Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Counsel Concerns

By ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
July 28, 2005

Sanctions Vacated

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York vacated sanctions issued against an attorney representing the estate of Tarzan illustrator Burne Hogarth, which had sued over rights in Hogarth's works following the release of The Walt Disney Co.'s animated “Tarzan” movie. The named defendant was Edgar Rice Burroughs Inc. (ERB), the owner of the copyrights of the Tarzan author and creator. But after the plaintiffs lost in both the district and appeals courts, the district court issued sanctions against the Hogarth plaintiffs and their attorney David Smallman. The court concluded in part that Smallman had actually found documents before filing suit that undermined the plaintiffs' claims. The parties then reached a settlement under which plaintiffs' and counsel would pay $80,000 to ERB ' $50,000 of that over the document-withholding issue ' whatever decision the district court reached on the plaintiffs' motion to vacate sanctions. Smallman then filed an affidavit with the court stating that he had in fact found the disputed documents much later in the case than the court had previously been held to believe.

In vacating the sanctions ruling, the district court noted: “While the movants have a significant hurdle to overcome, they have shown that exceptional circumstances exist that counsel in favor of a reexamination of the entire record to ensure that the finding of sanctionable conduct accords with what are now undisputed facts. … When the principal finding that was the linchpin for the award is shown to be unreliable, concern for the appearance of justice becomes a significant factor to weigh in the decision of whether to accept newly presented evidence. … Smallman has shown that he did not have possession of the critical documents until shortly before he produced them in discovery. With that finding, the principal basis for imposing sanctions on counsel disappears.” The Estate of Burne Hogarth v. Edgar Rice Burroughs Inc., 00 CIV. 9569 (DLC).

The sanctions against Smallman had included for an attempt to disqualify defense counsel “on the eve of trial” and for a post-verdict motion to correct the record. But the district court concluded: “The two other grounds for imposing sanctions on plaintiffs' counsel were subsidiary, and the inferences drawn in imposing those sanctions were significantly influenced by the finding that other intentional and more significant misconduct had already occurred in the litigation. Without the finding that documents had been intentionally withheld, it is therefore appropriate to vacate the other sanctions imposed through the Sanctions Opinion.”

Sanctions Vacated

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York vacated sanctions issued against an attorney representing the estate of Tarzan illustrator Burne Hogarth, which had sued over rights in Hogarth's works following the release of The Walt Disney Co.'s animated “Tarzan” movie. The named defendant was Edgar Rice Burroughs Inc. (ERB), the owner of the copyrights of the Tarzan author and creator. But after the plaintiffs lost in both the district and appeals courts, the district court issued sanctions against the Hogarth plaintiffs and their attorney David Smallman. The court concluded in part that Smallman had actually found documents before filing suit that undermined the plaintiffs' claims. The parties then reached a settlement under which plaintiffs' and counsel would pay $80,000 to ERB ' $50,000 of that over the document-withholding issue ' whatever decision the district court reached on the plaintiffs' motion to vacate sanctions. Smallman then filed an affidavit with the court stating that he had in fact found the disputed documents much later in the case than the court had previously been held to believe.

In vacating the sanctions ruling, the district court noted: “While the movants have a significant hurdle to overcome, they have shown that exceptional circumstances exist that counsel in favor of a reexamination of the entire record to ensure that the finding of sanctionable conduct accords with what are now undisputed facts. … When the principal finding that was the linchpin for the award is shown to be unreliable, concern for the appearance of justice becomes a significant factor to weigh in the decision of whether to accept newly presented evidence. … Smallman has shown that he did not have possession of the critical documents until shortly before he produced them in discovery. With that finding, the principal basis for imposing sanctions on counsel disappears.” The Estate of Burne Hogarth v. Edgar Rice Burroughs Inc., 00 CIV. 9569 (DLC).

The sanctions against Smallman had included for an attempt to disqualify defense counsel “on the eve of trial” and for a post-verdict motion to correct the record. But the district court concluded: “The two other grounds for imposing sanctions on plaintiffs' counsel were subsidiary, and the inferences drawn in imposing those sanctions were significantly influenced by the finding that other intentional and more significant misconduct had already occurred in the litigation. Without the finding that documents had been intentionally withheld, it is therefore appropriate to vacate the other sanctions imposed through the Sanctions Opinion.”

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
Overview of Regulatory Guidance Governing the Use of AI Systems In the Workplace Image

Businesses have long embraced the use of computer technology in the workplace as a means of improving efficiency and productivity of their operations. In recent years, businesses have incorporated artificial intelligence and other automated and algorithmic technologies into their computer systems. This article provides an overview of the federal regulatory guidance and the state and local rules in place so far and suggests ways in which employers may wish to address these developments with policies and practices to reduce legal risk.

Is Google Search Dead? How AI Is Reshaping Search and SEO Image

This two-part article dives into the massive shifts AI is bringing to Google Search and SEO and why traditional searches are no longer part of the solution for marketers. It’s not theoretical, it’s happening, and firms that adapt will come out ahead.

While Federal Legislation Flounders, State Privacy Laws for Children and Teens Gain Momentum Image

For decades, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act has been the only law to expressly address privacy for minors’ information other than student data. In the absence of more robust federal requirements, states are stepping in to regulate not only the processing of all minors’ data, but also online platforms used by teens and children.

Revolutionizing Workplace Design: A Perspective from Gray Reed Image

In an era where the workplace is constantly evolving, law firms face unique challenges and opportunities in facilities management, real estate, and design. Across the industry, firms are reevaluating their office spaces to adapt to hybrid work models, prioritize collaboration, and enhance employee experience. Trends such as flexible seating, technology-driven planning, and the creation of multifunctional spaces are shaping the future of law firm offices.

From DeepSeek to Distillation: Protecting IP In An AI World Image

Protection against unauthorized model distillation is an emerging issue within the longstanding theme of safeguarding intellectual property. This article examines the legal protections available under the current legal framework and explore why patents may serve as a crucial safeguard against unauthorized distillation.