Suits and Litigation (Civil)

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares159 Views

      in Movies

      Depp’s $22.5 Million ‘Pirates’ Deal Collapsed After Op-Ed, Manager Testifies

      by

      Mr. Depp’s talent manager said the actor had been up to play Captain Jack Sparrow again until his ex-wife, Amber Heard, wrote an op-ed saying she was a “public figure representing domestic abuse.”Johnny Depp’s talent manager testified on Monday in the actor’s defamation trial that Mr. Depp lost a $22.5 million deal to star in a sixth “Pirates of the Caribbean” movie after his ex-wife, Amber Heard, published an op-ed in which she called herself a “public figure representing domestic abuse.”The exact timing of when Mr. Depp was cut from the “Pirates” franchise has become a pertinent question in the trial because Mr. Depp’s lawsuit against Ms. Heard claims that her op-ed, published by The Washington Post in December 2018, “devastated” his reputation and career.Although the op-ed does not mention Mr. Depp by name, he has argued that it clearly referred to their relationship. Ms. Heard has accused Mr. Depp of assaulting her repeatedly during their relationship, which Mr. Depp denies.At Fairfax County Circuit Court in Virginia, the talent manager, Jack Whigham, testified that the actor had a verbal agreement with Disney to reprise his role as Captain Jack Sparrow in a proposed sixth film, but that in early 2019, it became clear that Disney was “going in a different direction.”“After the op-ed, it was impossible to get him a studio film,” testified Mr. Whigham, who has represented Mr. Depp since 2016.Lawyers for Ms. Heard have argued that it was not the actress’s op-ed that undermined Mr. Depp’s career but rather his own actions that led to bad publicity, seeking to prove during cross-examination of Mr. Whigham that Mr. Depp had, in fact, lost the “Pirates” job before the article was published.Elaine Charlson Bredehoft, a lawyer for Ms. Heard, pointed to a previous deposition by Mr. Whigham in which he said that it had been the fall of 2018 — before the op-ed was published — when he came to understand that it was becoming unlikely that Mr. Depp would appear in the next “Pirates” movie.Mr. Whigham testified that around that time, Disney had not yet made a decision about whether Mr. Depp would appear in the movie and it was “trending badly,” but he and the film producer Jerry Bruckheimer were still seeking to convince the company to keep Mr. Depp in the franchise.“We had hope,” Mr. Whigham said, “and it became clear to me in early 2019 that it was over.”In the op-ed, Ms. Heard asserted that her own career had been affected by becoming a “public figure representing domestic abuse,” saying that she was dropped as the face of a fashion brand and a movie had recast her role.The idea for the op-ed came from the American Civil Liberties Union, and a communications department employee from the nonprofit organization drafted the article, according to earlier testimony from Terence Dougherty, general counsel for the A.C.L.U. Initially, the op-ed draft referenced Ms. Heard’s relationship with Mr. Depp directly. But those references were later edited out after back-and-forth between A.C.L.U. personnel and Ms. Heard’s lawyers about a nondisclosure agreement associated with the couple’s divorce, Mr. Dougherty testified.Aside from discussions about the op-ed on which Mr. Depp’s lawsuit is based, much of the trial has focused on diverging accounts of physical abuse in Ms. Heard and Mr. Depp’s relationship. Mr. Depp testified that he has never hit Ms. Heard and that she was the aggressor, accusing her of punching him in the face and kicking a bathroom door into his head. Ms. Heard, who has not yet testified in the trial, has said in court papers that she never hit Mr. Depp except in self-defense or in defense of her sister, and that Mr. Depp tended to perpetrate violence against her when he was under the influence of drugs or alcohol.Amber Heard has countersued Mr. Depp, asserting that his former lawyer defamed her by referring to her allegations as a hoax.Pool photo by Steve Helber/EPA, via ShutterstockOn Monday, Ms. Heard’s lawyers sought to undermine Mr. Whigham’s claim that Mr. Depp had a formal deal for the sixth “Pirates” movie at all.“Do you have any explanation for why there exists nothing — no piece of paper — nothing suggesting that Mr. Depp ever had a deal with Disney for ‘Pirates 6’?” Ms. Bredehoft asked.Mr. Whigham said it was not unusual for an actor to have a verbal agreement for a movie that is later put into writing.Ms. Bredehoft also pointed to other possible precursors to Mr. Depp’s reputational decline other than the op-ed, citing a headline from The Sun newspaper in Britain that called Mr. Depp a “wife beater.” That article was published in April 2018, she pointed out, and Mr. Depp sued the newspaper for it in June 2018 — both months before Mr. Whigham’s recollection of Disney’s declining interest in Mr. Depp for “Pirates.”(Ms. Heard’s potential witness list includes Tina Newman, a Disney executive.)Ms. Heard’s legal team has referred repeatedly to the defamation trial in Britain that arose from that lawsuit. But it appears that the team has been restricted from mentioning the outcome of the case, in which a judge in London ruled against Mr. Depp and found that there was “overwhelming evidence” that he had assaulted Ms. Heard repeatedly during their marriage. More

