By Samantha Paul Cher’s long-running royalties lawsuit against Mary Bono, the widow of her former husband and musical partner Sonny Bono, has produced a major victory for the singer but is not completely over. A California federal judge ruled that Mary Bono could not use federal copyright termination law to eliminate Cher’s contractual right to a share of royalties established in her 1978 divorce settlement with Sonny. Final judgment was entered in 2025, but Mary Bono appealed, and Cher has now filed her own appeal concerning more than $1 million in attorney’s fees.
Why Did Cher Sue Mary Bono?
Cher filed the lawsuit in October 2021 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
The dispute goes back to the Marriage Settlement Agreement, or MSA, that Cher and Sonny Bono entered into in 1978 after their divorce. Under that agreement, Cher received a 50% interest in certain composition and recording royalties associated with music created during their relationship.
For decades, those royalty arrangements continued after Sonny’s death in 1998.
The conflict began after Mary Bono and Sonny’s other heirs served copyright termination notices in 2016 under Section 304(c) of the Copyright Act. Mary later took the position that the termination process affected Cher’s continuing royalty rights.
What Are Copyright Termination Rights?
Federal copyright law gives authors and, in certain circumstances, their heirs an opportunity to terminate older transfers of copyright interests.
Congress created these rights partly to allow creators or their families to recover valuable copyrights that may have been transferred years earlier on unfavorable terms.
Mary Bono argued that the termination provisions allowed Sonny’s heirs to recapture rights associated with his compositions and therefore eliminated Cher’s continuing right to receive the disputed U.S. composition royalties.
Cher argued that this misunderstood her legal interest. She said her royalty rights came from the 1978 divorce settlement governed by state contract law, rather than from one of Sonny’s earlier copyright grants to music publishers.
Judge Rules in Cher’s Favor
U.S. District Judge John A. Kronstadt agreed with Cher on the central issue in May 2024.
The court held that the copyright termination notice did not terminate Cher’s rights under the Marriage Settlement Agreement. The judge concluded that the relevant agreement was the 1978 settlement and that Cher’s contractual royalty interest survived the later copyright termination efforts.
The court granted Cher summary judgment on her request for declaratory relief and found Mary Bono liable for breach of contract for diverting royalties that should have gone to Cher.
The ruling protected not only money already withheld but Cher’s continuing contractual interest in covered royalties.
How Much Did Cher Receive?
The final judgment entered on November 26, 2025, awarded Cher $187,534.91 in composition royalties that Mary Bono had personally received and retained, along with prejudgment interest calculated at 7% annually from February 1, 2022.
Additional disputed royalty money had been placed in separate accounts rather than distributed directly to Mary. Court filings indicated that those funds were also subject to the ruling establishing Cher’s continuing royalty rights.
Some media accounts have described the overall amount of unpaid or withheld royalties involved in the dispute as exceeding $400,000, but the final judgment specifically identifies $187,534.91 plus interest as damages payable by Mary Bono herself.
Mary Bono Appeals the Judgment
The district-court victory did not end the case.
Mary Bono filed an appeal on December 29, 2025, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The appeal is Cher v. Bono, No. 25-8085.
The appellate proceedings initially entered the Ninth Circuit’s mediation process and were temporarily administratively closed. In August 2026, however, the appeal was reopened.
That means the appeals court could eventually review whether the district judge correctly interpreted the relationship between federal copyright termination rights and Cher’s contractual interests under the divorce settlement.
Cher Loses Her $1 Million Attorney-Fee Request
Cher won the central royalty dispute but suffered a separate setback in July 2026.
She asked the district court to require Mary Bono to reimburse $1,023,605.30 in attorney’s fees, plus additional expenses associated with preparing the fee request.
Judge Kronstadt denied the request. The court concluded that the litigation was fundamentally based on contractual rights rather than a claim that qualified Cher for attorney’s fees under the federal Copyright Act.
The ruling means Cher must currently bear her own substantial legal expenses despite prevailing on the main royalty claims.
Cher Files Her Own Appeal
Cher has now appealed the attorney-fee decision.
Her appeal was opened in the Ninth Circuit on July 31, 2026, as Case No. 26-4919. On August 4, the appeals court consolidated Cher’s appeal with Mary Bono’s earlier appeal.
The consolidated briefing schedule calls for the first cross-appeal brief in October 2026, followed by additional briefing later in the year.
Where Does the Cher–Mary Bono Lawsuit Stand Now?
As of August 31, 2026, Cher remains the winner of the underlying district-court royalty dispute. The judgment confirms that the 2016 copyright termination notice did not wipe out her rights under the 1978 divorce agreement.
However, that judgment is being challenged by Mary Bono in the Ninth Circuit. Cher, meanwhile, is challenging the separate ruling requiring her to pay her own legal fees.
The case has become an important copyright and entertainment-law dispute because it examines the boundary between powerful federal copyright termination rights and independent financial rights created through divorce and contract agreements.