Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Mysterious Lawyer Is at Center of Suit Against Counsel To 'Superman' Heirs

By Drew Combs
May 27, 2010

Given that the story lines played out in Superman comic books are full of shadowy figures with dark motivations, it seems fitting that the real world legal fight over who owns the rights to the Man of Steel would feature such a character in a pivotal role. Call him The Vanisher. On May 14, in what The New York Times labeled “an aggressive move to defend its 'Superman' franchise,” Warner Bros. sued Marc Toberoff, the lawyer for the comic icon's co-creators' families, in federal court in Los Angeles, accusing him of engaging in a “scheme” to “enrich himself” by trying to wrongfully seize control of a substantial chunk of the Superman property.

In its 56-page complaint (see, http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/files/supermancomplaint.pdf), Warner Bros., represented by O'Melveny & Myers partner Daniel Petrocelli, alleges that Toberoff “orchestrated a web of collusive agreements concerning the Superman copyrights with the heirs to the co-creators of Superman, Jerome Siegel and Joseph Shuster,” that, as the Los Angeles Times reported it, “caused the families to repudiate their agreements with DC Comics in a bid to recapture the copyright to the character.”

Toberoff's reaction? “This frivolous complaint severely underestimates the intelligence of the federal judiciary,” he says. At the same time, Toberoff suggests, his formal response to the suit could have serious consequences for The Vanisher, whose identity he has until now been content to keep secret.

Warner's suit is based in part on a seven-page letter ' laid out in timeline form and attached to the complaint as an exhibit ' that Warner's characterizes as a detailed accounting of Toberoff's efforts to attach himself to the Superman franchise. The source of the anonymous letter, which the court granted the studio access to in December 2008, is a lawyer who used to work for Toberoff. (Petrocelli would not comment on the case, but a source close to the matter says that no one at Warner's or O'Melveny's knew the lawyer's identity.)

While Toberoff wouldn't identify the attorney in question when contacted by The Am Law Daily, an ALM Entertainment Law & Finance affiliate, in a court filing last year, he described the lawyer as someone who worked at the Toberoff firm for less than three months, “disappeared on his lunch break in November 2005 without notice,” and didn't respond to e-mails or phone calls after disappearing.

“My law firm's investigation has revealed that the stolen documents were secretly copied and stolen from my law firm's files by a disgruntled attorney employed by the firm who thereafter furnished documents to Warner Bros,” Toberoff states in the declaration, adding that the former attorney also contacted Toberoff clients soon after leaving the firm and offered to take on their matters at a reduced fee.

That the letter to Warner's included a note saying the timeline information could lead to Toberoff being “suspended” and “disgraced” isn't something Toberoff takes lightly. He says he expects to reveal the mysterious lawyer's identity as part of his broader response to the Warner's suit.

Even more ominously, Toberoff says he is considering reporting the associate's actions to the California bar. In other words, The Vanisher may face a day of reckoning. Stay tuned for the next installment.


Drew Combs reports for The American Lawyer, an affiliate publication of Entertainment Law & Finance.

Given that the story lines played out in Superman comic books are full of shadowy figures with dark motivations, it seems fitting that the real world legal fight over who owns the rights to the Man of Steel would feature such a character in a pivotal role. Call him The Vanisher. On May 14, in what The New York Times labeled “an aggressive move to defend its 'Superman' franchise,” Warner Bros. sued Marc Toberoff, the lawyer for the comic icon's co-creators' families, in federal court in Los Angeles, accusing him of engaging in a “scheme” to “enrich himself” by trying to wrongfully seize control of a substantial chunk of the Superman property.

In its 56-page complaint (see, http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/files/supermancomplaint.pdf), Warner Bros., represented by O'Melveny & Myers partner Daniel Petrocelli, alleges that Toberoff “orchestrated a web of collusive agreements concerning the Superman copyrights with the heirs to the co-creators of Superman, Jerome Siegel and Joseph Shuster,” that, as the Los Angeles Times reported it, “caused the families to repudiate their agreements with DC Comics in a bid to recapture the copyright to the character.”

