‘George & Tammy’ Lawsuit Could Have Chilling Effect on Artistic License

By most all accounts, the late 2022 Showtime limited series George & Tammy was a major success. The opening episode was the most-watched debut episode in Showtime’s history. Ratings remained stellar throughout the series run. It was nominated for four Emmy Awards, and received mostly positive reviews from fans and critics alike.
Most importantly, the series helped put Tammy Wynette (portrayed by Jessica Chastain) and George Jones (played by Michael Shannon) back into the public consciousness, even if it came through saucy and sometimes scandalous details of the couple’s often tumultuous relationship.
That doesn’t mean everyone was happy about how the series turned out. Some hardcore Tammy Wynette and George Jones fans didn’t appreciate some of the artistic license taken with the facts, or the dramatic interpretations of certain events. And they’re not alone. The estate of Tammy Wynette’s fifth husband, George Richey, is not too pleased with the characterizations of the late songwriter and producer in the series either, and is now suing Showtime.
“The series depicts Richey as a devious husband who abused Wynette and Richey’s prior wife, facilitated and encouraged Wynette’s addiction to prescription painkillers, and engaged in financial and managerial manipulation of Wynette,” say the lawyers for George Richey’s widow, Sheila Slaughter Richey.
The lawsuit takes special exception to the final episode of the series, which portrays George Jones discovering a last will and testament Tammy Wynette wrote on a yellow note pad. Near the end of the episode, text appears on the screen saying, “George Richey inherited the vast majority of her estate” and that “Tammy’s yellow note pads were never found.”
George Richey passed away in 2010. Sheila Slaughter married George Richey in 2001 after Tammy Wynette passed away in 1998. Sheila and George Richey’s daughter Tatum Richey is also a party to the lawsuit.
The source material for the George & Tammy series was the only child of George Jones and Tammy Wynette, Georgette Jones, and her 2011 memoir The Three of Us: Growing Up with Tammy and George. Georgette Jones was also a producer and consultant on the series.
It’s the participation of Georgette Jones in the series that the estate of George Richey is taking exception to. Hypothetically, Showtime can’t be sued for the portrayal of George Richey outright, especially since it’s a dramatic series that everyone expects to take liberties with the story to make it more appealing. So instead they’re suing Showtime for supposedly putting Georgette Jones in a position where she could have violated a previously-signed agreement with the Richey estate in 2019 that disallowed her from making disparaging comments about the estate—or what is being called “tortious interference with contract.”
Whether George Richey treated Tammy Wynette in the manner that the series portrays is up for dispute and interpretation, as are many of the other details in the series. After the conclusion of the series, Saving Country Music did a run down of some of the disputed facts and timeline issues with the project. But nobody ever claimed that George & Tammy was a true to life reenactment. It was not a documentary. George & Tammy was a dramatic series based off the recollections and understandings of George and Tammy’s daughter run through a dramatic filter.
Whether Showtime put Georgette Jones in a position where she could violate her non disparagement clause with the Richey estate is something the courts will decide in the coming months, and likely, years. The truth is that the estates of George Jones, Tammy Wynette, George Richey, and the real life doings of Georgette Jones are a mess of lawsuits, counter-lawsuits, non disparagement clauses, gag orders, and other litigious goings on as everyone fights for control and money among two of the most important estates in country music history.
History is messy, and sometimes there are no easy or concrete answers to conclude upon when it comes to who said or did what, and when. Emotions get in the way of people’s memories and perspectives, people pass away and take their recollections with them, and when others are legally bound to not speak about certain matters, it makes getting to the real truth even harder for the public.
At points in the George & Tammy series, George Richey is portrayed as more of a good guy, or simply as a secondary character. As the relationship between George Jones and Tammy Wynette turns sour and outright violent, Richey steps up as emotional support to Wynette. It is fair though to say that Richey does play a villain role later in the movie, and it’s understandable why his estate would be upset.