    • 100 Shares139 Views

      in Theater

      ‘Great Comet’ Producer Hasn’t Paid Royalties, Composer Says

      by

      Dave Malloy has filed a petition seeking the help of an arbitrator in his dispute with Howard Kagan over international productions.The creator of “Natasha, Pierre & the Great Comet of 1812” says the show’s producer has refused to fully compensate him for international productions of the musical, and the artist is now going to court in an effort to force payment.Dave Malloy, who wrote the book, music and lyrics for the show, has filed a petition in New York County Supreme Court asking a judge to appoint an arbitrator to settle his dispute with the producer Howard Kagan.In the court documents, filed on April 11, Malloy says he is owed “hundreds of thousands of dollars” for productions of the musical that took place in Japan in 2019 and in Korea in 2021.“The Great Comet,” adapted from a section of the classic Tolstoy novel “War and Peace,” arrived on Broadway in 2016 after a series of Off Broadway and out-of-town productions, starting at the nonprofit Ars Nova. The musical, starring Josh Groban, won strong reviews and was nominated for 12 Tony Awards, but it won just two, for scenic design and lighting, and closed at a loss in 2017.The production endured several previous public controversies. In 2016, Ars Nova asked the courts for help in a bitter dispute with Kagan over how the nonprofit was credited in the show’s Playbill. That dispute was settled, but then the next year the Broadway production imploded after a controversy over who would play the show’s lead role after Groban’s departure, and amid questions about its finances.Lawyers for Malloy and Blue Wizard Music, the publisher of “Great Comet,” declined to comment; lawyers for Kagan and his producing entity Comet Lands on Broadway did not respond to requests for comment. More

    • 100 Shares189 Views

      in Movies

      Johnny Depp v. Amber Heard: What We Know

      by

      Mr. Depp has sued Ms. Heard, his ex-wife, on grounds that she defamed him in an op-ed she wrote for The Washington Post.The defamation trial in Virginia between the actors Johnny Depp and Amber Heard has become a fierce battleground over the truth about their relationship, with both sides accusing the other of repeated domestic abuse in what was an unquestionably tumultuous marriage.Before a seven-person jury in Fairfax County Circuit Court, lawyers have questioned witnesses about the events of what has been described as a whirlwind romance that started on a movie set and soured into a barrage of fights and physical confrontations — the details of which vary widely depending on the account.Mr. Depp, 58, sued Ms. Heard, 35, for defamation after she wrote an op-ed for The Washington Post referring to herself as a “public figure representing domestic abuse.” After more than a year of legal sparring, Ms. Heard then countersued Mr. Depp, alleging that he defamed her when his former lawyer released statements saying her allegations of abuse were a hoax.Many of the allegations being aired in the courtroom have already been heard in a British case — which Mr. Depp lost — in which the actor sued The Sun newspaper for printing a headline that called him a “wife beater.”The trial, which started with opening arguments on April 12, is expected to last about six weeks.Why is Mr. Depp suing Ms. Heard?Mr. Depp’s lawsuit, filed in 2019, revolves around the 2018 op-ed written by Ms. Heard titled, “I spoke up against sexual violence — and faced our culture’s wrath. That has to change.”The op-ed does not mention Mr. Depp by name, but in it, Ms. Heard wrote that two years before the article’s publication, she became a “public figure representing domestic abuse.”In 2016, Ms. Heard was granted a temporary restraining order after showing up to a California court with a bruised face, writing in an application for the order that Mr. Depp had thrown a phone at her face at close range. (The actor denies this.)In the application, Ms. Heard wrote that Mr. Depp had been verbally and physically abusive to her throughout their relationship, detailing a recent incident in which she said he grabbed her by the hair and violently shoved her to the ground. (Mr. Depp wrote in court papers that this was a lie and that she was the one who punched him in the face that night.)Mr. Depp’s lawsuit asserted that Ms. Heard’s abuse allegations were an “elaborate hoax” that cost the actor his career and reputation.“Mr. Depp brings this defamation action to clear his name,” the actor’s lawsuit said.What did Ms. Heard’s op-ed in The Washington Post say?The op-ed says that after she became a “public figure representing domestic abuse,” she started to experience a backlash to her career.“Friends and advisers told me I would never again work as an actress — that I would be blacklisted,” she wrote. “A movie I was attached to recast my role. I had just shot a two-year campaign as the face of a global fashion brand, and the company dropped me.”She wrote that she saw “in real time, how institutions protect men accused of abuse.” Ms. Heard was identified in the op-ed as an ambassador on women’s rights for the American Civil Liberties Union, and in court papers, Ms. Heard said the A.C.L.U. suggested that she write the article and submitted it.Although the trial has become a sprawling inquiry into the couple’s marriage, one of Ms. Heard’s lawyers, Ben Rottenborn, tried to impress upon the jury in open arguments the idea that, ultimately, the case rests on “one piece of paper” — this op-ed.Ms. Heard is countersuing, claiming Mr. Depp had conspired with a lawyer to “attempt to destroy and defame Ms. Heard in the press.”Pool photo by Jim Lo ScalzoWhy is Ms. Heard suing Mr. Depp?The jury is simultaneously considering Ms. Heard’s countersuit against Mr. Depp, which was filed in 2020.Ms. Heard’s defamation claim is against Mr. Depp, but the statements it centers on came from his former lawyer, Adam Waldman, who told the British tabloid The Daily Mail that the actress’s allegations were an “abuse hoax.”Her lawsuit claims Mr. Depp has “authorized and conspired” with Mr. Waldman, who was acting on the actor’s behalf, to “attempt to destroy and defame Ms. Heard in the press.” (Mr. Waldman was not named as a defendant.)What has Mr. Depp said in his testimony?So far, Mr. Depp has testified that he had never struck Ms. Heard, nor any other woman. Instead, he asserted that Ms. Heard was the aggressor in the relationship, engaging in angry tirades and “demeaning name-calling” that would often escalate into physical violence.Johnny Depp’s Libel Case Against Amber HeardCard 1 of 6In the courtroom. More

