Connect with us

Lifestyle

A judge blocks the foreclosure sale of Elvis' Graceland, after his heir alleges fraud

Published

on

A judge blocks the foreclosure sale of Elvis' Graceland, after his heir alleges fraud

Elvis Presley pictured with then-girlfriend Yvonne Lime at his home Graceland in Memphis, Tennessee around 1957.

AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

AP


Elvis Presley pictured with then-girlfriend Yvonne Lime at his home Graceland in Memphis, Tennessee around 1957.

AP

A judge in Tennessee has blocked a foreclosure sale of Elvis Presley’s Graceland compound, after his granddaughter sued to stop it.

A company called Naussany Investments & Private Lending LLC advertised that such a sale would take place on Thursday, saying the trust that controls Graceland owed the property as collateral after failing to repay a 2018 loan taken out by Lisa Marie Presley, Elvis’ only child.

Advertisement

Actress Danielle Riley Keough, who goes by Riley, became the owner of the Memphis property after her mother’s death in January 2023. She alleged in a lawsuit earlier this month that Naussany Investments not only forged documents, but doesn’t actually exist.

The 61-page complaint says that in September 2023, the company “presented documents purporting to show that Lisa Marie Presley had borrowed $3.8 million from Naussany Investments and gave a deed of trust encumbering Graceland as security.”

But Keough says Presley never borrowed money from or gave a deed of trust — for Graceland or any other property — to Naussany Investments, alleging “these documents are fraudulent.” Moreover, the lawsuit argues that Naussany Investments “is not a real entity” at all.

“Naussany Investments & Private Lending LLC appears to be a false entity created for the purpose of defrauding the Promenade Trust, the heirs of Lisa Marie Presley, or any purchaser of Graceland at a non-judicial sale,” it reads.

Shelby County Chancellor JoeDae Jenkins sided with Keough after a hearing on Wednesday.

Advertisement

The Associated Press reports that he issued a temporary injunction to block the sale, essentially extending a restraining order he had placed on Naussany Investments last week.

Jenkins said in court that it would be prudent to delay any foreclosure sale of Graceland, given its prominence.

“The public interest is best served, particularly here in Shelby County, for Graceland is a part of this community, well loved by this community and, indeed, around the world,” Jenkins said, according to NBC News.

The 14-acre compound is a popular tourist destination as well as the final resting place of several of Keough’s family members, including Elvis and his parents, as well as her own mother and brother.

Jenkins also said that Keough will likely succeed in her lawsuit, “provided that you prove the fraud that has been alleged.”

Advertisement

Keough was not present on Wednesday, and her lawyers declined to comment on ongoing litigation. Naussany Investments did not have representation in court, according to multiple media outlets.

Elvis Presley Enterprises (EPE), the company that manages the late singer’s estate, told NPR via email that “there will be no foreclosure.”

“As the court has now made clear, there was no validity to the claims,” it said. “Graceland will continue to operate as it has for the past 42 years, ensuring that Elvis fans from around the world can continue to have a best in class experience when visiting his iconic home.”

Keough is accusing the company of forging documents

Riley Keough, pictured at the Met Gala earlier this month, is fighting a foreclosure sale of Graceland.

Angela Weiss/AFP via Getty Images


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Angela Weiss/AFP via Getty Images


Riley Keough, pictured at the Met Gala earlier this month, is fighting a foreclosure sale of Graceland.

Angela Weiss/AFP via Getty Images

Advertisement

The lawsuit names as defendants both the LLC and Kurt Naussany, whom it says has acted on the company’s behalf by sending Keough’s lawyers “numerous emails seeking to collect the purported $3.8 million debt and threatening to conduct a non-judicial sale of Graceland.”

Emails NPR sent to several addresses linked to the company have not been returned, and a Naussany phone number listed in the legal filing is out of service.

Adding to the intrigue, Kurt Naussany told NBC News via email that “he left the firm in 2015 and should not be named in the filing” — though one of the exhibits attached to the complaint shows a signed email he purportedly sent in 2023.

A lawyer for Keough told NPR he could not comment on pending litigation. EPE said in an emailed statement that any outside claims to the Graceland property “are fraudulent.”

“There is no foreclosure sale,” it said. “Simply put, the counter lawsuit [that] has been filed is to stop the fraud.”

Advertisement

Priscilla Presley — Elvis’ ex-wife and Lisa Marie’s mother — also refuted claims of a foreclosure sale on her social media accounts on Monday. She shared a picture of the front of the Graceland mansion, covered by animated red text reading: “It’s a scam!”

The lawsuit alleges that the documents purporting to show the loan and deed of trust at issue are “forgeries.”

