Latest on MJJC

Why was Branca's 2003 firing letter on the web?

Maria MJ

Maria MJ

Proud Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
1,051
Points
0
Location
East Europe
I can't help wondering about that. By whose permission was it posted? If it was stolen it would have been removed.
So somebody wanted it out there.
Have we ever seen eg.the letter firing Dileo or Tohme or anyone else who was working for Mike under business capacity?
 
I'm not sure. I have never seen this letter. What website did you see it on?
 
The letter was one of the attachments of Joe's approx. 80 page objection against the executors, which is public record as it was filed in the probate proceeding, so I assume that's how.
 
Branca was rehired 1 week before MJ death. (Highly suspicious to me.)

Why we have to care about this letter ?

Jackson Family Claims MJ Fired Branca
Posted Oct 1st 2009 4:39PM by TMZ Staff
TMZ has learned an attorney acting on behalf of at least two members of Michael Jackson's family will go to court tomorrow and ask the judge to boot named co-executor John Branca from the case, but there's something they don't know.



Attorney Brian Oxman -- the lawyer who pops up from time to time in the Jackson saga -- says he has a document proving Jackson fired Branca.

Branca served as Jackson's lawyer on and off for 29 years. Sources connected to Branca freely admit Jackson fired the lawyer in 1990, but rehired him 3 years later. We're also told Branca quit Michael in 2006 because Jackson insisted on hiring "advisors" Branca believed would do great harm to MJ.

A month before Jackson died, he began conversations with Branca, saying he wanted him back in the fold. We've learned on June 17, eight days before Jackson died, Jackson signed a letter hiring Branca back as his lawyer.

Howard Weitzman, a lawyer for the estate, confirmed, "In mid-June, Michael Jackson retained John Branca to represent him as general and entertainment counsel in his business and personal affairs." Weitzman added, "The letter retaining Branca was shared with lawyers for Katherine Jackson very early in the probate proceedings."

Attorney Londell McMillan, who reps Katherine Jackson, tells TMZ "We will not comment on what we will do tomorrow." McMillan also had no comment on Brian Oxman, but did say he had "valuable information."


Read more: http://www.tmz.com/tag/john+branca/#ixzz0iqU8LKOB
 
does his rehiring really matter though. if he hadnt been rehired branca would still be an executor.it changes nothing in the scheme of things
 
elusive moonwalker said:
does his rehiring really matter though. if he hadnt been rehired branca would still be an executor.it changes nothing in the scheme of things
Click to expand...

You find this completly normal ?

If Branca wasnt rehired, they could have question the legimity of Branca and maybe lose the estate.
 
honeysucklejasmine said:
Not the greatest quality but here it is (reproduced by ET online)

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_NiWiL9dw-...0ZOwf2s/s1600-h/jacksonfiringbrancaletter.jpg

I found it on a blog: http://mjhoaxlive.blogspot.com/ but have seen it on a few other websites over the last few months
Click to expand...

Thank you very much. I have never seen this. Yes, I do believe it became part of some public record. Like some said I think they were trying to question the legitimacy of Branca as an estate attorney. they were also saying it was a conflict of interest.
 
Calotte12 said:
If Branca wasnt rehired, they could have question the legimity of Branca and maybe lose the estate.
Click to expand...

elusive moonwalker said:
does his rehiring really matter though. if he hadnt been rehired branca would still be an executor.it changes nothing in the scheme of things
Click to expand...

As elusive moonwalker said whether Branca was hired or not does not matter in regards of being an executor. For example McClain wasn't working for Michael at all.

Executors are the people that have the ability and knowledge (and of course willingness) to do such a task. If you look to Branca and McClain they are an entertainment lawyer and a music executive.
 
I dont think thats true. They were intending procedure to take out Branca because of the 2003 letters, and it makes sense if he was out of mj life.

But then MJ rehired him 1 week before his death... :O
 
Calotte12 said:
I dont think thats true. They were intending procedure to take out Branca because of the 2003 letters, and it makes sense if he was out of mj life.

But then MJ rehired him 1 week before his death... :O
Click to expand...

Who knows if it was Michael?

Thome said he had control of nearly all of Michael's life, all his business affairs.

Michael said he didn't know what Thome was doing with the control.
 
kasume said:
Who knows if it was Michael?

Thome said he had control of nearly all of Michael's life, all his business affairs.

Michael said he didn't know what Thome was doing with the control.
Click to expand...
But..........

It's John Branca :mello:.... who worked for many years for Michael and is not a lawyer any (regardless of any negative fact between them and I do not believe that Tohme has to do with it, with the hiring of Branca). Tohme could hire any person unknown.

