Sperone Westwater’s closure has exposed a deeper legal and financial dispute than first suggested by the gallery’s sudden shutdown at the end of 2025. Newly filed court documents allege governance failures, disputed payments to artists, and years of internal deadlock at the 50-year-old New York firm.
As Artnet News reported earlier this week, the gallery closed amid a legal battle between its two principals, Gian Enzo Sperone and Angela Westwater, who each control 50 percent of the company. The dispute centers on the dissolution of Sperone Westwater Inc., which also owns the Norman Foster–designed building on the Bowery that has housed the gallery since 2000.
In a petition filed in New York Supreme Court in August and supported by nearly two dozen exhibits and affidavits submitted through early January, Sperone and Sandstown Trade Ltd., an entity connected to his family, are seeking judicial dissolution of the corporation and the appointment of a receiver to oversee the wind-down of its assets.
The petition argues that the company has been paralyzed by irreconcilable internal divisions, the failure since 2021 to elect successor directors, an inability to elect directors, and a breakdown in communication between the two partners. According to the filings, the directors “do not even speak directly to one another,” creating what the petition describes as a “parasitic deadlock.”
Beyond governance issues, the documents outline a series of financial disputes. Central among them is the relationship between the gallery and the Foster Building, which is owned by a separate corporate subsidiary. The petitioners allege that the parties had agreed the gallery would pay approximately $1.8 million per year in rent to the holding company, generating income from the real estate investment. They claim that Westwater later reduced and ultimately eliminated that rent without board approval in order to subsidize what the filings describe as an increasingly unprofitable gallery operation.
Financial records attached to the case show that gallery revenue peaked at roughly $20 million in 2021 before falling sharply in subsequent years, reaching approximately $3.6 million in 2025. The petition alleges losses in five of the past seven years and a shortfall of more than $2 million in 2025 alone.
The filings also raise questions about artist payments and consignor funds. The petition claims that artworks were sold without consultation and that artists were not paid as required by law. The petitioners argue that this poses potential exposure under New York’s Arts and Cultural Affairs Law, which regulates the handling of artist proceeds, though the filings stop short of identifying specific artists by name.
Westwater, in filings submitted in December, disputes those characterizations. She contends that she has been the sole manager of the gallery’s day-to-day operations for years and accuses Sperone of long-term absenteeism, alleging that he spent limited time at the gallery even before relocating to Europe in 2016. She has asked the court to dismiss the petition and argued that the gallery’s closure was handled responsibly, stating that employees were terminated and “nearly all consigned artworks” were returned to their owners.
The petitioners counter that Sperone’s limited physical presence was long understood within the partnership and documented in public statements, and that his reduced travel in later years was driven by health concerns rather than abandonment. They further allege that access to financial records, bank accounts, and accounting systems was restricted, preventing meaningful oversight by the other shareholder.
Another point of contention is the role of outside advisers. The filings allege conflicts of interest involving legal and accounting representation, including claims that advisers acted simultaneously for Westwater personally and for the corporation, and that financial service providers were engaged without board approval.
While the legal fight continues, some aspects of the wind-down are already underway. Westwater’s filings confirm that the brokerage firm CBRE has been retained to market the Foster Building, and that discussions over asset disposition have taken place under mediation, though those talks have not resulted in a comprehensive settlement.
The case now turns on how the dissolution will proceed and whether a court-appointed receiver will be installed to manage the process. In recent submissions, Sperone’s attorneys argue that the question before the court is no longer whether the gallery will close, but how the company’s assets will be liquidated and its obligations resolved.
ARTnews has reached out to representatives for Sperone Westwater for comment on the latest filings and allegations but has not yet received a response.
The dispute puts a spotlight on the fragility of legacy gallery structures in a market that has become more capital-intensive, business-oriented, and operationally complex, particularly when ownership is evenly divided and succession planning remains unresolved. For now, the fate of one of New York’s most storied contemporary art galleries rests with the court.
