Supermodel and entrepreneur Tyra Banks faces a significant legal challenge as Washington, D.C. landlord Christopher Powell filed a $2.8 million breach of contract lawsuit in federal court.
The complaint, submitted October 9, 2024, alleges that Banks and business partner Louis Bélanger-Martin signed a 10-year commercial lease in April 2024, then abruptly abandoned the property just two months later without paying rent.
The Dream That Fell Apart
Banks originally pitched Smize & Dream as more than a simple ice cream shop to landlord Christopher Powell. According to court documents, she envisioned the D.C. location as the flagship for a global chain dedicated to serving underserved communities worldwide.
The venture included plans for youth education programs in science, sales, and hospitality through Banks’ nonprofit School of SMiZE, making it seem like a significant social enterprise.
The Pivot to Sydney
Powell claims that after collaborating on designs for the Washington, D.C. location, he discovered Banks showcasing the same designs for a Smize & Dream shop opening in Sydney, Australia instead.
This discovery raised immediate questions about whether Banks and Martin had ever intended to fulfill their commitment to Powell’s Eastern Market property, or whether the D.C. location was merely a temporary consideration.
The Sudden Abandonment
By June 2024, just two months after signing the 10-year lease agreement, Banks and Martin allegedly “abruptly abandoned the premises” without providing explanation or fulfilling their rental obligations.
Powell claims he had “no indication that Ms. Banks and Mr. Martin would desert the venture,” especially given their repeated assurances of commitment to the D.C. flagship location.
The Pop-Up That Added Insult
Making matters worse for Powell, just weeks after abandoning his property, Banks opened a Smize & Dream pop-up shop at 2653 Connecticut Avenue in Woodley Park—merely miles away from Powell’s Eastern Market location.
This move suggested that Banks and Martin had not abandoned the D.C. market entirely, but rather chose alternative locations over Powell’s property.
Threats and False Accusations
When Powell attempted to resolve the dispute amicably, he allegedly received a letter from Banks and Martin containing what he describes as “numerous false accusations” against him, his building, and the lease terms.
The letter allegedly threatened to publicize these accusations if Powell filed lawsuit, escalating the conflict from contractual disagreement to apparent intimidation.
The No-Payment Threat
Most troubling, the letter allegedly stated that Banks and Martin would refuse to pay any judgment against them, even if they lost in court.
According to Powell’s complaint, they threatened to avoid liability by shifting blame to their company, claiming it had no assets—a statement that, if accurate, suggests deliberate asset-shielding tactics.
Powell’s Attorney Responds
Powell’s lawyer, Arziki Adamu, issued a firm statement defending his client’s reputation and professionalism. Adamu emphasized that Powell has worked with “other high-profile clients with only positive results” and filed suit only after defendants made clear they would not honor the lease agreement.
The attorney characterized the defendants’ behavior as flagrant breach requiring judicial enforcement of a valid contract.
Seeking Substantial Damages
Powell is demanding $2,831,331 in base damages plus late fees, accrued interest, additional rent payments, attorneys’ fees, and reletting expenses related to the abandoned lease.
The total claim could significantly exceed the initial $2.8 million figure once all additional costs are calculated and awarded by the court.
The Defense Motion
Banks and Martin’s attorney, Steven Willner, filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit on November 11, 2024, arguing the case lacks subject matter jurisdiction and fails to state a valid legal claim.
The defendants claim they provided termination notice several months before the lease was set to commence, giving Powell adequate time to find alternative tenants and mitigate his losses.
The Space Access Dispute
Banks’ legal team argues they backed out of the lease because they did not receive full access to the space promised in the original agreement. This claim contradicts Powell’s assertion that the defendants visited the property multiple times before signing and fully understood its configuration.
Key Dates and Deadlines
The timeline of events is crucial to understanding the dispute. Powell first met with Banks and Martin in March 2024, followed by the formal lease signing on April 17, 2024.
The alleged abandonment occurred in June 2024, with Banks opening the D.C. pop-up in July 2024. Judge Amy Berman Jackson granted Powell’s team until December 16, 2024, to respond to the motion to dismiss.
A Pattern of Business Struggles
This lawsuit represents the latest chapter in Banks’ troubled entrepreneurial history outside of television. Over the past 15 years, she has launched multiple failed ventures including the Tyra Beauty MLM scheme, ModelLand theme park, TypeF fashion website, and the FABLife talk show.
Each venture promised transformation but delivered disappointment.
The ModelLand Precursor
Banks’ $21,000-square-foot ModelLand experience at Santa Monica Place opened in 2022 after a decade of development and repeated postponements. The attraction closed by 2023 after visitors described it as unclear in concept and underwhelming in execution.
Critics noted it never seemed to know what it wanted to be.
Tyra Beauty’s MLM Controversy
In 2014, Banks launched Tyra Beauty as a multi-level marketing cosmetics company offering “beautytainers” only 25% commissions on retail sales. The direct sales portion shut down by 2017 after accusations of operating as a pyramid scheme.
The venture demonstrated Banks’ struggle to understand viable business models.
Television Success That Generated Wealth
Banks’ most significant business success came from America’s Next Top Model, which aired for 22 cycles and earned her approximately $30 million annually at its peak. She self-funded subsequent ventures using ANTM profits, yet those ventures consistently failed despite adequate capitalization.
The Australia Relocation
Banks relocated to Sydney, Australia, with partner Louis Bélanger-Martin and her son York to establish what appears to be her primary business focus—the Smize & Dream flagship location. The Sydney shop opened in June 2024 with an ornate design featuring gilded archways and large golden doors.
Recent Personal Tragedy
In January 2025, Banks revealed she lost her Los Angeles home in the Palisades Fire while she was in Australia. She emotionally disclosed on the Australian morning show Sunrise: “I lost my house. I just didn’t want to pull a lot of attention to me.”.
The property loss adds another layer of complexity to her current legal situation.
Financial Status and Implications
Despite the lawsuit, Banks maintains an estimated net worth of $90 million accumulated through television production, real estate investments, and endorsement deals. However, the lawsuit threatens both her finances and her carefully cultivated image as an empowering businesswoman.
What Comes Next
The federal court case will proceed unless Judge Amy Berman Jackson grants the motion to dismiss. Powell’s response, filed by the December 16 deadline, will determine whether Banks faces discovery, depositions, and potential trial regarding her business conduct.
The outcome could have far-reaching implications for how celebrity entrepreneurs handle contractual obligations and business commitments.
Sources:
”Tyra Banks sued for $2.8 million by landlord over ice cream shop lease.” Entertainment Weekly, December 12, 2025.
“Tyra Banks, ‘hot ice cream’ and a D.C. lawsuit.” Axios Washington DC, December 18, 2025.
“Tyra Banks faces $2.8M lawsuit over ‘hot ice cream’ shop lease dispute.” Fox Baltimore, December 17, 2025.
“Lawsuit Filed Against Tyra Banks For $2.8M Over Lease Dispute.” Yahoo Entertainment, December 18, 2025.
“Tyra Banks Reveals She Lost Her Home in the L.A. Wildfires.” Hollywood Reporter, January 21, 2025.