Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Bit Parts

By Stan Soocher
March 01, 2004

'Garcia' Guitar Decision

The Court of Appeal of California, First Appellate District, Division Two, decided in an unpublished opinion that a Marin County court had jurisdiction to rule that Grateful Dead Productions (GDP), rather than the estate of group member Jerry Garcia, owned a particular guitar at the time of Garcia's death. Irwin v. Grateful Dead Productions Inc., A099413. Guitar-maker Doug Irwin had filed a petition under Probate Code Sec. 9860 to order GDP to turn several Irwin-made, Garcia-played guitars over to Garcia's estate. Irwin, GDP and Garcia's co-executors entered into a stipulation over the disposition of all the guitars, except one named “Tiger.” Irwin later withdrew his probate petition at a hearing over the right to “Tiger.” (The underlying issue was whether Garcia's estate was responsible for tax liabilities on the guitar.) But the court proceeded to rule that “Tiger” belonged to GDP. After ruling that Garcia's widow and co-executor, Deborah Koons Garcia, was a proper party to the lower court proceedings (an issue Irwin had contested), the court of appeal affirmed on the guitar-ownership issue, noting, “By virtue of the stipulation, [Irwin] was able to obtain possession of the Tiger guitar and sell it for a large sum of money. GDP and the co-executors agreed to have him receive possession of the guitar on the promise that the issue of ownership of the guitar at the time of Garcia's death would be determined by the court. Irwin could not simply avoid this aspect of the stipulation by dismissing his petition.”


Put Deal Not Subordinate

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • 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

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

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.

Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations Image

This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.

The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs Image

The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.

CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys Image

Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.

Discovery of Claim Construction and Infringement Analysis May be Compelled Prior to a Markman Hearing Image

A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.