Suits and Litigation (Civil)

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares99 Views

      in Music

      For Some Sex Assault Accusers, This Local Law Has Become a Last Resort

      by

      The law, which underpins several civil suits against Sean Combs, is the only remaining tool for reviving older claims in New York.In New York, where state laws that extended the time to file sex abuse suits have lapsed, plaintiffs have found one remaining tool: Section 10-1105 of New York City’s administrative code.The provision, known as the Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Law, has provided the basis for recent lawsuits against the Aerosmith frontman Steven Tyler; the luxury real estate agents Tal and Oren Alexander; New York City’s Department of Correction; and the hip-hop mogul Sean Combs, who is a defendant in four.“This statute continues to provide an avenue of relief for survivors,” said Douglas Wigdor, a lawyer for a woman who sued Mr. Combs under the gender-motivated violence law, accusing him and two other men of gang-raping her in a New York recording studio in 2003. He has vehemently denied the allegations.Lawyers say they have been increasingly using the law, first passed by the City Council in 2000, since the expiration last year of the New York state law that had allowed for the filing of lawsuits over sexual abuse allegations even after the statute of limitations had passed. The state law, one of many adopted around the country in the wake of a surge in #MeToo complaints, led to more than 3,000 state court filings relating to claims that often dated back decades — in addition to thousands more filed under an earlier law for people who said they were sexually abused as children.Now plaintiffs are often relying on the city law that — because of a 2022 amendment — established a two-year window in which plaintiffs can sue over older allegations. That window closes at the start of March 2025, and the claims have to be related to events said to have occurred in New York City.In recent months, though, defense lawyers have mounted significant legal challenges to the city’s amendment. They have argued that the City Council infringed on the jurisdiction of state lawmakers, and in several cases, judges have issued decisions limiting the amendment’s scope.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in Music

      The N.Y. Law That Underpins Several Lawsuits Against Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs

      by

      The law, which underpins several civil suits against Sean Combs, is the only remaining tool for reviving older claims in New York.In New York, where state laws that extended the time to file sex abuse suits have lapsed, plaintiffs have found one remaining tool: Section 10-1105 of New York City’s administrative code.The provision, known as the Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Law, has provided the basis for recent lawsuits against the Aerosmith frontman Steven Tyler; the luxury real estate agents Tal and Oren Alexander; New York City’s Department of Correction; and the hip-hop mogul Sean Combs, who is a defendant in four.“This statute continues to provide an avenue of relief for survivors,” said Douglas Wigdor, a lawyer for a woman who sued Mr. Combs under the gender-motivated violence law, accusing him and two other men of gang-raping her in a New York recording studio in 2003. He has vehemently denied the allegations.Lawyers say they have been increasingly using the law, first passed by the City Council in 2000, since the expiration last year of the New York state law that had allowed for the filing of lawsuits over sexual abuse allegations even after the statute of limitations had passed. The state law, one of many adopted around the country in the wake of a surge in #MeToo complaints, led to more than 3,000 state court filings relating to claims that often dated back decades — in addition to thousands more filed under an earlier law for people who said they were sexually abused as children.Now plaintiffs are often relying on the city law that — because of a 2022 amendment — established a two-year window in which plaintiffs can sue over older allegations. That window closes at the start of March 2025, and the claims have to be related to events said to have occurred in New York City.In recent months, though, defense lawyers have mounted significant legal challenges to the city’s amendment. They have argued that the City Council infringed on the jurisdiction of state lawmakers, and in several cases, judges have issued decisions limiting the amendment’s scope.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 113 Shares99 Views

      in Music

      Dueling Ramones Heirs Fight Over the Punk Band’s Legacy

      by

      The brother of Joey Ramone and the widow of Johnny Ramone, who each control half of the band’s intellectual property rights, have filed lawsuits against each other.Years of disputes over control of the legacy of the Ramones escalated this month when the brother of Joey Ramone sued the widow of Johnny Ramone, accusing her of trademark infringement, trademark dilution and breach of contract.Joey Ramone’s brother, Mickey Leigh, and Johnny Ramone’s widow, Linda Cummings-Ramone, each control 50 percent of Ramones Productions, the company that holds the punk band’s intellectual property rights. Joey Ramone, its lead vocalist, died in 2001, and Johnny Ramone, the guitarist, in 2004.In the lawsuit, Mickey Leigh, whose legal name is Mitchel Hyman, accuses Ms. Cummings-Ramone of improperly exploiting the band’s legacy — often in sharply personal terms — and leveraging its intellectual property “for her own fame and vanity.”Ms. Cummings-Ramone had sued Mr. Hyman in January, accusing him of wrongfully developing a Ramones biopic without her approval. That case is pending.Representatives for Mr. Hyman and Ms. Cummings-Ramone did not respond to a request for comment.Alan Fisch, a veteran intellectual properties litigator, said Ms. Cummings-Ramone’s ownership stake in Ramones Productions did not necessarily grant her control over its intellectual assets.“Just because she owns half of the business doesn’t mean she has an unfettered right to use its intellectual property,” he said. “That each of the two shareholders have different views is part of the challenge that they’ve created for themselves in being 50 percent owners.”The rivalry between Mr. Hyman and Ms. Cummings-Ramone in some ways mirrors the famously chilly relationship between Joey and Johnny Ramone. Before she began dating Johnny Ramone, Ms. Cummings-Ramone, a philanthropist and model, was in a multiyear relationship with Joey Ramone.Mr. Hyman and Ms. Cummings-Ramone’s clash reached an inflection point in 2018, when he took her to arbitration over the usage of Ramones trademarks in an annual tribute event for Johnny Ramone. Mr. Hyman also objected to Ms. Cummings-Ramone’s adoption of the name “Linda Ramone,” which he said falsely portrayed her as the “keeper of the legacy” of the group. (The last name “Ramone” was a pseudonym and not the legal name of any member of the band.)When the arbitrator ruled on those disputes, he also expressed frustration with their frequent battles.“Mickey Hyman and Linda Cummings-Ramone have an almost sacred mission to be the caretakers for the band’s creative work, to protect their iconic brand and to educate new fans in order to grow their legend,” he wrote. “Instead, the parties have allowed their personal egos and their animus for one another to interfere with their joint obligations.” More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Television

