harvest, in 1935. The following year, they were compelled to leave their home in Munich on the eve of WWII.

The complaint contends that the institution, which acquired the artwork in 1956 for one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars, must have realized it was almost certainly stolen property. The descendants are now seeking the restitution of the artwork along with compensation.

In the decades since WWII, this plundered piece has been often and discreetly exchanged, purchased and sold in and through New York, states the lawsuit.

The Sterns' Escape

The Stern family fled from their Munich home to the United States in 1936 with their six children due to the oppressive Nazi regime. However, they were prevented from taking the painting, which was painted by the renowned Dutch in the late 19th century.

Before the family's emigration, the regime designated the masterpiece as a German cultural asset and banned the couple from taking it abroad. Following authorization from a Third Reich agent, a trustee assigned by the authorities sold the painting on the couple's behalf. However, the money from the sale were placed in a restricted account, which the authorities later seized.

Subsequent Ownership

By 1948, or not long after, the artwork entered the United States and was bought by a prominent figure, one of America's wealthiest people. Subsequently, it was exchanged through a gallery to the museum, which then transferred it to prominent shipowner the magnate and his wife, Elise Goulandris, in the early 1970s.

The Greek couple founded the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which runs a institution in the Greek capital where the artwork is currently on display.

Legal Arguments

BEG and a family member of Goulandris are named as defendants. The legal action states that the defendants and its affiliates have concealed and disguised the artwork's provenance and location from the plaintiffs.

To this day, the defendants continue to hide the circumstances the BEG came into control of the piece; the Stern family's ownership of the artwork from several years; and the facts that the Third Reich looted the artwork from the heirs, coerced the family into disposing of it via a regime representative, and seized the money of the transaction.

Previous Legal Action

The descendants submitted a related lawsuit in CA in the year 2022, but it was thrown out in 2024. An appeal was also rejected in May 2025.

The Met's Position

The complaint argues that the museum's acquisition of the piece was approved by a curator, the institution's specialist of European paintings and a renowned specialist on art theft during the Nazi era. The curator and the museum must have known that the Painting had likely been seized by the regime.

The Met said in a statement that it takes seriously its longstanding commitment to handle Nazi-era claims.

An official commented: Never during the museum's possession of the artwork was there any evidence that it had previously been owned to the family – actually, that data did not become available until many years after the masterpiece left the Museum's collection.

The Met's sale of the Van Gogh met the institution's rigorous standards for disposal – in particular, it was noted that the piece was considered to be of lesser quality than other pieces of the comparable nature in the inventory. Even though the institution upholds its stance that this artwork entered the collection and was sold legally and well within all guidelines and policies, the museum invites and will examine any further evidence that comes to light.

Goulandris Statement

Legal counsel acting for the foundation commented: BEG is a renowned institution in Athens. The effort to take legal action against the Foundation and the family in the US upon misleadingly incomplete allegations was already thrown out, twice. We are confident it will be once more.