    • 138 Shares189 Views

      in Movies

      Johnny Depp, Accused of Spousal Abuse, Says Ex-Wife Was the Aggressor

      by

      The actor testified in a defamation case that he filed against his ex-wife, Amber Heard, who has said he often struck her during their relationship.The actor Johnny Depp took the stand for the second day on Wednesday to describe his turbulent marriage to the actress Amber Heard, whom he has sued for defamation, accusing her of “demeaning name-calling” that often escalated into physical violence.“It could begin with a slap, it could begin with a shove, it could begin with throwing a TV remote at my head, throwing a glass of wine in my face,” Mr. Depp told a jury at Fairfax County Circuit Court in Virginia.Ms. Heard has accused Mr. Depp in court papers of repeatedly assaulting her throughout their relationship, from slapping and kicking to dragging her across the floor by her hair and grasping her throat, making her fearful that he would kill her.But over the past few years of legal wrangling in the United States and Britain, Mr. Depp has maintained that Ms. Heard was the one who was violent toward him. In testimony on Tuesday, Mr. Depp denied ever striking Ms. Heard or any woman.“She has a need for conflict, she has a need for violence,” he said of Ms. Heard. “It erupts out of nowhere.”Ms. Heard denied in court papers that she had ever struck Mr. Depp except in self-defense or in defense of her sister.Mr. Depp has sued Ms. Heard for defamation over an op-ed she wrote in 2018 in which she said she was a ​​“public figure representing domestic abuse.” The article did not mention Mr. Depp’s name, but he testified that the time-frame reference in the op-ed was clearly in reference to their marriage, which lasted less than two years.The seven-person jury will also consider Ms. Heard’s countersuit, which asserts that Mr. Depp defamed her when his former lawyer made statements saying that her allegations of domestic abuse were a hoax.During more than five hours of testimony on Wednesday, the jury heard snippets of recorded arguments between the couple. Those included audio of Mr. Depp confronting Ms. Heard about kicking a door into his head the previous night and Ms. Heard asking, “Why are you obsessing over the fact that I can’t remember it the way you remember it?”During his testimony, Mr. Depp strove to present his side of several incidents that have surfaced as their problems in their relationship became public, including the time Mr. Depp’s middle finger was severed. The injury occurred in 2015 while the couple was in Australia for the filming of the fifth “Pirates of the Caribbean” movie.Mr. Depp told the jury that, at the time, Ms. Heard was angry about a meeting she had with a lawyer about a potential postnuptial agreement and threw two vodka bottles at him, one of which missed while another shattered into his hand, causing his finger to bleed “like Vesuvius.” He testified that he then experienced a “nervous breakdown” and used his bloody finger to write on the walls messages that “represented lies that she told me.”Ms. Heard, who is expected to take the stand later in the trial, has given a very different account of the incident in Australia, writing in court papers that Mr. Depp became violent with her during an argument about his drug use. She has said that at one point he grabbed her by the neck and collarbone and slammed her into a countertop, then hit her with the back of his hand and slammed a phone against a wall until it “smashed into smithereens,” injuring his finger.Upon her return to Los Angeles, Ms. Heard wrote in court papers that “I had a busted lip, a swollen nose and cuts all over my body.”Johnny Depp’s Libel Case Against Amber HeardCard 1 of 6In the courtroom. More

