The Met Responds to Legal Action Over Reportedly Nazi-Plundered Van Gogh Masterpiece

The heirs of a Jewish pair have brought a case against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, alleging that a Vincent van Gogh art piece was looted by the Nazis.

Historical Background

Per the court documents, the Stern couple bought the artwork, titled Olive Harvest, in the mid-1930s. The following year, they were compelled to leave their dwelling in Munich just before World War II.

The legal action argues that the institution, which acquired the masterpiece in 1956 for $125,000, ought to have been aware it was probably confiscated property. The heirs are now seeking the return of the artwork along with financial restitution.

Following the war, this Nazi-looted painting has been often and discreetly exchanged, purchased and sold in and through New York, states the lawsuit.

Family's Flight

The Stern family fled from their Munich home to California in 1936 with their large family due to persecution by the Nazis. However, they were barred from transporting the artwork, which was painted by the celebrated artist in 1889.

Prior to their departure, the Nazi government designated the painting as a German cultural asset and prohibited the Sterns from bringing it with them. Following authorization from a Nazi official, a representative appointed by the Nazis auctioned the piece on the family's behalf. But, the money from the sale were placed in a frozen account, which the authorities later took.

Later Transactions

Around 1948, or shortly after, the artwork arrived in the United States and was bought by a wealthy American, one of America's wealthiest people. Eventually, it was exchanged through a art dealer to the museum, which then sold it to prominent shipowner Goulandris and his wife, Mrs. Goulandris, in 1972.

Basil and Elise set up the Goulandris Foundation in the late 1970s, which runs a institution in Athens where the painting is currently on display.

Claims and Defenses

BEG and a living relative of the magnate are listed as respondents. The legal action claims that the Goulandris family and its related entities have covered up the masterpiece's history and whereabouts from the heirs.

To this day, the Goulandris Defendants continue to hide how and when the BEG came into possession of the piece; the Stern family's ownership of the artwork from several years; and the reality that the regime confiscated the Painting from the heirs, forced the Sterns into selling it via a trustee, and seized the funds of the transaction.

Earlier Lawsuits

The family initiated a related lawsuit in California in recently, but it was rejected in 2024. An appeal was also rejected in recently.

Institution's Statement

The lawsuit contends 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 institution and its expert knew or should have known that the Painting had likely been seized by the Nazis.

The institution responded that it takes seriously its longstanding commitment to resolve claims from the Nazi period.

A representative remarked: At no time during The Met's ownership of the painting was there any evidence that it had previously been owned to the heirs – indeed, that information did not become accessible until a long time after the painting left the institution's holdings.

The museum's disposal of the artwork met the Met's guidelines for disposal – in particular, it was noted that the work was considered to be of inferior standard than other works of the similar kind in the inventory. Even though the museum respectfully stands by its view that this piece entered the inventory and was deaccessioned properly and well within all rules and regulations, the museum welcomes and will consider any new information that emerges.

BEG's Response

William Charron acting for the Goulandris Foundation commented: The Goulandris Foundation is a highly prestigious organization in Greece. The action to sue and smear the Foundation and the defendants in the US upon misleadingly incomplete allegations was already thrown out, multiple times. We are convinced it will be a third time.