Courthouse Steps

CASE CAPTION: Marco Brambilla and Vast Productions Inc. v. NBC Universal Inc., Universal City Studios Inc., and Carolyn Hampton, L.A. Superior Court # BC341136.

CAUSES OF ACTION: Breach of written contract; breach of oral contract; breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; unfair competition and restraint of trade; fraudulent inducement; unjust enrichment/disgorge profits; and promissory estoppel.

COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS: Plaintiff Brambilla is a director who came up with an idea for, and got the rights to produce, a movie about Evel Knievel. The plaintiff entered into agreements with Universal under which he would produce and direct the film. Universal later asked the plaintiff to step aside as director but promised he would be involved in the creative direction of the film. The plaintiff agreed to step aside in reliance on a promise that he would get another Universal project to direct. Universal has breached the agreement by making creative decisions on the Evel-Knievel movie without him and revising the script without his knowledge.

RELIEF SOUGHT: At least $1 million.

PLAINTIFFS' COUNSEL: Lee W. Cotugno and Richard N. Rust of Beverly Hills' Kalisch, Cotugno & Rust (310-274-6683).

CASE CAPTION: Kevin Costner v. Ascendant Pictures LLC, L.A. Superior Court # BC343674.

CAUSES OF ACTION: Promissory estoppel and breach of oral contract.

COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS: In Dec. 2004, the parties entered into an oral agreement for plaintiff Costner to play the lead male character in a film entitled “Taming Ben Taylor.” Costner was to be paid $8 million, plus additional compensation under a structured compensation agreement (ie, a percentage of gross). Defendant Ascendant drafted a deal-term summary, but repudiated the agreement in June 2005. The plaintiff didn't accept other engagements in the interim in reliance on the agreement.

RELIEF SOUGHT: Eight million dollars, plus additional sums.

PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL: William A. Bossen, Scott J. Ivy and James C. Chow of L.A.'s Music, Peeler & Garrett (213-629-7976).

CASE CAPTION: Joel Lamontagne v. Project Runway; Project Greenlight Productions; General Electric; NBC-Universal Inc.; Walt Disney Pictures and TV Inc.; Miramax TV; Miramax Films Corp.; Bravo Co.; Bravo TV.COM Freemantle Media; The Gap Inc.; Banana Republic; Tony Yates; Hachette Filipacchi Media US Inc. dba Elle Magazine; L'Oreal; Heidi Klum; and Elizabeth Hurley, L.A. Superior Court # BC343428.

CAUSES OF ACTION: Breach of implied contract; fraud; tortious interference with business relations; intentional misrepresentation; negligent misrepresentation; copyright infringement; an accounting; disgorgement of profits; and constructive trust.

COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS: Plaintiff Lamontagne had copyright and Writers Guild registration of a treatment for a reality show entitled “America's Fashion Designer Search.” He made the treatment available to co-defendant Tony Yates, a producer for Project Greenlight Productions, which promoted itself as a company designed to help undiscovered writers get their work produced. But Project Greenlight stole plaintiff Lamontagne's idea for its “Project Runway.” The plaintiff's agent also pitched the show to Fremantle, which later purchased the worldwide rights to “Project Runway,” produced by Miramax. Co-defendant Elizabeth Hurley is hosting the British version; co-defendant Klum the American version.

PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL: Ivan B. Schwartz of San Diego, CA (619-231-2704).

CASE CAPTION: The Firm Inc. v. Aleen Keshishian and Brillstein-Grey Entertainment, L.A. Superior Court # BC343006. (See companion case below.)

CAUSES OF ACTION: Intentional interference with existing contractual relationship; declaratory relief; an accounting; money had and received; and conversion.

COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS: The Firm is a professional management company. Keshishian is a talent manager and former employee of The Firm who left the company on July 11, 2005. Keshishian was primarily responsible for representing actor Orlando Bloom, who The Firm had managed since June 2002. Keshishian now holds herself out as a partner of Brillstein-Grey, which now manages Bloom. The defendants have collected at least $200,000 in commissions (out of a total of $660,000) from Bloom for the second and third “Pirates of the Caribbean” films, even though The Firm negotiated the contracts for those films. The defendants solicited Bloom to leave The Firm as a client while Keshishian was still employed by The Firm and instructed Bloom to pay them the commissions. They also solicited actress Natalie Portman. Brillstein-Grey secretly solicited Keshishian while in conversations with The Firm about a possible merger.

