> At a Glance
> – D.C. landlord Christopher Powell sued Tyra Banks and partner Louis Martin for $2.8 million after they walked away from a 10-year lease.
> – The suit, filed in August 2024, claims the pair abandoned the Eastern Market property in June without paying rent.
> – Smize and Dream opened a pop-up miles away in July; the flagship later launched in Sydney.
> Why it matters: The case highlights the financial risks landlords face when celebrity-backed ventures collapse mid-negotiation.
A March 2024 handshake on an ice-cream dream has melted into a multi-million-dollar courtroom battle. Powell says he turned away other tenants and invested heavily after Martin signed the 10-year lease on April 17, 2024.
Lease Breakdown
By June, the unit sat empty. Powell’s complaint states the duo stopped communicating and left him holding renovation costs and lost rent. He first demanded payment on August 20, 2024; a letter from Banks and Martin denied liability.
- Lease start: April 17, 2024
- Abandonment: June 2024
- Demand letter: August 20, 2024
- Lawsuit filed: October 2024
Counter-Claims
Banks and Martin fired back in September, arguing the lease was invalid because they say Powell promised the entire building, not two retail and two office bays. They also cite “myriad mechanical, electrical, and plumbing deficiencies” and claim Powell ignored their termination notice until he sued.
| Party | Key Argument |
|---|---|
| Powell | Signed lease, unpaid rent, lost opportunities |
| Banks & Martin | Misrepresentation, building not in working order |
The defendants moved to dismiss in November; Powell’s attorney Arziki Adamu had a response due December 30, 2025. On that date Powell voluntarily dismissed the federal suit so the case can proceed in D.C. Superior Court.
Attorney Arziki Adamu confirmed the dismissal was procedural and the lawsuit will continue in the higher local court.
Smize and Dream counsel Steven Jay Willner has not replied to requests for comment.
Key Takeaways
- Powell seeks $2.8 million for lost rent and investment after the 10-year lease collapse.
- Banks and Martin argue the space was misrepresented and uninhabitable.
- The dispute shifts from federal to D.C. Superior Court following the Dec. 30 dismissal.
The landlord-tenant showdown is far from over as both sides prepare for the next round in local court.
