🔗 Share this article

The descendants of a Jewish couple have brought a case against The Metropolitan Museum of Art, asserting that a the Dutch artist canvas was looted by the Nazis.

Case History

According to the legal filing, Frederick and Hedwig Stern bought the piece, titled Olive Picking, in the mid-1930s. The following year, they were compelled to leave their residence in the German city of Munich on the eve of WWII.

The legal action states that the Met, which acquired the masterpiece in the mid-1950s for $125,000, should have known it was likely looted property. The descendants are now requesting the return of the canvas along with compensation.

In the decades since the war, this stolen artwork has been repeatedly and secretly trafficked, acquired and disposed of in and through New York, alleges the legal filing.

The Sterns' Escape

The Stern family fled from the city of Munich to the United States in the late 1930s with their six children due to persecution by the Nazis. Nevertheless, they were prevented from taking the artwork, which was created by the celebrated artist in 1889.

Before they left, Nazi authorities designated the artwork as a German cultural asset and banned the Sterns from bringing it with them. Once approved from a Third Reich agent, a representative designated by the authorities auctioned the painting on the couple's behalf. Yet, the money from the sale were placed in a frozen account, which the Nazis later seized.

Subsequent Ownership

In 1948, or shortly after, the artwork arrived in NYC and was bought by a prominent figure, a member of the Astor family. Later, it was exchanged through a commercial outlet to the Met, which then sold it to prominent shipowner Basil Goulandris and his wife, Elise, in 1972.

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

Court Allegations

BEG and a family member of Goulandris are listed as respondents. The filing alleges that the Goulandris family and its associated organizations have concealed and disguised the masterpiece's history and current place from the family.

Currently, the foundation continue to hide how and when the institution came into possession of the artwork; the Stern family's ownership of the artwork from several years; and the truth that the regime stole the canvas from the Stern family, forced the family into selling it via a trustee, and confiscated the proceeds of the transaction.

Earlier Lawsuits

The family filed a comparable case in California in recently, but it was dismissed in 2024. An further action was also dismissed in May 2025.

The Met's Position

The complaint states that the institution's buying of the artwork was authorized by Theodore Rousseau Jr, the Met's authority of European art and one of the world's foremost experts on Nazi-era looted art. The curator and the museum were aware or ought to have been aware that the masterpiece had probably been seized by the Nazis.

The Met issued a statement that it takes seriously its ongoing pledge to address Nazi-era claims.

A representative stated: At no time during the museum's possession of the artwork was there any record that it had previously been owned to the family – in fact, that data did not become accessible until many years after the masterpiece left the Met's possession.

The institution's deaccessioning of the artwork met the museum's strict criteria for deaccessioning – specifically, it was noted that the piece was judged to be of inferior standard than additional artworks of the same type in the inventory. Although the museum upholds its position that this artwork entered the collection and was deaccessioned legally and well within all rules and regulations, the museum invites and will examine any new information that comes to light.

BEG's Response

A lawyer on behalf of the Goulandris Foundation stated: The institution is a highly prestigious organization in the Greek capital. The attempt to take legal action against the Foundation and the Goulandris family in the United States upon inaccurate and partial claims was earlier rejected, twice. We are convinced it will be again.