Metropolitan Museum Responds to Lawsuit Over Supposedly Nazi-Looted Van Gogh Artwork
The family members of a Jewish pair have initiated legal proceedings against The Met, alleging that a Van Gogh oil painting was seized by the Third Reich.
Origins of the Dispute
According to the legal filing, Hedwig and Frederick Stern acquired the painting, titled Gathering Olives, in 1935. A year after, they were forced to flee their home in the German city of Munich on the eve of WWII.
The complaint argues that the museum, which purchased the masterpiece in the 1950s for a significant sum, ought to have been aware it was probably stolen property. The descendants are now seeking the restitution of the painting along with compensation.
In the decades since the war, this Nazi-looted painting has been repeatedly and secretly trafficked, purchased and sold in and through New York, claims the lawsuit.
Family's Flight
The Sterns fled from Munich to California in 1936 with their large family due to the oppressive Nazi regime. Yet, they were barred from transporting the painting, which was painted by the celebrated artist in the late 19th century.
Before the family's emigration, the Nazi government classified the artwork as property of the state and banned the couple from bringing it with them. After obtaining permission from a Nazi official, a agent designated by the Nazis sold the artwork on the Sterns' behalf. Yet, the funds from the sale were held in a frozen account, which the regime later took.
Post-War History
Around 1948, or soon after, the artwork arrived in the United States and was acquired by a wealthy American, one of America's wealthiest people. Eventually, it was sold through a gallery to the institution, which then transferred it to prominent shipowner the magnate and his wife, Elise, in 1972.
The Goulandris pair founded the BEG in 1979, which operates a gallery in Athens, Greece where the painting is currently shown.
Claims and Defenses
The institution and a family member of Basil Goulandris are listed as respondents. The legal action claims that the defendants and its related entities have hidden and obscured the artwork's provenance and current place from the family.
Currently, the defendants continue to conceal the circumstances the institution came into ownership of the Painting; the couple's ownership of the masterpiece from 1935 to 1938; and the facts that the regime stole the artwork from the family, pressured the couple into disposing of it via a regime representative, and took the funds of the sale.
Previous Legal Action
The family filed a comparable case in California in 2022, but it was rejected in 2024. An further action was also denied in recently.
The Met's Position
The legal action contends that the museum's acquisition of the painting was authorized by Theodore Rousseau Jr, the Met's authority of Old Masters and a renowned specialist on Nazi-era looted art. The institution and its expert must have known that the Painting had almost certainly been seized by the regime.
The Met said in a statement that it is committed to its ongoing pledge to address issues related to WWII.
A representative stated: At no time during the institution's custody of the artwork was there any record that it had previously been owned to the family – indeed, that data did not become known until several decades after the painting left the Museum's collection.
The museum's disposal of the Van Gogh met the institution's rigorous standards for disposal – in particular, it was documented that the piece was considered to be of lesser quality than other works of the comparable nature in the holdings. Although the institution maintains its stance that this piece entered the holdings and was deaccessioned lawfully and well within all guidelines and policies, the institution welcomes and will consider any additional details that emerges.
Foundation's Defense
Legal counsel acting for the Goulandris Foundation commented: The institution is a highly prestigious organization in the Greek capital. The effort to take legal action against the organization and the Goulandris family in the United States upon deceptive and insufficient accusations was earlier rejected, on two occasions. We are confident it will be again.