In a nutshell: Two people who are not blood relatives of John Steinbeck continue decades-long fight over his estate.

You know how it goes. A famous person marries a few times. They die. Multiple heirs contest who gets what despite everyone making money. It's like the worst reality TV show ever aired on Bravo.

In essence, that's what's been ongoing with John Steinbeck's extended family for decades--and it's been a classic case of contempt and lawsuits.


Quick Synopsis Time!:
The Nobel laureate and writer of The Grapes of Wrath and East of Eden died in 1968, while married to his third wife Elaine of 18 years. With his second wife, Gwyndolyn, Steinbeck had two sons, Thomas and John.

Seemingly attempting to be fair to all, Steinbeck divvied up how his family could earn income from his novels after his death. In short, Elaine was bequeathed interest from earlier works Steinbeck outright-owned the copyright to. Meanwhile, his sons would receive royalties from copyrights later. Copyright law is a mindless labyrinth and confusing to everyone, so we'll skip the minutia.

Elaine dies years later. In her own will, she leaves her Steinbeck income to her daughter from a previous marriage (and Steinbeck's stepdaughter), Waverly Scott Kaffaga.

Meanwhile, both sons died, with Thomas leaving his royalties to his own wife (and Steinbeck's daughter-in-law) Gail Knight Steinbeck.

Still following? Let's Continue!:
Now, Gail and Waverly have been in court for years fighting for more money.

In 2017, Waverly was awarded $13 million by a jury after it was found that Gail was trying to interfere with Waverly's negotiations with movie studios for film adaptations. In September, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reduced the verdict to roughly $5 million, but still found in Waverly's favor. Yet, Gail and Waverly continue fighting in court over who owns what and who has done one wrong.

Why? Because there was yet another agreement signed by the then-living parties in 1983 how this would all be divided up. Alas (((rubs temples furiously)))--copyright law being what it is, which is full of jargon and a myriad of poorly-worded language--Gail believes she has rights to works, while Waverly contends only she does.

All of this means the case eventually could end up in the United States Supreme Court, as The Hollywood Reporter explains.

In conclusion:
Two people who are not blood relatives of John Steinbeck want John Steinbeck's money.

This is why I choose to remain broke. My heirs can't quibble with their inheritance if there's no inheritance.