Toberoff's reaction? “This frivolous complaint severely underestimates the intelligence of the federal judiciary,” he says. At the same time, Toberoff suggests, his formal response to the suit could have serious consequences for The Vanisher, whose identity he has until now been content to keep secret.

Warner's suit is based in part on a seven-page letter ' laid out in timeline form and attached to the complaint as an exhibit ' that Warner's characterizes as a detailed accounting of Toberoff's efforts to attach himself to the Superman franchise. The source of the anonymous letter, which the court granted the studio access to in December 2008, is a lawyer who used to work for Toberoff. (Petrocelli would not comment on the case, but a source close to the matter says that no one at Warner's or O'Melveny's knew the lawyer's identity.)

While Toberoff wouldn't identify the attorney in question when contacted by The Am Law Daily, an ALM Entertainment Law & Finance affiliate, in a court filing last year, he described the lawyer as someone who worked at the Toberoff firm for less than three months, “disappeared on his lunch break in November 2005 without notice,” and didn't respond to e-mails or phone calls after disappearing.

“My law firm's investigation has revealed that the stolen documents were secretly copied and stolen from my law firm's files by a disgruntled attorney employed by the firm who thereafter furnished documents to Warner Bros,” Toberoff states in the declaration, adding that the former attorney also contacted Toberoff clients soon after leaving the firm and offered to take on their matters at a reduced fee.

That the letter to Warner's included a note saying the timeline information could lead to Toberoff being “suspended” and “disgraced” isn't something Toberoff takes lightly. He says he expects to reveal the mysterious lawyer's identity as part of his broader response to the Warner's suit.

Even more ominously, Toberoff says he is considering reporting the associate's actions to the California bar. In other words, The Vanisher may face a day of reckoning. Stay tuned for the next installment.


Drew Combs reports for The American Lawyer, an affiliate publication of Entertainment Law & Finance.

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
COVID-19 and Lease Negotiations: Early Termination Provisions Image

During the COVID-19 pandemic, some tenants were able to negotiate termination agreements with their landlords. But even though a landlord may agree to terminate a lease to regain control of a defaulting tenant's space without costly and lengthy litigation, typically a defaulting tenant that otherwise has no contractual right to terminate its lease will be in a much weaker bargaining position with respect to the conditions for termination.

How Secure Is the AI System Your Law Firm Is Using? Image

What Law Firms Need to Know Before Trusting AI Systems with Confidential Information In a profession where confidentiality is paramount, failing to address AI security concerns could have disastrous consequences. It is vital that law firms and those in related industries ask the right questions about AI security to protect their clients and their reputation.

Authentic Communications Today Increase Success for Value-Driven Clients Image

As the relationship between in-house and outside counsel continues to evolve, lawyers must continue to foster a client-first mindset, offer business-focused solutions, and embrace technology that helps deliver work faster and more efficiently.

Pleading Importation: ITC Decisions Highlight Need for Adequate Evidentiary Support Image

The International Trade Commission is empowered to block the importation into the United States of products that infringe U.S. intellectual property rights, In the past, the ITC generally instituted investigations without questioning the importation allegations in the complaint, however in several recent cases, the ITC declined to institute an investigation as to certain proposed respondents due to inadequate pleading of importation.

Generative AI and the 2024 Elections: Risks, Realities, and Lessons for Businesses Image

GenAI's ability to produce highly sophisticated and convincing content at a fraction of the previous cost has raised fears that it could amplify misinformation. The dissemination of fake audio, images and text could reshape how voters perceive candidates and parties. Businesses, too, face challenges in managing their reputations and navigating this new terrain of manipulated content.

How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter? Image

A recent research paper offers up some unexpected results regarding the best ways to manage retirement income.