Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
A Word To The Wise
It is often said that bad facts make bad law. A corollary to that principle may be that notorious clients make for problematic verdicts. Such was the case in Bell v. Helmsley, 2003 WL 1453108 (Sup.Ct. N.Y.Cty. 3/4/03), a trial dominated by the ever-entertaining presence of the Queen of Mean, Leona Helmsley. Her testimony, according to the court, lasted only approximately 21 minutes, yet so inflamed the jury that the court felt required to reduce the resulting punitive damages award from $10 million down to $500,000.
Are there any lessons to be learned from the Bell case? The facts, by now, are well-known. Charles Bell worked at a Helmsley hotel, the Park Lane, in Manhattan. He alleged that Mrs. Helmsley discriminated against him because he is gay. This alleged discrimination led to Helmsley regularly berating him, on occasion pulling on his goatee, lightly slapping his face twice, and ultimately terminating him because of his sexual orientation. The hotel responded that Bell was terminated for performance reasons, including his alleged propensity to give free rooms to his friends. The jury found for Bell and awarded him back pay in the amount of $321,000, $800,000 in future lost wages and benefits, $30,000 in pain and suffering, $24,000 in future pain and suffering, and $10 million in punitive damages. The court struck down the back and front pay awards based on Bell's failure to mitigate (see accompanying box) and, as already noted, reduced the punitive damages award (see “Punitive Damages Take a Beating,” page 1).
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Why So Many Great Lawyers Stink at Business Development and What Law Firms Are Doing About It
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
A Lawyer's System for Active Reading
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
Protecting Innovation in the Cyber World from Patent Trolls
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.