Authenticity, Authority, and the Art Market: The Morrisseau Estate Lawsuit Isn’t Just a Legal Story

When Norval Morrisseau Estate Ltd. was sued this spring by a Calgary gallery for defamation and breach of contract, the headlines focused on reputational damage and a disputed handshake deal. CBC Thunder Bay reported the story on July 2, 2025.

But what’s happening beneath that surface is something much deeper—and more unsettling.

We are watching a tug-of-war between legal structures and legacy, between the rights of a gallery to sell work and the responsibility of an estate to safeguard cultural truth.

This is not a simple case of “he said, gallery said.” This is a familiar and painful story to many of us who work with Indigenous art, artist estates, or cultural property.

Because here’s the thing:
🖼️ There are still thousands of fake Morrisseau’s circulating.
⚖️ There is no unified system for authenticating the work of Indigenous artists.
💔 The artist’s family, community, and cultural worldview are too often sidelined.

So when we talk about contracts and public statements, we also need to ask:
-Who gets to define authenticity?
-How do we reconcile moral authority with legal incorporation?
-Can the market ever serve Indigenous cultural sovereignty, or only exploit it?

As someone who has worked in museum collections and cultural investment, I believe this case is not just a flashpoint; it’s a warning signal. We need a more robust framework for ethical estate governance, particularly when it comes to Indigenous artists.

This story isn’t over. But it’s already asking us hard questions.