Cher Wins Royalty Battle, But Judge Says Pay Your Own $1M Legal Bill
In a classic case of winning the war but losing the pocketbook, pop legend Cher successfully defended her right to half of the Sonny & Cher royalties. But a federal judge just told her she has to foot her own $1 million legal bill. This is a story about contracts, copyrights, and the cold reality of the law.
U.S. District Judge John A. Kronstadt ruled on July 17 that Cher cannot force Sonny Bono's widow, Mary, to pay her $1,023,605.30 in attorney fees. The judge said the federal copyright law Cher cited doesn't apply here because her victory was won under California contract law, not federal copyright. It's a technicality that stings.
The Judge Rejected Cher's $1.02 Million Fee Request
Cher asked for the cash in January, arguing her legal team had to fight off Mary's attempt to kill the royalty payments guaranteed by Cher and Sonny's 1978 marriage settlement agreement. Her lawyers claimed the case was so intertwined that splitting the bill was pointless. But Kronstadt wasn't buying it.
The court saw Cher's royalty rights as a contractual obligation, not a copyright creation. Sure, federal copyright termination rules sparked the fight, but Cher won because the divorce agreement's payment obligations survived the termination notice. The judge said the Copyright Act didn't erase that deal.
Cher's Contractual Royalty Rights Remain Protected
The final judgment from November 2025 is clear: the termination notice from Sonny's heirs did not cancel Cher's 50% share of qualifying composition royalties from songs written or acquired before February 1974. The 1978 settlement also gives her half the receipts from certain recording contracts signed before the couple split.
Kronstadt did award Cher $187,534.91 in composition royalties that Mary had pocketed, plus 7% annual interest from February 2022. There's also $418,156.82 in royalties held by Wixen Music Publishing that would have gone to Cher as of June 30, 2022. That money is separate from the damages award.
Mary still gets to pick the royalty administrator for the heirs, subject to the rights of Sonny's four children. Cher can object if she has reasonable concerns about the administrator's qualifications, contract terms, or fees.
The Dispute Covers the Sonny & Cher Catalog
Cher and Sonny were the king and queen of 1960s pop with hits like 'I Got You Babe' and 'The Beat Goes On.' Their 1978 settlement kept the money flowing even after the marriage and the act ended. That's the American way: a deal is a deal.
After Sonny died in a 1998 skiing accident, Mary took over his estate. In 2016, the heirs tried to use a copyright termination provision to reclaim the rights. Mary argued that killed Cher's royalty share. Cher said no, the divorce contract stands on its own. Judge Kronstadt agreed with Cher. But he also said, 'You pay your own lawyers.'
Mary has already filed an appeal. The Ninth Circuit docket shows the case was temporarily closed for mediation, with a conference set for July 23 and the administrative closure extended through July 30. This fight isn't over yet.
FAQ: What Does This Mean for Cher and the Bono Estate?
Why did the judge deny Cher's legal fees?
The judge ruled that Cher's victory was based on California contract law, not federal copyright law. The fee-shifting provision she cited only applies to copyright claims, not contract claims.
Does Cher still get her royalties?
Yes. The court confirmed that the 1978 divorce agreement remains in effect. Cher will continue to receive 50% of qualifying royalties from Sonny & Cher songs.
What happens next?
Mary Bono has appealed the ruling. The case is currently in mediation at the Ninth Circuit. A conference is scheduled for July 23, with the case on hold through July 30.
Is this a win for Cher?
It's a mixed result. She kept her royalty rights and got back $187,534.91 in unpaid royalties plus interest. But she has to pay over $1 million in legal fees out of her own pocket.