    • 138 Shares149 Views

      in Theater

      Alan J. Hruska, a Founder of Soho Press, Dies at 88

      by

      A litigator for 44 years, he was also a novelist; a writer, director and producer of plays and films; and helped establish the independent publishing house Soho Press.Alan J. Hruska, a corporate litigator who had a second, wide-ranging career as a founder of the independent publishing house Soho Press, which invests in serious fiction by unsung authors; as a novelist; and as a writer, director and producer of plays and films, died on March 29 at his home in Manhattan. He was 88.The cause was lymphoma, his daughter, Bronwen Hruska, the publisher of Soho Press, said.Even before Mr. Hruska retired from his day job at Cravath Swaine & Moore in New York in 2001 after four decades there, he published his first novel, in 1985. The next year, with his wife, Laura Chapman Hruska, and Juris Jurjevics, a former editor in chief of Dial Press, he founded Soho Press.Soho Press made its reputation by welcoming unsolicited manuscripts from little-known writers. Its ambitions, Mr. Jurjevics said, were “not to have a certain percentage of growth a year and not to be bought by anybody.”Soho Press, based in Manhattan, has specialized in literary fiction and memoirs with a backlist that includes books by Jake Arnott, Edwidge Danticat, John L’Heureux, Delores Phillips, Sue Townsend and Jacqueline Winspear. The company also has a Soho Teen young adult imprint and a Soho Crime imprint that publishes mysteries in exotic locales by, among others, Cara Black, Colin Cotterill, Peter Lovesey and Stuart Neville.Mr. Hruska (pronounced RUH-ska) often said that there was less of a vocational disconnect between lawyering and literature than met the eye. Both, done successfully, he said, are about storytelling, whether arguing a case in a legal brief or writing a novel, script or screenplay.“I was a trial lawyer, and, while I would expect my actors to remember their lines better than my witnesses did, there is less disparity between the two professions than might be thought,” he said in an interview with a blogger in 2017.“A trial and a play are both productions,” he added. “Putting each together involves telling a story. So does writing a brief or making an oral argument to a panel of judges. If you don’t tell a story, you will very likely put them to sleep.”Mr. Hruska made his theatrical debut directing an Off Broadway revival of “Waiting for Godot” in 2005.Joan MarcusAlan Jay Hruska was born on July 9, 1933, in the Bronx and was raised in Far Rockaway, Queens. His father, Harry Hruska, was in the textile business. His mother, Julia (Schwarz) Hruska, was a homemaker.While he was undecided on a profession, Alan had a penchant for filmmaking that took hold when he was 8. As a youth, he would ride the subway into Manhattan to attend double features at first-run movie theaters.After graduating from Lawrence High School on Long Island, he earned a bachelor’s degree in economics from Yale in 1955 and was persuaded to apply to Yale Law School by a college professor who was impressed by his skills in logic and rationalization. He, in turn, found the law to be an ideal vehicle for his writing and reasoning.He graduated from the law school in 1958, the same year he married Laura Mae Chapman, one of three women in their law school class.She died in 2010. In addition to their daughter, he is survived by two sons, Andrew and Matthew; his wife, Julie Iovine, a former reporter for The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal, whom he married in 2013; and six grandchildren.Mr. Hruska borrowed from his litigation experiences in major cases in writing a number of his novels, including “Wrong Man Running” (2011); “Pardon the Ravens” (2015); “It Happened at Two in the Morning” (2017), which The Wall Street Journal said showed the author “at his thriller-writing best”; and “The Inglorious Arts” (2019).Michael Cavadias as the cross-dressing character Wendy in a scene from the romantic comedy “Nola,” a 2003 film written and directed by Mr. Hruska.Samuel Goldwyn FilmsHe also wrote and directed the film “Nola,” a romantic comedy starring Emmy Rossum which opened at the Tribeca Film Festival in 2003.Other films of his include “The Warrior Class,” a comedy about a rookie lawyer that premiered at the Hamptons International Film Festival in 2005; and “The Man on Her Mind,” an existential comedy based on his play of the same name, which premiered at the Charing Cross Theatre in London in 2012.He made his theatrical debut directing an Off Broadway revival of “Waiting for Godot” in 2005. Ten years later, when a surreal play of his about love, marriage and an impending hurricane opened, the critic Alexis Soloski wrote in The Times in 2015, “If an existentialist philosopher ever attempted a light romantic comedy, it might sound a little like ‘Laugh It Up, Stare It Down,’ Alan Hruska’s quaintly absurdist play at the Cherry Lane Theater.”Mr. Hruska oversaw a wide range of civil litigation at Cravath in the 44 years before he retired in 2001. He was named senior counsel in 2002. He also served as secretary of the New York City Bar Association.Asked by The American Lawyer in 2015 whether he ever felt that the law was not his true calling, he replied: “Not at all. I had a great experience. I did about 400 cases, won 200 and settled 200. I’m particularly proud of the settlements because they can put people in a much better position than winning a case.” More

