Cher must cover a $1,023,605.30 legal bill even after a judge awarded her more than $418,000 in unpaid royalties from songs she recorded with Sonny Bono. Federal Judge John A. Kronstadt denied her January 2026 request to recover attorney fees on July 17, 2026, finding the dispute was primarily a contract matter and not subject to federal copyright fee-shifting. The 80-year-old performer still faces the seven-figure tab plus about $10,000 in additional expected expenses. The case highlights how costly long-running music rights fights can be even when a plaintiff wins on the merits.
Cher's outcome is a study in contrasts: a confirmed entitlement to unpaid royalties, paired with a court ruling that she must shoulder her own legal costs. In May 2024 a California judge held that Cher was owed more than $418,000 in unpaid royalties tied to songs she recorded with Sonny Bono. After that victory, Cher asked the court in January 2026 to award $1,023,605.30 in attorney's fees, saying those costs were incurred in successfully prosecuting the case, People reported.
Federal Judge John A. Kronstadt rejected that fee claim on July 17, 2026. Kronstadt concluded that the fee-shifting mechanism available under federal copyright law didn't apply because the dispute was primarily a contract law matter rather than a federal copyright enforcement action. The judge's ruling therefore required each side to bear its own attorneys' costs, leaving Cher responsible for the seven-figure tab and an additional estimated $10,000 in expected legal expenses cited in the filings.
The dispute began with an October 2021 complaint Cher filed against Mary Bono, the widow of Sonny Bono. Cher sought roughly $1 million in damages and argued that a 1978 divorce agreement gave her a permanent 50 percent share of publishing revenue from songs the pair recorded together.
Mary Bono countered that a statutory termination right in the Copyright Act of 1976 allowed reclamation of rights, a legal theory the court rejected in the 2024 royalties decision.
That factual ruling on the termination provision helped secure the unpaid royalties award, but it didn't carry the collateral legal benefit Cher sought. Her fee motion framed the litigation as one in which fee-shifting under federal copyright law should apply because the claims touched on copyright termination rights. Kronstadt's July decision separated the remedies question from the merits, treating the fee request through a contract law lens that doesn't trigger federal fee-shifting.
The result is a partial victory with a concrete cost. On paper the legal bill is small relative to Cher's headline net worth and real estate holdings.
Her Malibu oceanfront estate was listed at million in 2022 and cut to million in 2023, according to realtor.com - roughly 80 times the legal bill she must now absorb herself. Still, the episode renewed attention on the economic value of classic-song catalogs and on the expense of litigating legacy rights disputes.
Mary Bono has appealed the 2024 royalties judgment, and that appeal remains pending before a federal appeals court, according to legal coverage. The pending appeal leaves open the core royalties question even as the fee fight, for now, ends with each side carrying its own costs.
An appeal of the underlying royalties decision is pending before a federal appeals court. Originally reported by USA Today and People; Malibu property details from realtor.com.
This article was created with AI assistance.
