🔗 Share this article

The heirs of a Jewish spouses have filed a lawsuit against The Met, alleging that a Vincent van Gogh oil painting was looted by the Nazis.

Historical Background

Per the court documents, Hedwig and Frederick Stern bought the artwork, titled Olive Harvest, in the mid-1930s. The following year, they were compelled to leave their dwelling in the German city of Munich prior to World War II.

The suit argues that the Met, which purchased the artwork in the mid-1950s for $125,000, must have realized it was almost certainly confiscated property. The heirs are now requesting the return of the artwork along with compensation.

Since the end of World War II, this plundered piece has been frequently and covertly traded, acquired and disposed of in and through NYC, claims the legal filing.

Forced Emigration

The Stern family escaped from Munich to the United States in the late 1930s with their large family due to the oppressive Nazi regime. Nevertheless, they were barred from transporting the artwork, which was produced by the renowned Dutch in 1889.

Before they left, Nazi authorities declared the artwork as German cultural property and banned the Sterns from taking it abroad. After obtaining permission from a Nazi official, a representative assigned by the regime disposed of the painting on the couple's behalf. Yet, the funds from the sale were held in a restricted account, which the authorities later took.

Post-War History

By 1948, or not long after, the canvas arrived in the United States and was acquired by Vincent Astor, among the richest individuals in the US. Later, it was sold through a commercial outlet to the institution, which then sold it to Greek shipping magnate Goulandris and his partner, Elise, in 1972.

The Greek couple founded the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which runs a institution in Athens, Greece where the artwork is currently shown.

Claims and Defenses

The institution and a surviving nephew of the magnate are named as defendants. The filing claims that the Goulandris family and its associated organizations have covered up the painting's ownership and whereabouts from the heirs.

Even now, the foundation continue to hide the manner and time the foundation came into possession of the piece; the Stern family's ownership of the artwork from the mid-1930s; and the truth that the regime stole the canvas from the family, forced the couple into disposing of it via a Nazi-appointed agent, and seized the proceeds of the transaction.

Prior Cases

The family initiated a similar complaint in California in 2022, but it was dismissed in the following years. An appeal was also denied in recently.

Institution's Statement

The legal action states that the institution's buying of the painting was approved by the museum's expert, the Met's authority of European paintings and one of the world's foremost experts on art theft during the Nazi era. The curator and the museum were aware or ought to have been aware that the masterpiece had likely been stolen by the Nazis.

The Met said in a statement that it prioritizes its historical dedication to resolve Nazi-era claims.

A representative stated: Not once during the museum's possession of the painting was there any documentation that it had previously been owned to the Stern family – in fact, that information did not become known until several decades after the masterpiece left the Met's possession.

The Met's sale of the Van Gogh met the institution's rigorous standards for disposal – in particular, it was recorded that the work was considered to be of inferior standard than additional artworks of the similar kind in the inventory. Even though the museum upholds its stance that this work entered the collection and was removed properly and well within all rules and regulations, the museum welcomes and will consider any further evidence that emerges.

BEG's Response

Legal counsel representing BEG commented: BEG is a renowned institution in the Greek capital. The effort to take legal action against the organization and the family in the United States upon inaccurate and partial claims was previously dismissed, on two occasions. We are certain it will be again.