What Dolly Parton’s estate fight reveals about family business succession

fastcompany.com

Dolly Parton’s nephew Bryan Seaver announced the legendary singer’s death on August 25, 2026, in a prerecorded video. Seaver, the son of one of Parton’s 11 siblings , had been her head of security for many years. But Seaver is embroiled in a messy dispute with She’s Alive LLC, the company Parton established to manage her business assets after her death . This acrimonious fight highlights some of the business succession problems that can arise when the founder of a company dies but wants its other leaders to keep it going. Parton, the American singer, actress, entrepreneur, and philanthropist, left behind an estimated $450 million estate . She’s Alive LLC terminated Seaver’s involvement with the business, and a court has issued a restraining order against him. Seaver is accused of engaging in “ an obscene, deliberate and escalating campaign of threats” against Parton’s estate . He denies the allegations. As professors who research and teach topics related to inheritance law, we are fascinated by the Parton case. It illustrates some of the pitfalls of planning for the transition of a privately held business after the founder’s death—a concern for celebrity and noncelebrity estates alike. Following Dolly Parton’s death, there has been turmoil in her estate’s management involving her nephew Bryan Seaver. Managing celebrity estates after death Celebrity estates like Parton’s are distinct because they often contain valuable intellectual property. This includes copyrights, which protect creative works such as songs and recordings, including Parton’s catalog of hits. Another valuable asset in these estates is publicity rights , which protect the use of the celebrity’s name or likeness, such as the use of Parton’s face on a T-shirt sold for profit. These rights can be enormously valuable long after the celebrity has died. Without careful planning beforehand and appropriate management after death, the estate may never get the full value of these property interests. Prince, for example, died in 2016 without a will or any formal estate plan. The twice-divorced pop star, who lived in Minneapolis, had no surviving children. His estate passed to his siblings, who were his sole heirs . It took more than six years to administer his complicated $156 million estate , which concluded with the heirs establishing corporate entities to manage his intellectual property rights. One of those entities, Prince Legacy LLC, recently became embroiled in litigation when some of Prince’s heirs sought to fire the managers who had been hired to oversee their share of the intellectual property rights. Marilyn Monroe, who died in 1962, also without any children, left behind a professionally drafted will under which her longtime acting coach, Lee Strasberg, (and his then-wife) inherited most of her publicity rights. But Strasberg remarried, and later his widow—a woman Monroe never met—hired various professional managers, including CMG Worldwide , which specializes in the management, marketing , and promotion of publicity rights associated with dead celebrities. Because of the successful management of her estate’s publicity rights, Monroe became known as one of the highest-paid dead celebrities —with large sums enriching a woman she didn’t know. Should a founder’s relatives remain in charge? Many family businesses that are much less famous face similar questions about how to keep their profits and revenue flowing and who should manage the company after the founder dies. A continuation of business operations may offer benefits for a deceased founder’s family. The founder may have relayed their succession plans to them. Relatives often have institutional knowledge and loyalties that can enhance the value of the business and make it last longer. Studies have not conclusively shown, however, whether continuing a business within the family is clearly better or worse for its bottom line than having outsiders manage it. As one study found, family managers often have a “ sense of kinship obligation ” and enjoy “personal and social fulfillment” from working together in the business. That, in turn, creates incentives to manage the company carefully with an eye toward long-term survival. By contrast, another study of small and midsize businesses after the sudden death of a CEO-owner found that, in the short run, nonfamily successors are better equipped to run the company . Relatives may be hampered by grief and the impact of the death. But the study also found that in the long run, family members may be more successful in managing the business because they “are likely to view the firm’s survival as a way to stay connected with the deceased family member and keep their memory alive. In turn, this is expected to inspire great stewardship towards the firm.” Other studies, however, have found that maintaining family control over the management of a company after its founder’s death can hurt its performance. Restricting the pool of potential managers to relatives excludes better-qualified candidates who can bring expertise and experience that members of the family lack. Research by McKinsey has shown that hiring pros tends to be best for the business . Death can be bad for business When the owner of a privately held business dies, their assets, including real property, intellectual property, and investments, will pass to others according to the estate plan, if the owner created one. But in many cases, the true value of a business is more than just the sum of its assets. Some of the value may reside in the owner’s talent, knowledge, and business acumen. In some cases, the owner maintained personal relationships with employees or customers that may have played a key operational role. In others, the owner may have relied upon unique personal qualities to achieve success. Parton herself, for example, was likely the most significant driver of value for her business because of her creativity and star power. According to a 2022 study by economists who studied what happened to startups after the death of nearly 1,500 business founders, growth and profitability fell once the founder was gone. Smaller companies are at risk of having to close altogether. The study found that the negative effects on business continuity “appear to be driven by entrepreneur specialness rather than leadership transition,” which suggests that the founder’s unique contributions to the business can be difficult to replicate after death even with excellent transition planning. What this means for Parton’s estate Parton’s full estate plan is not yet publicly known, but she had no children, and her husband died before her. According to court filings, Parton engaged in “ extensive estate planning measures ” that included trusts and various corporate entities to manage her business assets and intellectual property rights. She gave generously to charity, with acclaimed gifts for medical research and disaster relief. She also created the Imagination Library through her Dollywood Foundation. It sends free books to millions of children from their birth until they turn 5. The amount that anyone—family, friends, or charities—will receive from the estate of a wealthy celebrity depends on how their business assets and intellectual property rights are managed after death. Parton planned carefully, but it is up to others to make the most of what she left behind. Reid Kress Weisbord is a distinguished professor of law at Rutgers University – Newark . Naomi Cahn is a professor of law at the University of Virginia . This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article .