SOUTH CAROLINA — After almost 15 years of legal battles involving over 100 attorneys, the war for control of music legend James Brown’s estate has ended at last.
The question left unanswered is: at what cost to Brown’s “I Feel Good” Trust was the “peace treaty” purchased?
Important question, no answer.
The terms of a recently announced settlement are being kept secret by the parties involved: Brown’s estate, represented by trustee Russell Bauknight of Columbia; Tomirae Hynie, the woman whose claim to be Brown’s wife has been rejected by the S.C. Supreme Court; and several of Brown’s children and grandchildren.
While it cannot be known how much of what Brown gave to his charity will be used for that purpose, his intentions were clear.
Brown left his 850+ copyrights and rights to his image to the “I Feel Good” Trust, and needy students in South Carolina and Georgia were the primary beneficiaries of what The New York Times has described as “a charitable plan so dear to Mr. Brown that he made it the centerpiece of his will: the distribution of millions of dollars in scholarships for underprivileged children.”
Several stories about the settlement ran in news outlets from Augusta to London in recent days. Many explained that the charity was not currently operational—and named a scapegoat for that failure.
Since Brown’s death on Christmas Day 2006, the estate has not awarded one dime in scholarships, even though the estate has paid “tens of millions” for litigation costs, according to court filings by Bauknight in a California federal court.
In the federal lawsuit, some of Brown’s heirs alleged Bauknight worked with Hynie to make secret deals that cheated the heirs out of copyright proceeds—while her marital status was still under appeal.
The federal lawsuit was also settled in the recently announced agreement, in which the children waived all rights to sue the estate in the future.
Despite continuous litigation involving Brown’s children, the estate and Hynie (from the 2007 will contests, to the copyright dispute resolved only days ago) the settling parties blamed former trustee Adele Pope of Newberry for the failure of the estate to establish the charity and award scholarships.
According to court filings, Pope and Bob Buchanan of Aiken were court-appointed in 2007 after financial irregularities were discovered with the original three trustees. One original trustee, David Cannon, later accepted a guilty plea related to millions the estate found missing.
When Hynie, her son and several Brown children filed will contests, Pope and Buchanan defended Brown’s will as written, but then-Attorney General Henry McMaster intervened. He worked a settlement that gave over half of what Brown left his charity to Hynie and other will contestants.
Bauknight was appointed trustee under the McMaster settlement, approved by the court in 2009, at which time public records show the estate was bringing in more than $4 million annually.
Buchanan and Pope appealed the settlement. The attorney general, Bauknight, Hynie and others sued Pope and Buchanan in an effort to have them drop the appeal. Pope and Buchanan filed for counterclaims.
This lawsuit, known as Richland 4900, continued when Alan Wilson became attorney general and has yet to be resolved. Records received by this reporter in 2020; however, show the attorney general’s office never authorized the private law firm of Kenneth Wingate to file Richland 4900 on behalf now-Governor McMaster.
In 2013, the S.C. Supreme Court overturned the McMaster settlement, calling it a “dismemberment” of Brown’s estate plan. Pope requested $2.8 million for the total of over six years she served as trustee and worked on the appeal, according to an article several years ago in The New York Times.
Even though Bauknight has paid his attorneys between $1-2 million every year he has filed an accounting since 2012, he refused to pay Pope, and she had to sue for her fees. At a trial in 2018, she agreed to settle for $2.1 million, but the settlement offer was rejected.
Despite several lawsuits involving the estate, for many years there has been no impediment from any lawsuit in funding the “I Feel Good” Trust or in awarding scholarships from it, according to court filings.
Brown’s international royalties are not subject to the “termination rights” available to family members under the U.S. Copyright Act, and neither are publicity rights. They were left outright to the charity.
Funds from these assets could have been used for years for the purpose Brown intended, but instead the estate has paid tens of millions in legal fees so that will contestants could receive what Brown did not intend for them to have.
Two news articles in the Augusta and Savannah areas made Pope a scapegoat for the failure of the estate to award scholarships and reported she had requested $16 million for legal services, but that is incorrect. A portion of the story was picked up by the press in London, where Hynie currently resides.
Since Pope was not part of the recent settlement and is not an impediment to establishing the charity, one can only speculate why she would be mentioned.
One possibility is as a distraction. The secret settlement agreement included waivers that prevent some children and Hynie from suing Bauknight or the estate. With a secret agreement, it is not possible to know what, if anything, those waivers may have cost the charity—and with a convenient scapegoat, it may be no one will ask.
There has been a pattern of secrecy in the James Brown estate: gag orders, court filings sealed and removed, evidence not admitted, public documents withheld under the Freedom of Information Act, full accountings not filed—
Secrecy leaves important questions unanswered. How much money should be in the charity, given the $5 million vs. $100 million dispute over the at-death value of Brown’s assets? After all, the estate was earning around $5 million a year when the McMaster settlement was reached. How could it be possible the estate had a value of only $4.7 million, as Bauknight told the IRS, when the estate has since paid “tens of millions” in litigation costs, as Bauknight told the federal court in California?
In the recent settlement, what did the children receive versus what the charity received versus what the lawyers received? Why is Hynie, who was not Brown’s wife, included in the settlement?
A few things are certain. Brown wanted his copyrights in an education trust, and all of his children knew that when they contested his will.
Added to the list of what is certain: the estate and Brown’s heirs have found a convenient scapegoat for their failure to carry out Brown’s “noble estate plan,” and that would be the co-trustees who defended Brown’s charity.
Perhaps with the settlement, needy students in South Carolina and Georgia can have more hope of receiving the scholarships Brown intended them to have.
They have been waiting 15 years, and maybe that will be enough.