Cher Seeks Over $800K in Attorney Fees from Sonny Bono's Widow After Major Court Win

It seems the legal battle over Sonny Bono's music legacy is far from over, but one thing is clear: Cher is holding the winning hand, at least for now. The iconic singer is now seeking a hefty sum, more than $800,000, in attorney fees and costs from Mary Bono, Sonny's widow, following a significant victory in a federal appeals court. This latest development adds another chapter to a dispute that has been simmering for years, rooted deeply in copyright law and the former couple's divorce settlement.

For those who haven't been following the twists and turns, Cher filed a lawsuit back in October 2021. Her claim? That Mary Bono was attempting to terminate certain copyright termination rights for some of Sonny Bono's most beloved songs. Such a move, Cher argued, would effectively cut off her half of the royalties — a share she's been entitled to since her divorce from Sonny way back in 1975. The core of their separation agreement stipulated that Cher would receive 50% of the income generated from their joint compositions, a foundational promise she clearly intends to uphold.

Mary Bono, however, saw things differently. She filed a motion to dismiss Cher's lawsuit, contending that federal copyright law should override any state community property laws that might have been established in the divorce settlement. Essentially, she was arguing that federal law gave her the power to reclaim these rights, regardless of prior agreements. But a federal judge didn't buy it, denying Mary's motion and allowing Cher's case to move forward. Naturally, Mary wasn't ready to give up and took the fight to the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.

Well, just last month, the Ninth Circuit delivered its verdict, affirming the lower court's decision. This was a massive win for Cher, effectively cementing her ability to pursue her claims that Mary's termination notices — aimed at 30 compositions, mind you — directly violate their 1975 divorce settlement. The legal rationale often harks back to the 1978 Copyright Act, which includes a provision allowing authors or their heirs to reclaim copyrights after 35 years. Mary's termination notices, served in 2021, were an attempt to exercise this very right, but the courts have repeatedly indicated that Cher's contractual rights from the divorce settlement deserve consideration.

So, here we are: Cher, having successfully fended off Mary's attempts to dismiss her lawsuit, is now asking the court to make Mary foot the bill for the substantial legal expenses incurred. We're talking about a demand for $811,465.72 in attorney fees and an additional $2,007.60 in costs. It’s a significant amount, to be sure, reflecting the complex and drawn-out nature of this particular legal tussle. One can only imagine the countless hours spent poring over legal documents, crafting arguments, and navigating the intricacies of copyright law.

It all boils down to whether a widow's federal copyright termination rights can trump a former spouse's contractual agreements from a divorce settlement. For now, the courts have leaned in Cher's favor, suggesting that those decades-old agreements hold considerable weight. This ongoing saga is a potent reminder that even after personal relationships end, the threads of shared professional legacies can continue to be a source of contention for years, even decades, to come. And in this case, the beat, or rather, the legal battle, certainly goes on.