Chadwick Boseman’s brothers ask court to oust widow as estate administrator: ‘Cannot be trusted’ 39%

By Emily St. Martin22%

7/23/2026, 11:10:58 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 21 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Appeal to Authority, and Quote-first Misdirection, with Optimism Bias as the most egregious example at 12% saturation with 81 hits. Analysis detected 860 faulty-reasoning hits from 674 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 44.2% and a BS Rank of 39% (13,556 of 21,886 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 61.90% of the article peer group.

Chadwick Boseman's brothers, Derrick Boseman and Kevin Boseman, are taking the actor's widow to court over her handling of his multimillion-dollar estate. 
The pair filed a petition with a Los Angeles court to remove control of the "Black Panther" actor's estate from his widow, Taylor Simone Ledward. 
They claim Ledward has mishandled distribution of the funds and "cannot be trusted with the continued administration of the estate." 
According to court documents reviewed by The Times, the brothers filed the petition last week on behalf of their parents, Leroy and Carolyn Boseman, whom they say each inherited 25% of their son's "sizeable" estate while Ledward inherited 50%. 
The petition states that the estate included residuals and royalties, rights to his image and intellectual property, investments, insurance policies, personal property and multiple bank accounts. 
Because the actor did not leave a will, the estate was passed to his parents and Ledward. 
Ledward, the petition claims, "was also appointed as administrator" but never "fully distributed [Boseman's] estate. ... 
Instead, she continues to exercise complete control over his estate without input from Leroy and Carolyn." 
The filing asks the court to have Ledward distribute the remaining estate assets, make a case for why she shouldn't be "held in contempt for disobeying the court's order," and provide a "full accounting with receipts for her time as administrator." 
It also asks that the court remove her as administrator. 
The brothers asked the court to pass Ledward's role as administrator to a private fiduciary and forensic accountant, who they claim will be essential in investigating Ledward's alleged "mismanagement of the estate and marshaling any unaccounted-for assets." 
Reps for Ledward did not immediately respond to The Times' request for comment. 
The actor's brothers allege that, because of their lack of access to Boseman's estate, they are "blocked from pursuing lucrative business opportunities" that might benefit their "elderly parents." 
“For years, our parents have sought clarity regarding matters connected to the estate of our brother, Chadwick Boseman, including his intellectual property and legacy,” the brothers said in an emailed statement shared by their representative. 
“On behalf of our parents, we are committed to ensuring that transparency, accountability, and respect guide the resolution of these matters. 
Our hope is that this process brings clarity, honors the Court’s orders, and ensures the responsible stewardship of Chadwick’s legacy. 
“We love our brother, and we remain committed to preserving his legacy with dignity, integrity, and respect.” 
The Oscar nominee died in 2020 at 43 years old after privately battling colon cancer for four years. 
He was diagnosed with Stage 3 colon cancer in 2016, the same year he made his debut as comics superhero T’Challa, a.k.a. the Black Panther, in “Captain America: Civil War.” 
The acclaimed actor also portrayed real-life icons Jackie Robinson in “42,” James Brown in “Get on Up” and Thurgood Marshall in “Marshall.” 
Boseman and Ledward, an R&B artist who uses the stage name sahn, started dating in 2015 and quietly wed in 2020 before the actor's death. 
In a December 2020 interview with "CBS Sunday Morning," Boseman's friend and the producer of the Netflix movie "Ma Rainey's Black Bottom," Denzel Washington, said that while on the set of the film he watched Ledward care for the actor in the midst of his cancer battle and told him to "put a ring on that finger." 
In recent years, Ledward has advocated for colon cancer awareness and spoken at multiple events. 
In 2024, she spoke at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, saying, “Colorectal cancer is killing young people across the country, and most are vastly underestimating their risk. 
I’ve seen how this disease moves, and I know now how treatable it is when it’s detected early," she said, per NBC Boston. 
"My personal advocacy stems from this understanding, and from the disappointment I feel in the lack of awareness in my community," she said. 
"We who have this knowledge have an obligation to inform our fellow man. 
Spreading awareness will save lives.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 2.4%Emily St. Martin: 1.9%Daily Pilot: 2.9%Confirmation Bias2.4%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.1%Daily Pilot: 1.2%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 1.9%Emily St. Martin: 2.2%Daily Pilot: 3.5%Availability Heuristic1.9%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.6%Daily Pilot: 1.0%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.7%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.3%Daily Pilot: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 8.0%Emily St. Martin: 6.9%Daily Pilot: 7.5%Framing Effect8.0%This article: 4.2%Emily St. Martin: 0.2%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Loss Aversion4.2%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.1%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 12.0%Emily St. Martin: 1.4%Daily Pilot: 3.6%Optimism Bias12.0%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.2%Daily Pilot: 1.4%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 11.3%Emily St. Martin: 5.8%Daily Pilot: 7.8%Negativity Bias11.3%This article: 7.6%Emily St. Martin: 2.7%Daily Pilot: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias7.6%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.1%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.1%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 7.1%Emily St. Martin: 0.8%Daily Pilot: 1.6%In-Group Bias7.1%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 4.7%Emily St. Martin: 6.1%Daily Pilot: 5.1%Halo Effect4.7%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.2%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.8%Daily Pilot: 1.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.3%Daily Pilot: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 5.0%Emily St. Martin: 1.1%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Ad Hominem5.0%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 11.3%Emily St. Martin: 3.7%Daily Pilot: 4.9%Appeal to Authority11.3%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.4%Daily Pilot: 1.2%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.7%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.1%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 4.2%Emily St. Martin: 1.1%Daily Pilot: 4.4%Hasty Generalization4.2%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.1%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.8%Daily Pilot: 1.0%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 8.0%Emily St. Martin: 7.6%Daily Pilot: 5.7%Appeal to Emotion8.0%This article: 3.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.6%Daily Pilot: 0.7%Begging the Question3.0%This article: 4.5%Emily St. Martin: 1.3%Daily Pilot: 2.6%Post Hoc (False Cause)4.5%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 6.1%Emily St. Martin: 0.5%Daily Pilot: 0.4%Burden of Proof6.1%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.1%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.1%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.7%Emily St. Martin: 2.4%Daily Pilot: 2.8%Anecdotal0.7%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.8%Daily Pilot: 1.6%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 7.9%Emily St. Martin: 0.5%Daily Pilot: 0.2%Special Pleading7.9%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.5%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 5.2%Emily St. Martin: 2.5%Daily Pilot: 1.3%Unattributed Quote5.2%This article: 10.5%Emily St. Martin: 2.1%Daily Pilot: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection10.5%This article: 2.1%Emily St. Martin: 4.4%Daily Pilot: 6.0%Biased Writer Voice2.1%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.6%Daily Pilot: 1.5%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.9%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 0.0%Daily Pilot: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Emily St. Martin: 1.1%Daily Pilot: 4.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

674 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker8.5%attributed speech617writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 14 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 41 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 35 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 25 words • 0.0% coverageDenzel Washington • 57 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Denzel Washington

100%flagged-word coverage
57 attributed words100% of attributed speech71% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Quote-first Misdirection+97.7 ptsWriter: 2.3%Denzel Washington: 100.0%100.0%Unattributed Quote-5.7 ptsWriter: 5.7%Denzel Washington: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice-2.3 ptsWriter: 2.3%Denzel Washington: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.