Photo Credit: Cher by David Carroll / CC by 2.0
A federal judge has denied Cher’s request to force Sonny Bono’s widow to reimburse her for over $1 million in legal fees after their royalty court battle.
After Cher’s triumph in court against Mary Bono, widow of her ex-husband Sonny, the singer requested Bono cover her legal fees, which amounted to more than $1 million. But a federal judge has denied that request, meaning Cher will have to foot her attorneys’ bill herself.
The matter centered on Mary Bono’s attempts to stop Cher’s 50% share of royalty payments from her 1978 divorce settlement with Sonny. Mary Bono argued that copyright “termination rights” allowed her to void the divorce agreement. But the judge disagreed with that interpretation, ruling that the divorce agreement took precedence over any copyright termination clauses.
While Mary Bono continues to appeal Cher’s victory, Cher sought to force Bono to reimburse her legal fees, claiming that Bono “dragged” the case out unnecessarily over the last two years. However, Judge John A. Kronstadt denied the motion in a decision on Monday, July 20.
Sonny and Cher’s 1978 divorce settlement entitled her to a permanent 50% cut of the publishing revenue from songs written during their time together, including “I Got You Babe” and “The Beat Goes On.” Bono later married Mary; he passed away in a skiing accident in 1998.
In 2021, Mary argued she should no longer be required to pay out under the divorce settlement due to copyright termination rights. She claimed that the settlement should be the same as a songwriter selling their rights to a publisher, and she should therefore be able to void it by invoking termination rights.
Judge Kronstadt ruled in May 2024 that termination did not apply in this case, since Sonny and Cher’s settlement was a contract for financial compensation rather than a copyright assignment. In November, that decision was finalized.
Afterward, Cher immediately turned around and filed a motion for Mary Bono to reimburse her legal fees, claiming that it was only fair since she had racked up over a million dollars defeating an argument that would have revoked “millions of dollars” in royalties.
“Defendant argued, repeatedly and frivolously, that a federal statute that expressly states it does not affect state-law rights somehow extinguishes those state-law rights,” wrote Cher’s lawyers.
But the beat goes on, and Cher will have to pay her own legal fees.