      Michael Crichton’s Estate Calls New Show an Unauthorized ‘ER’ Remake in Lawsuit

      by

      The best-selling author’s estate has filed suit over “The Pitt,” an upcoming series, claiming that it is an unauthorized reboot of the hit hospital drama.The estate of Michael Crichton filed suit against Warner Bros. Television on Tuesday, claiming that its upcoming Max series, “The Pitt,” is an unauthorized “ER” reboot that fails to credit him and compensate his heirs.The suit accused Warner Bros. and R. Scott Gemmill, the showrunner of “The Pitt,” of breaching a contract that requires Crichton’s consent for any remakes of the hit hospital drama. The estate also sued John Wells, an executive producer, and Noah Wyle, set to star and serve as an executive producer.“The lawsuit filed by the Crichton Estate is baseless,” Warner Bros. Television said in an emailed statement, calling “The Pitt” a “new and original show.” The company said it would “vigorously defend against these meritless claims.”The complaint, filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, claims that in 2020, Warner Bros., Gemmill, Wells and Wyle began developing a reboot of the show without informing Sherri Crichton, the author’s widow and the guardian of his estate. Gemmill and Wells were executive producers on “ER,” and Wyle was a star of that show.When they told her about the project, nearly two years into development, Crichton’s estate was prepared to approve a reboot based on the condition that he would be credited as a creator, in addition to a set of financial terms. But Warner Bros. later walked back on many of its promises, the lawsuit said.After negotiating for nearly a year, the parties did not reach an agreement, according to the suit. But Warner Bros. “simply moved the show from Chicago to Pittsburgh, rebranded it ‘The Pitt’ and has plowed ahead without any attribution or compensation for Crichton and his heirs,” the complaint said.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Music

      Sean Combs Fights Lawsuit by Music Producer Alleging Sexual Misconduct

      by

      The hip-hop mogul’s lawyers are seeking the dismissal of a suit from Rodney Jones Jr., arguing it is baseless and “replete with far-fetched tales of misconduct.”Lawyers for Sean Combs filed court papers on Monday seeking the dismissal of a civil suit by a music producer who accused Mr. Combs of making unwanted sexual contact, arguing that the lawsuit was baseless and “replete with far-fetched tales of misconduct.”The filing, in Federal District Court in Manhattan, is the latest effort by the hip-hop impresario’s legal team to dismiss a series of recent lawsuits that accuse him of sexual assault and misconduct. The suit by Rodney Jones Jr., a music producer who worked on Mr. Combs’s most recent album, accuses Mr. Combs of groping him and forcing him to solicit prostitutes; he also alleges that Mr. Combs threatened him with violence.In their response, lawyers for Mr. Combs wrote that Mr. Jones’s claims lack basic details, including where and when the alleged groping occurred, along with how, exactly, Mr. Combs pressured him into hiring prostitutes.“Such vague allegations fall well short of federal pleading standards,” wrote one of the lawyers, Erica A. Wolff, who argued that the real purpose of the lawsuit is to “generate media hype and exploit it to extract a settlement.”One threat of violence that the lawsuit alleges was that Mr. Combs once threatened to “eat Mr. Jones’s face,” but the exact context for the comment was unclear in Mr. Jones’s suit, a 98-page document that details a litany of allegations from his time as a part of Mr. Combs’s entourage.Mr. Jones’s lawyer, Tyrone A. Blackburn, called the filing a “desperate Hail Mary attempt.”“Nothing in this complaint is far-fetched,” he said. “Nothing in this complaint is too vague.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares119 Views

