New York's Met Museum Responds to Legal Challenge Over Supposedly Nazi-Looted Van Gogh Painting
The heirs of a Jewish couple have initiated legal proceedings against New York's Metropolitan Museum, alleging that a Van Gogh art piece was seized by Nazi forces.
Case History
As stated in the court documents, the Stern couple acquired the artwork, titled Gathering Olives, in the mid-1930s. A year after, they were compelled to leave their home in Munich, Germany just before WWII.
The complaint argues that the institution, which obtained the painting in the mid-1950s for one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars, must have realized it was almost certainly stolen property. The family are now seeking the return of the painting along with compensation.
Following WWII, this Nazi-looted painting has been frequently and covertly traded, acquired and disposed of in and through NYC, states the lawsuit.
Forced Emigration
Hedwig and Frederick Stern escaped from the city of Munich to the United States in 1936 with their large family due to Nazi persecution. Nevertheless, they were barred from transporting the Van Gogh piece, which was created by the celebrated artist in the late 19th century.
Before they left, the regime designated the masterpiece as a German cultural asset and forbade the Sterns from bringing it with them. Following authorization from a regime representative, a representative designated by the Nazis auctioned the artwork on the couple's behalf. Yet, the money from the auction were held in a restricted account, which the authorities later seized.
Post-War History
Around 1948, or shortly after, the artwork arrived in New York and was acquired by a wealthy American, one of America's wealthiest people. Eventually, it was sold through a gallery to the Met, which then passed it on to wealthy Greek businessman Basil Goulandris and his spouse, Elise Goulandris, in 1972.
The Greek couple established the Goulandris Foundation in the late 1970s, which manages a gallery in Athens where the masterpiece is currently exhibited.
Legal Arguments
The foundation and a family member of the magnate are named as defendants. The lawsuit alleges that the defendants and its associated organizations have covered up the masterpiece's history and current place from the family.
Even now, the defendants continue to hide the manner and time the BEG came into possession of the Painting; the couple's ownership of the masterpiece from several years; and the truth that the Third Reich confiscated the Painting from the family, pressured the family into parting with it via a trustee, and took the proceeds of the sale.
Prior Cases
The Stern heirs initiated a similar complaint in California in 2022, but it was rejected in 2024. An further action was also denied in recently.
Museum's Response
The legal action states that the Met's purchase of the piece was authorized by a curator, the museum's curator of Old Masters and one of the world's foremost experts on art theft during the Nazi era. The curator and the museum must have known that the Painting had almost certainly been seized by Nazis.
The institution responded that it takes seriously its historical dedication to address issues related to WWII.
A representative remarked: At no time during The Met's ownership of the painting was there any documentation that it had earlier been possessed to the heirs – actually, that information did not become available until a long time after the artwork left the Museum's collection.
The Met's sale of the artwork met the museum's strict criteria for deaccessioning – in particular, it was noted that the piece was judged to be of lesser quality than additional artworks of the same type in the inventory. Even though the museum upholds its position that this work entered the inventory and was removed legally and well within all rules and regulations, the museum is open to and will review any further evidence that is discovered.
Goulandris Statement
A lawyer on behalf of BEG said: The Goulandris Foundation is a renowned institution in Athens. The action to take legal action against the Foundation and the family in the United States upon inaccurate and partial claims was already thrown out, on two occasions. We are confident it will be again.