Entertainment

Mastodon Asks Court to Dismiss Parts of Brent Hinds Estate Lawsuit

Kiran MachadoPublished 4m ago2 min readBased on 2 sources
Mastodon Asks Court to Dismiss Parts of Brent Hinds Estate Lawsuit
Photo by Jimmy Hubbard / Warner Music Sweden / CC BY 3.0

Mastodon's surviving members want an Atlanta judge to throw out some of the claims in a lawsuit brought over the estate of their late guitarist, Brent Hinds. Brann Dailor, Bill Kelliher and Troy Sanders made the request in a court filing on 2 November, as Billboard reported.

The dispute centres on money and ownership. Hinds' estate wants to cash out his 25% stake in Mastodon's operations, meaning his share of the business that runs the band. It argues that an $80,000 payment made after his death was too low.

Hinds died in a motorcycle crash in August 2025, at age 51. A few months earlier, Mastodon had announced that he would end his 25-year run with the band. When he died, he was still negotiating the terms of his exit, and no final paperwork had been signed.

The filing seeks dismissal of two kinds of claim. The first is breach of fiduciary duty, a legal obligation to act in another person's best interests. The second is conversion, a claim that someone wrongly took or used another person's property. Mastodon's lawyers argue that honouring Hinds' legacy does not require rewriting the agreements that govern his business interests. Nor, they say, does it require imposing obligations that Georgia law does not recognise.

The estate also alleges that the cover of Mastodon's August 2026 album, Marrow Deep, used the guitarist's likeness, meaning his image, without permission. The album debuted at No. 2 on Billboard's Top Hard Rock Albums chart, a weekly ranking of hard rock releases.

The estate has spoken publicly before. In a statement in September, it explained why it had filed the suit and asked fans for peace and compassion while the legal process continues, according to Loudwire.

Mastodon's filing says the remaining factual and contractual disputes, and the truth behind them, will be addressed in due course. The court has not yet ruled on the request to dismiss.