Category Archives: Supreme Court

Supreme Court – The latest news about Supreme Court from the Lawstarz Blog – Latest news and coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court.

Warner Bros. Can’t Dodge Sylvester Stallone’s Fraud Lawsuit

Sylvester Stallone has scored an early and significant ruling in his lawsuit against Warner Bros. over profits from the 1993 science-fiction film Demolition Man. Not only has a Los Angeles Superior Court judge rejected the studio’s bid to throw out breach of contract and fraud claims, but the actor is being permitted to bring a potentially big claim that Warners’ accounting practices are likely to deceive the public, including others in Hollywood with profit participation agreements.

Through his loan-out company Rogue Marble, Stallone filed his lawsuit in April.

“The motion picture studios are notoriously greedy,” stated the complaint. “This one involves outright and obviously intentional dishonesty perpetrated against an international iconic talent. Here, WB decided it just wasn’t going to account to Rogue Marble on the Film. WB just sat on the money owed to Rogue Marble for years and told itself, without any justification, that Rogue Marble was not owed any profits.”

According to the lawsuit, Warner Bros. initially asserted that nearly $67 million was unrecouped on Demolition Man and therefore nothing was owed to Stallone, who was to get 15 to 20 percent of defined profits on the film. After being challenged, the studio sent Stallone a check for $2.82 million. The actor wasn’t satisfied.

There are many legal actions targeting “Hollywood accounting,” including the must-watch one from Frank Darabont over The Walking Dead. What makes Stallone’s case provocative — besides an A-list actor suing the same studio that distributed 2015’s Creed, which earned Stallone an Oscar nomination — is a claim of unfair business practices.

Full Read – http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/warner-bros-cant-dodge-sylvester-stallones-fraud-lawsuit-1026520

Disney Accused of Illegally Tracking Children Via Apps in New Lawsuit

A San Francisco mom says her child was illegally tracked while using the Disney Princess Palace Pets app.

Amanda Rushing, on behalf of her child referred to as “L.L.,” is suing The Walt Disney Company, Disney Electronic Content and others in a proposed class action filed Thursday in California federal court.

Rushing claims an advertising-specific software development kit is surreptitiously embedded in the code for the app, and that’s how Disney is collecting personal information and tracking online behavior.

“App developers and their SDK-providing partners can track children’s behavior while they play online games with their mobile devices by obtaining critical pieces of data from the mobile devices, including ‘persistent identifiers,’ typically a unique number linked to a specific mobile device,” writes attorney Michael Sobol in the complaint. “These persistent identifiers allow SDK providers to detect a child’s activity across multiple apps and platforms on the internet, and across different devices, effectively providing a full chronology of the child’s actions across devices and apps. This information is then sold to various third-parties who sell targeted online advertising.”

Full Read – http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/disney-accused-illegally-tracking-children-apps-new-lawsuit-1026881

O.J. SIMPSON STERN & EMOTIONAL … at Parole Board Hearing

O.J. Simpson had no problem getting tough while addressing Nevada’s Parole Board Commissioners … but he was also overcome with emotion.

The NFL Hall of Famer was granted parole by unanimous decision Thursday but not before an intense hearing that also included some chuckles from the board.

The 70-year-old NFL Hall of Famer addressed Nevada’s Board of Parole Commissioners via video conference. The earliest he can be released from Lovelock Correctional Center is October 1.

He’s served 9 years of his 33 year prison sentence.

He was acquitted of murdering his ex-wife, Nicole Brown Simpson, and Ron Goldman — and many legal experts feel his 33 year sentence was payback for the controversial murder trial verdict. That event, the board said, did not factor in its decision to grant parole.

Super Talkative in Court LEMME TALK TO ALL MY LAWYERS!!!

Suge Knight talked up a storm in court Thursday, begging a judge to let him talk to ALL his lawyers but the judge made it clear — his hands are tied.

The former rap mogul went on a diatribe, the likes of which we haven’t seen since he was arrested on murder charges in January 2015.

Suge was complaining he was not given access to his full team of lawyers and therefore couldn’t adequately prepare for trial. We won’t bore you with the legal mumbo jumbo, but this judge said he didn’t have the power to unleash Suge’s full legal team … another judge has to do that.

It’s interesting to hear Suge … he’s super engaged in the legal process.

Sourced From – http://www.tmz.com/2017/07/06/suge-knight-courtroom-lawyers-murder-robbery-case/

Should Avvo’s Legal Services Be Considered An Ethical Form Of Fee Splitting?

Avvo has argued that the fee-splitting prohibition could be a violation of the First Amendment.

A few days ago, three committees appointed by the New Jersey Supreme Court jointly ruled that its lawyers cannot participate in Avvo’s Legal Services program because it engages in unethical fee splitting with non-lawyers.

Avvo’s Legal Services program works like this: A lawyer who signs up for the program will have a chance to be connected to a client seeking a 15-minute consultation. The client pays $39.95 to Avvo which is deposited to the attorney’s bank account. Soon after, in a separate transaction, Avvo debits $10 from the attorney’s bank account as an “marketing fee” for that client.

Does the above make Avvo’s Legal Services program a fee-splitting scheme? Yes. You can call it a “marketing fee” or some other name that doesn’t include the words “fee split with non-lawyers.” But it does not change the fact that a lawyer is getting paid and a non-lawyer is getting a cut of that pay. And it’s not just New Jersey that thinks this way. The state bar ethics committees of Ohio, Pennsylvania, and South Carolina also ruled that this was impermissible fee splitting. I am very confident that other states will rule the same way.

Some argued that this system is no different than a credit card processing company charging a fee based on a percentage of the money received from a credit card transaction. There is a big distinction. The credit card processing company is not providing the clients. The processing company does not care whether the client is happy with the lawyer’s service. Avvo sets up a caller with an attorney. I do not know how Avvo matches up callers with attorneys, but I think it’s safe to assume that if callers are consistently unhappy with a particular attorney, that attorney will stop getting connections.

Full Article – http://abovethelaw.com/2017/06/should-avvos-legal-services-be-considered-an-ethical-form-of-fee-splitting/?rf=1