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

[h=1]Michael Jackson's Former Publicist Can't Revive $44 Million Lawsuit[/h][h=2]An appeals court considered what to do about a "newly discovered" letter concerning the singer, his former rep and the Sultan of Brunei.[/h]Long before Hassanal Bolkiah, the Sultan of Brunei, spurred a Hollywood boycott of the Beverly Hills Hotel thanks to the institution of Sharia law in his tiny Southeast Asian nation, he enjoyed a special relationship with one Michael Jackson. In 1996, the pop star performed a concert to mark the Sultan's 50th birthday, and a year before Jackson's death, the singer came close to buying one of the Sultan's properties in Las Vegas.
<iframe src="http://rma-api.gravity.com/v1/api/intelligence/w2?sg=01b0b9ad501e0c849a822e6124ff0fc2&pl=24&ug=a0d0fc47375b6f846935b0fcbee183d6&b=21&ad=&sp=1400&sourceUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hollywoodreporter.com%2Fthr-esq%2Fmichael-jacksons-publicist-cant-revive-703590&frameUrl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hollywoodreporter.com%2Fthr-esq%2Fmichael-jacksons-publicist-cant-revive-703590&clientTime=1400003615117&pageViewId%5BwidgetLoaderWindowUrl%5D=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hollywoodreporter.com%2Fthr-esq%2Fmichael-jacksons-publicist-cant-revive-703590&pageViewId%5BtimeMillis%5D=1400003614832&pageViewId%5Brand%5D=4729888902656687" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="width: 100%; height: 291px; overflow: hidden; display: inline; opacity: 1;"></iframe>

STORY: Michael Jackson's 'Xscape': Finger Snaps and Familiar Material Without Queen and Justin Bieber
This latter fact was highlighted in an appeals court decision on Tuesday in a dispute between Jackson's former publicist Raymone Bain and the Michael Jackson Estate. At the center of D.C. Circuit Judge Sri Srinivasan's decision to disallow Bain from reviving a lawsuit is a letter found in a file labeled "The Sultan of Brunei Finance."
To back up, Bain was retained by Jackson in 2003 to be his spokesperson, performing duties such as arranging for the 25th anniversary edition of Thriller. Later, Bain became Jackson's general manager and according to a personal services agreement signed in 2006, she was to receive a 10-percent finder's fee of any agreement entered into by the singer due to the direct efforts of Bain.
In 2009, Bain sued Jackson and claimed to be owed compensation amounting to at least $44 million. One week before the singer died, Michael Jackson Productions filed a motion to dismiss; a district court rejected Bain's lawsuit based upon a 2007 "Payment and Release Agreement." The contract gave Bain $488,820 as "full and final satisfaction of any [and] all monies, known or unknown, to be owed to you."
Bain contended that it was a fraud or a mistake. She wanted an investigation into the authenticity of Jackson's signature, but the district judge wouldn't allow it and granted summary judgment in favor of Jackson.
In October 2010, a few months after that decision, Bain moved for relief from the judgment based on "newly discovered evidence." She had come into possession of a letter from Jackson to Bain stating, "I have never terminated your services nor did I null and void any of your Agreements. I know nothing about a release form. I neither authorized or signed the same. Therefore, I am authorizing you to continue to communicate with Mr. Yakoob regarding the Sultan's property in Las Vegas, and to continue your role as my General Manager and President/COO of The Michael Jackson Company."
AUDIO: Michael Jackson-Justin Timberlake Duet 'Love Never Felt So Good' Debuts
And why wasn't the letter presented to the court earlier?
According to Bain's affidavit, an unnamed real estate consultant who worked for the Michael Jackson Company had taken a collection of files from Bain's office and boxed them up. The consultant returned the box in the summer of 2010, after which Bain discovered the letter misfiled in the "Sultan of Brunei Finance" batch.
"Not in my wildest imagination did I suspect that a box containing documents relating to real properties would contain any material relating to my relationship or employment with Mr. Jackson before this Court," Bain explained to the judge. "I knew I had correspondence from Mr. Jackson, but I could not find it. I made a diligent search of all the records and files in my office. I did not know, nor was I able to look in the Sultan of Brunei&#8217;s file, which was in the possession of the consultant. I looked for this file for months, spending many, many hours looking into all of the files which were in my office, but it was no where [sic] to be found."
Despite the unearthed evidence, the judge refused to reconsider the prior judgment.
Bain appealed. In the appellate court's decision on Tuesday, Judge Srinivasan examines the epistemological nature of what happened. He points to Webster's definition of "discover" -- "to obtain for the first time sight or knowledge of" -- as well as added meaning by Merriam-Webster's -- "to detect the presence of."
Evidence lost, hidden or unavailable can qualify as "newly discovered," writes the judge, but on the other hand, "a party&#8217;s unannounced awareness of evidence can affect the assessment of whether it exercised the 'reasonable diligence'&#8221; required by law. In other words, Bain could have taken steps to find the lost letter if she knew it existed somewhere.
"Bain&#8217;s efforts to find her own copy of the letter did not relieve her of all responsibility to undertake reasonable efforts to obtain the original letter (or a separate copy) from Jackson, his estate, or his counsel," writes Judge Srinivasan. "And by failing to apprise the district court of the letter, Bain denied the court any opportunity to assist with locating it."
For that reason, the mysterious letter that had gone missing in a box concerning the relationship between the King of Pop and the Sultan of Brunei, does Bain no good. The district judge's order is affirmed. The publicist's best evidence is without any voice.
Email: Eriq.Gardner@THR.com
Twitter: @eriqgardner

