🔗 Share this article

The family members of a Jewish pair have brought a case against The Met, alleging that a the Dutch artist canvas was looted by the Nazis.

Historical Background

According to the legal filing, Frederick and Hedwig Stern acquired the piece, titled Olive Picking, in 1935. Just one year later, they were obliged to escape their home in the German city of Munich on the eve of the Second World War.

The complaint states that the Met, which acquired the masterpiece in the mid-1950s for a significant sum, ought to have been aware it was almost certainly looted property. The heirs are now demanding the restitution of the artwork along with financial restitution.

Following WWII, this stolen artwork has been repeatedly and secretly trafficked, purchased and sold in and through the city of New York, states the court document.

Forced Emigration

The Sterns escaped from Munich to America in 1936 with their offspring due to persecution by the Nazis. However, they were unable to bring the Van Gogh piece, which was produced by the celebrated artist in the late 19th century.

Prior to their departure, Nazi authorities declared the masterpiece as a German cultural asset and forbade the family from taking it abroad. Once approved from a Third Reich agent, a agent designated by the Nazis disposed of the piece on the Sterns' behalf. Yet, the funds from the auction were held in a frozen account, which the Nazis later seized.

Later Transactions

Around 1948, or soon after, the artwork was brought to the United States and was acquired by Vincent Astor, among the richest individuals in the US. Later, it was transferred through a art dealer to the institution, which then sold it to prominent shipowner the magnate and his wife, Elise, in 1972.

The Greek couple founded the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in 1979, which runs a museum in Athens where the painting is currently shown.

Claims and Defenses

BEG and a family member of the magnate are listed as respondents. The filing alleges that the Goulandris family and its associated organizations have covered up the masterpiece's history and location from the family.

To this day, the Goulandris Defendants continue to conceal the circumstances the BEG came into ownership of the piece; the couple's ownership of the masterpiece from the mid-1930s; and the truth that the regime stole the canvas from the family, pressured the family into selling it via a Nazi-appointed agent, and seized the money of the transaction.

Prior Cases

The family filed a comparable case in California in 2022, but it was dismissed in the following years. An legal challenge was also rejected in recently.

The Met's Position

The legal action argues that the museum's acquisition of the painting was approved by Theodore Rousseau Jr, the institution's specialist of European paintings and a renowned specialist on art theft during the Nazi era. The curator and the museum were aware or ought to have been aware that the masterpiece had probably been looted by the Nazis.

The museum responded that it prioritizes its ongoing pledge to handle claims from the Nazi period.

A representative commented: At no time during the institution's custody of the piece was there any evidence that it had earlier been possessed to the family – in fact, that information did not become known until a long time after the painting left the institution's holdings.

The museum's disposal of Olive Picking met the museum's strict criteria for disposal – specifically, it was documented that the piece was judged to be of lesser quality than other pieces of the comparable nature in the holdings. Although The Met maintains its position that this piece entered the inventory and was removed properly and well within all guidelines and policies, the museum is open to and will review any further evidence that is discovered.

Foundation's Defense

A lawyer representing the Goulandris Foundation said: The institution is a esteemed foundation in the Greek capital. The attempt to litigate and defame the Foundation and the family in the United States upon deceptive and insufficient accusations was already thrown out, on two occasions. We are convinced it will be once more.