Tyra Banks Lawsuit | Tyra Banks Sued for $2.8M After Signing 10-Year Lease for “Hot Ice Cream” Shop Allegedly Abandoned
Tyra Banks faces a $2.8 million breach of contract lawsuit filed in October 2025 by Washington D.C. landlord Christopher Powell over her abandoned Smize & Dream ice cream shop. Powell alleges Banks and her business partner Louis Martin signed a 10-year lease in April 2024, abandoned the property in June 2024 without paying rent, then opened locations in Australia and nearby D.C. pop-ups. Banks filed a motion to dismiss in November 2025, claiming the building was defective and accusing Powell of extortion.
What Is the Tyra Banks Lawsuit About?
D.C. landlord Christopher Powell filed suit in October 2025 against Tyra Banks, her business partner Louis Bélanger-Martin (also her romantic partner), and her company School of SMiZE LLC in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The complaint alleges breach of contract, unjust enrichment, and fraud related to a planned flagship Smize & Dream ice cream shop in the Eastern Market neighborhood.
Powell claims Banks pitched the D.C. location as the cornerstone of a global ice cream empire that would provide educational opportunities for underserved youth in science, sales, and hospitality. He alleges she won him over with emotional stories about bonding with her late mother over ice cream and brought ice cream samples to their meetings.
When Did Tyra Banks Sign the Lease?
Banks and Martin signed the 10-year commercial lease on April 17, 2024, according to court documents. The lease covered the lower floors of Powell’s Eastern Market building at an undisclosed 7th Street address.
Powell claims Banks and Martin visited the property multiple times before signing and agreed to take the premises “as-is.” The lawsuit states they acknowledged the lease would not include the entire building—only specific floors.
What Happened After the Lease Was Signed?
According to Powell’s complaint, he immediately began preparing the space. He hired architects and designers, ordered equipment and supplies specifically requested by Banks, and spent thousands of dollars on buildout preparations.
By summer 2024, Powell discovered Banks was showcasing designs for a Smize & Dream location in Sydney, Australia, rather than focusing on the Washington property.
In June 2024—just two months after signing—Banks and Martin allegedly abandoned the premises entirely and stopped paying rent. Powell claims he received no warning about their departure despite their repeated assurances about dedication to the D.C. location.
What Is Tyra Banks’ Defense?
Banks and Martin filed a motion to dismiss on November 11, 2025, through attorney Steven Willner. Their defense argues:
Defective Building: They claim Powell failed to deliver the full space promised in the lease. Banks’ motion states they discovered building deficiencies that made the space unsuitable for their intended use.
Early Termination Notice: The defense claims they sent termination notice several months before the lease officially started, giving Powell adequate time to find replacement tenants and recoup costs.
Extortion Allegations: Banks’ November motion describes the lawsuit as “an opportunistic ploy … to extort money from defendants.” The filing argues Powell is targeting Banks specifically because of her celebrity status.
Lack of Jurisdiction: The motion challenges whether federal court has proper jurisdiction over this contract dispute.
Powell denies all defense claims. He insists the building has no defects and produced evidence showing Banks and Martin knew exactly what space the lease covered before signing.
What Does the Landlord Allege About Banks’ Behavior?
Powell’s complaint includes serious allegations about Banks’ conduct after abandoning the lease:
Threat of Public Smear: The lawsuit states Banks and Martin “threatened to publicize their lies if Mr. Powell filed a lawsuit against them.”
Refusal to Pay Judgment: Powell alleges Banks and Martin stated “even if Mr. Powell filed a lawsuit and secured a ruling against them, they would not pay any judgment. Instead, they would avoid liability by shifting blame onto their company that they claim has no assets.”
Celebrity Intimidation: The complaint claims Banks weaponized her celebrity status to discourage Powell from pursuing legal action.
Competing Locations: Just weeks after abandoning Powell’s building, Banks hosted a Smize & Dream pop-up event at a Connecticut Avenue location in D.C.’s Woodley Park neighborhood—mere miles from the abandoned Eastern Market property.
When Did the Pop-Up Open?
Banks launched the Woodley Park pop-up in July 2024, approximately one month after allegedly abandoning Powell’s property. The event attracted significant media attention, with Vice President Kamala Harris photographed eating at the location.
Powell claims he didn’t know about the location change until he saw a TikTok of the Vice President eating at the Connecticut Avenue shop.
The pop-up operated near the Smithsonian’s National Zoo but closed within months. The space is now occupied by a café.
What About the Australia Location?
Banks opened a permanent Smize & Dream flagship location in Sydney, Australia in June 2024—the same month she allegedly abandoned Powell’s D.C. property. She dedicated the Sydney shop to her mother, Carolyn London.
