Christine L. Reed v. BMG Entertainment; Windham Hill Records
Published: Nov. 21, 1998 | Result Date: Aug. 25, 1998 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: 401251 Verdict – $98,961
Judge
Court
San Mateo Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Neville L. Johnson
(Johnson & Johnson LLP)
Defendant
Thomas A. Myers
(AIDS HealthCare Foundation)
Experts
Plaintiff
Richard A. Johnson
(technical)
Facts
Plaintiff Christine Reed, a 50-year-old A&R executive, who signs and manages talent at a record label, moved from Milwaukee to Menlo Park, pursuant to a two-year agreement with Windham Hill, a new age label. As soon as she arrived, the label was in turmoil because media conglomerate BMG was exercising an option to buy out the 50 percent of the label it did not own. Approximately 50 staffers were let go from the Menlo Park label, which had been in existence for 20 years, and the company was relocated to Los Angeles. The plaintiff moved to Los Angeles. In Los Angeles, she claimed she was belittled ostracized and prevented from doing her job (such as signing artists to the label) by Steve Vining, the new president of Windham Hill, who wanted "his people" in key positions. After six months in Los Angeles, the plaintiff was told not to report to work any further, and her contract was paid off. The plaintiff brought this action against the defendant based on breach of contract and fraud theories of recovery. The court granted defendant's motion for summary judgment on plaintiff's claims that she was fraudulently induced to move and take the job, that the move was a breach of contract and that she was wrongfully terminated. Per defendant, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed her defamation claim on the first day of trial.
Settlement Discussions
The plaintiff made a settlement demand for $90,000. The defendant made an offer of $55,000, which at the time of trial was reduced to $25,000.
Other Information
The verdict was reached approximately one year and one month after the case was filed. A mediation was held on March 23, 1998, before Martin Quinn of JAMS, resulting in no settlement. Per the plaintiff, the jury colloquy with the judge after the verdict and on the record, stated that it did not find the defense witnesses credible. POST TRIAL MOTIONS: The defendant filed a motion for a new trial judgment notwithstanding the verdict and a motion to tax costs, and defendant Steve Vining submitted a memorandum of costs so the prevailing party against plaintiff, all of which were pending when plaintiff agreed she would not appeal the grant of defendant's motion for summary judgment on fraud and defendants agreed not to challenge plaintiff's submitted costs. The case thereafter settled.
Deliberation
one day
Poll
12-0 (per plaintiff), 9-3 (per defendant)
Length
five days
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390