    • 125 Shares179 Views

      in Movies

      Alec Baldwin Seeks to Avoid Liability in Fatal ‘Rust’ Shooting

      by

      In an arbitration demand against his fellow producers on the film, he denied culpability in the killing of a cinematographer and said he should not be held financially responsible.Alec Baldwin gave his most detailed account yet of fatally shooting a cinematographer on the set of the film “Rust” last year in an arbitration demand that his lawyers filed Friday against his fellow producers, claiming that his contract protected him from financial responsibility in her death and seeking coverage of his legal fees.Mr. Baldwin has been named in several lawsuits seeking damages since he shot and killed the cinematographer, Halyna Hutchins, on Oct. 21 in New Mexico while practicing for a scene that required him to draw a gun. The filing said that he was not responsible for her death, since he had been assured that the gun did not contain any live ammunition and because he was not responsible for checking the ammunition or for firearm safety on the set.The filing provided new details of Mr. Baldwin’s role as a producer of “Rust,” a production some former crew members claimed in lawsuits had sacrificed safety by cutting costs. While Mr. Baldwin was involved in creative matters, the filing said, others had authority over hiring and budgets. Mr. Baldwin was to be paid $250,000 to star in the movie and act as a producer, it said, but he gave back $100,000 as an “investment” in the film.And the filing contained text messages that Mr. Baldwin had exchanged with Matthew Hutchins, the widower of the slain cinematographer, which showed how their relationship had deteriorated over time — from mutual expressions of condolence and support in the immediate aftermath of the shooting to the pointed wrongful-death lawsuit Mr. Hutchins filed against Mr. Baldwin this year. Brian Panish, a lawyer for Mr. Hutchins, said in a statement that Mr. Baldwin was trying to avoid accountability for his “reckless actions.” The filing provided a vivid account of the fatal shooting on the New Mexico film set, which took place after lunch as Mr. Baldwin rehearsed a scene inside a church in which his character, Harland Rust, is cornered and draws his gun.“Rust’s Colt COCKED quietly now …” the filing quotes the direction in the script, as his pursuers approach. Then, shortly after that: “Colts EXPLODING.”Ms. Hutchins told Mr. Baldwin how to position the gun, the filing said.“She directed Baldwin to hold the gun higher, to a point where it was directed toward her,” it said. “She was looking carefully at the monitor and then at Baldwin, and then back again, as she gave these instructions. In giving and following these instructions, Hutchins and Baldwin shared a core, vital belief: that the gun was ‘cold’ and contained no live rounds.”Mr. Baldwin then asked Ms. Hutchins if she wanted him to pull back the hammer, as the script instructed, and she said yes, the filing said.“Baldwin then pulled back the hammer, but not far enough to actually cock the gun,” it said. “When Baldwin let go of the hammer, the gun went off.”It went on to describe the confusion and horror after the shooting, as Ms. Hutchins was flown by helicopter to a hospital, where she was later pronounced dead. It was later, at the end of his interview with the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Office, that Mr. Baldwin was shown a photograph of the projectile that had passed through Ms. Hutchins and then wounded the film’s director, Joel Souza, the filing said.What Happened on the Set of ‘Rust’What We Know: A gun that was being used as a prop by the actor Alec Baldwin on the set of the movie “Rust” went off, killing the film’s director of photography and wounding the director.Remembering the Victim: Halyna Hutchins was the movie’s director of cinematography.Baldwin’s Account: Mr. Baldwin spoke of the incident in an emotional ABC News interview, insisting he was not to blame in the fatal shooting.The Family Sues: Ms. Hutchins’s family has filed a wrongful-death lawsuit in New Mexico against crew members and producers.Denying Culpability: Mr. Baldwin, who has been named in the suit, has claimed that his contract protects him from financial responsibility in the death.“Baldwin recognized the object as a live bullet, and he finally began to comprehend what had transpired on the set of ‘Rust’ that day,” it said. “He was shocked.”In the filing, Baldwin’s lawyer, Luke Nikas, says a clause Mr. Baldwin and his company had signed in his contract with Rust Movie Productions L.L.C. means he bears no financial responsibility for legal fees or claims arising out of the death. The filing, with the JAMS private arbitration service, seeks to enforce the clause. The document names Rust Movie Productions L.L.C. and Ryan Smith, one of the other producers, as the respondents in the claim.