Latest on MJJC

Raymone Bain is back, she files an appeal in her $44 Million lawsuit

Another case of a gold digger. I don't see this letter making much of a difference.

Together with Tohme Tohme they are asking for a mind boggling sum of $94 millions. $50m for Tohme and $44m to RB. In return MJ got nothing. absolutely nothing. they couldn't even file his taxes.
 
Last edited:
So this letter is going to make or break the case. I guess she needs the money to pay her taxes.
 
So does this mean tohme & bain had been working together?
 
Schedule set

APPELLANT Brief due 04/11/2013. Appendix due 04/11/2013.
APPELLEE Brief due on 05/13/2013.
APPELLANT Reply Brief due 05/28/2013
 
ivy said:
Schedule set

APPELLANT Brief due 04/11/2013. Appendix due 04/11/2013.
APPELLEE Brief due on 05/13/2013.
APPELLANT Reply Brief due 05/28/2013
Click to expand...

Didn't she file her brief already on 19 February?
 
^^

no that was about her finding a lawyer and telling why her appeal should not be dismissed.
 
Update: All of the briefs have been filed. Today (oct 21) the court has set a date for the oral arguments it is December 06, 2013, at 9:30 A.M. After the oral argument it will be waiting for a decision from the appellate court.
 
:bugeyed All these lawsuits and/or appeals are enough to drive anyone insane!! Nevertheless, thanks for posting to keep us updated, Ivy. :)
 
ivy said:
Update: All of the briefs have been filed. Today (oct 21) the court has set a date for the oral arguments it is December 06, 2013, at 9:30 A.M. After the oral argument it will be waiting for a decision from the appellate court.
Click to expand...

Ivy, could you quickly do a summary of the brief for us. I would like to know how the estate responded so far. the oral argument is pretty much a repeat of what the briefs say.
 
Bain's argument for appeal has been pretty much the same.

A short recap of everything :

Bain is hired by MJ, she later becomes more than a publicist and she has agreement of a 10% fee. There have been unpaid salaries etc, later she gets paid and she is asked to sign a release form that says MJ doesn't own her anything. She signs it. Bain in her motions say she believed it was only about the unpaid salaries debt and not a termination. Anyway soon after this her communications with Michael gets less and less and ends. She files a lawsuit against Michael, later the Estate for the 10% fee from many of the deals such as Thriller 25 and even TII.

Her lawsuit against Estate gets dismissed at summary judgment mainly based on the release form. Court rules that as she signed the form saying MJ doesn't own anything to her, there's no case.

After the decision Bain finds a letter that was faxed to her by MJ that said he did not know anything about a release form and he did not terminate her. She argued this was newly discovered evidence. The court did not agree and kept their summary judgment of dismissing the case.

In appeal Bain makes the same argument. She found the letter MJ sent her after the courts decision and court made an error by not allowing it as a newly discovered evidence. She also argues that

- Michael said to her he would not sign the release and the authenticity of his signature on the release is doubtful
- the release form was about past debt due and not the fees due after it was signed
- bain signed the release form under duress and fraud
- bain states she knew about the letter but could not find it and the file the letter was in (Sultan of Brunei file) was taken from her office by a consultant of MJ. Bain also states as she could not find it, she did not mention the letter in her motions.
- the consultant returns the file to her after the summary judgment and that's when she finds the letter and she asked the lower court to reverse its summary judgment based on that newly discovered evidence.
- Bain argues that the lower court made a mistake by not allowing the newly discovered evidence. Court said as Bain knew about the letter it cannot be considered as a "newly discovered".
- Bain also argues that she showed due diligence in searching for the letter however the court disagreed as she did not notify the court about the missing letter. Court stated she should have told the court the existence of the letter and ask time to locate it.
- Bain also blames (and also sued) her lawyers claiming they made mistakes.

Estate's reply brief includes

- Bain knew about the alleged letter but never mentioned it.
- known letter cannot be "newly discovered". they state Bain admitted to knowing about the letter and just did not know its whereabouts.so she could and should have mentioned the letter.
- the consultant who has taken away the file from her office is never identified
- the consultant did not provide an affidavit confirming how and when the file was taken from Bain's office.
- a reasonable person would have asked the consultant who took away some files if the letter was in the files or at least notify the court about the letters existence and ask time for discovery of it.
- letter is faxed so it's authenticity isn't determined. Origin, source of transmission and MJ's signature is not authenticated.
- letter might not make any difference to the outcome of the case. MJ's letter doesn't cancel the release, it just states he denies the knowledge of the release. Estate states that not only Bain signed the release but received the money mentioned in the release.
- Estate questions Bain's version of events. In her affidavit she writes both "in her wildest imagination she would not suspect the box containing information about houses" would include the letter but in other parts she state she looked for Sultan of Brueni file. (Michael's letter also mentions Sultan's house)
- Bain claims a real estate consultant have removed the files to look over the houses in 2008 and returned them in 2010. Estate states that Bain never contacted the consultant to ask for the files, never contacted MJ (when alive) or MJ Lawyers to ask if they still have a copy of the letter and never notified the court and ask for courts help and time to locate the letter.

Bain's reply consists of

- detailed arguments about what is "newly discovered"
- arguing Bain showed due diligence in searching for the letter
- argues that the letter is authenticated through Bain's statements and no contrary evidence is presented by the Estate
- argues that the letter states Michael never signed the release and therefore it would make a huge impact on the case

and so on. I guess this will be enough to give an idea
 
Thanks very much Ivy for your summary, great job.