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/michael-jacksons-publicist-cant-revive-703590
 
Now the title thread should be updated with a "dismmissed" note.
 
All Right. Bye Bye Bain. Another one gone, Next.



The thing is she never said, look I have a letter and I am going to look for it. If she knew about this letter all along how come she never mentioned what it entailed. Then, she comes in later with this letter which looks very suspicious to me. Anyway she has a book about michael coming out so she should be able to get some millions to pay off the taxes.
 
All Right. Bye Bye Bain. Another one gone, Next.



The thing is she never said, look I have a letter and I am going to look for it. If she knew about this letter all along how come she never mentioned what it entailed. Then, she comes in later with this letter which looks very suspicious to me. Anyway she has a book about michael coming out so she should be able to get some millions to pay off the taxes.

Who's going to buy that book? Her career is literally dead.
 
Courthouse News Service Wednesday, July 09, 2014Last Update: 7:51 AM PT
Win for Michael Jackson Estate Could Cost Firm
By NICK DIVITO


WASHINGTON (CN) - Michael Jackson's former publicist may prove that a law firm tanked her $44 million lawsuit by sitting on evidence she had to unearth from the grave, a federal judge ruled.
Central to the allegations is a deal that the King of Pop inked in May 2006 with his publicist Raymone Bain of Davis, Bain & Associates, who allegedly oversaw "damage control" for Jackson during his 2005 trial on child-molestation charges and brought the singer back from the brink of foreclosure in late 2007.
Bain said her 2006 contract entitled her to a 10 percent finder's fee if Jackson benefitted from any agreements or engagements made by Bain or her contacts, but she another deal with Jackson in December 2007 that releasing "Jackson from any liability to her in excess of $488, 820.05."
Two months after Jackson announced a series of comeback concerts called "This Is It" in March 2009, Bain filed suit for her 10 percent. The $44 million complaint in Washington also sought payment for arranging the 25th anniversary edition of Jackson's best-selling album "Thriller."
Jackson moved to dismiss the case just seven days before his drug overdose on June 25, 2009 at the age of 50.
Bain, then represented by Cahn & Samuels, fought to keep the case going, but it was stayed pending the appointment of an executor for Jackson's estate.
When the stay was lifted in November 2009, Cahn & Samuels withdrew as Bain's counsel and she hired the law firm of Gary, Williams, Parenti, Watson & Sperando.
U.S. District Judge James Robertson ruled for Jackson's estate in May 2010, and the Gary firm did not move for reconsideration or file an appeal.
Bain returned to court that October, seeking to set aside the judgment based on an April 2008 letter she had purportedly just unearthed,
In the letter Jackson tells Bain that he had no awareness of, and had never signed, the December 2007 release agreement. Bain said she had only discovered the letter in August 2010 when a consultant for Michael Jackson Co. returned it among a box of files taken from her office.
The court said Bain had failed to exercise due diligence in retrieving the letter, however, and denied her request for relief under Rule 60(b)(2).