RELIEF SOUGHT: At least $660,000 for Bloom's commissions and millions for other lost commissions from other clients, including Portman who left The Firm.

PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL: Joseph R. Taylor, Joseph M. Gabriel and Glen A. Rothstein of L.A.'s Liner Yankelevitz Sunshine & Regenstreif (310-500-3500).

CASE CAPTION: The Firm Inc. v. Orlando Bloom, L.A. Superior Court # BC343007.

CAUSES OF ACTION: Breach of oral contract; conspiracy to commit conversion; money had and received; quantum meruit; an accounting; and declaratory relief.

COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS: Defendant Bloom's June 2002 management agreement called for The Firm to get 10% commissions. Bloom terminated the agreement in July 2005. The Firm is entitled to $660,000 for negotiating contracts for Bloom for the second and third “Pirates of The Caribbean” movies.

RELIEF SOUGHT: $660,000.

PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL: Joseph R. Taylor, Joseph M. Gabriel and Glen A. Rothstein of L.A.'s Liner Yankelevitz Sunshine & Regenstreif (310-500-3500).

CASE CAPTION: Doris Roberts and Swimma Productions Inc. v. Innovative Artists Talent and Literary Agency Inc., and Scott Harris, L.A. Superior Court # BC432989.

CAUSES OF ACTION: Breach of fiduciary duty; fraud; negligence; money had and received; and declaratory relief.

COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS: The defendants were plaintiff Roberts' agents in connection with her acting employment on the TV series “Everybody Loves Raymond.” At the suggestion of Harris and Innovative, Roberts hired James Hornstein and the law firm of Greenberg, Glusker, Fields, Claman and Machtinger to represent her in renegotiating her “Raymond” contract. But Roberts wasn't told that Hornstein was defendants' long-standing personal attorney and wasn't a transactional entertainment lawyer. The negotiations led Roberts to give the show's producers an option to engage her for the seventh, eighth and ninth seasons of the TV series. The defendants told Roberts that they had requested a guarantee of compensation for a minimum of 22 episodes per season and that the show's producers had told them that no other actor was guaranteed payments for more than 13 episodes in any series year. The defendants lied about that, and later admitted that the show producers never said that. When the show's cast members became concerned that the producers wouldn't agree to produce a ninth season, it was decided that Roberts and co-actors Patricia Heaton and Peter Boyle would negotiate together to get increased compensation, including a share of back-end profits for the series. Harris suggested Greenberg Glusker represent all three actors. In Aug. 2003, the show's producers informed the actors that there wouldn't be a ninth season. Heaton never signed the law-firm retainer agreement and requested changes. The main change was to aggregate any back-end or cash guarantee the three actors got and to divide it in rations of the actors' current ninth-season base salary for the series, instead of dividing it equally. This benefited Heaton but was detrimental to Roberts. The retainer agreement was revised and Roberts signed. Innovative failed to counsel Roberts about a conflict of interest. Following negotiations, the show's producers agreed to provide 2% back-end interest to four lead actors (Roberts, Heaton, Boyle and Brad Garrett). But instead of getting .5% of the profits, Roberts only got .4375%. In March 2004, Roberts learned that other actors, including Heaton and Garrett, had received guarantees for up to 25 episodes per year The defendants then counseled Roberts to not execute a proposed profit-sharing agreement if it contained a provision ratifying her earlier renegotiated agreement because Roberts' consent had been obtained by fraud. In Oct. 2004, the defendants admitted they had no evidence that the show's producers said no other actors had been guaranteed more than 13 episodes. Roberts then fired Innovative.

RELIEF SOUGHT: At least $2 million, plus $1.75 million in fees already paid to Innovative.

PLAINTIFFS' COUNSEL: Richard C. Leonard of Beverly Hills' Leonard, Dicker & Schreiber (310-551-1987).

