box1 header1
Entry Detail
Terms of Use The data on this site is for education, insights, and entertainment, and is not to be used for commercial purposes. If you want to use content for noncommercial purposes, be kind and give us due credit. To read the full Terms of Use, click here.
Options Conduct New Search
Copy Permalink to this Item
 
Bing's Company Wants Royalties
Highest Court California Court of Appeal
Year Ended 2008
Plaintiffs Business Entity of Artist(s)
Family of Artist(s)
Trust of Artist(s)
Defendants GRP Records
MCA Records
Universal Records
Universal Studios
Other Crosby, Bing
Short Description HLC Properties, the corporation responsible for the business interests, intellectual property rights, and general commercial exploitation of Bing Crosby's career, sued MCA Records and associated entities for numerous counts arising from the latter breaching recording contracts entered with Bing over the years. They alleged breach of contract, implied covenants, and fiduciary duties, as well as numerous equitable remedies. During discovery, Plaintiffs claimed attorney-client privilege transferred from Bing Crosby to HLC Properties, while Defendants claimed Bing's privilege attached to his estate; HLC could not claim the privilege, since it did not apply to them. The court agreed with Defendants, holding the initial privilege attached to Bing personally, and not HLC, thus HLC could not claim attorney client privilege regarding documents exchanged between Bing and his attorneys. After discovery, the court granted summary judgment regarding certain claims, such as breach of fiduciary duties, in Defendants' favor, but decided contractual breach theories on the merits, without a jury, in Plaintiffs' favor. The appellate court found that, while the summary adjudication had been correctly granted, the contract claims were legal in nature, not equitable, and thus Plaintiffs' claims, even though decided in Plaintiffs' favor, nevertheless should have been tried before a jury, as Plaintiff claimed. Those issues were remanded for retrial according to proper procedures. - LSW

Legal Issues
Civil Procedure Privileges Attorney-Client Privilege & Work Product Doctrine
Contracts Breach Payment & Performance
Copyrights Ownership Assignments, Licenses & Renewal Rights


Opinions HLC Properties, Ltd., v. MCA Records, Inc.
2008 WL 2068155
California Court of Appeal , May 16, 2008 ( No. B191608 )


HLC Properties, Ltd., v. MCA Records, Inc.
35 Cal. 4th 54
Supreme Court of California , February 14, 2005 ( No. S120332 )


HLC Properties, Ltd., v. MCA Records, Inc.
4 Cal. Rptr. 3d 898
California Court of Appeal , September 29, 2003 ( No. B167458 )


HLC Properties, Ltd., v. MCA Records, Inc.
7 Cal.Rptr.3d 779
Supreme Court of California , December 23, 2003 ( No. S120332 )


Errors Do you see something that is not correct?
The Discography is an ongoing project. Some entries in the database are displayed in various stages of completion. If you see spelling or grammar issues, they are likely to be corrected in the near future as they're noticed by editors (they're on the "To Do" list, we promise). But If you notice errors regarding facts, legal conclusions, or other information, please contact us to let us know. We've done our best, but can't assure perfection. Thank you.


Related Searches Parties
Business Entity of Artist(s) ( Plaintiff )
Crosby, Bing ( Other )
Family of Artist(s) ( Plaintiff )
GRP Records ( Defendant )
MCA Records ( Defendant )
Trust of Artist(s) ( Plaintiff )
Universal Records ( Defendant )
Universal Studios ( Defendant )

Legal Issues
Civil Procedure / Privileges / Attorney-Client Privilege & Work Product Doctrine
Contracts / Breach / Payment & Performance
Copyrights / Ownership / Assignments, Licenses & Renewal Rights

Courts
California Court of Appeal (highest court)
Supreme Court of California


permalink to this entry