SDNY Judge Tosses Copyright Suit Against Jerry Seinfeld Over 'Comedians in Cars' Series
U.S. District Judge Alison J. Nathan ruled Monday that the suit by Christian Charles, a writer and director who worked with Seinfeld on the show's pilot, was barred under the three-year statute of limitations for copyright infringement claims.
October 01, 2019 at 02:08 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on New York Law Journal
Jerry Seinfeld has won a copyright lawsuit against a former collaborator who claimed to have come up with the idea for the hit series "Comedians in Cars Getting Coffee."
U.S. District Judge Alison J. Nathan of the Southern District of New York ruled Monday that the suit by Christian Charles, a writer and director who worked with Seinfeld on the show's pilot, was barred under the three-year statute of limitations for copyright infringement claims.
In a nine-page ruling, Nathan said that Charles knew about his potential claim for ownership as early as 2011, when Seinfeld twice rejected his request for back-end compensation on "Comedians in Cars," making it clear that Charles' only involvement was on a work-for-hire basis.
But Charles, who claimed to have pitched the idea of two friends "driving and talking" to Seinfeld, did not file his lawsuit until February 2018.
According to court documents, Charles worked up a treatment and shot a pilot with Seinfeld when the comedian began developing the show in 2012. The two later had a falling out over Charles' demands for compensation and ownership. Though he was eventually paid nearly $108,00 for his work, Charles had no further involvement with the show.
Charles said in court filings that between 2012 and 2014, he "maintained a reasonable and good faith belief" that Seinfeld would eventually acknowledge his ownership and "bring him in" on the show, which debuted as a popular web series on the streaming service Crackle.
In wasn't until Netflix inked a lucrative deal to bring the show onto its platform in 2017 that Seinfeld's lawyer told Charles directly that Seinfeld was the sole creator and owner of the show, he said.
However, Nathan said that Seinfeld's early rejections were enough to put Charles on notice of his copyright claims, and it was clear that Seinfeld went on to produce the show without him.
"Even if all inferences are drawn in favor of Charles, a reasonably diligent plaintiff would have understood that Seinfeld was repudiating any claim of ownership that Charles may have," Nathan wrote.
"Because Charles was on notice that his ownership claim had been repudiated since at least 2012, his infringement claim is time-barred," she said.
Orin Snyder, a Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher partner who represented Seinfeld, called the ruling "complete vindication" for his client.
"Jerry created 'Comedians in Cars' and this lawsuit was nothing but a money-grab seeking to capitalize on the success of the show," Snyder said in a statement. "We are pleased that the court saw through the noise and dismissed the case."
Peter Skolnik, who represented Charles, said in a strongly worded statement that he intended to appeal the decision.
"The only thing that has protected Mr. Seinfeld—so far—from having to answer for his arrogant and unprincipled theft of Christian Charles's property is the district court's mistaken analysis of the applicable statute of limitations," said Skolnik, of Clark Guldin in Montclair, New Jersey.
Seinfeld was represented by Snyder and David M. Kusnetz of Gibson Dunn in New York.
The case was captioned Charles v. Seinfeld.
Read More:
Seinfeld Wants Copyright Suit Over 'Comedians In Cars' Kicked to the Curb
Composer Ennio Morricone Wins Rights to Italian Film Scores
Commonly Used Copyright Assignment Language Is Invalidated by Third Circuit
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
© 2025 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 AllLitigators of the (Past) Week: Tackling a $4.7 Billion Verdict Post-Trial for the NFL in 'Sunday Ticket' Antitrust Litigation
Take-Two's Pete Welch on 'Getting the Best Results While Getting in the Way the Least'
Litigators of the Week: Kirkland Beats Videogame Copyright Claim From Lebron James' Tattoo Artist
Trending Stories
- 1Pogo Stick Maker Wants Financing Company to Pay $20M After Bailing Out Client
- 2Goldman Sachs Secures Dismissal of Celebrity Manager's Lawsuit Over Failed Deal
- 3Trump Moves to Withdraw Applications to Halt Now-Completed Sentencing
- 4Trump's RTO Mandate May Have Some Gov't Lawyers Polishing Their Resumes
- 5A Judge Is Raising Questions About Docket Rotation
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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