ARTnews Top 200 Collector David Geffen’s short-lived marriage has come to an unceremonious end, with the billionaire entertainment mogul reaching a private settlement with his estranged husband, David Armstrong, capping months of unusually public legal sparring.
According to court filings reported on by TMZ this week, Geffen, 83, and Armstrong, 33, have agreed to resolve their divorce, though the financial terms remain undisclosed. The split follows less than two years of marriage and, crucially, no prenuptial agreement. It’s that detail that helped turn the proceedings into a high-stakes dispute over money, lifestyle, and control that has generated much tabloid coverage.
The news also comes ahead of the opening of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art’s new building next week, which is named the David Geffen Galleries.
What began as a relatively straightforward separation quickly escalated. Armstrong, a model who has also gone by name Donovan Michaels, argued in court filings that Geffen was attempting to limit spousal support while maintaining a standard of living that, he claimed, once exceeded $3 million a month. Geffen, for his part, countered that he had already provided substantial support, including hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments and a New York apartment.
The dispute eventually widened beyond just money. Armstrong accused Geffen of withholding full disclosure of his wealth, comparing their legal battle to “David and Goliath,” citing the vast imbalance in resources between the two. He also filed—and later withdrew—a civil lawsuit accusing Geffen of exploitation and claiming that he was treated as a kind of “trophy,” manipulated psychologically, and even pushed into drug dependency as a form of control. Geffen’s legal team dismissed those claims outright.
That lawsuit’s withdrawal marked a turning point, and brought the battle back to the core issues of spousal support and division of assets. Still, the absence of a prenup and the disparity in wealth ensured that even a two-year marriage could carry hefty financial implications.
In the end, both sides appear to have opted for closure instead escalating things further. The settlement brings to a quiet end a case that, for a while, gave a behind the scenes look into the personal and financial mechanics of one of Hollywood’s most private billionaire art collectors.
