Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Malpractice 'Notice' and 'Claims' Issues In Suits Against Entertainment Attorneys
The increase in recent years in malpractice claims against lawyers has impacted entertainment attorneys, too. If a malpractice complaint is filed, will the attorney's liability policy cover the suit? Two primary concerns here are whether the attorney has timely notified his or her insurer of a malpractice claim and how to determine the number of malpractice 'claims' for purposes of the insurer's malpractice-coverage obligations.
A recent ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin addressed both issues, as well as which state's law should apply in interpreting malpractice policies. McCraw v. Mensch, 06-C-86-S. In the case, Ilinois-based music attorney Linda Mensch had served as counsel for the Wisconsin-based rock group the BoDeans for 12 years, beginning in 1985. She handled the legal work for the formation of the BoDeans operating entity, Keshaw Inc., as well as the group's publishing company, Lla-Mann Music Partnership. Mensch also negotiated a 1996 employment agreement between the BoDeans and their long-time manager Mark McCraw. The band-manager relationship later soured. In the summer of 2004, Mensch was deposed in litigation between the BoDeans and McCraw in Milwaukee County Circuit Court. (The band-manager litigation was settled after the circuit court judge ordered a retrial, following a 2005 trial.) On Dec. 3, 2004, the BoDeans' counsel wrote Mensch that the band planned to file a malpractice complaint against her. '[B]ased on your own testimony, I sincerely doubt that you are surprised to receive this letter,' the BoDeans' lawyer stated in the letter. Mensch sent a copy of the letter to her malpractice insurer, Illinois State Bar Association Mutual Insurance Co. (ISBA), which received it on Dec. 9.
Mensch's ISBA malpractice policies covered claims made against her during or within 60 days of the policies' expiration dates. Mensch was required to inform ISBA of any claims 'as soon as practicable.' The policy definition of a 'claim' was:
1. a demand received by YOU for money or services, or the service of a suit or the initiation of an arbitration proceeding against YOU that seeks DAMAGES arising out of YOUR WRONGFUL ACT;
2. an incident or circumstance of which YOU have knowledge that may result in a demand against YOU that seeks DAMAGES arising out of YOUR WRONGFUL ACT.
In addition, the policies stated:
Two or more CLAIMS arising out of a single act, error or omission or a series of related acts, errors or omissions will be treated as a single CLAIM ' all such CLAIMS will be subject to the Limit of Liability.
In a malpractice-policy renewal application Mensch filed in October 2004, she had responded 'no' to the question: 'During the past 12 months, has any current member of Applicant become aware of any circumstance or incident that could result in a claim or suit which has not been previously reported to ISBA Mutual?'
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
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?