Banks has since relocated to Sydney with Martin and her son. As of December 2025, the Sydney location remains the only operating Smize & Dream brick-and-mortar shop.
Powell’s lawsuit emphasizes the timing: while he scrambled to address financial fallout from the abandoned D.C. lease, Banks and Martin launched their Australian venture using designs he claims were originally developed for his property.
How Much Is Powell Seeking?
Powell demands $2,831,331 under the lease terms, plus:
- Late fees and interest
- Attorney’s fees
- Court costs
- Expenses incurred finding replacement tenants
- Damages for lost business opportunities
The total exceeds $2.8 million. Powell claims Banks’ abandonment left him with significant financial losses, especially given the money spent preparing the space according to her specifications.
What Is the Current Status of the Case?
November 11, 2025: Banks and Martin filed motion to dismiss through attorney Steven Willner.
December 16, 2025: Judge Amy Berman Jackson set this deadline for Powell to file his response opposing dismissal. Court records indicate Powell’s team received an extension to file.
End of December 2025: Powell’s opposition to the motion to dismiss was expected by this date according to court documents reviewed in mid-December reporting.
The case remains in the motion to dismiss phase. If Judge Jackson denies the motion, the case will proceed to discovery, where both sides exchange evidence and documents. If she grants dismissal, Powell may appeal or the case ends in Banks’ favor.
Who Is Christopher Powell?
Powell is a Washington D.C. entrepreneur and landlord who owns commercial properties in the Eastern Market area. His attorney, Arziki Adamu, states Powell has successfully worked with other high-profile clients and only speaks publicly about this case to protect his professional reputation.
Powell’s complaint portrays him as a landlord who believed in Banks’ mission to combine business with social good through youth education programs. He claims he invested significant time and money based on her emotional pitch about honoring her late mother and giving back to the D.C. community.
What Is Smize & Dream?
Smize & Dream is Banks’ ice cream brand named after her signature modeling phrase “smize”—smiling with your eyes. She launched the concept in 2021, initially operating an ice cream truck in Dubai and shipping pre-packaged pints to the U.S.
The brand markets “hot ice cream”—a sippable, warm ice cream concept that has generated significant social media attention and confusion. Banks recently released a holiday song “Santa Smize” and performed it at an Australian gay bar in December 2025, wearing a tight black dress and yellow Santa hat. The viral performance divided fans, with some entertained and others concerned about the promotional strategy.
The brand operates primarily through pop-ups and limited engagements rather than permanent locations. Besides the Sydney flagship, Smize & Dream has appeared in multiple U.S. cities through temporary events.
What Are the Legal Claims?
Powell’s October 2025 complaint lists six counts:
Breach of Contract: Violating the 10-year commercial lease by abandoning the property and refusing to pay rent.
Unjust Enrichment: Benefiting from Powell’s preparations and expenditures without compensating him.
Fraud: Making false representations about intentions to open the D.C. flagship location.
Additional Contract Claims: Related to specific lease provisions regarding notice, payment terms, and property maintenance.
The complaint argues Banks and Martin never intended to fulfill the lease, instead using Powell’s property as leverage while developing their Australian location.
What Laws Apply to This Case?
As a federal contract dispute in D.C., the case involves:
D.C. Contract Law: Governs commercial lease agreements, breach remedies, and damages calculations.
Federal Jurisdiction: U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia handles the case. Banks’ motion challenges whether federal court has proper subject matter jurisdiction or if the case belongs in local D.C. Superior Court.
Commercial Lease Standards: Require tenants to pay rent, maintain property, and provide proper notice before termination. Landlords must deliver habitable spaces meeting lease specifications.
Fraud Standards: Powell must prove Banks made false statements, knew they were false, intended him to rely on them, and that he suffered damages from relying on those statements.
The motion to dismiss phase will determine if Powell’s complaint states valid legal claims under these standards.
What Do Similar Celebrity Lease Cases Reveal?
Celebrity commercial real estate disputes typically settle before trial. High-profile defendants often prefer confidential settlements over public litigation revealing business failures or financial problems.
Contract disputes hinge on what the lease actually says versus what parties claim was promised verbally. Powell’s inclusion of the signed April 2024 lease in his complaint suggests he has strong documentary evidence supporting his version.
Banks’ extortion and celebrity-targeting claims mirror defenses in other high-profile business disputes where defendants argue plaintiffs exploit their fame for financial gain. Courts typically examine the underlying contract merits rather than focusing on celebrity status.
