Movie moguls sue Warner Brothers for “Hobbit” breach of contract
The contract says the Weinsteins and Miramax are owed receipts on the first motion picture based on each book, but not on remakes.
December 13, 2013 at 06:56 AM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
We all know The Hobbit, that Tolkien classic where a ragtag group of down-on-their-luck beings travel long ways to finally realize their dream and file a $75 million breach of contract claim in New York Supreme Court.
Haven't heard that version of the story? Well, movie moguls Harvey and Ben Weinstein are looking to change the narrative just as “The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug” hits movie theaters worldwide.
The Weinsteins and their former company Miramax Co., filed suit in court, saying that Time Warner Inc.-owned Warner Brothers owes them $75 million in damages for the final two “Hobbit” movies in the trilogy. Warner Brothers, meanwhile, claims that they do not owe any funds.
While headed by the Weinsteins, Miramax originally owned the big screen rights to both Tolkien's Hobbit and Lord of the Rings tales. In 1998, the company decided to sell the rights to Warner Brothers for $11.8 million plus 5 percent of the movies' gross receipts. When the Weinsteins left Miramax and founded their own Weinstein Co., Miramax agreed to give half of those receipts to the two brothers.
Through the agreement, Miramax and the Weinsteins received $90 million for the Lord of the Rings movies and $25 million for the first Hobbit movie, according to The Wall Street Journal.
However, the disagreement comes within language of the payment contract. The contract says the Weinsteins and Miramax are owed receipts on the “first motion picture” based on each book, but not on “remakes.” However, nothing in the language stipulates what happens when a single book is split into multiple movies, such as what is happening with the Hobbit series.
Naturally, the Weinsteins want a piece of the action, but Warner Brothers views the second and third movies as remakes. According to the WSJ, Warner Brothers is attempting to keep the case out of court and have it be settled by an independent arbitrator.
Breach of contract suits are common in the legal industry, and InsideCounsel has the biggest ones covered:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCoinbase Hit With Antitrust Suit That Seeks to Change How Crypto Exchanges Operate
3 minute readBaker Botts' Biopharma Client Sues Former In-House Attorney, Others Alleging Extortion Scheme
Trending Stories
- 1'Largest Retail Data Breach in History'? Hot Topic and Affiliated Brands Sued for Alleged Failure to Prevent Data Breach Linked to Snowflake Software
- 2Former President of New York State Bar, and the New York Bar Foundation, Dies As He Entered 70th Year as Attorney
- 3Legal Advocates in Uproar Upon Release of Footage Showing CO's Beat Black Inmate Before His Death
- 4Longtime Baker & Hostetler Partner, Former White House Counsel David Rivkin Dies at 68
- 5Court System Seeks Public Comment on E-Filing for Annual Report
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250