Metropolitan Museum Confronts Lawsuit Over Supposedly Nazi-Plundered Van Gogh Painting
The heirs of a Jewish couple have initiated legal proceedings against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, claiming that a Van Gogh art piece was seized by Nazi forces.
Origins of the Dispute
According to the lawsuit, the Stern couple acquired the artwork, titled Olive Picking, in 1935. A year after, they were compelled to leave their dwelling in Munich, Germany prior to the Second World War.
The legal action argues that the institution, which obtained the masterpiece in 1956 for $125,000, ought to have been aware it was probably stolen property. The family are now requesting the repatriation of the painting along with financial restitution.
Following WWII, this plundered piece has been often and discreetly exchanged, acquired and disposed of in and through NYC, alleges the court document.
The Sterns' Escape
The Stern family escaped from Munich to California in 1936 with their offspring due to the oppressive Nazi regime. Yet, they were prevented from taking the painting, which was produced by the celebrated artist in 1889.
Prior to their departure, the regime designated the masterpiece as German cultural property and prohibited the Sterns from exporting it. Following authorization from a Third Reich agent, a representative assigned by the authorities auctioned the piece on the couple's behalf. But, the money from the sale were deposited in a frozen account, which the authorities later confiscated.
Later Transactions
Around 1948, or soon after, the artwork entered NYC and was bought by a prominent figure, among the richest individuals in the US. Eventually, it was transferred through a gallery to the museum, which then sold it to Greek shipping magnate the magnate and his partner, Elise Goulandris, in 1972.
Basil and Elise established the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which runs a gallery in the Greek capital where the masterpiece is currently shown.
Legal Arguments
The institution and a living relative of Goulandris are named as defendants. The filing states that the family and its associated organizations have hidden and obscured the painting's ownership and location from the family.
Even now, the defendants continue to hide the manner and time the foundation came into ownership of the artwork; the family's possession of the masterpiece from the mid-1930s; and the facts that the Third Reich confiscated the artwork from the heirs, forced the Sterns into parting with it via a Nazi-appointed agent, and seized the funds of the deal.
Previous Legal Action
The family initiated a similar complaint in California in the year 2022, but it was thrown out in 2024. An appeal was also denied in spring 2025.
Museum's Response
The complaint contends that the Met's purchase of the piece was sanctioned by a curator, the Met's authority of European art and a leading authority on Nazi-era looted art. Rousseau and the Met knew or should have known that the Painting had probably been seized by Nazis.
The institution issued a statement that it prioritizes its longstanding commitment to address issues related to WWII.
An official stated: At no time during the institution's custody of the artwork was there any record that it had previously been owned to the Stern family – in fact, that data did not become known until several decades after the artwork left the institution's holdings.
The museum's disposal of Olive Picking met the Met's guidelines for deaccessioning – in particular, it was recorded that the work was deemed to be of inferior standard than other pieces of the comparable nature in the inventory. Although the institution upholds its position that this artwork entered the collection and was sold lawfully and well within all guidelines and policies, the museum is open to and will review any new information that emerges.
BEG's Response
William Charron on behalf of BEG commented: BEG is a esteemed foundation in Athens. The effort to take legal action against the organization and the Goulandris family in the United States upon inaccurate and partial claims was previously dismissed, twice. We are certain it will be once more.