But in truth, none of the characters in George & Tammy were portrayed in a positive light, most especially Tammy Wynette and George Jones. Their flaws and frailties were put on full display in often starkly honest and outright shocking moments. George Jones was portrayed as an unhinged, clinically insane alcoholic prone to outbursts and narcissistic rage. Tammy Wynette was portrayed as a drug abuser with her own mental health issues and secrets to hide.
But this is all what made the series so compelling, honest, and more like real life than fiction, even if certain things were embellished to allow the story to flow and be more dramatic on screen. George & Tammy was like country music, full of two-timing, broken hearts, broken families, and divorce.
So often we hear about biopics or other projects portraying country music greats that never get off the ground. Satisfying certain demands of estates and legal concerns over potential lawsuits are often the reason these projects never come to fruition. Screenplay writers, directors, and producers should be given the latitude to work with long-standing artistic license as long as they are open with the public that liberties are being taken in certain instances and the work is “inspired by actual events” as opposed to a dry recitation of them.
Commonly films inspired by actual events utilize artistic license. The 2011 film Moneyball with Brad Pitt was nominated for six Academy Awards. It portrayed Oakland A’s manager Art Howe as the “bad guy” in the film while real-life accounts dispute this characterization. 2013’s Dallas Buyer’s Club starring Matthew McConaughey was also critically-acclaimed, but took multiple liberties with the true story.
Meanwhile, despite the portrayals in George & Tammy, George Jones, Tammy Wynette, and George Richey are remembered fondly for their contributions to country music. Just a couple of weeks ago, Saving Country Music highlighted the song “The Grand Tour” co-written by George Richey, and recorded by George Jones during better times between the two men. The song is told from the perspective of a man walking through an empty house after his wife has left.
Songs like “The Grand Tour” are what come from the real life turmoil that George Richey, George Jones, and Tammy Wynette experienced, and its these dramatic interpretations of actual events in song that give country music the unique quality to offer solace, commiseration, and a sense of relief to those suffering from similar fates. The George & Tammy series had a similar effect for many, and it would be a shame if lawsuits and potential lawsuits had a chilling effect on such dramatic interpretations of events moving forward.
February 2, 2024 @ 1:37 pm
Documentaries especially and biopics are very effective tools at swaying public opinion. They never tell the full truth and sometimes provide a misleading and one-sided view. I think we can all agree that Joe Exotic needs to be released for a legit Tiger King part 2. (I’ve never wanted a 4-wheeler THAT bad)
February 2, 2024 @ 1:45 pm
I’d be interested to hear Jimmy McDonough’s take on this situation. He wrote a definitive biography of Tammy Wynette (Tammy Wynette : Tragic Country Queen). George Richey didn’t come across too well in that telling either.
February 2, 2024 @ 1:56 pm
The other thing about this lawsuit is that it takes it as a given that everything portrayed in the film about George Richey is false. But if you talk to certain people, they’ll tell it didn’t go far enough. I can understand if someone made direct defamatory and provably false comments about Richey how the estate would want to clean those claims up. But in a fictionalized portrayal, you’re really asking a lot.
February 2, 2024 @ 1:51 pm
Richey’s reputation isn’t worth the paper needed to file a lawsuit, even if it were written on toilet paper.
February 2, 2024 @ 1:54 pm
It’s longstanding law that one cannot be held liable for defaming the dead. The estate of a recently deceased individual can continue an ongoing action that was brought while the person was alive, but it cannot bring an action after death.
I’m sure the lawyers bringing this suit believe they’ve found an exception or a basis for changing the law, but given that Richey has been dead for 13-plus years and the alleged defamation occurred more than 10 years after his death, I doubt this is going to be the case that does it.
February 2, 2024 @ 2:58 pm
Don’t think this lawsuit is about defamation per Sr. it is more about violation some sort of non–disclosure agreement which created the opportunityfor defamation to take place. A fine point. The nature of the defamation or if the parry is dead or not isn’t the point, the breaking of the contract is – ironically the damages may be awarded based on defamation. Keep in mind this will depend on the strength of the laws in the jurisdiction involved….
