The Firm has obtained two important victories in a litigation on behalf of the daughter of renowned photographer Hans Namuth concerning the disposition of his photographs, negatives, documents, and other unique archival assets.
 

Hans Namuth (1915-1990) was a highly regarded German-American photographer and documentary filmmaker. He became particularly known for his iconic portraits of some of the true giants of midcentury art, including Jackson Pollock, Mark Rothko, Frank Lloyd Wright, Robert Rauschenberg, Jasper Johns, and Clyfford Still. Namuth’s work has been extensively exhibited and published, cementing his status as both an important artist in his own right, and the creator of irreplaceable images of other legendary artists.
 

In late 2025, the Grossman team filed a lawsuit in New York County state court on behalf of Namuth’s daughter against another individual who has also inherited certain rights related to Namuth’s estate. In the New York County action, we asserted a number of claims regarding the defendant’s conduct as the parties have tried to make important decisions regarding the long-term plans for and disposition of these assets, as well as the defendant’s handling of the physical assets themselves. In response, the defendant sought to initiate—in a completely different state court in Columbia County—a proceeding to dissolve a corporate entity that holds these photographic assets.
 

We promptly responded by asking the Columbia County judge to halt the defendant’s competing action. Yesterday, the Columbia County court agreed, fully adopting our position that, because the two actions involve the same parties and similar facts, and could potentially lead to duplicative litigation and even conflicting decisions, the defendant’s Columbia County action should be stayed—essentially put on hold—while our New York County action proceeds. At the same time, the court in New York County granted our request—over the other side’s objections—to conduct an in-person inspection of a subset of the assets, which are located at the defendant’s property upstate. Both decisions will allow us to continue to seek to vindicate our client’s interests in preserving her father’s legacy.
 

Photo by Lindsay Moe on Unsplash