🔗 Share this article

The heirs of a Jewish pair have brought a case against New York's Metropolitan Museum, asserting that a the Dutch artist art piece was stolen by Nazi forces.

Historical Background

According to the legal filing, the Stern couple bought the artwork, titled Gathering Olives, in the mid-1930s. Just one year later, they were forced to flee their residence in Munich just before World War II.

The complaint states that the museum, which purchased the artwork in 1956 for one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars, ought to have been aware it was probably looted property. The heirs are now requesting the return of the canvas along with financial restitution.

In the decades since the war, this plundered piece has been frequently and covertly traded, acquired and disposed of in and through the city of New York, states the legal filing.

Forced Emigration

The Stern family fled from the city of Munich to the United States in 1936 with their offspring due to Nazi persecution. Yet, they were unable to bring the painting, which was created by the celebrated artist in 1889.

Before the family's emigration, the regime classified the artwork as property of the state and banned the Sterns from exporting it. Following authorization from a Third Reich agent, a agent assigned by the authorities disposed of the painting on the couple's behalf. Yet, the money from the sale were held in a restricted account, which the authorities later took.

Subsequent Ownership

By 1948, or shortly after, the artwork entered the United States and was bought by a prominent figure, among the richest individuals in the US. Eventually, it was sold through a commercial outlet to the institution, which then passed it on to Greek shipping magnate Goulandris and his spouse, Mrs. Goulandris, in 1972.

The Greek couple established the Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which operates a museum in Athens where the painting is currently shown.

Court Allegations

The foundation and a living relative of Goulandris are named as defendants. The legal action states that the defendants and its related entities have hidden and obscured the masterpiece's history and current place from the heirs.

Even now, the foundation continue to hide the manner and time the BEG came into possession of the Painting; the family's possession of the masterpiece from several years; and the truth that the Nazis stole the canvas from the Stern family, coerced the couple into disposing of it via a Nazi-appointed agent, and took the funds of the transaction.

Prior Cases

The family submitted a related lawsuit in California in recently, but it was thrown out in the following years. An further action was also denied in May 2025.

Museum's Response

The complaint argues that the Met's purchase of the artwork was sanctioned by Theodore Rousseau Jr, the Met's authority of European paintings and one of the world's foremost experts on art theft during the Nazi era. The institution and its expert were aware or ought to have been aware that the masterpiece had likely been looted by the Nazis.

The Met responded that it prioritizes its longstanding commitment to resolve issues related to WWII.

An official remarked: At no time during The Met's ownership of the piece was there any record that it had once belonged to the Stern family – indeed, that data 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 institution's rigorous standards for deaccessioning – specifically, it was documented that the artwork was judged to be of lower caliber than other pieces of the comparable nature in the holdings. Although the institution maintains its position that this artwork entered the inventory and was sold legally and well within all standards and procedures, the museum welcomes and will consider any further evidence that emerges.

Goulandris Statement

William Charron acting for BEG said: The Goulandris Foundation is a renowned institution in the Greek capital. The action to litigate and defame the institution and the defendants in the US upon deceptive and insufficient accusations was earlier rejected, on two occasions. We are confident it will be a third time.