“Someone is culpable for chambering the live round that led to this horrific tragedy, and it is someone other than Baldwin,” Mr. Nikas wrote in the claim, portraying Mr. Baldwin as a victim who trusted others to do their jobs and is haunted by Ms. Hutchins’s death. “This is a rare instance when the system broke down, and someone should be held legally culpable for the tragic consequences. That person is not Alec Baldwin.”Representatives of Rust Movie Productions L.L.C. and a lawyer for Mr. Smith did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Mr. Nikas described in the claim how, in the weeks after the fatal shooting, Mr. Baldwin had sought to persuade the cast and crew of “Rust” to finish the film to honor Ms. Hutchins, outlining a plan in which an insurance payout and the film’s profits would go to a settlement for Mr. Hutchins and the couple’s 9-year-old son.Shortly after the shooting, the filing said, Mr. Baldwin had breakfast in Santa Fe with Mr. Hutchins and his son. At the meeting, the filing said, “Hutchins hugged Baldwin and told him, ‘I guess we’re going to go through this together.’” Mr. Baldwin denied responsibility for the shooting in an ABC News interview in December with George Stephanopoulos. Matthew Hutchins, the widower of the slain cinematographer, would later say that the interview had made him “angry.”Jeff Neira/ABC via Getty ImagesBut their relationship, which continued through a series of texts and calls, broke down in the aftermath of a television interview Mr. Baldwin gave in December in which he denied responsibility for Ms. Hutchins’s death; Mr. Hutchins later filed a lawsuit against Mr. Baldwin and followed it by giving his own television interview, on NBC’s “Today” show in February, in which he described being angered by Mr. Baldwin’s deflection of blame. Although a number of crew members have described the set as unsafe, and several quit shortly before the fatal shooting, the filing said that Mr. Baldwin had not heard about or observed any safety problems on the set. In the filing, Mr. Baldwin sought to rebut several claims that Mr. Hutchins and some “Rust” crew members had made in lawsuits and in comments to the news media.Two lawsuits filed by crew members have claimed that Mr. Baldwin should have checked that the gun was safe to handle, even after he had received an assurance from the film’s first assistant director that it was.But the new filing said that during firearm training for the film, the movie’s armorer, Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, had told Mr. Baldwin that “it was her job to check the gun — not his.” That instruction was similar to what he had been told before, it said. (Asked for comment, a lawyer for Ms. Gutierrez-Reed said he was reviewing the filing.)“An actor cannot rule that a gun is safe,” the filing said. “That is the responsibility of other people on the set.”And while a lawsuit filed by Serge Svetnoy, the film’s gaffer, claimed that the movie’s producers had “declined requests for weapons training days,” and Ms. Gutierrez-Reed said that Mr. Baldwin had failed to attend “cross draw” training, Mr. Baldwin’s filing says that he had inquired about lessons about a month before he showed up on set and that he had training once he had arrived.The demand also claims that Mamie Mitchell, the script supervisor, had told Mr. Baldwin shortly after the fatal shooting, “You realize you’re not responsible for any of what happened in there, don’t you?” Ms. Mitchell is now suing Mr. Baldwin and other producers, blaming him for failing to check whether the gun he was handling was loaded. A lawyer for Ms. Mitchell, Gloria Allred, said in a statement, “Whatever Ms. Mitchell said immediately after the shooting when she was in a state of shock, and whatever Mr. Baldwin said immediately after the shooting, will be testified to at the trial in our civil case.” She said that the filing was “simply one more attempt by Mr. Baldwin to avoid responsibility for what he did.”In the filing, Mr. Baldwin and his lawyer go so far as to publish private text correspondence between Mr. Baldwin and Mr. Hutchins. The texts show Mr. Baldwin checking whether Mr. Hutchins still wanted to continue their conversations given the possible legal sensitivities, and Mr. Hutchins agreeing to continue communicating despite, according to the texts, the likely wishes of his legal advisers and press representative.Mr. Panish, the lawyer for Mr. Hutchins, called the inclusion of personal texts “irrelevant.”“Baldwin’s disclosure of personal texts with Matt Hutchins is irrelevant to his demand for arbitration and fails to demonstrate anything other than Hutchins’ dignity in his engagement with Baldwin,” he said in the statement. “It is shameful that Baldwin claims Hutchins’ actions in filing a wrongful-death lawsuit derailed the completion of ‘Rust.’ The only action that ended the film’s production was Baldwin’s killing of Halyna Hutchins.”The filing notes that Mr. Baldwin spoke at a memorial for Ms. Hutchins and that later Mr. Hutchins had shared a photograph of his son with Mr. Baldwin.Later, Mr. Hutchins filed a lawsuit against Mr. Baldwin, claiming that he had “recklessly shot and killed Halyna Hutchins on the set.” In an interview on NBC’s “Today” show, he said it was “absurd” for Mr. Baldwin to deny responsibility.When the family of Ms. Hutchins, left, filed a wrongful-death lawsuit against Mr. Baldwin, they showed an animated re-creation of their version of the shooting.Chris Pizzello/Associated Press“Before Hutchins’s appearance on the ‘Today’ show, his interactions with Baldwin had only been polite, collaborative, and, at times, even warm,” Mr. Baldwin’s filing said.In the NBC interview, Mr. Hutchins spoke in emotional terms about seeing Mr. Baldwin discuss the shooting on television. “I was just so angry to see him talk about her death so publicly in such a detailed way,” Mr. Hutchins said in the NBC interview, “and then to not accept any responsibility after having just described killing her.”Nicole Sperling contributed reporting. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Television

