🔗 Share this article

The family members of a Jewish pair have filed a lawsuit against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, asserting that a Van Gogh art piece was looted by the Third Reich.

Origins of the Dispute

Per the lawsuit, Hedwig and Frederick Stern acquired the piece, titled Gathering Olives, in the year 1935. The following year, they were compelled to leave their dwelling in the German city of Munich on the eve of the Second World War.

The suit argues that the Met, which acquired the artwork in 1956 for a significant sum, must have realized it was almost certainly confiscated property. The family are now requesting the repatriation of the painting along with damages.

In the decades since World War II, this plundered piece has been frequently and covertly traded, purchased and sold in and through the city of New York, alleges the legal filing.

Forced Emigration

The Stern family escaped from Munich to the United States in 1936 with their large family due to Nazi persecution. Nevertheless, they were unable to bring the Van Gogh piece, which was created by the Dutch post-impressionist in 1889.

Prior to their departure, Nazi authorities declared the painting as a German cultural asset and banned the couple from taking it abroad. Once approved from a Third Reich agent, a trustee appointed by the regime disposed of the painting on the Sterns' behalf. Yet, the proceeds from the sale were placed in a restricted account, which the authorities later took.

Later Transactions

Around 1948, or soon after, the painting arrived in NYC and was bought by a prominent figure, one of America's wealthiest people. Later, it was sold through a gallery to the Met, which then transferred it to prominent shipowner Basil Goulandris and his spouse, Elise, in 1972.

Basil and Elise set up the BEG in 1979, which manages a museum in Athens where the artwork is currently on display.

Claims and Defenses

The foundation and a surviving nephew of Goulandris are named as defendants. The filing alleges that the family and its associated organizations have concealed and disguised the painting's ownership and current place from the plaintiffs.

Currently, the foundation continue to hide the manner and time the foundation came into control of the piece; the couple's ownership of the masterpiece from 1935 to 1938; and the facts that the regime confiscated the canvas from the family, forced the Sterns into selling it via a trustee, and seized the proceeds of the sale.

Earlier Lawsuits

The descendants filed a similar complaint in California in the year 2022, but it was rejected in the following years. An appeal was also dismissed in recently.

Institution's Statement

The complaint argues that the museum's acquisition of the painting was sanctioned by the museum's expert, the museum's curator 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 artwork had probably been looted by the Nazis.

The institution responded that it is committed to its longstanding commitment to address issues related to WWII.

A spokesperson stated: Never during the museum's possession of the piece was there any documentation that it had previously been owned to the Stern family – indeed, that data did not become accessible until a long time after the painting left the Met's possession.

The Met's sale of the Van Gogh met the Met's guidelines for removal from collection – namely, it was recorded that the work was judged to be of lesser quality than additional artworks of the same type in the holdings. Even though the institution upholds its stance that this work entered the holdings and was deaccessioned properly and well within all guidelines and policies, the museum invites and will examine any new information that emerges.

Goulandris Statement

Legal counsel on behalf of the Goulandris Foundation commented: BEG is a renowned institution in Greece. The action to take legal action against the organization and the family in the United States upon misleadingly incomplete allegations was already thrown out, on two occasions. We are confident it will be a third time.