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
 
Phil Spector vs. Leiber & Stoller
Highest Court S.D. New York
Year Ended 1989
Plaintiffs Music Publisher(s)
Defendants Music Publisher(s)
Other Leiber & Stoller
Spector, Phil
Short Description Phil Spector isn't known for being easy to work with, and this lawsuit contains inklings of precisely why. Defendant is a music publisher (Trio) incorporated in 1960 by Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller, the songwriting duo known colloquially as "Leiber & Stoller," who wrote some of the biggest hits of the mid-century R&B and rock n' roll industry, including "Hound Dog." Spector formed the Plaintiff company the same day he filed this lawsuit, though he'd previously operated one legitimate company under the same name and feigned others at various times. The lawsuit related to a contract between the parties from 1972, in which Leiber & Stoller agreed to pay Spector royalties on certain songs they composed, such as "Why Don't They Let Us Fall In Love" and "Da Do Run Run." That contract was between the original Mother Bertha and Trio, not Spector's current company. Defendants sought to dismiss, alleging either Plaintiff was incorporated solely for diversity jurisdiction or the original entity had continued as a de factor corporation and thus the new entity could not confer jurisdiction. The court, however, refused both theories, and allowed litigation to proceed. Spector had at least facially-valid explanations for his incorporation. If it later comes out Spector did indeed incorporate to fabricate diversity, it will be relevant then. - LSW

Legal Issues
Business Associations Corporations Formation, Operation & Dissolution
Conflicts of Law Jurisdiction & Forum Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Contracts Breach Payment & Performance
Copyrights Ownership Assignments, Licenses & Renewal Rights


Opinions Mother Bertha Music, Inc. v. Trio Music Co., Inc.
717 F. Supp. 157
S.D. New York , July 07, 1989 ( No. 88 Civ. 8577 (JMW) )


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
Leiber & Stoller ( Other )
Music Publisher(s) ( Plaintiff )
Music Publisher(s) ( Defendant )
Spector, Phil ( Other )

Legal Issues
Business Associations / Corporations / Formation, Operation & Dissolution
Conflicts of Law / Jurisdiction & Forum / Subject Matter Jurisdiction
Contracts / Breach / Payment & Performance
Copyrights / Ownership / Assignments, Licenses & Renewal Rights

Courts
S.D. New York (highest court)


permalink to this entry