🔗 Share this article

The descendants of a Jewish couple have brought a case against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, asserting that a the Dutch artist canvas was seized by Nazi forces.

Case History

Per the lawsuit, Frederick and Hedwig Stern acquired the piece, titled Gathering Olives, in 1935. Just one year later, they were obliged to escape their dwelling in Munich, Germany prior to the Second World War.

The suit states that the institution, which acquired the artwork in 1956 for a significant sum, ought to have been aware it was almost certainly confiscated property. The family are now requesting the restitution of the canvas along with compensation.

Following WWII, this stolen artwork has been repeatedly and secretly trafficked, bought and sold in and through New York, alleges the court document.

Family's Flight

Hedwig and Frederick Stern escaped from their Munich home to the United States in the late 1930s with their large family due to the oppressive Nazi regime. However, they were prevented from taking the Van Gogh piece, which was painted by the renowned Dutch in 1889.

Prior to their departure, Nazi authorities classified the masterpiece as German cultural property and prohibited the Sterns from taking it abroad. After obtaining permission from a Third Reich agent, a representative designated by the Nazis sold the piece on the couple's behalf. But, the proceeds from the auction were held in a blocked account, which the Nazis later confiscated.

Subsequent Ownership

In 1948, or soon after, the painting entered the United States and was bought by Vincent Astor, a member of the Astor family. Subsequently, it was exchanged through a commercial outlet to the Met, which then transferred it to Greek shipping magnate Basil Goulandris and his partner, Elise, in 1972.

The Goulandris pair founded the BEG in the late 1970s, which manages a gallery in Athens where the artwork is currently on display.

Legal Arguments

The foundation and a surviving nephew of Goulandris are listed as respondents. The filing claims that the family and its related entities have concealed and disguised the painting's ownership and whereabouts from the plaintiffs.

To this day, the foundation continue to hide the circumstances the BEG came into control of the piece; the couple's ownership of the masterpiece from 1935 to 1938; and the reality that the Nazis stole the Painting from the heirs, forced the couple into selling it via a regime representative, and seized the money of the deal.

Previous Legal Action

The descendants filed a comparable case in California in recently, but it was dismissed in the following years. An legal challenge was also rejected in recently.

Museum's Response

The complaint argues that the Met's purchase of the artwork was approved by the museum's expert, the institution's specialist of European art and one of the world's foremost experts on Nazi art looting. The institution and its expert were aware or ought to have been aware that the artwork had probably been looted by Nazis.

The Met responded that it takes seriously its longstanding commitment to handle issues related to WWII.

A representative commented: Never during the institution's custody of the piece was there any documentation that it had once belonged to the Stern family – indeed, that information did not become available until several decades after the artwork left the Met's possession.

The museum's disposal of Olive Picking met the Met's guidelines for removal from collection – namely, it was noted that the piece was deemed to be of lesser quality than other works of the similar kind in the collection. While The Met upholds its stance that this piece entered the holdings and was deaccessioned lawfully and well within all guidelines and policies, the institution invites and will examine any new information that emerges.

Foundation's Defense

A lawyer representing the Goulandris Foundation said: The Goulandris Foundation is a renowned institution in Greece. The action to sue and smear the institution and the Goulandris family in the United States upon misleadingly incomplete allegations was earlier rejected, twice. We are certain it will be a third time.