“While the documents bear signatures that look like the signatures of Lisa Marie Presley, Lisa Marie Presley did not in fact sign the documents,” it says.

And it points to two clues that further suggest they are fake.

The documents were supposedly acknowledged before a notary public — an officer appointed by the state to witness such transactions — named Kimberly Philbrick in Duval County, Fla., in May 2018, according to the lawsuit.

Advertisement

The notarial acknowledgment on one of the documents includes language saying it was acknowledged before the notary “by means of ( ) physical presence or ( ) online notarization,” with the option to check either. But online notarization — and therefore, the language mentioning it — wasn’t authorized in Florida until 2020.

Secondly, Philbrick herself says she did not notarize either of the documents. She swore as much in an affidavit signed earlier this month, which was submitted alongside the complaint.

“I have never met Lisa Marie Presley, nor have I ever notarized a document signed by Lisa Marie Presley,” she wrote. “I do not know why my signature appears on this document.”

Another attachment shows Naussany Investment’s notice of the foreclosure sale, published online on May 12, on the grounds that the loan using Graceland as collateral was not repaid.

It said it would hold public auction outside the Shelby County Courthouse at 11 a.m. on May 23, and sell the property to the “highest and best bidder for cash.”

Advertisement

Keough, arguing that the company has “no right whatsoever” to conduct the sale, asked the court to issue an injunction permanently blocking the sale and declare that the note and deed of trust are fraudulent (and therefore unenforceable).

Last week, the judge issued a restraining order that prohibits the company, defendant Kurt Naussany “or any party acting in concert with either of them” from conducting a sale ahead of Wednesday’s hearing.

Elvis’ home base is now a major tourist draw

Visitors line up to enter the Graceland mansion in 2017, 40 years after Elvis’ death.

Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images


Visitors line up to enter the Graceland mansion in 2017, 40 years after Elvis’ death.

Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images

Graceland started as part of a cattle farm. Elvis bought the grounds and existing mansion for $102,500 in March 1957. Its worth was estimated between $400 million and $500 million as of 2020.

Advertisement

Elvis moved in later in 1957, after he finished filming “Jailhouse Rock.” He would go on to expand the mansion to 17,552 square feet, adding fixtures like the kidney-shaped swimming pool and sheet music-styled gates.

Graceland remained his home base for the next two decades, until he died there in August 1977.

The estate then went to Elvis’ dad, Vernon Presley, and subsequently to Lisa Marie upon her 25th birthday in 1993. Keough officially became the owner in August 2023, after a months-long legal dispute with her grandmother over her mother’s will.

Graceland has been open to the public since 1982, and has expanded over the years to include a hotel, several museums, restaurants and an entertainment complex, among other attractions.

Advertisement

It employs hundreds of workers and draws upwards of 500,000 visitors annually, according to the venue, which calls itself the “most famous home in America after the White House.”

Graceland joined the National Register of Historic Places in 1991, and was designated a National Historic Landmark in 2006, becoming the first rock-n-roll site to be named to both lists.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Lifestyle

'Wait Wait' for July 27, 2024: With Not My Job guest Kathleen Hanna

Published

on

'Wait Wait' for July 27, 2024: With Not My Job guest Kathleen Hanna

Kathleen Hanna of The Julie Ruin performs onstage at the 2016 Panorama NYC Festival – Day 2 at Randall’s Island on July 23, 2016 in New York City. (Photo by Nicholas Hunt/Getty Images)

Nicholas Hunt/Getty Images/Getty Images North America


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Nicholas Hunt/Getty Images/Getty Images North America

This week’s show was recorded in Chicago with host Peter Sagal, judge and scorekeeper Bill Kurtis, Not My Job guest Kathleen Hanna and panelists Meredith Scardino, Peter Grosz, and Mo Rocca Click the audio link above to hear the whole show.

Who’s Bill This Time

Momala Takes Over; Assigned Seats Are Back; And The Heat Is On

Advertisement

The Olympic Torch Reporch

Our Summer Olympics Preview

Bluff The Listener

Our panelists tell three stories about someone committing an office faux pas, only one of which is true.

Not My Job: We quiz Bikini Kill’s Kathleen Hanna on Hanna-Barbera

Advertisement

Punk icon Kathleen Hanna plays our game called, “Kathleen Hanna Meet Hannah-Barbera.” Three questions about the animation studio.

Panel Questions

Hide Your Receipts; VR Meets ER; Avocado Apologies

Limericks

Bill Kurtis reads three news-related limericks: Situation Room Cocktails; Burrito Bird; Hopped Up Sharks

Advertisement

Lightning Fill In The Blank

All the news we couldn’t fit anywhere else

Predictions

Our panelists predict what will be the big story out of the Paris Olympic Games

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Lifestyle

L.A. Affairs: At 77, I had a crush on my best friend’s widower. Did he feel the same way?

