Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
11th Circuit Sides With Attorney Sued Over Prince Concert Snafu
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit upheld the dismissal of a lawsuit claiming a Florida lawyer failed to follow through on a $75,000 deal to land the late mega-musician Prince for a 2012 gig. Walace v. Cousins, 18-10267. (The appeals court said in a footnote: "Although the style of the case refers to [Janet] Wallace as Walace, both parties agree that her name is Wallace.")
The lawyer — who made what were described as "many false and grandiose promises" about his connections to the star who died in 2016 — refused to return the money. Plaintiff Janet Wallace sued the lawyer, Patrick Cousins, for fraud after the performance failed to occur. Cousins, of West Palm Beach, FL, responded that he did exactly what he promised to do: Try to arrange the show. The trial judge in the Northern District of Georgia found there was no controversy and threw out the case.
The appeals court agreed, ruling that nothing in the case could lead a "rational trier of fact" to conclude the lawyer defrauded Wallace. "Janet Wallace may find hollow Prince's refrain that he 'never meant to cause … any sorrow' or 'pain,'" stated the per curiam opinion issued by Chief Judge Ed Carnes and Judges Jill Pryor and R. Lanier Anderson III of the Eleventh Circuit. There was no evidence that Cousins' claim that he was "willing and able to facilitate Prince's performance" was fraudulent, the appellate judges found.
Cousins, who is representing himself along with Derek Welch of Anderson & Welch in Atlanta, GA, said, "As the lower court ruling brought out, I did exactly what I was hired to do. Ms. Wallace took things into her own hands and terminated me, and Prince decided not to do the show."
Wallace has been represented on the appeal by her original attorney, Atlanta solo Antonio Thomas, along with Ted Lackland of Lackland & Associates in Marietta, GA. "[The opinion] just came out, so we're still deciding what to do," Thomas said when this article was written. He noted that related litigation is ongoing in Florida.
Court filings show the case began when Wallace, then a show manager for Bronner Brothers — a Georgia-based, hair-care products company that produces trade shows for beauticians — wanted to book Prince for a trade show set for August 2012. Wallace heard that Cousins had contacts with Prince and arranged a meeting. Wallace on behalf of Bronner Brothers signed an agreement with Cousins specifying that "Cousins is willing and able to facilitate Prince's performance" for the planned trade show. The agreement also stated Cousins was to receive a good faith payment of $75,000 upon signing the agreement.
Wallace wired Cousins $75,000 from her bank account the next day. Cousins swung into action, emailing a Prince representative the performance agreement, which promised payment of $2.5 million apiece for two shows at Phillips arena, or $5 million for one show at the Georgia Dome, depending on Prince's preference.
Prince's representative responded that the artist was away and would be asked about the show when he returned. There was still no response three weeks later, so Cousins emailed another representative explaining that the show's date was approaching and that Bronner Brothers needed an answer by the next morning or they would have to find someone else. Cousins was advised that Prince had the offer and was considering it but hadn't decided.
More weeks passed and Wallace finally decided to pull the plug and requested her money back from Cousins, who refused. Cousins claimed he had performed the first part of the contract — contacting Prince and pitching the show — and that after Prince requested more details the plaintiffs had "capriciously and arbitrarily fired Cousins Law."
Wallace filed a bar complaint against him in Florida, Cousins said, but she voluntarily dismissed that complaint. In 2014, she filed her lawsuit making state law claims for breach of contract and fraud.
Federal Judge Mark Cohen of the Northern District of Georgia dismissed the breach of contract claims after Wallace "failed to comply with the court's order that she amend her complaint to allege facts showing that she was a real party in interest" to the contract.
"Cousins moved for summary judgment on Wallace's fraud claim, contending that there was no genuine dispute about the truthfulness of his statement that he was willing and able to facilitate Prince's performance at the trade show," the appellate opinion explained.
District Judge Cohen had agreed, dismissing the case in 2017. He later turned down Cousins' request for attorney fees, finding no evidence of bad faith on the plaintiffs' part. In upholding the district court's ruling, the appellate panel said: "Wallace has not carried her burden of setting forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine dispute about whether Cousins' statement that he was willing and able to facilitate Prince's performance at the trade show was false."
"That Cousins promptly emailed the details of the planned performance to one of Prince's representatives suggests that he was willing to get the gig going from the get-go," the appellate opinion noted. "And the follow-up communications between Cousins and Prince's representatives undermine Wallace's claim that Cousins did not have the ability to do so."
Wallace's fraud claim thus could not be supported, the Eleventh Circuit reasoned.
*****
Greg Land is a Reporter for The Daily Report, an ALM Atlanta-based sibling publication of Entertainment Law & Finance.
|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
How Secure Is the AI System Your Law Firm Is Using?
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.
COVID-19 and Lease Negotiations: Early Termination Provisions
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.
Pleading Importation: ITC Decisions Highlight Need for Adequate Evidentiary Support
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.
The Power of Your Inner Circle: Turning Friends and Social Contacts Into Business Allies
Practical strategies to explore doing business with friends and social contacts in a way that respects relationships and maximizes opportunities.
Authentic Communications Today Increase Success for Value-Driven Clients
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.