🔗 Share this article The Met Responds to Legal Action Over Supposedly Nazi-Plundered Van Gogh Painting The family members of a Jewish couple have initiated legal proceedings against The Met, asserting that a Van Gogh oil painting was looted by the Third Reich. Case History According to the lawsuit, Hedwig and Frederick Stern purchased the artwork, titled Olive Picking, in 1935. Just one year later, they were obliged to escape their residence in Munich on the eve of WWII. The legal action argues that the institution, which obtained the artwork in the 1950s for one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars, ought to have been aware it was likely confiscated property. The heirs are now demanding the restitution of the canvas along with financial restitution. Since the end of the war, this plundered piece has been often and discreetly exchanged, purchased and sold in and through New York, alleges the lawsuit. The Sterns' Escape Hedwig and Frederick Stern fled from their Munich home to America in 1936 with their large family due to Nazi persecution. Yet, they were barred from transporting the artwork, which was created by the Dutch post-impressionist in the late 19th century. Prior to their departure, the regime classified the masterpiece as property of the state and banned the Sterns from taking it abroad. Following authorization from a Third Reich agent, a trustee assigned by the regime sold the piece on the family's behalf. But, the money from the transaction were deposited in a frozen account, which the regime later took. Later Transactions In 1948, or soon after, the canvas was brought to the United States and was acquired by a prominent figure, one of America's wealthiest people. Subsequently, it was exchanged through a gallery to the Met, which then transferred it to prominent shipowner Basil Goulandris and his wife, Elise, in the early 1970s. Basil and Elise set up the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which operates a museum in the Greek capital where the masterpiece is currently shown. Court Allegations The institution and a surviving nephew of Basil Goulandris are identified in the suit. The lawsuit claims that the Goulandris family and its affiliates have concealed and disguised the painting's ownership and whereabouts from the family. Currently, the foundation continue to conceal how and when the foundation came into possession of the piece; the family's possession of the artwork from 1935 to 1938; and the truth that the Third Reich stole the canvas from the Stern family, coerced the Sterns into selling it via a trustee, and seized the money of the deal. Earlier Lawsuits The Stern heirs filed a related lawsuit in California in 2022, but it was rejected in 2024. An further action was also denied in recently. The Met's Position The lawsuit contends that the Met's purchase of the piece was approved by the museum's expert, the institution's specialist of European paintings and one of the world's foremost experts on art theft during the Nazi era. The institution and its expert must have known that the artwork had almost certainly been looted by Nazis. The institution responded that it takes seriously its historical dedication to address issues related to WWII. A spokesperson stated: Not once during The Met's ownership of the piece was there any evidence that it had earlier been possessed to the Stern family – in fact, that knowledge did not become available until a long time after the painting left the Met's possession. The museum's disposal of the Van Gogh met the Met's guidelines for removal from collection – namely, it was recorded that the work was deemed to be of lesser quality than other pieces of the similar kind in the inventory. Although the museum upholds its view that this artwork entered the holdings and was sold properly and well within all rules and regulations, the Met invites and will examine any further evidence that is discovered. BEG's Response William Charron acting for the Goulandris Foundation said: BEG is a highly prestigious organization in the Greek capital. The attempt to take legal action against the Foundation and the Goulandris family in the United States upon inaccurate and partial claims was earlier rejected, twice. We are certain it will be once more.