Ty Warner v. Santa Barbara Sea Center

Beanie Babies mogul Ty Warner is pursuing legal action against the Santa Barbara Museum of Natural History, accusing the institution of reneging on a naming-rights agreement for its Sea Center after Warner was convicted of tax evasion in 2013 and the museum subsequently removed his name from the Stearns Wharf building.

Warner is seeking unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, as well as damages for “emotional distress.” The lawsuit, filed in September 2025, was dismissed this January by a federal judge for exceeding the statute of limitations. Warner, however, has appealed the dismissal, and the case will now be heard by the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. 

Back in 2003, Warner donated $1.5 million toward an $8 million renovation of the Sea Center. In exchange, it would be named the “Ty Warner Sea Center” for “no less than 25 years” from the date of its reopening, the agreement stipulated. Warner also designed a limited-edition octopus-shaped Beanie Baby, “Opie,” for sale at the gift shop.

Ten years later, in 2013, Warner pleaded guilty to hiding more than $24.4 million in secret Swiss bank accounts and avoiding nearly $5.6 million in U.S. taxes. He was sentenced to two years of probation and 500 hours of community service and ordered to pay $53 million in penalties. 

Shortly thereafter, Luke Swetland, the museum’s CEO and president, sent a letter to Warner informing him of the decision to remove his name from the building and all collateral materials. Swetland cited Warner’s criminal conviction but explained that, publicly, the museum would say the move was part of a rebranding effort to align the Sea Center more closely with the Museum of Natural History for its 10th anniversary.

Warner responded with a letter of his own that expressed surprise and disappointment at the decision. He noted that other companies that are “extraordinarily protective about their brand and image” ― including Disney, McDonald’s, and the NFL ― “continue to have their products associated with my name and logo.” 

Warner believed that because the museum had kept his $1.5 million gift, it intended to restore his name at a later date, “after the tenth anniversary of the Sea Center had passed, but before April 23, 2030, when the 25-year naming period was due to expire,” the lawsuit states. “[Warner] therefore refrained from requesting a full or partial refund of the money paid and refrained from pursuing legal action against [the museum]” at the time, it says.

Fast-forward to December 2024 and Warner ― whose estimated worth is $7.4 billion ― was reviewing his charity work when he decided to press the museum for a final answer on the possibility of restoring his name. The museum said no, it would not reconsider its prior decision, but it was open to discussing other naming opportunities. The museum suggested a $50 million donation from Warner for which he would receive a plaque on the interior wall of the Sea Center.

This made Warner realize that the museum’s true motive for dropping his name had nothing to do with his tax issue, the lawsuit asserts, “and was simply a ruse and mechanism to keep all of [Warner’s] money, while undertaking a rebranding effort and soliciting additional donations from other individuals.” That constitutes intentional misrepresentation and a breach of contract, the suit argues.

In a statement to the Independent this week, Swetland said “the Museum stands by its actions and believes that the litigation is wholly without merit.” 

“While it is unfortunate that this legal dispute will require resources that would otherwise support our local children, our educational programs, and community outreach,” Swetland continued, “we are grateful that a friend of the Museum has stepped forward to help underwrite the legal costs in defending against this frivolous action.”

Swetland said the museum will oppose Warner’s appeal and is confident that the trial court’s ruling to dismiss the case will ultimately be affirmed. “We remain hopeful that this matter can be resolved swiftly so that the Museum can continue dedicating its full energy to serving local children, families, and visitors,” he said.