      Supreme Court Will Not Review Decision to Overturn Bill Cosby’s Conviction

      by

      Prosecutors had appealed a ruling by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, which had overturned the conviction on due process grounds.The U.S. Supreme Court has rejected the bid by prosecutors in Pennsylvania to reinstate Bill Cosby’s conviction for sexual assault, a decision that ends the criminal case that had led to imprisonment for the man once known as America’s Dad.In an order issued Monday, the court said, without elaborating, that it had declined to hear the appeal filed by prosecutors last November.The Supreme Court’s decision leaves in place a ruling issued by an appellate court in Pennsylvania last year that had overturned Mr. Cosby’s 2018 conviction on due process grounds, allowing Mr. Cosby, 84, to walk free after serving nearly three years of a three-to-10-year prison sentence.Mr. Cosby had been found guilty of drugging and sexually assaulting Andrea Constand at his home outside Philadelphia, though his lawyers argued at trial that the encounter, in 2004, had been consensual.The case, one of the first high-profile criminal prosecutions of the #MeToo era, drew widespread attention, in part because of Mr. Cosby’s celebrity and in part because dozens of women had over a period of years leveled similar accusations of sexual abuse against the entertainer. But the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled last June that Mr. Cosby’s due process rights had been violated when the Montgomery County District Attorney’s office pursued a criminal case against him despite what the appellate court found was a binding verbal promise not to prosecute given to him by a previous district attorney.The former district attorney, Bruce L. Castor Jr., who said he believed Ms. Constand but was not sure he could win a conviction, said he had agreed years ago not to press charges against Mr. Cosby to induce him to testify in a civil case brought by Ms. Constand. He said the substance of his promise was contained in a news release he issued at the time that said he found insufficient credible and admissible evidence. But he held out the possibility of a civil action “with a much lower standard of proof.” Ms. Constand later received $3.38 million as part of a settlement in her civil case against Mr. Cosby.During the civil case, Mr. Cosby acknowledged giving narcotics to women as part of an effort to have sex with them, a statement that was later introduced as evidence at Mr. Cosby’s trial.Understand Bill Cosby’s Sexual Assault CaseBill Cosby was released from prison June 30, 2021, after the Pennsylvania Supreme Court overturned his 2018 conviction for sexual assault.Why He Was Released: Here’s a breakdown of the issues surrounding the ruling to overturn the conviction.What Legal Analysts Think: The court’s decision opened an unusually vigorous debate among the legal community.His Uncertain Future: Experts say it’s unlikely the ruling will change the public perception of the former star.The Aftermath: The Times critic Wesley Morris looks at what to do with our fondness for “The Cosby Show,” and W. Kamau Bell’s documentary series contextualizes his legacy.Following Mr. Cosby’s conviction in 2018, an intermediate appeals court in Pennsylvania found that no formal agreement never to prosecute had ever existed, a position that aligned with what the trial court had ruled.But in a 6-to-1 ruling, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court found that Mr. Cosby had, in fact, relied on Mr. Castor’s assurances that he wouldn’t be prosecuted, and that charging Mr. Cosby and using his testimony concerning drugs at the criminal trial had violated his due process rights.Prosecutors had argued that such a promise had never been made. They said that no one else in the district attorney’s office at the time had been made aware of it and that a news release could not be the basis of a formal immunity agreement.A spokesman for Mr. Cosby, Andrew Wyatt, welcomed the decision Monday, saying in a statement that the entertainer and his family “would like to offer our sincere gratitude to the justices of the United States Supreme Court for following the rules of law and protecting the Constitutional Rights of ALL American Citizens.”Ms. Constand and her lawyers released a statement Monday that criticized the Pennsylvania Supreme Court’s ruling, in particular faulting the panel for assuming “there was a valid agreement not to prosecute, which was vigorously disputed in the Habeas proceedings, and determined by the trial judge not to exist.”Andrea Constand and her lawyers have consistently taken issue with the reasoning of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in overturning Mr. Cosby’s conviction.Angela Lewis for The New York TimesThe Montgomery County district attorney, Kevin R. Steele, released a statement in which he expressed his appreciation to Ms. Constand and described petitioning for Supreme Court review as “the right thing to do,” even though there was only a small chance the court would take up the case.“All crime victims deserve to be heard, treated with respect and be supported through their day in court,” the statement continued. “I wish her the best as she moves forward in her life.”Mr. Cosby was first accused in 2005 of having molested Ms. Constand, then an employee of the Temple University basketball team for whom he had become a mentor. The case was reopened in 2015, and Mr. Cosby went through two trials, the first of which ended with a hung jury. The second ended in April 2018, with a jury in Montgomery County convicting Mr. Cosby of three counts of aggravated indecent assault.Both cases were closely watched by many of the women who came forward with similar accusations but statutes of limitations in their cases made further prosecutions unlikely.Mr. Cosby has consistently denied the accusations that he was a sexual predator, suggesting that any encounters were completely consensual.Patricia Leary Steuer, who accused Mr. Cosby of drugging and assaulting her in 1978 and 1980, said in an interview on Monday that she felt “a little let down by the decision” but that “it does not change anything for me and the other survivors” since, she said, public sentiment is on their side.“The survivors did what we were supposed to do which was to come forward and tell the truth and that’s what we did,” she said. “The rest is out of our hands.”Legal experts had predicted it would be unlikely that the Supreme Court, which denies the vast majority of petitions for review, would take up the Cosby case. For one thing, they said, the case involved a unique set of circumstances that did not necessarily raise far-reaching constitutional issues.Dennis McAndrews, a Pennsylvania lawyer and former prosecutor who has followed the case, said the Supreme Court typically “looks to determine whether there are compelling issues of constitutional law about which the courts across the country need additional guidance, especially if the case is capable of repetition.”Shan Wu, a former federal prosecutor in Washington, said the Supreme Court likely considered whether its ruling would have the potential for broader significance outside the parameters of this case. “It’s a very unique set of circumstances,” he said. “It’s highly unlikely to be repeated.” More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Movies

