Photo: David Shankbone · CC BY 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons

Born in United States · Nationalities Polish, American — media / business / financial markets / governance / commercial litigation

Martha Stewart

Business and billionaires Film, television and entertainment

Documented profile covering 11 controversies, including “2014: Confidential settlement with Macy's ends litigation against MSLO” and “2011–2013: J.C. Penney agreement challenged by Macy's, preliminary injunction and trial over commercial exclusivity”.

Are you concerned? Right of reply

Profile No. 2198 · Updated on 12 October 2026

11Documented controversies

12Sources

1 followed by a conviction

§ Legal statuses reflect the documented sources as of the date shown; they replace neither court decisions nor the presumption of innocence. Counts are not a rating. Methodology

I. Documented controversies

2 January 2014

2014: Confidential settlement with Macy's ends litigation against MSLO

Civil / administrative proceedings

MSLO and Macy's announced a confidential settlement of their contractual dispute. The terms were not disclosed, and both companies said they intended to continue their partnership.

State of the evidence: Documented

Sources · 2

[1]
Macy’s, Inc.Macy’s and Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia Settle Legal DisputePress releaseHigh reliability
[2]
U.S. Securities and Exchange CommissionMSLO and Macy’s Settle Legal Dispute — Exhibit 99.1Regulatory filingVery high reliability

Last verified: 14 September 2026

Add to this entry

December 2011–October 2013

2011–2013: J.C. Penney agreement challenged by Macy's, preliminary injunction and trial over commercial exclusivity

Civil / administrative proceedings

Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia entered into a partnership with J.C. Penney covering product categories already subject to an exclusivity contract with Macy's. Macy's sued for breach of contract; a preliminary injunction limited certain activities, followed by a lengthy trial.

State of the evidence: Documented
Attribution: Personally implicated

Sources · 2

[1]
U.S. Securities and Exchange CommissionMartha Stewart Living Omnimedia 2013 Form 10-KRegulatory filingVery high reliability
[2]
New York Appellate Division / JustiaMacy’s Inc. v. Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, Inc.Court decisionVery high reliability

Last verified: 14 September 2026

Add to this entry

Case · 3 documented stages

January 2006: Convictions upheld on appeal

Conviction

6 January 2006

January 2006: Convictions upheld on appeal

Conviction

The Second Circuit rejected the principal arguments raised by Stewart and Bacanovic and upheld their criminal convictions.

Sources · 1

[1]
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit / JustiaUnited States v. Martha Stewart and Peter BacanovicCourt decisionVery high reliability

Last verified: 14 September 2026

Add to this entry

27 February–5 March 2004

March 2004: Securities fraud count dismissed, but convicted on four counts of obstruction, conspiracy and false statements

Conviction

Before deliberations, the judge dismissed the securities fraud count relating to Stewart's public statements. The jury subsequently found her guilty on the other four counts: conspiracy, obstruction of an administrative proceeding and two false statements to investigators.

Attribution: Directly implicated

Sources · 2

[1]
The Washington PostStewart Guilty on All ChargesPressHigh reliability
[2]
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit / JustiaUnited States v. Martha Stewart and Peter BacanovicCourt decisionVery high reliability

Last verified: 14 September 2026

Add to this entry

16 July 2004

July 2004: Five months in prison, five months of home confinement and $30,000 fine

Conviction

Stewart received the minimum sentence under the guidelines: five months' imprisonment, five months' home confinement, two years' supervision and a $30,000 fine.

State of the evidence: Documented
Attribution: Directly implicated

Sources · 1

[1]
The Washington PostMartha Stewart Sentenced To PrisonPressHigh reliability

Last verified: 14 September 2026

Add to this entry

7 August 2006

August 2006: SEC ImClone settlement — approximately $195,000 and temporary ban on listed-company directorships

Civil / administrative proceedings

Stewart settled the SEC civil insider trading allegations by agreeing to disgorgement, interest and penalties totalling approximately $195,000, together with a five-year ban on serving as a director of a listed company and similar restrictions as an officer.