The “asset-less company” defense Banks allegedly threatened—using a limited liability company to shield personal assets—is common in business litigation but rarely absolves parties of all liability. Courts can “pierce the corporate veil” when companies exist solely to avoid legitimate debts.
What Impact Could This Have on Banks’ Brand?
The lawsuit arrives as Banks attempts to reinvent herself beyond modeling and television hosting. Smize & Dream represented a blend of entrepreneurship, philanthropy, and personal mission—honoring her late mother while supporting underserved youth.
The allegations of abandoning the youth education component while pursuing profitable Australian locations could damage Banks’ philanthropic reputation. The claims about threatening Powell and refusing to pay judgments paint an unflattering picture regardless of legal outcomes.
Banks’ recent viral “Santa Smize” performance and “hot ice cream” marketing already generated mixed reactions. The lawsuit adds negative publicity during a critical brand-building phase.
However, if Banks successfully dismisses the case or proves Powell’s building was genuinely defective, she could emerge with her reputation intact. The extortion defense—if substantiated—might even generate sympathy.
What Should Business Owners Learn From This Case?
Document Everything: Written leases with specific terms about property condition, space allocation, and termination notice protect both parties. Verbal promises without documentation rarely prevail in court.
Conduct Due Diligence: Inspect properties thoroughly before signing long-term leases. Banks’ defense claims property defects, but Powell alleges multiple pre-signing visits where they saw the space.
Provide Proper Notice: Commercial leases typically require specific written notice periods for termination. Banks claims she provided several months’ notice before the lease start date; Powell claims she abandoned the property without proper notification.
Understand LLC Limitations: Using limited liability companies provides some asset protection but doesn’t eliminate all personal liability, especially when fraud is alleged.
Calculate Real Costs: Landlords should carefully consider upfront investments in tenant improvements, especially for celebrity tenants who may have alternative options.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Tyra Banks being sued for?
Tyra Banks faces a $2.8 million breach of contract lawsuit from Washington D.C. landlord Christopher Powell. He alleges she signed a 10-year commercial lease in April 2024 for a Smize & Dream ice cream shop, abandoned the property in June 2024 without paying rent, then opened locations elsewhere while refusing to honor the contract.
When was the lawsuit filed?
Christopher Powell filed the lawsuit in October 2025 in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Banks and her business partner Louis Martin filed a motion to dismiss on November 11, 2025.
What is Tyra Banks’ defense?
Banks argues the building was defective and didn’t match what Powell promised in the lease. She claims she sent termination notice several months before the lease officially started, giving Powell time to find another tenant. Her motion to dismiss accuses Powell of extortion and targeting her because of her celebrity status.
What is “hot ice cream”?
“Hot ice cream” is Smize & Dream’s signature product—a warm, sippable ice cream concept that has generated significant social media attention. The unconventional dessert has left many confused about whether it’s actually ice cream or a different warm dessert marketed under the ice cream name.
Where is Smize & Dream located now?
As of December 2025, the only operating Smize & Dream brick-and-mortar location is in Sydney, Australia, where Banks now lives with her partner Louis Martin. The brand previously operated a temporary pop-up in Washington D.C.’s Woodley Park neighborhood in July 2024, but that location closed within months.
What happens next in the lawsuit?
Judge Amy Berman Jackson set a December 16, 2025 deadline for Powell to respond to Banks’ motion to dismiss. If the judge denies the motion, the case proceeds to discovery and potentially trial. If she grants dismissal, the case could end in Banks’ favor, though Powell might appeal.
Can Tyra Banks avoid paying if she loses?
Powell’s complaint alleges Banks and Martin stated they would refuse to pay any judgment by claiming their company has no assets. However, courts can “pierce the corporate veil” and hold individuals personally liable when companies exist solely to avoid legitimate debts. Powell is suing both Banks personally and her company, making it harder to avoid liability through corporate structures.
Did Tyra Banks really threaten the landlord?
According to Powell’s complaint, Banks and Martin threatened to publicize false claims about property defects if he filed a lawsuit, and stated they would not pay any judgment against them. Banks denies these allegations through her motion to dismiss, calling the lawsuit an extortion attempt. The court will evaluate evidence from both sides to determine what actually occurred.
Disclaimer
This article provides general information about the Tyra Banks lawsuit based on publicly available court documents and news reports. It does not constitute legal advice. The case remains pending, and all allegations are disputed. Outcomes depend on evidence presented, applicable law, and judicial rulings. Information is current as of December 22, 2025, but legal proceedings are ongoing and facts may change as the case develops.
For business or legal questions about commercial leases, contract disputes, or celebrity business ventures, consult with a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.
About the Author
Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah