🔗 Share this article

The family members of a Jewish couple have initiated legal proceedings against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, claiming that a the Dutch artist oil painting was looted by the Nazis.

Historical Background

According to the lawsuit, the Stern couple purchased the artwork, titled Olive Picking, in the year 1935. A year after, they were obliged to escape their residence in Munich, Germany on the eve of the Second World War.

The complaint states that the Met, which obtained the masterpiece in the mid-1950s for one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars, should have known it was likely confiscated property. The family are now seeking the return of the canvas along with financial restitution.

Following the war, this Nazi-looted painting has been repeatedly and secretly trafficked, bought and sold in and through NYC, claims the lawsuit.

Forced Emigration

The Stern family fled from the city of Munich to California in 1936 with their six children due to Nazi persecution. Yet, they were barred from transporting the artwork, which was created by the celebrated artist in 1889.

Prior to their departure, Nazi authorities designated the artwork as a German cultural asset and banned the Sterns from bringing it with them. Following authorization from a Nazi official, a agent designated by the regime disposed of the artwork on the couple's behalf. Yet, the money from the sale were deposited in a restricted account, which the Nazis later confiscated.

Post-War History

Around 1948, or soon after, the painting arrived in the United States and was purchased by a prominent figure, one of America's wealthiest people. Later, it was exchanged through a gallery to the Met, which then sold it to prominent shipowner Goulandris and his wife, Elise Goulandris, in 1972.

The Greek couple founded the Basil & Elise Goulandris Foundation in the late 1970s, which manages a museum in Athens where the artwork is currently exhibited.

Legal Arguments

BEG and a family member of the magnate are listed as respondents. The lawsuit claims that the Goulandris family and its related entities have concealed and disguised the masterpiece's history and location from the family.

Even now, the foundation continue to hide how and when the institution came into possession of the piece; the family's possession of the artwork from 1935 to 1938; and the truth that the Nazis looted the artwork from the Stern family, pressured the couple into parting with it via a trustee, and seized the proceeds of the transaction.

Previous Legal Action

The family initiated a comparable case in California in recently, but it was rejected in the following years. An legal challenge was also denied in spring 2025.

Museum's Response

The complaint argues that the museum's acquisition of the artwork was sanctioned by Theodore Rousseau Jr, the Met's authority of European art and one of the world's foremost experts on Nazi art looting. The institution and its expert must have known that the Painting had almost certainly been looted by Nazis.

The institution responded that it takes seriously its ongoing pledge to address Nazi-era claims.

A spokesperson stated: At no time during The Met's ownership of the painting was there any evidence that it had previously been owned to the heirs – actually, that knowledge did not become available until a long time after the masterpiece left the Met's possession.

The museum's disposal of the artwork met the museum's strict criteria for deaccessioning – in particular, it was documented that the piece was considered to be of lesser quality than additional artworks of the same type in the inventory. While the museum respectfully stands by its view that this artwork entered the holdings and was removed properly and well within all guidelines and policies, the institution invites and will examine any additional details that comes to light.

Foundation's Defense

William Charron acting for BEG stated: BEG is a esteemed foundation in Athens. The effort to take legal action against the organization and the defendants in the US upon deceptive and insufficient accusations was already thrown out, multiple times. We are certain it will be once more.