Published

on

L.A. Affairs: At 77, I had a crush on my best friend’s widower. Did he feel the same way?

At 77, I had given up. After two failed marriages and years of unsuccessful dating, I accepted what seemed to be my fate: single for almost 40 years and single for however many remained. You don’t get it all, I told myself. I was grateful for family, friends and work. Life settled into what felt like order.

Until Ty.

As the husband of my best friend, he was no stranger, but he was usually peripheral. Then 10 years ago, my friend got lung cancer. I watched during visits, stunned at how nurturing Ty could be, taking care of her even though they had separated years before at her request.

After she died, Ty and I stayed in touch sporadically: a surprise sharing of his second granddaughter a year after we scattered my friend’s ashes, an invitation to the launch of my book a year later. Ty attended, hovering in the back, emerging after everyone left to attentively help load my car.

Advertisement

Two more years passed. During quiet moments, I remembered his sweetness. I also remembered his handsome face and long, tall body. Confused about what I wanted, I texted Ty, who’s an architect, under the guise of purchasing a tree for my backyard.

We spent an afternoon at the nursery, laughing, comparing options and agreeing on a final selection. When the tree arrived, I emailed a photo. He emailed a thank you.

Another three years passed, broken only by news of his third granddaughter and my memories of how good it felt to be with him. Alert to his attentiveness, but unsettled by both his remove and my growing interest, I risked reaching out again, this time about remodeling my garage.

Ty spent several hours at my house making measurements, checking the foundation and sharing pictures of his home in Topanga. His sketches for the garage arrived two weeks later via email.

I was grateful for his help but unsure over what sort of friendship we were developing, at least from his point of view. I, however, was clear. I wanted him to wrap his long arms around me, tell me sweet things and make me his.

Advertisement

Instead, I sent a gift card to a Topanga restaurant to thank him for his drawings.

“Maybe we should spend it together,” he texted.

We dined in the dusk of late summer. Our talk was easy. Discomfort lay in the unspoken. Anxious for clarity, I repeatedly let my hand linger near the candle flickering in the middle of our table. It remained untouched.

And that was as far as I was willing to go. I refused to be any more forward, having already compromised myself beyond my comfort level with what seemed, at least to me, embarrassingly transparent efforts to indicate my interest. Not making the first move was very important. If a man could not reach out, if he didn’t have the self-confidence to take the first step, he would not, I adamantly felt, be a good partner for me.

Two weeks later, Ty did email, suggesting an early evening hike in Tuna Canyon in Malibu. The setting was perfect. Sun sparkled off the ocean. A gentle breeze blew. We climbed uphill for sweeping coastal vistas and circled down to the shade of live oaks, touching only when he took my hand to steady me where the path was slippery. At the end of the trail, overlooking the juncture between the mountains and the sea, we stood opposite each other and talked animatedly for almost an hour, both of us reluctant to part.

Advertisement

Our conversation was engaging, but my inner dialogue was louder. When, I kept thinking, is this man going to suggest we continue the evening over dinner? We didn’t have to go out. We could eat at his house. It was 7 p.m., for God’s sake. Passing hikers even stopped to remark on our matching white hair and how well they thought we looked together. It was like a movie scene where the audience is yelling, “Kiss her, kiss her,” rooting for what they know is going to happen while the tension becomes almost unbearable. But bear it I did.

Each of us ate alone.

A few weeks later, at his suggestion, we were back at Tuna Canyon. This time Ty did invite me to end the evening at his house. Sitting close on his couch, but not too close, we drifted toward each other in the darkening room. His shoulder brushed mine reaching for his cup of coffee. My hip pressed his as I leaned in for my tea. Slowly, sharing wishes and hopes for our remaining years, we became shadows in the light of the moon. And in that darkness, in that illuminated space, he reached out.

This reticent man, this man who was so slow to move toward me, this sensitive man who hid himself behind layers so opaque I was unsure of his interest, released all that he had inside him.

“I wanted you,” Ty repeated again and again. “I was afraid of ruining things. You were her best friend. I didn’t want to lose your friendship.”

Advertisement

Our pent-up tension exploded.

Stunned and thrilled, I leaned into the space he opened.

Three years later, it is a space we continue to share: a place where neither of us has given up, a place where he wraps me in his long arms, a place we hold carefully against our diminishing days.

