$400-Million Claim Against Hammer Estate Dismissed : Courts: Decision resolves one phase of a bitter family dispute involving niece of tycoon’s late wife.

In a surprisingly swift resolution to a bitter and prolonged family legal dispute over oil millions and valuable artworks, a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge Tuesday threw out a $400-million claim by the niece of Armand Hammer’s late wife that sought half the late oil tycoon’s estate, including art now housed in the UCLA-managed museum that bears his name.

The judgment invalidates the claims against the estate of Hammer, the controversial Russian-born philanthropist and entrepreneur who built Occidental Petroleum Corp., by Joan Weiss, the niece and sole heir of the millionaire’s wife, Frances, who died in 1989.

The suit was filed in 1990, five months before Hammer’s death that year at age 92. It alleged that Hammer improperly persuaded his wife to sign away her interest in art and other property acquired during the Hammers’ 33-year marriage.

During the course of that marriage, Hammer amassed a formidable art collection, in part with Occidental’s money. Near the end of his life, he built a museum in Westwood to house it--his legacy to the city of Los Angeles and a monument to himself. The art in the museum is valued at several hundred million dollars.

On Tuesday, attorneys for the Hammer estate were jubilant at the quick judgment, which came after only two days of trial.

“Joan has lost her case against Hammer, against Occidental and against the museum, pending appeals,” said Arthur Groman, Hammer’s longtime friend and attorney and an Occidental board member whose firm handled the defense.

Weiss may appeal the judgment. Neither Weiss nor her attorney was available for comment. Officials at Occidental declined to comment.

Resolution of the Weiss claims appears to lift the uncertainty that has been hanging over the UCLA/Armand Hammer Museum of Art and Cultural Center since Hammer’s death.

This year, UCLA took over management of the museum, whose building is owned by Occidental and whose collection is owned by the Armand Hammer Foundation, to which Hammer left the bulk of his estate.

As part of the agreement, the museum set aside roughly a third of the art collection for possible sale to cover any liability that may arise from Weiss’ suit, museum Director Henry T. Hopkins said.

So far, the museum has said, it will sell only one artwork, albeit one of the collection’s most valuable: the so-called Codex Hammer, a hand-illustrated scientific manuscript of Renaissance master Leonardo da Vinci, valued at $10 million. That sale will proceed as planned Nov. 11, Hopkins said.

The judgment involves in a case that generated 250,000 documents and 5,000 pages of depositions, Groman said.

Among other allegations, Weiss charged in court papers that Hammer engaged in a longtime extramarital relationship with the woman who was to become the chief fund-raiser for the museum before UCLA stepped in.

The suit originally named the Hammer estate, the Armand Hammer Living Trust, the Hammer foundation, Occidental Petroleum Corp. and the museum. The oil company and museum were dropped from the suit last month.

This week, despite the mountain of documents, Weiss’ attorney mounted a case that consisted mainly of stipulations to the date and duration of the Hammers’ marriage and the amount of Hammer’s income, officials said.

Before Hammer’s attorneys could begin their defense, Judge Henry W. Shatford of the Los Angeles County Superior Court, Central-West District, granted a defense motion to dismiss the claim.

“The plaintiff was not able to put up a shred of evidence supporting the contention” that Hammer had deceived his wife, Shatford said in an interview.

Attorneys for Hammer’s estate and charitable foundation will go back to court on Monday, this time to pursue a counterclaim against Weiss to invalidate Frances Hammer’s will and seek millions in damages, said Daniel M. Petrocelli, a partner in Groman’s firm and the chief defense attorney.