While her appeal was pending, Bain sued the Gary firm for legal malpractice because it failed to amend her complaint to include details of the letter, failed to "marshal additional facts and evidence," never told the court about the letter, didn't keep her apprised of her case and didn't timely file a motion for reconsideration or an appeal.
Though the firm said Bain cannot prove that the letter would have helped her win the case against Jackson's estate, U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth ruled Monday that it is the defendants who lack "facts to support their assertion."
The seven-page opinion in Washington points to the D.C. Circuit's recent opinion affirming dismissal of Bain's claims against the Jackson estate.
In doing so, the appellate panel had "relied entirely upon the failure of Ms. Bain to inform the court of the letter's existence."
"It is therefore not speculation to infer that, assuming the truth of all facts asserted by Ms. Bain, the Gary Firm's erroneous advice caused the loss of Ms. Bain's claim," Lamberth wrote.
The firm also argued that Bain never told them about the letter, and that a partner at Willie Gary never promised to move for reconsideration or appeal as Bain claimed.
Lamberth disagreed, however, that such "fundamental questions of fact" support the firm's motion to dismiss.
Jackson's death kept him from his long-sought comeback, but Forbes named him the top-earning dead celebrity in 2013. In addition to profits from Jackson's music and the Beatles hits that make up his half of the Sony/ATV catalog, Jackson's estate also sees income from two Cirque du Soleil shows. The singer's image is put to work as well with his hologram-like image making a splash at the 2014 Billboard Music Awards.
The years have been less kind to Bain who pleaded guilty in June 2011 to two counts of failing to file tax returns, and cheating the government out of at least $200,000.
Jackson's doctor, Conrad Murray, was convicted that same year of involuntary manslaughter and was sentenced to four years in jail.

http://www.courthousenews.com/2014/07/09/69370.htm
 
I wonder what is the truth of this Bain story? Is this letter ligit? Did Michael fire her and then claim he did not fire her?
 
I'm not surprised. This case has been bouncing in and out of court for years. What a shame.
 
Last edited:
^^

this latest has nothing to do with Estate. Estate won the lawsuit and Appeal is over. So Bain won't be getting anything from Estate for this claim. (she has a second one in probate court)

this last thing is between Bain and her lawyers who she sued for malpractice - basically making her lose the case. Personally who cares what happens between her and her lawyers?
 
^^

this latest has nothing to do with Estate. Estate won the lawsuit and Appeal is over. So Bain won't be getting anything from Estate for this claim. (she has a second one in probate court)

this last thing is between Bain and her lawyers who she sued for malpractice - basically making her lose the case. Personally who cares what happens between her and her lawyers?

Thanks ivy.
 
All Right. Bye Bye Bain. Another one gone, Next.



The thing is she never said, look I have a letter and I am going to look for it. If she knew about this letter all along how come she never mentioned what it entailed. Then, she comes in later with this letter which looks very suspicious to me. Anyway she has a book about michael coming out so she should be able to get some millions to pay off the taxes.



Alright this should be the end of this thread no more can be said bye Bain.
 
Back
Top