Show summary Hide summary
A legal structure intended to keep the Los Angeles Lakers inside the Buss family has instead triggered a bitter dispute among Jerry Buss’s heirs. Five of his six adult children favor selling the family’s remaining stake—recently valued at about $12.5 billion—while their sister Jeanie is fighting the move in court.
Jerry Buss split control of the team evenly among his six children but named Jeanie the franchise governor. According to reporting from ESPN, Jeanie has asked a California court to block the sale and to remove siblings Janie and Joey as co‑trustees of the family trust that holds the NBA stake. The trust reportedly contains a “last man standing” provision that redirects a deceased sibling’s shares to surviving siblings rather than to that sibling’s children, a feature that lawyers say can create strong incentives to sell.
Using life insurance to balance heirs’ interests
Estate attorneys say the impulse behind the Buss provision—avoiding fragmentation of ownership—is understandable. But there are less divisive alternatives. One common tool is to use life insurance to compensate the descendants who will not inherit equity.
Apple’s iTunes remains, but it’s now in a different form
Week 2 fantasy QBs: Who to start and who to bench
Under this approach the trust buys policies on the children of the original owner. When a child dies, their ownership can revert to the surviving siblings while the deceased child’s children receive cash from the policy proceeds. If the death benefit falls short, the trust can issue a secured note backed by a lien on the business to make up the difference. That note can be paid over time or accelerated if the company is sold.
Attorneys caution this strategy has limits. First‑generation entrepreneurs may be reluctant or unable to purchase large, expensive policies while they are younger. Still, experts say the method can deliver liquidity to non‑controlling descendants without splintering the company’s shareholder base.
Control voting power, separate it from economic shares
How decision‑making authority is allocated matters as much as who owns the equity. Jerry Buss reportedly gave each child an equal economic share and vote, while naming Jeanie governor—a position that depends on maintaining a minimum ownership level for the family. A letter from Jeanie’s lawyer cited a trust requirement that Janie and Joey, as co‑trustees, must vote to keep the family above the NBA’s 15% governor threshold.
Some advisers recommend concentrating managerial votes in one or two family members best suited to run the business while dividing financial benefits equally. That can be done by pooling shares into a single vehicle—often called a pot trust—and naming a single trustee with authority to manage or sell, with proceeds later distributed to the individual sibling trusts.
Others favor different balances of power. One estate lawyer suggests keeping equal say for each child and relying on majority decision rules to reduce the appearance of favoritism. But several attorneys warn majority voting can blow up family ties if a minority sibling feels outvoted and betrayed.
Many estate planners also recommend adding an independent co‑trustee or advisory committee to provide professional perspective and help defuse interpersonal conflict.
Keep family out of daily management—or limit their roles
Some wealthy families avoid intra‑generational conflict by restricting direct family involvement in running the company. One attorney described a fourth‑generation, billion‑dollar family business that succeeded precisely because no family member is permitted to work there.
That family amended shareholder rules after prolonged litigation between heirs and now uses governance limits to prevent a repeat. The same lawyer said the approach won’t suit prestige businesses like the Lakers, where public roles and visibility are part of the appeal, but it can work well for private companies.
There is no foolproof way to stop heirs from suing when disputes arise. Clauses that require arbitration or threaten disinheritance for litigation exist in many trust documents, but they are not always enforceable. As one planner put it, descendants often lack the “muscle memory” of the founder’s risk and sacrifice, and old grievances can still lead to courtroom battles.