      in Music

      Anna Netrebko, Shunned in U.S. Over Putin Support, to Sing in Palm Beach

      by

      The star soprano, who lost work at American opera companies after Russia invaded Ukraine, will sing at a gala for Palm Beach Opera, her first American engagement since 2019.Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the superstar soprano Anna Netrebko has been persona non grata at cultural institutions in the United States, shunned for her past support of Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin.But in February, Ms. Netrebko will make her first appearance in the United States since 2019: She will perform in Florida at a gala concert at the Breakers Palm Beach hotel to benefit Palm Beach Opera, the company announced on Wednesday.Ms. Netrebko, one of the biggest stars in classical music, has in recent months returned to many top concert halls and opera houses in Paris, Milan, Berlin and elsewhere in Europe, prompting some protests but also winning ovations and strong reviews.But most American institutions, including the Metropolitan Opera, where she reigned as a prima donna for two decades, have continued to refuse to engage her because of her past support for Mr. Putin and her unwillingness to criticize him now. Her last performance in the United States was before the pandemic, when she headlined a gala New Year’s Eve performance at the Met Opera.In a statement, Ms. Netrebko said she was looking forward to singing in Florida.“I am honored to be lending my voice to the Palm Beach Opera’s annual gala,” she said. “I am excited to spend time in this beautiful community.”James Barbato, who leads the Palm Beach Opera, said in a statement that Ms. Netrebko was “more than a great artist with a magnetic stage presence and a voice of breathtaking beauty and power.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in Television

      Richard Gadd Says ‘Baby Reindeer’ Was ‘Emotionally True’ but ‘Fictionalized’

      by

      Richard Gadd, the show’s creator, said in a court filing that Fiona Harvey, who is suing Netflix for defamation, harassed him in real life but that the show is a dramatic retelling.After Netflix was sued by a woman who claimed that she inspired the stalker character on the hit series “Baby Reindeer,” the show’s creator, Richard Gadd, said in court papers filed Monday that he had been stalked by the woman in real life but that the series was a “fictionalized retelling.”In a declaration filed in federal court in Los Angeles, Mr. Gadd said that the woman, Fiona Harvey, harassed him in many of the same ways the character Martha stalks Mr. Gadd’s character, Donny, on “Baby Reindeer,” which claims to be “a true story.”Mr. Gadd said that in real life, Ms. Harvey visited him constantly at the bar where he worked and sent him “thousands of emails, hundreds of voicemails, and a number of handwritten letters,” some which were sexually explicit or threatening. But he also argued that “Baby Reindeer” is “a dramatic work.”“It is not a documentary or an attempt at realism,” Mr. Gadd wrote in the filing. “While the Series is based on my life and real-life events and is, at its core, emotionally true, it is not a beat-by-beat recounting of the events and emotions I experienced as they transpired. It is fictionalized, and is not intended to portray actual facts.”Mr. Gadd gave his declaration in support of a motion filed by Netflix seeking to dismiss the defamation lawsuit Ms. Harvey filed last month.Ms. Harvey claimed in the suit that the character Martha was based on her, and that the series defamed her by portraying the character as a convicted stalker who at one point sexually assaults the character played by Mr. Gadd. In her lawsuit, Ms. Harvey said she had never been convicted of a crime and had never sexually assaulted Mr. Gadd.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares179 Views

      in Music

      Michael Jackson Died With $500 Million in Debt

      by

      Jackson owed about $40 million to the tour promoter A.E.G. in 2009, his estate’s executors said in a court filing. They said all the debts have been eliminated.Michael Jackson’s debts and creditor’s claims at the time of his death in 2009 totaled more than $500 million, according to a court filing by the pop superstar’s estate that provides details of his financial woes toward the end of his life.Jackson owed about $40 million to the tour promoter A.E.G., according to the filing, which was made in Los Angeles County Superior Court this month and earlier reported by People magazine. The filing said that 65 creditors made claims against the singer after his death, some of which resulted in lawsuits, and that some of his debt had been “accruing interest at extremely high interest rates.”A representative for the Jackson estate, which is executed by John Branca and John McClain, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The estate filed the court papers as a request to authorize the payment of about $3.5 million to several legal firms for their work in the second half of 2018.In the court filing, the executors say that they have eliminated the estate’s debt and that almost all of the creditors’ claims and litigation have been resolved.Jackson earned hundreds of millions of dollars throughout the 1980s and 1990s as the creator of some of the biggest-selling albums of all time, along with dazzling concert tours that filled stadiums around the world. He bought the Beatles’ song catalog for $47.5 million in 1985 and later sold it to Sony/ATV Music in exchange for a 50 percent share in the company. Sony bought back the estate’s share for $750 million in 2016.But when Jackson died at the age of 50, shortly before he was supposed to embark on a tour called This Is It, he left behind a tangled web of assets and liabilities.Jackson was famous for his lavish lifestyle and spent money with abandon. He incurred millions of dollars in debt from his Neverland Ranch estate in Southern California and had a penchant for expensive art, jewelry and private jets. He was paying more than $30 million annually on interest payments, a forensic accountant testified during a 2013 wrongful-death trial in which A.E.G. prevailed.The Jackson estate is currently in a dispute with the I.R.S. after a tax audit. In a separate court filing this year, the estate said that the federal agency accused it of undervaluing its assets and said it owed “an additional $700 million in taxes and penalties.”Kirsten Noyes More