The Lakers Trust Fight Is a Lesson in How Estate Planning Goes Wrong

Jerry Buss structured his estate specifically to keep the Los Angeles Lakers in his family after his death. Trusts and estates lawyers now point to that structure as the thing driving his children apart.

Five of Buss's six adult children want to sell the family's remaining stake in the franchise, valued by a recent transaction at $12.5 billion. Their sister Jeanie argues they lack the legal authority to do so and is opposing the sale, which would cost her the position of Lakers governor.

The clause at the centre

ESPN reported this week that Jeanie Buss has asked a California court to block the sale and to remove her siblings Janie and Joey as co-trustees of the trust holding the stake. The trust contains what Janie Buss once described as a "last man standing" provision, transferring interests as siblings die or exit.

Provisions of that kind are written to prevent exactly what is happening: an asset the founder considered inalienable being liquidated by heirs who did not share that view.

Why the safeguards backfire

The recurring failure in dynastic planning is that a founder can bind the asset but not the family. A structure that makes selling difficult does not make the siblings agree; it converts disagreement into litigation, with the asset frozen while it runs.

The practical lesson advisers draw is unglamorous: governance matters more than restriction. Deciding in advance how a family resolves a split — buy-out formulas, valuation mechanics, exit rights — ages better than a clause designed to make the split impossible.