CASE CAPTION: Marco Brambilla and Vast Productions Inc. v. NBC Universal Inc., Universal City Studios Inc., and Carolyn Hampton, L.A. Superior Court # BC341136.

CAUSES OF ACTION: Breach of written contract; breach of oral contract; breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; unfair competition and restraint of trade; fraudulent inducement; unjust enrichment/disgorge profits; and promissory estoppel.

COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS: Plaintiff Brambilla is a director who came up with an idea for, and got the rights to produce, a movie about Evel Knievel. The plaintiff entered into agreements with Universal under which he would produce and direct the film. Universal later asked the plaintiff to step aside as director but promised he would be involved in the creative direction of the film. The plaintiff agreed to step aside in reliance on a promise that he would get another Universal project to direct. Universal has breached the agreement by making creative decisions on the Evel-Knievel movie without him and revising the script without his knowledge.

RELIEF SOUGHT: At least $1 million.

PLAINTIFFS' COUNSEL: Lee W. Cotugno and Richard N. Rust of Beverly Hills' Kalisch, Cotugno & Rust (310-274-6683).

CASE CAPTION: Kevin Costner v. Ascendant Pictures LLC, L.A. Superior Court # BC343674.

CAUSES OF ACTION: Promissory estoppel and breach of oral contract.

COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS: In Dec. 2004, the parties entered into an oral agreement for plaintiff Costner to play the lead male character in a film entitled “Taming Ben Taylor.” Costner was to be paid $8 million, plus additional compensation under a structured compensation agreement (ie, a percentage of gross). Defendant Ascendant drafted a deal-term summary, but repudiated the agreement in June 2005. The plaintiff didn't accept other engagements in the interim in reliance on the agreement.

RELIEF SOUGHT: Eight million dollars, plus additional sums.

PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL: William A. Bossen, Scott J. Ivy and James C. Chow of L.A.'s Music, Peeler & Garrett (213-629-7976).

CASE CAPTION: Joel Lamontagne v. Project Runway; Project Greenlight Productions; General Electric; NBC-Universal Inc.; Walt Disney Pictures and TV Inc.; Miramax TV; Miramax Films Corp.; Bravo Co.; Bravo TV.COM Freemantle Media; The Gap Inc.; Banana Republic; Tony Yates; Hachette Filipacchi Media US Inc. dba Elle Magazine; L'Oreal; Heidi Klum; and Elizabeth Hurley, L.A. Superior Court # BC343428.

CAUSES OF ACTION: Breach of implied contract; fraud; tortious interference with business relations; intentional misrepresentation; negligent misrepresentation; copyright infringement; an accounting; disgorgement of profits; and constructive trust.

COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS: Plaintiff Lamontagne had copyright and Writers Guild registration of a treatment for a reality show entitled “America's Fashion Designer Search.” He made the treatment available to co-defendant Tony Yates, a producer for Project Greenlight Productions, which promoted itself as a company designed to help undiscovered writers get their work produced. But Project Greenlight stole plaintiff Lamontagne's idea for its “Project Runway.” The plaintiff's agent also pitched the show to Fremantle, which later purchased the worldwide rights to “Project Runway,” produced by Miramax. Co-defendant Elizabeth Hurley is hosting the British version; co-defendant Klum the American version.

PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL: Ivan B. Schwartz of San Diego, CA (619-231-2704).

CASE CAPTION: The Firm Inc. v. Aleen Keshishian and Brillstein-Grey Entertainment, L.A. Superior Court # BC343006. (See companion case below.)

CAUSES OF ACTION: Intentional interference with existing contractual relationship; declaratory relief; an accounting; money had and received; and conversion.

COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS: The Firm is a professional management company. Keshishian is a talent manager and former employee of The Firm who left the company on July 11, 2005. Keshishian was primarily responsible for representing actor Orlando Bloom, who The Firm had managed since June 2002. Keshishian now holds herself out as a partner of Brillstein-Grey, which now manages Bloom. The defendants have collected at least $200,000 in commissions (out of a total of $660,000) from Bloom for the second and third “Pirates of the Caribbean” films, even though The Firm negotiated the contracts for those films. The defendants solicited Bloom to leave The Firm as a client while Keshishian was still employed by The Firm and instructed Bloom to pay them the commissions. They also solicited actress Natalie Portman. Brillstein-Grey secretly solicited Keshishian while in conversations with The Firm about a possible merger.

