Judge Rejects DeLorean Estate's Claim for 'Back to the Future' Royalties
A federal judge found the estate for John DeLorean signed over rights to proceeds of the contract with Universal when it settled an earlier lawsuit.
October 15, 2018 at 03:39 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on New Jersey Law Journal
A Newark, New Jersey, federal judge has rejected a claim by the widow of automobile executive John DeLorean for royalties paid by Universal Pictures for appearances by the iconic DeLorean sports car in its “Back to the Future” movie trilogy.
Sally DeLorean signed over her rights to proceeds of a contract with Universal when she settled a prior lawsuit relating to licensing of the DeLorean car's name, design and trademarks, the judge ruled.
The automaker's widow claimed in a lawsuit filed in April that she was entitled to proceeds of a 1989 agreement her late husband signed with Universal, in which he signed over rights to feature the DeLorean automobile in movies and related merchandising. The contract promised the company would pay him 5 percent of its net receipts from merchandising and commercial tie-ups in connection with the films.
In recent years Universal has licensed the Back to the Future name for Nike shoes and Lego play sets, among other things, plaintiffs claim.
A previous suit filed by the automaker's widow in the District of New Jersey in 2014, in which she sought to prevent licensing of the car's name and logo by DeLorean Motor Co. of Humble, Texas, ended with a September 2015 settlement in which she released her claims in exchange for payment in an amount that was not made public. Her latest suit, filed on behalf of her late husband's estate, sought a declaration that she retained all rights stemming from the 1989 Universal agreement, and that she did not sign over any of those rights to the Texas company.
But U.S. District Chief Judge Jose Linares of the District of New Jersey ruled Oct. 12 that the 2015 settlement encompassed the subject matter of the Universal agreement. He cited the “overlap of the clear terms in both agreements,” such as the name DeLorean Motor Co., the DMC logo and the stylized word DeLorean. Linares noted that both the settlement and the Universal agreement pertain to the use of those names and trademarks in the context of manufacturing and merchandising of products displaying the DeLorean automobile's image and brand.
“Considering both agreements pertained to the merchandising of similar items associated with the DeLorean automobile's image, brand and related trademarks, as contemplated by the 2014 action and the clear language of the agreements, the court concludes that plaintiff's claims under the Universal agreement were incorporated in, and therefore barred by, the settlement agreement. Accordingly, plaintiff cannot state a claim for relief in connection with the Universal agreement as a matter of law, and the complaint must be dismissed,” Linares wrote.
R. Scott Thompson of Lowenstein Sandler, who represents Sally DeLorean, when asked about the ruling, said, “We're studying the opinion. We don't really understand some of what's in this opinion and we are, as best as we understand the opinion, planning on appealing.”
John DeLorean was an engineer at General Motors before he founded his own company and produced the DeLorean DMC-12 from 1981-83. The car, which had gull-wing doors and stainless steel body panels, was depicted as a time machine in the 1985 movie “Back to the Future,” as well as two sequels.
The Texas-based DeLorean Motor Co. sells used DeLorean cars as well as car parts and hats, notebooks and other merchandise bearing the carmaker's name and DMC logo. The company has also announced plans to construct new replicas of the two-seat DeLorean coupe, but the company's website says federal Clean Air Act regulations have gotten in the way of that plan.
The lawyer for the car company, William Mead Jr. of Litchfield Cavo in Cherry Hill, did not return a call seeking comment.
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 AllHolland & Knight Hires Former Davis Wright Tremaine Managing Partner in Seattle
3 minute readSupreme Court Reinstates Corporate Disclosure Law Pending Challenge
Trending Stories
- 1No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 2Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 3Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
- 4Lawyers' Phones Are Ringing: What Should Employers Do If ICE Raids Their Business?
- 5Freshfields Hires Ex-SEC Corporate Finance Director in Silicon Valley
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