"After the decision Bain finds a letter that was faxed to her by MJ that said he did not know anything about a release form and he did not terminate her."

Basically she could have made up the whole letter by herself or with someone?
"letter is faxed so it's authenticity isn't determined. Origin, source of transmission and MJ's signature is not authenticated."

I quess MJ had a signature stamp, and she could have had access to it, and how they are going to find out the source of transmission in these times when faxes are made redundant?
 
this is the letter btw, it was posted on the first page with the basic summary of the appeal

348t1y8.jpg
 
chances of winning an appeal is 20-25%.
 
I'm sick and tired of all this. No one should be getting a single dime of Michael's blood money anymore.
 
Oral arguments have been completed last friday (december 6th). Now we wait.
 
First of all this fax would not fly with me as proof of anything, I'm sure as his publicist she had his signature stamp and Xerox machines do wonders (kids used to Xerox dollar bills and use them in our school vending machines until they updated them).
Second of all how much money did she generate for Michael Jackson that her share would be $44 million. He would not have been cash strapped if she was bringing him in that much income.
 
pug said:
First of all this fax would not fly with me as proof of anything, I'm sure as his publicist she had his signature stamp and Xerox machines do wonders (kids used to Xerox dollar bills and use them in our school vending machines until they updated them).
Second of all how much money did she generate for Michael Jackson that her share would be $44 million. He would not have been cash strapped if she was bringing him in that much income.
Click to expand...


This is one time that the widely held belief that MJ was broke can be a benefit.
 
Firm Seeks To Ax Michael Jackson Publicist's Malpractice Suit

Share us on:TwitterFacebookLinkedInBy Linda Chiem 0 Comments

Law360, New York (June 27, 2013, 3:31 PM ET) -- Florida-based law firm Gary Williams Parenti Watson & Gary PL asked a Washington federal court Wednesday to toss a $300 million malpractice suit launched by Michael Jackson's former publicist alleging it bungled her underlying suit against the late pop star, costing her millions in owed payments.

The law firm, its founder Willie E. Gary and former partner Linnes Finney Jr. filed a motion to dismiss celebrity publicist Raymone K. Bain’s malpractice suit for failure to state a claim, saying it’s substantively flawed. They contend that Bain’s suit merely speculates that she might have won her underlying breach of contract suit against Jackson and MJJ Productions Inc. if her lawyers at Gary Williams had presented proper evidence, amended her suit or at least filed a prompt appeal after it was dismissed on summary judgment in 2010.

“The core premise of Bain’s legal malpractice claim is not only speculative on its face, it is also flatly contradicted by the indisputable documentary record,” the motion said.

The firm and the lawyers contend that Bain couldn’t prove a viable legal malpractice claim on grounds that they didn’t tell the court about a April 24, 2008, letter signed by Jackson — which Bain only found after her underlying suit was dismissed — in which the pop star allegedly told Bain that he neither authorized nor signed any release that discharged the Jackson parties from any future claims and payments owed to her.

“Bain cannot demonstrate a causal relationship between the negligence and the harm she suffered as required to advance a viable legal malpractice claim,” the motion said. “Bain makes no allegations that the affidavits filed by the Gary defendants on her behalf in response to the motion for summary judgment were insufficient in any way. Other than speculation, her only argument is that the April 24th letter would have changed the outcome but as articulated herein, that argument fails.”

In the underlying suit filed in May 2009, Bain sued Jackson and MJJ Productions Inc. claiming she was entitled to a 10 percent finder’s fee for a number of deals she negotiated for Jackson, including a deal to release a 25th anniversary edition of the King of Pop's signature album “Thriller.” Jackson died in June 2009. Her suit was dismissed on summary judgment in May 2010 after a judge ruled she had signed the release containing a $488,000 payment that precluded her contract claims.

Last month, Bain sued her lawyers at Gary Williams for legal malpractice, claiming they failed to include important evidence in their arguments and their negligence lost her the case.

Counsel for Bain was not immediately available for comment on Thursday.

Bain is represented by Steven M. Pavsner of Joseph Greenwald & Laake PA.

The defendants are represented by Karl L. Chen of Chen Law PLLC and Sheryl Wood of The Wood Law Firm PLLC.

The case is Raymone K. Bain v. Gary Williams Parenti Watson & Gary PL et al., case No. 1:13-cv-00848, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

http://www.law360.com/articles/453694/firm-seeks-to-ax-michael-jackson-publicist-s-malpractice-suit
 
Hey wait a minute!! "Last month, Bain sued her lawyers at Gary Williams for legal malpractice: I did not realize she was suing her lawyers? So she is involved in an appeal for the 44 million, is suing her lawyers, and has to pay the IRS a hefty sum. This woman is very active. I guess the 2 cases are to help with the taxes.
 
So basically the estate could be off the hook without doing anything as she is accusing her own lawyers for malpractice. If judge decides there was no legal malpractice, her case against the estate is out of appeals court? Am I right ivy?
 
Annita said:
How long has the court time for a decision. 90 days?
Click to expand...

This is a different district, different court, different rules, different caseloads. I checked their latest decisions and saw that they took between 2 to 5 months for a decision. Regardless I'm checking it regularly and I'll let everyone know as soon as there's decision.
 
This is so sad to see. I wish Michael was here to defend himselves.

Thank Ivy
 
Can someone give me a link to the complaint von Bain where she mentions the Thriller 25-contract with Sony she did for Michael ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top