State of the evidence: Settlement
Attribution: Directly implicated

Sources · 1

[1]
U.S. Securities and Exchange CommissionMartha Stewart and Peter Bacanovic Settle SEC Insider Trading ChargesOfficial statementVery high reliability

Last verified: 14 September 2026

Add to this entry

October 2004–August 2005

2004–2005: Serves federal prison sentence followed by home confinement

No legal proceedings

After deciding not to await completion of her appeal before beginning her sentence, Stewart served five months in prison followed by five months of home confinement.

Attribution: Directly implicated

Sources · 1

[1]
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit / JustiaUnited States v. Martha Stewart and Peter BacanovicCourt decisionVery high reliability

Last verified: 14 September 2026

Add to this entry

June 2003–15 March 2004

June 2003–March 2004: Successive resignations from leadership and board of Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia

No legal proceedings

Following her indictment, Stewart resigned as chair and chief executive of Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia. After her conviction in March 2004, she also left the board and Chief Creative Officer role, becoming Founding Editorial Director without executive responsibilities.

State of the evidence: Documented
Attribution: Directly implicated

Sources · 2

[1]
U.S. Securities and Exchange CommissionMartha Stewart Living Omnimedia 2003 Form 10-KRegulatory filingVery high reliability
[2]
U.S. Securities and Exchange CommissionMartha Stewart Living Omnimedia Proxy StatementRegulatory filingVery high reliability

Last verified: 14 September 2026

Add to this entry

4 June 2003

June 2003: Federal indictment for conspiracy, obstruction and false statements, and SEC civil insider trading complaint

Civil / administrative proceedings

Stewart and Bacanovic were criminally indicted for their conduct during the investigation, while the SEC filed a civil insider trading complaint against them the same day. Stewart pleaded not guilty.

Attribution: Accused

Sources · 2

[1]
The Washington PostStewart Pleads Not Guilty to All ChargesPressHigh reliability
[2]
U.S. Securities and Exchange CommissionMartha Stewart and Peter Bacanovic — SEC Litigation Release 18169Regulatory authorityVery high reliability

Last verified: 14 September 2026

Add to this entry

February–April 2002

2002: Statements to investigators about alleged $60 sell order central to obstruction charge

Investigation

During interviews with the SEC, FBI and prosecutors, Stewart maintained that she and her broker Peter Bacanovic had agreed to sell ImClone at $60. The government subsequently established at trial that this account and related explanations were false and intended to divert the investigation.

Attribution: Directly implicated

Sources · 1

[1]
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit / JustiaUnited States v. Martha Stewart and Peter BacanovicCourt decisionVery high reliability

Last verified: 14 September 2026

Add to this entry

27 December 2001

December 2001: Sale of ImClone shares after information about Waksal family sales

Civil / administrative proceedings

Martha Stewart sold 3,928 ImClone shares after her broker informed her that executive Samuel Waksal and his daughter were selling their holdings. The following day, an adverse FDA decision sent ImClone shares down.

State of the evidence: Documented
Attribution: Directly implicated

Sources · 2

[1]
U.S. Securities and Exchange CommissionMartha Stewart and Peter Bacanovic — SEC Litigation Release 18169Regulatory authorityVery high reliability
[2]
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit / JustiaUnited States v. Martha Stewart and Peter BacanovicCourt decisionVery high reliability

Last verified: 14 September 2026

Add to this entry

II. Constellation of documented links

No documented link with another published profile for now.

Two profiles are linked when a documented controversy of one names the other. The link points to that controversy and its sources; it does not indicate a personal relationship.

III. Has something changed?

A new court decision, a missing source, a mistake? Tell us what should be updated: every request is read by the editorial team.

Support the archive

Controversia checks and updates its profiles independently. Support is optional and has no effect on the content of profiles.

Donate