Post-Mortem Drama Continues For Farrah Fawcett Portraits Painted By Andy Warhol
Sometimes money can be divided more easily than a painting.
![](https://abovethelaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/farrah-fawcett-GettyImages-51996154-300x312.jpg)
Farrah Fawcett (Photo by Frederick M. Brown/Getty Images)
Michael Jackson and Farah Fawcett both died on June 25, 2009. Each of these icons’ estates has been the subject of litigation, dispute, and popular interest. In recent legal news, Jackson’s Estate commenced a lawsuit against HBO as a result of the documentary, Leaving Neverland. Fawcett’s Estate, however, provides particular recent intrigue with respect to two portraits of the star, painted by Andy Warhol.
In December 2013, a Los Angeles jury found that Ryan O’Neal, Fawcett’s life partner of three decades, was the rightful owner of one of two Andy Warhol paintings of Fawcett. Trial testimony revealed that the art icon made two portraits of Fawcett in September 1980, in his New York studio, The Factory. In her last will and testament, Fawcett bequeathed her artwork to her alma mater, the University of Texas.
![How To Maximize Productivity With Westlaw Precision With CoCounsel](https://abovethelaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/AdobeStock_68866527-300x144.jpeg)
How To Maximize Productivity With Westlaw Precision With CoCounsel
The story behind the twin Warhol portraits would make for a great Charlie’s Angels plot. Following Fawcett’s passing, the University, which did not know it was receiving Fawcett’s artwork, let alone a Warhol, secured one of the Fawcett portraits, but the other was in O’Neal’s possession, unbeknownst to them. The University was not aware of its existence until Fawcett’s college boyfriend, football player Gregg Lott, informed the school of the existence of a second portrait. (Allegedly Lott and O’Neal have a bad relationship.) Producers from Chasing Farrah, Fawcett’s reality show, gave the University film clips of the paintings to verify that a second portrait existed. After significant research and the viewing of an OWN network documentary about Fawcett and O’Neal, the University confirmed that a second portrait existed and laid claim to it pursuant to the last will’s bequest.
O’Neal, however, claimed that he owned the painting that hung over the couple’s bed in their California beach house. By his theory, it was not part of Fawcett’s estate and therefore not the University’s property. In addition to the artwork left to the University of Texas, Fawcett left $4.5 million to her son, Redmond O’Neal, $500,000 to her father, $100,000 to Lott, and her personal belongings to a Texas nephew. O’Neal was not included in her last will or trust.
During trial, O’Neal testified that he had introduced Fawcett to Warhol and further arranged for the portrait session, of which he was present. He testified that Warhol gave Fawcett one portrait and he gave O’Neal the other. Other witnesses corroborated the story.
The jury was tasked with the question of whether Fawcett owned the Warhol portrait (in O’Neal’s possession) when she died on June 25, 2009. If she died owning the painting, it would pass via her last will to the University of Texas. If it was not hers upon her death, then the University had no right to the artwork. Witness testimony was all that the jury could consider as Fawcett and Warhol are dead and there were no receipts, reports, or gift correspondence relating to the transfer.
Sponsored
![How To Maximize Productivity With Westlaw Precision With CoCounsel](https://abovethelaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/AdobeStock_68866527-300x144.jpeg)
How To Maximize Productivity With Westlaw Precision With CoCounsel
![Calling All Biglaw Pros! Your Dream Job Awaits—Take Our Survey](https://abovethelaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/New_Beginning_-_Man_Looking_to_the_Future-1-300x221.jpg)
Calling All Biglaw Pros! Your Dream Job Awaits—Take Our Survey
![Attention Buyer: Not All Legal AI Models Are Created Equal](https://abovethelaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Gen-AI-Models-300x169.jpeg)
Attention Buyer: Not All Legal AI Models Are Created Equal
![Raising The Bar in Bar Prep](https://abovethelaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Themis_logo_march_2024-small-300x200.png)
Raising The Bar in Bar Prep
The jury found the witness testimony and that of O’Neal’s credible enough to deem that Fawcett did not own it upon her passing and that it was in fact O’Neal’s property. The painting has just returned to the news as O’Neal is attempting to sell it for approximately $18 million. Despite its tremendous personal meaning, O’Neal reportedly wants to sell it to an art collector as opposed to having it pass to his four children, when he dies. Surely money can be divided more equally than a painting.
It is not uncommon for questions of ownership of tangible property to arise following a death. Often they relate to jewelry, furniture, and art work, items that can be easily transported or transferred. Sometimes there exist claims of lifetime gifting and certain items may not be part of the estate. In the case of gifting, generally the burden is on the donee to prove that a gift had been made. In this case, O’Neal’s argument was that it never belonged to Fawcett and he was the original owner of the piece transferred directly to him by Warhol.
It is impractical to list every piece of tangible personal property in one’s last will and testament. Often individuals sell or transfer items during their lifetimes and making such a bequest in a last will causes confusion when items that were long ago transferred are not found upon death. An Andy Warhol portrait, however, is significant enough to specifically identify. In this case, where there are twin paintings, a specific reference could have saved O’Neal, the University, and the court significant time and resources. Additionally, if the intention was in fact for the University to receive the art collection, best practice would have been to inform the school of this, so as to have a clear inventory of what was included in the bequest. The twin Warhols are not the only issues involving Fawcett’s art work as the probate court was also left to decide whether acquired art work in addition to original artwork was left to the University of Texas.
Perhaps O’Neal’s desire to sell the portrait, which he testified was an important part of his life, is to avoid unnecessary administration or even chaos upon his passing. If it is sold now, the monies can be used during his lifetime and then divided when he dies, as he directs. Alternatively, the painting, if in his estate upon his passing, can be specifically bequeathed to a person(s), sold, or transferred to an institution as a donation. Given the drama that ensued following Fawcett’s passing, perhaps O’Neal’s desire to sell now makes the most sense financially and also with respect to preservation of the iconic piece of art.
Sponsored
![Biglaw Professionals: We Want To Know About Your Dream Job](https://abovethelaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/StockSnap_F13A7GWM7O-300x200.jpg)
Biglaw Professionals: We Want To Know About Your Dream Job
![Raising The Bar in Bar Prep](https://abovethelaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Themis_logo_march_2024-small-300x200.png)
Raising The Bar in Bar Prep
Cori A. Robinson is a solo practitioner having founded Cori A. Robinson PLLC, a New York and New Jersey law firm, in 2017. For more than a decade Cori has focused her law practice on trusts and estates and elder law including estate and Medicaid planning, probate and administration, estate litigation, and guardianships. She can be reached at [email protected].