Priscilla Presley is facing a lawsuit from her former business partners, who accuse her of fraud and breach of contract, claiming she left them liable for substantial damages after allegedly misrepresenting ownership of her name and brand, rights they say she secretly sold decades earlier.
In a complaint filed Wednesday in California state court, Brigitte Kruse and Kevin Fialko, co-heads of Priscilla Presley Partners, allege Presley failed to disclose the prior sale while securing lucrative investments, ultimately leaving their company in ruins. They are seeking at least $50 million in damages.
According to the lawsuit, the dispute stems from a behind-the-scenes battle over the Presley family trust. The filing alleges that in 2023, as her daughter Lisa Marie Presley prepared to remove her as sole head of the trust, Priscilla Presley “prematurely withdrew life-saving medical treatment” after Lisa Marie suffered cardiac arrest, aiming to secure control of the estate.
“Priscilla knew that Lisa’s death neutralised the threat of Lisa’s efforts to have Priscilla removed as the sole trustee of Lisa’s irrevocable life insurance trust, and Priscilla ultimately wanted to control the Promenade Trust and Graceland,” the complaint states. “At her house the following week (before Lisa’s funeral), Priscilla exclaimed, ‘I’m the queen. I’m in charge of Graceland.’”
Lisa Marie Presley, Elvis Presley’s only child, was the sole heir to his estate. After her death, Priscilla Presley contested a 2016 amendment to the trust that removed her and former family business manager Barry Siegel as trustees, naming Lisa Marie’s children Riley Keough and the late Benjamin Keough as co-trustees. Kruse and Fialko claim they helped negotiate a settlement in that dispute, which included a $2.4 million payment to Presley.
After the settlement, Presley was allegedly approached by Keya Morgan, Stan Lee’s former business manager, who was charged and later acquitted in an elder abuse case, offering to help reclaim her name, image, and likeness rights from Elvis Presley Enterprises. The relationship between Presley and her partners allegedly soured when Morgan, alongside Presley, accused Kruse and Fialko of coercion and elder abuse.
Presley is accused of severing ties with Priscilla Presley Partners and exploiting her name, image, and likeness for personal gain, including appearances on NBC’s Christmas at Graceland, comic conventions, and promotional events, without disclosure or profit-sharing. The complaint also accuses her of taking money from the company’s bank accounts.
The dispute coincided with the release of Sofia Coppola’s Priscilla, for which Kruse and Fialko say they negotiated additional compensation for Presley from A24 Pictures. They claim they were disinvited from the Venice Film Festival premiere, with Morgan attending instead.
“As detailed video recordings and communications already confirm, there is absolutely no evidence of undue influence, coercion, or elder abuse involved, only a legitimate, well-documented business partnership,” said Jordan
Matthews, attorney for Kruse and Fialko, in a statement. “The evidence will establish that the real victims here are my clients, who invested millions and years of hard work into revitalising Priscilla Presley’s brand, only to be betrayed and falsely accused once the money was on the table and every personal and business issue had been resolved.”
Marty Singer, Presley’s lawyer, dismissed the lawsuit as “meritless” in a statement.
“This is, without a doubt, one of the most shameful, ridiculous, salacious, and meritless lawsuits I have seen in my practice. This is nothing more than a sad and vicious attempt to falsely tarnish the reputation of an eighty year old woman in blatant retaliation for bringing a lawsuit to redress the wrongful conduct of Brigitte Kruse, Kevin Fialko, and their co-conspirators,” the statement read.
“Accusing a grieving mother of contributing to her daughter’s death is not savvy advocacy; it is malicious character assassination, and should be broadly condemned. These fabricated claims have absolutely no validity and we are confident this case will be dismissed.”
Images: Instagram