The author is the owner of a preschool in Venice as well as a psychotherapist, photographer and writer. Her first book, “Naked in the Woods: My Unexpected Years in a Hippie Commune,” was published in 2015. Her newest manuscript, “Bargains: A Coming of Aging Memoir Told in Tales,” is seeking a publisher. She lives in Mar Vista and can be found at margaretgrundstein.com, Instagram @margwla, Medium @margaretgrundstein and Substack @mgrundstein.

L.A. Affairs chronicles the search for romantic love in all its glorious expressions in the L.A. area, and we want to hear your true story. We pay $400 for a published essay. Email LAAffairs@latimes.com. You can find submission guidelines here. You can find past columns here.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Lifestyle

'Deadpool & Wolverine' is a self-cannibalizing slog

Published

on

'Deadpool & Wolverine' is a self-cannibalizing slog

Ryan Reynolds stars as Deadpool and Hugh Jackman as Wolverine in an odd-couple action hero pairing.

Jay Maidment/20th Century Studios


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Jay Maidment/20th Century Studios

When Fox Studios released the first Deadpool movie back in 2016, it played like an irreverently funny antidote to our collective comic-book-movie fatigue. Wade Wilson, or Deadpool, was a foul-mouthed mercenary who obliterated his enemies and the fourth wall with the same gonzo energy.

Again and again, Deadpool turned to the camera and mocked the clichés of the superhero movie with such deadpan wit, you almost forgot you were watching a superhero movie. And Ryan Reynolds, Hollywood’s snarkiest leading man, might have been engineered in a lab to play this vulgar vigilante. I liked the movie well enough, though one was plenty; by the time Deadpool 2 rolled around in 2018, all that self-aware humor had started to seem awfully self-satisfied.

Now we have a third movie, Deadpool & Wolverine, which came about through some recent movie-industry machinations. When Disney bought Fox a few years ago, Deadpool, along with other mutant characters from the X-Men series, officially joined the franchise juggernaut known as the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Advertisement

That puts the new movie in an almost interesting bind. It tries to poke fun at its tortured corporate parentage; one of the first things Deadpool says is “Marvel’s so stupid.” But now the movie also has to fit into the narrative parameters of the MCU. It tries to have it both ways: brand extension disguised as a satire of brand extension.

It’s also an odd-couple comedy, pairing Deadpool with the most famous of the X-Men: Logan, or Wolverine, the mutant with the unbreakable bones and the retractable metal claws, played as ever by a bulked-up Hugh Jackman.

The combo makes sense, and not just because both characters are Canadian. In earlier movies, Deadpool often made Wolverine the off-screen butt of his jokes. Both Deadpool and Wolverine are essentially immortal, their bodies capable of self-regenerating after being wounded. Both are tormented by past failures and are trying to redeem themselves. Onscreen, the two have a good, thorny chemistry, with Jackman’s brooding silences contrasting nicely with Reynolds’ mile-a-minute delivery.

I could tell you more about the story, but only at the risk of incurring the wrath of studio publicists who have asked critics not to discuss the plot or the movie’s many, many cameos. Let’s just say that the director Shawn Levy and his army of screenwriters bring the two leads together through various rifts in the multiverse. Yes, the multiverse, that ever-elastic comic-book conceit, with numerous Deadpools and Wolverines from various alternate realities popping up along the way.

I suppose it’s safe to mention that Matthew Macfadyen, lately of Succession, plays some kind of sinister multiverse bureaucrat, while Emma Corrin, of The Crown, plays a nasty villain in exile. It’s all thin, derivative stuff, and the script’s various wink-wink nods to other shows and movies, from Back to the Future to Furiosa to The Great British Bake Off, don’t make it feel much fresher. And Levy, who previously directed Reynolds in the sci-fi comedies Free Guy and The Adam Project, doesn’t have much feel for the splattery violence that is a staple of the Deadpool movies. There’s more tedium than excitement in the characters’ bone-crunching, crotch-stabbing killing sprees, complete with corn-syrupy geysers of blood.

Advertisement

For all its carnage, its strenuous meta-humor and an R-rated sensibility that tests the generally PG-13 confines of the MCU, Deadpool & Wolverine does strive for sincerity at times. Some of its cameos and plot turns are clearly designed to pay tribute to Fox’s X-Men films from the early 2000s.

As a longtime X-Men fan myself, I’m not entirely immune to the charms of this approach; there’s one casting choice, in particular, that made me smile, almost in spite of myself. It’s not enough to make the movie feel like less of a self-cannibalizing slog, though I suspect that many in the audience, who live for this kind of glib fan service, won’t mind. Say what you will about Marvel — I certainly have — but it isn’t nearly as stupid as Deadpool says it is.

Continue Reading

Trending