February 2, 2024 @ 2:49 pm
Sounds like the apple didn’t fall far from the Richey tree.
I’m thinking Showtime has lawyers too.
February 2, 2024 @ 4:33 pm
Imagine if Salieri still had living heirs in 1984
February 2, 2024 @ 4:51 pm
Documentaries about famous celebrities are always polarizing for all involved whovwill complain about performances, facts abd negative portrayals
However this new vector of of “interference with contract” is unique here sincev the enforceability of NDAs and confidentiality agreements and settlements – and the degrees of disclosure the parties involved can engage is involved. This is not subjective like slander and libel; the terms in these agreements have enforceable specifications and limitations. Parties are bound by contract and civil law. The actual parties are liable if they violate the agreement and in this case, studios, production ompanies et al are also liable as acomplises in abetting in the violation.
We will see about the “Chilling Effect”. First, the contributor(s) here had some kind of agreement, they should have confirmed their legal status to see what actual rights of disclosure they agreed to. Second, the outcome of this may be dependent on rhe strength of the laws involved in the jurisdictions upon which they were entered. Third, if there are any legal agreements between family members, estates, corporations or whatvever, a trupvto tge lawyer to see if you can actually disclose is in order (since even “inspired by ….” has limitations especially if using actual names even in parody).
Disclsuner: This is strictly my opinion only abd nothing more.
February 2, 2024 @ 9:46 pm
Thanks for that disclunser.
February 4, 2024 @ 4:31 pm
Darn these arthritic fingers….
February 2, 2024 @ 5:27 pm
Richey’s survivors are clearly unhappy with how he was portrayed in the film. So they found a scapegoat with Georgette because her name was in the credits for that film
But that may be a hard case to make considering Richey’s misdeeds have been written about elsewhere and were common knowledge to many in the Nashville music industry. Tammy’s life overflowed with opportunists & vultures and Richey was the last in line to take advantage of her. Georgette was definitely not alone with that knowledge.
When a free week of Showtime was offered by my cable system a while back I watched the entire George & Tammy series. Previously I had only seen the free premier episode. I thought it to be borderline dreadful mostly due to Micheal Shannon’s Godawful singing. Subsequent episodes never got any better in my opinion. George & Tammy deserved better.
February 4, 2024 @ 7:55 am
You did not kneel before Zod?
February 4, 2024 @ 8:21 am
What is a Zod?
February 2, 2024 @ 5:39 pm
How sad it is.
February 3, 2024 @ 3:08 am
It was a good drama series and well worth watching. The law suit does seem to be a bit if a long shot and achieve little or nothing.
February 4, 2024 @ 7:52 am
I despise “based on a true story” because “artistic license” removes it from its implied nonfiction status.
I’m a huge baseball guy, but Moneyball, A League Of Their Own and 42 have events and in the case of Jonah Hill, characters who are fictional as Hell. And I love Braveheart, but the bridge is missing from the Battle of Sterling Bridge and Wallace’s real-life tactics were every bit as fascinating as those in the film version.
February 4, 2024 @ 4:41 pm
Based on a true story” also can be tainted by sour grapes, inebriated percerctions, idol worship or just a good old ax to grind. Guess it makes for good entertainment and that’s it; look for the truth- don’t know where. Maybe better off not knowing some of the behind the scenes issues because it will ruin your perception of them. Then again you could say why bother….
February 6, 2024 @ 10:10 am
Forget the fictitious movie “George and Tammy.” To country music enthusiasts the story of George Jones and Tammy Wynette will forever be a real beautiful true love story. Georgette Jones sums it best in her song “You, Me, and Time”—of course Richey is the rotten egg who robbed country music fans of the end to the true beautiful love story of George and Tammy in my opinion; worst of all, only the attorneys of both estates will get to benefit from the labors of George and Tammy. How unfair. Drugs are never the answer to any long-term solutions. SO TRAGIC!,