      Alec Baldwin and ‘Rust’ Producers Sued for Halyna Hutchins’s Death

      by

      The suit charges that Baldwin “recklessly shot and killed Halyna Hutchins on the set” and that the production’s “aggressive cost-cutting” had endangered the crew.The suit, filed by the family of Halyna Hutchins, the film’s cinematographer who was fatally shot by Mr. Baldwin on the set, accused him and other defendants of reckless conduct and dangerous cost-cutting measures.Swen Studios/Via ReutersThe family of Halyna Hutchins, the cinematographer fatally shot by Alec Baldwin on the set of the movie “Rust” last year, filed a wrongful-death lawsuit on Tuesday in New Mexico against crew members and producers, including Mr. Baldwin.The suit, filed by Ms. Hutchins’s widower, Matthew Hutchins; her 9-year-old son; and the personal representative of Ms. Hutchins’s estate, accused Mr. Baldwin and the other defendants of reckless conduct and cost-cutting measures that endangered the crew, including failing to follow basic industry standard safety checks and gun safety rules.“Halyna Hutchins deserved to live, and the Defendants had the power to prevent her death if they had only held sacrosanct their duty to protect the safety of every individual on a set where firearms were present,” the lawsuit said, “instead of cutting corners on safety procedures where human lives were at stake, rushing to stay on schedule and ignoring numerous complaints of safety violations.”Ms. Hutchins, 42, was shot on Oct. 21 while the production was lining up camera angles for a scene in which Mr. Baldwin draws an old-fashioned revolver from a shoulder holster. Shortly before the gun went off, discharging a bullet that killed Ms. Hutchins and injured Joel Souza, the film’s director, the crew had been told that the revolver did not contain live ammunition and was safe to handle.The lawsuit said Mr. Baldwin “recklessly shot and killed Halyna Hutchins on the set.” Mr. Baldwin has said in the past that he was not to blame for her death. “Someone put a live bullet in a gun, a bullet that wasn’t even supposed to be on the property,” Mr. Baldwin said in an ABC television interview in December. “Someone is ​responsible for what happened, and I can’t say who that is, but I know it’s not me.”.css-1xzcza9{list-style-type:disc;padding-inline-start:1em;}.css-3btd0c{font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-size:1rem;line-height:1.375rem;color:#333;margin-bottom:0.78125rem;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-3btd0c{font-size:1.0625rem;line-height:1.5rem;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}}.css-3btd0c strong{font-weight:600;}.css-3btd0c em{font-style:italic;}.css-1kpebx{margin:0 auto;font-family:nyt-franklin,helvetica,arial,sans-serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.125rem;line-height:1.3125rem;color:#121212;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-1kpebx{font-family:nyt-cheltenham,georgia,’times new roman’,times,serif;font-weight:700;font-size:1.375rem;line-height:1.625rem;}@media (min-width:740px){#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-1kpebx{font-size:1.6875rem;line-height:1.875rem;}}@media (min-width:740px){.css-1kpebx{font-size:1.25rem;line-height:1.4375rem;}}.css-1gtxqqv{margin-bottom:0;}.css-19zsuqr{display:block;margin-bottom:0.9375rem;}.css-12vbvwq{background-color:white;border:1px solid #e2e2e2;width:calc(100% – 40px);max-width:600px;margin:1.5rem auto 1.9rem;padding:15px;box-sizing:border-box;}@media (min-width:740px){.css-12vbvwq{padding:20px;width:100%;}}.css-12vbvwq:focus{outline:1px solid #e2e2e2;}#NYT_BELOW_MAIN_CONTENT_REGION .css-12vbvwq{border:none;padding:10px 0 0;border-top:2px solid #121212;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-rdoyk0{-webkit-transform:rotate(0deg);-ms-transform:rotate(0deg);transform:rotate(0deg);}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-eb027h{max-height:300px;overflow:hidden;-webkit-transition:none;transition:none;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-5gimkt:after{content:’See more’;}.css-12vbvwq[data-truncated] .css-6mllg9{opacity:1;}.css-qjk116{margin:0 auto;overflow:hidden;}.css-qjk116 strong{font-weight:700;}.css-qjk116 em{font-style:italic;}.css-qjk116 a{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration:underline;text-decoration:underline;text-underline-offset:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-thickness:1px;text-decoration-thickness:1px;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:visited{color:#326891;-webkit-text-decoration-color:#326891;text-decoration-color:#326891;}.css-qjk116 a:hover{-webkit-text-decoration:none;text-decoration:none;}Aaron Dyer, a lawyer for Mr. Baldwin and other “Rust” producers, said in a statement that “any claim that Alec was reckless is entirely false,” arguing that Mr. Baldwin and other members of the cast and crew were relying on professionals tasked specifically with checking firearms.“Actors should be able to rely on armorers and prop department professionals, as well as assistant directors, rather than deciding on their own when a gun is safe to use,” the statement said.He noted that “everyone’s hearts and thoughts remain with Halyna’s family as they continue to process this unspeakable tragedy.”At a news conference, lawyers for Mr. Hutchins played a video that used animation to recreate what they say happened on the day of the shooting, based on interviews with crew members and at one point including Mr. Baldwin’s comments from the ABC interview.The lawsuit said that the defendants should not have allowed live ammunition onto the set, that Mr. Baldwin should not have pointed a gun at anyone, and accused the production of “aggressive cost-cutting” that it said had “jeopardized and endangered the safety of the cast and crew.” The suit claimed that the producers had hired an “inexperienced” and “unqualified” armorer, and that members of the production had ignored earlier firearms discharges on the set that had led to complaints about a lack of safety.Brian Panish, a lawyer for Mr. Hutchins, said at a news conference in Los Angeles: “There are many people culpable, but Mr. Baldwin was the person holding the weapon that, but for him shooting it, she would not have died. So clearly he has a significant portion of the liability, but there are others.”Last month, lawyers for the Hutchins family indicated that they were contemplating a lawsuit when they asked a court to appoint a representative in New Mexico for Ms. Hutchins’s estate. Under New Mexico law, half of any proceeds from the lawsuit would go to Mr. Hutchins and half would go to her son.Ms. Hutchins was a rising cinematographer from Ukraine; friends and colleagues described her as fiercely dedicated to the art of filmmaking.It remains unclear why live bullets were on the film set and how one of them got into the gun that Mr. Baldwin was handling. The sheriff’s office in Santa Fe has been investigating that question since the fatal shooting, but officials have made no new public disclosures about the inquiry since last month, when Mr. Baldwin turned his cellphone over to the authorities.Several other lawsuits have been filed in relation to the shooting. Two crew members filed separate lawsuits in California, alleging that cost-cutting measures by the production contributed to lax adherence to safety protocols and that Mr. Baldwin should have checked that the gun was safe to handle. Lawyers for Mr. Baldwin and other producers behind “Rust” filed a motion seeking to dismiss one of the lawsuits, arguing that Mr. Baldwin could not have intentionally shot a live bullet from the gun because he had been told it was “cold,” meaning it did not contain any live bullets.Mr. Baldwin has denied responsibility in the shooting, saying in the television interview last year that Ms. Hutchins was instructing him on where to point the gun when it discharged. He said he did not pull the trigger, suggesting that it could have been set off when he pulled back the hammer.The lawsuit accused him and others of not properly following safety protocols. Other defendants include Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, the film’s armorer, who the lawsuit accuses of being unqualified for the job; Dave Halls, the first assistant director, who told an investigator that he did not check all of the rounds in the gun before handing it to Mr. Baldwin; and Seth Kenney, a supplier of guns and ammunition for the film.Jason Bowles, a lawyer for Ms. Gutierrez-Reed, said she inspected the gun before handing it over to Mr. Halls that day and asked that she be called back to recheck it later, but the production did not do so. Mr. Kenney and a lawyer for Mr. Halls did not immediately respond to requests for comment.“Had Defendant Baldwin, the Producers, and the Rust Production Companies taken adequate precautions to ensure firearm safety on the set of Rust or if basic firearm safety rules had been followed on the set of Rust on Oct. 21, 2021,” the lawsuit said, “Halyna Hutchins would be alive and well, hugging her husband and nine-year old son.” More