Latest on MJJC

Demann - MJ Estate / Former Michael Jackson Manager Pursuing Estate Over Commissions

no. up to this point their arguments have been technical such as he did not file a creditors claim on time. Demann convinced the judge and now it'll go on and probably the judge will consider which accounting - if any- he would allow Demann to see.
 
The problem I have with these judges, is that there are laws about when things should take place, & then they go against these if the person gives a good argument.
 
Last edited:
^^Thanks Ivy. Sorry but I have another question. How would a jury trial help the estate?
 
The latest according to case proceedings
03/13/2014 at 01:30 pm in Department 5, Michael I. Levanas, Presiding
Conference-Case Management - Case Taken Under Submission

I don;t know what that means but it is still going on.

There is a hearing regarding Arons case today.
 
BP117321 1004 JACKSON, MICHAEL JOSEPH - DECEDENT
LETTERS OF ADMINISTR
APPROVAL - SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

Petitioner(s): BRANCA, JOHN MCCLAIN, JOHN

Attorney(s): COHEN, JERYLL S., ESQ.

Continuance Number: 1 Continuance From: Tuesday, July 8, 2014

Last Date Changed: Tuesday, July 22, 2014 04:02 PM

Last Note Changed By: MGUAYANT

To clear probate notes "filed documents" must be submitted to Rm 258, within time frames set forth in Rule 4.4(b) of LASC Rules. You may contact the Probate Attorney whose E-Mail address appears at the end of these notes, subject to compliance with all conditions governing the use of Interactive E-Mail. E-mail Rules are available in Rm 258 and on the Court's web site at www.LASuperiorCourt.org.

Petition filed 5/13/14

PRIOR ORDERS: Cont to 7/24/14 (Court's tentative ruling is to GRANT the petition and approve the settlement. Probate Note A cleared)

SUMMARY:
Petnrs are co-extrs

OTHER CASES: N/A

FACTS: Proposed settlement agreement with DeMann Entertainment, Inc. purports to resolve litigation filed by DeMann against the extrs and their cross-complaint filed against DeMann concerning commissions under a management agreement.

MATTERS TO CLEAR:
a. Notice of hearing filed 6/24/14 sufficient? No supplement filed setting forth the names and addresses of the parties who are entitled to receive notice of the petition (and special notice/copy) filed (as alleged in paragraph 14) - CLEARED PER PRIOR ORDERS ABOVE

RELIEF:
1. JTD approving of and authorizing the Executors to enter the Agreement on behalf of the Estate and to take all actions necessary in order to implement its terms

PA COMMENTS: See Motion to Seal at calendar #0015.
(settlement agreement filed with the Court conditionally under seal)

mosborne@lasuperiorcourt.org MO(7/1)MG(7/22)
RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION:
RELATED ITEMS: 1001-1005

Order to be Prepared By Clerk: Attorney:




Department LA 51 Court Convened at: 08:30 AM 07/24/2014
Honorable
, Deputy County Clerk , Deputy Sheriff
, Reporter

BP117321 1005 JACKSON, MICHAEL JOSEPH - DECEDENT
LETTERS OF ADMINISTR
MOTION - OTHER

Petitioner(s): BRANCA, JOHN MCCLAIN, JOHN

Attorney(s): COHEN, JERYLL S., ESQ.

Continuance Number: Continuance From:

Last Date Changed: Tuesday, July 22, 2014 03:58 PM

Last Note Changed By: MGUAYANT

To clear probate notes "filed documents" must be submitted to Rm 429, within time frames set forth in Rule 4.4 (b) of LASC Rules. You may contact the Probate Attorney or Probate Examiner whose E-Mail address appears at the end of these notes, subject to compliance with all conditions governing the use of Interactive E-Mail. E-mail Rules are available on the Court's web site at www.LASuperiorCourt.org.

Motion to Seal Settlement Agreement filed 7/07/14; set for hearing on 9/29/14; advanced to 7/08/14 & continued to 7/24/14.
 
Motion to seal settlement:^^ I wish we could find out the details in these settlements, like how much money the plaintiffs will get. I guess this guy leaves with some millions.
 
I don't understand why there's going to be a settlement. He didn't file a creditors claim on time. Why settle?
 
court had allowed his late claim to move forward and this was going to trial. I think that's why settlement happened.
 
Does this mean that depending on the state late claims are allowed. Sometimes I don't understand the courts. I guess there was some circumstance or law that allowed the late claim to be recognized.
 
On what basis was his late claim allowed? I'm interested in this from the aspect of the Robson case.

ETA: Okay, I found it in the article on the previous page:

Judge Beckloff expressed doubts as to whether DeMann could file a late creditor’s claim, given how much time has passed in the litigation.

California Probate Code Section 9000 requires a creditor to file a claim within four months of the appointment of an estate’s executors. It defines a claim as a demand for payment “whether due, not due, accrued or not accrued, or contingent, and whether liquidated or unliquidated.”

But DeMann’s attorney Stephen M. Lowe said he could not have made a demand for payment at the time of Jackson’s death because the contracts for the video game and other posthumous reuses of the singer’s work did not exist yet.

“You shouldn’t allow a technical defect — if there is even a defect — to block the allowance of a cause of action,” Lowe said at Tuesday’s hearing.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I always say that this management job is good business. You work with a guy in the 70's and after he dies you can still earn money from the deceased current ventures. Basically he just has to sit back and let the estate managers use their brains to figure out new deals, and if it involves any of the work he worked on with Michael decades ago, he gets a check.
 
I wonder how come other Michael's former managers didn't sue the estate on the same grounds than Demann?

There was Dileo, Ron W, Sandy G,Dieter W and so on.
 
That odd but you could be right maybe their didn't have the same contract with Michael or maybe their just didn't want to sue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top