RELIEF SOUGHT: At least $660,000 for Bloom's commissions and millions for other lost commissions from other clients, including Portman who left The Firm.

PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL: Joseph R. Taylor, Joseph M. Gabriel and Glen A. Rothstein of L.A.'s Liner Yankelevitz Sunshine & Regenstreif (310-500-3500).

CASE CAPTION: The Firm Inc. v. Orlando Bloom, L.A. Superior Court # BC343007.

CAUSES OF ACTION: Breach of oral contract; conspiracy to commit conversion; money had and received; quantum meruit; an accounting; and declaratory relief.

COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS: Defendant Bloom's June 2002 management agreement called for The Firm to get 10% commissions. Bloom terminated the agreement in July 2005. The Firm is entitled to $660,000 for negotiating contracts for Bloom for the second and third “Pirates of The Caribbean” movies.

RELIEF SOUGHT: $660,000.

PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL: Joseph R. Taylor, Joseph M. Gabriel and Glen A. Rothstein of L.A.'s Liner Yankelevitz Sunshine & Regenstreif (310-500-3500).

CASE CAPTION: Doris Roberts and Swimma Productions Inc. v. Innovative Artists Talent and Literary Agency Inc., and Scott Harris, L.A. Superior Court # BC432989.

CAUSES OF ACTION: Breach of fiduciary duty; fraud; negligence; money had and received; and declaratory relief.

COMPLAINT ALLEGATIONS: The defendants were plaintiff Roberts' agents in connection with her acting employment on the TV series “Everybody Loves Raymond.” At the suggestion of Harris and Innovative, Roberts hired James Hornstein and the law firm of Greenberg, Glusker, Fields, Claman and Machtinger to represent her in renegotiating her “Raymond” contract. But Roberts wasn't told that Hornstein was defendants' long-standing personal attorney and wasn't a transactional entertainment lawyer. The negotiations led Roberts to give the show's producers an option to engage her for the seventh, eighth and ninth seasons of the TV series. The defendants told Roberts that they had requested a guarantee of compensation for a minimum of 22 episodes per season and that the show's producers had told them that no other actor was guaranteed payments for more than 13 episodes in any series year. The defendants lied about that, and later admitted that the show producers never said that. When the show's cast members became concerned that the producers wouldn't agree to produce a ninth season, it was decided that Roberts and co-actors Patricia Heaton and Peter Boyle would negotiate together to get increased compensation, including a share of back-end profits for the series. Harris suggested Greenberg Glusker represent all three actors. In Aug. 2003, the show's producers informed the actors that there wouldn't be a ninth season. Heaton never signed the law-firm retainer agreement and requested changes. The main change was to aggregate any back-end or cash guarantee the three actors got and to divide it in rations of the actors' current ninth-season base salary for the series, instead of dividing it equally. This benefited Heaton but was detrimental to Roberts. The retainer agreement was revised and Roberts signed. Innovative failed to counsel Roberts about a conflict of interest. Following negotiations, the show's producers agreed to provide 2% back-end interest to four lead actors (Roberts, Heaton, Boyle and Brad Garrett). But instead of getting .5% of the profits, Roberts only got .4375%. In March 2004, Roberts learned that other actors, including Heaton and Garrett, had received guarantees for up to 25 episodes per year The defendants then counseled Roberts to not execute a proposed profit-sharing agreement if it contained a provision ratifying her earlier renegotiated agreement because Roberts' consent had been obtained by fraud. In Oct. 2004, the defendants admitted they had no evidence that the show's producers said no other actors had been guaranteed more than 13 episodes. Roberts then fired Innovative.

RELIEF SOUGHT: At least $2 million, plus $1.75 million in fees already paid to Innovative.

PLAINTIFFS' COUNSEL: Richard C. Leonard of Beverly Hills' Leonard, Dicker & Schreiber (310-551-1987).