New York's Met Museum Faces Legal Action Over Reportedly Nazi-Stolen Van Gogh Masterpiece

The family members of a Jewish couple have brought a case against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, claiming that a the Dutch artist canvas was seized by the Nazis.

Historical Background

Per the legal filing, Frederick and Hedwig Stern acquired the artwork, titled Olive Harvest, in 1935. Just one year later, they were obliged to escape their dwelling in Munich on the eve of the Second World War.

The legal action contends that the institution, which purchased the masterpiece in the 1950s for one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars, should have known it was probably confiscated property. The descendants are now demanding the restitution of the canvas along with compensation.

Since the end of the war, this Nazi-looted painting has been frequently and covertly traded, acquired and disposed of in and through the city of New York, alleges the court document.

The Sterns' Escape

The Stern family departed from the city of Munich to California in 1936 with their offspring due to the oppressive Nazi regime. Yet, they were barred from transporting the painting, which was created by the Dutch post-impressionist in 1889.

Before they left, the regime designated the artwork as a German cultural asset and forbade the Sterns from bringing it with them. After obtaining permission from a Nazi official, a trustee assigned by the Nazis auctioned the artwork on the couple's behalf. However, the proceeds from the transaction were placed in a restricted account, which the authorities later took.

Later Transactions

By 1948, or shortly after, the canvas entered New York and was purchased by Vincent Astor, one of America's wealthiest people. Eventually, it was sold through a art dealer to the Met, which then passed it on to wealthy Greek businessman Basil Goulandris and his wife, Elise, in 1972.

Basil and Elise established the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which runs a gallery in Athens where the masterpiece is currently on display.

Court Allegations

The foundation and a living relative of the magnate are named as defendants. The lawsuit states that the family and its related entities have covered up the painting's ownership and whereabouts from the plaintiffs.

Even now, the defendants continue to obscure the manner and time the institution came into ownership of the Painting; the couple's ownership of the artwork from several years; and the facts that the Nazis stole the canvas from the heirs, coerced the couple into parting with it via a trustee, and took the money of the deal.

Previous Legal Action

The descendants filed a related lawsuit in California in recently, but it was rejected in the following years. An further action was also rejected in May 2025.

The Met's Position

The complaint contends that the museum's acquisition of the artwork was approved by Theodore Rousseau Jr, the institution's specialist of Old Masters and one of the world's foremost experts on Nazi art looting. The institution and its expert knew or should have known that the masterpiece had almost certainly been looted by the regime.

The institution said in a statement that it takes seriously its ongoing pledge to handle claims from the Nazi period.

A representative commented: At no time during The Met's ownership of the piece was there any evidence that it had once belonged to the Stern family – actually, that knowledge did not become known until several decades after the masterpiece left the Museum's collection.

The museum's disposal of the Van Gogh met the museum's strict criteria for removal from collection – namely, it was recorded that the piece was deemed to be of inferior standard than other pieces of the same type in the inventory. Although the institution maintains its stance that this work entered the holdings and was removed legally and well within all guidelines and policies, the museum is open to and will review any further evidence that emerges.

Goulandris Statement

A lawyer acting for BEG commented: The institution is a esteemed foundation in the Greek capital. The attempt to litigate and defame the organization and the defendants in the America upon inaccurate and partial claims was previously dismissed, multiple times. We are convinced it will be a third time.