🔗 Share this article

The descendants of a Jewish couple have brought a case against New York's Metropolitan Museum, asserting that a the Dutch artist canvas was stolen by the Nazis.

Case History

As stated in the court documents, Frederick and Hedwig Stern bought the painting, titled Olive Picking, in the mid-1930s. A year after, they were forced to flee their home in Munich on the eve of World War II.

The suit contends that the Met, which purchased the masterpiece in the mid-1950s for one hundred twenty-five thousand dollars, must have realized it was probably stolen property. The heirs are now demanding the repatriation of the painting along with compensation.

Following WWII, this stolen artwork has been often and discreetly exchanged, purchased and sold in and through the city of New York, states the lawsuit.

Forced Emigration

The Sterns escaped from the city of Munich to America in 1936 with their offspring due to Nazi persecution. Yet, they were prevented from taking the artwork, which was produced by the renowned Dutch in 1889.

Before the family's emigration, Nazi authorities classified the masterpiece as German cultural property and prohibited the family from exporting it. Following authorization from a regime representative, a trustee appointed by the Nazis sold the painting on the family's behalf. But, the proceeds from the transaction were placed in a blocked account, which the regime later seized.

Post-War History

Around 1948, or soon after, the canvas arrived in the United States and was purchased by Vincent Astor, among the richest individuals in the US. Later, it was exchanged through a commercial outlet to the Met, which then passed it on to Greek shipping magnate the magnate and his wife, Elise Goulandris, in 1972.

Basil and Elise established the BEG in the late 1970s, which operates a museum in Athens where the painting is currently exhibited.

Court Allegations

BEG and a living relative of the magnate are listed as respondents. The lawsuit claims that the Goulandris family and its associated organizations have hidden and obscured the artwork's provenance and whereabouts from the heirs.

Even now, the defendants continue to hide the circumstances the institution came into ownership of the Painting; the family's possession of the artwork from 1935 to 1938; and the reality that the Third Reich looted the artwork from the family, forced the couple into selling it via a trustee, and seized the proceeds of the transaction.

Previous Legal Action

The family filed a comparable case in the state of California in the year 2022, but it was thrown out in the following years. An legal challenge was also denied in recently.

Institution's Statement

The legal action argues that the Met's purchase of the artwork was approved by the museum's expert, the institution's specialist of Old Masters and a leading authority on art theft during the Nazi era. Rousseau and the Met knew or should have known that the artwork had probably been looted by the Nazis.

The institution said in a statement that it takes seriously its ongoing pledge to resolve claims from the Nazi period.

An official remarked: Never during the museum's possession of the artwork was there any evidence that it had previously been owned to the heirs – in fact, that information did not become available until many years after the painting left the institution's holdings.

The museum's disposal of the artwork met the museum's strict criteria for deaccessioning – specifically, it was recorded that the artwork was considered to be of inferior standard than other pieces of the comparable nature in the inventory. Even though the museum respectfully stands by its position that this piece entered the collection and was deaccessioned lawfully and well within all rules and regulations, the Met is open to and will review any further evidence that emerges.

BEG's Response

William Charron representing the Goulandris Foundation commented: The institution is a renowned institution in Greece. The action to litigate and defame the institution and the defendants in the US upon inaccurate and partial claims was earlier rejected, twice. We are certain it will be once more.