And if someone say it was fake signature (which I know is that the letter is signed by Michael) is simple, just ask an expert to examine the signature to see if it was fake.
 
princessleia said:
The letter was one of the attachments of Joe's approx. 80 page objection against the executors, which is public record as it was filed in the probate proceeding, so I assume that's how.
Click to expand...

So thanks to Joe this letter went public.
What about the June 17 re-hiring letter? Wasn't it filed in the probate proceeding?
I don't understand how shady documents remain well hidden, while others make it easily to the daylight.
 
Maria MJ said:
So thanks to Joe this letter went public.
What about the June 17 re-hiring letter? Wasn't it filed in the probate proceeding?
I don't understand how shady documents remain well hidden, while others make it easily to the daylight.
Click to expand...


The June 17 letter is in Court.
 
kasume said:
Who knows if it was Michael?

Thome said he had control of nearly all of Michael's life, all his business affairs.

Michael said he didn't know what Thome was doing with the control.
Click to expand...

thome was gone when branca was rehired. if thome was doing the hiring they would have brought someone inhouse in from colony etc
 
Calotte12 said:
You find this completly normal ?

If Branca wasnt rehired, they could have question the legimity of Branca and maybe lose the estate.
Click to expand...

find what normal. that mj rehired branca. as i said branca was named as an executor. if he hadnt been rehired he would still be an executor.if mj hadnt wanted him as an executor he would have taken the steps when branca left his employment.john came and went interms of working for mj left and came back many times. its doesnt question the legitimacy of the estate. u dont have to work for mj to be an executor. mclain wasnt hired. hadnt worked for mj in donkeys years yet he was an executor
 
Michael did take the steps. He ordered B to return all documents and have nothing to do with his personal or business life anymore.
So why would the 2002 will remain in Branca's hands for 6 years?
And why did Barry Siegel resign from executor?
Could it be because there was a more recent will drafted?
 
Michael did take the steps. He ordered B to return all documents and have nothing to do with his personal or business life anymore.
Click to expand...
yet didnt ask for his will back or write a new one. not going down that road again. anyone can argue anything but if u dont have proof its irrelevent.
 
This is the propaganda from Oxman. He said in his motion that MJ asked JB to return all his documents multiple times. Yet, there is just ONE letter. And Oxman said also that MJ asked him to resign as executor. it's false. In this letter, he never asked him to resign.
And so, MJ could have written a new will.

Oxman is pursuing his propaganda and some fans are failing in the trap.
 
Maria MJ said:
Michael did take the steps. He ordered B to return all documents and have nothing to do with his personal or business life anymore.
Click to expand...

returning documents or not , being hired by Michael or not has nothing to do with being an executor. and Michael did not need anybody to return him anything or leave the executor position. he could simply sign another document saying that these people are no longer my executors and/or these new people are my current executors. It would invalidate the older executors.

More importantly check the date on the document February 2003 . Yes Branca has been fired and rehired over the years. and guess what he was rehired after Feb 2003. He was again working for Michael between 2003-2006. (during the trial as Michael's business people he attended meetings, rallies).
So perhaps when Michael asked him in Feb 2003 he returned the documents and when Michael hired him back later in the year he gave the documents back to Branca. who knows for certain?

Maria MJ said:
So why would the 2002 will remain in Branca's hands for 6 years?
Click to expand...

We also do not know for sure that the will was in Branca's hand for the 6 years. We heard that Branca referred Michael to a lawyer whose expertise is in wills and trusts. That lawyer could have had a copy in his possession and then give it to Branca when Michael died as he was an executor. And Branca could have just filed the will with the court.

Maria MJ said:
And why did Barry Siegel resign from executor?
Could it be because there was a more recent will drafted?
Click to expand...

Drafting a more recent will and naming new executors automatically invalidates the older ones. You don't have to resign in that case.
 
Last edited:
ginvid said:
Thank you very much. I have never seen this. Yes, I do believe it became part of some public record. Like some said I think they were trying to question the legitimacy of Branca as an estate attorney. they were also saying it was a conflict of interest.
Click to expand...

You're welcome.

I don't follow why Branca/his firm is questioned for still having a copy of the will as the 2003 termination letter states copies of all originals would be returned (end of paragraph 2).

Re: conflict of interest.
Branca interview on his website http://www.johnbranca.com/news
entitled HITS Magazine Profile from 1993 before MJ rehired him. Have quoted a bit about his views on 'conflict of interest' below as thought it was informative (the whole article is worth reading - good insight into Branca and the affection he had for MJ despite having been let go 3 years earlier):

The topic of "conflict of interest" is a hot one. How would you define "conflict of interest"?

JB: "The whole conflict of interest subject is a result of the fact that the legal business is a highly regulated business and that lawyers are expected to conduct themselves in accordance with higher standards than people operating in other businesses. The ethical rules that govern attorneys are very complicated and constantly evolving. In fact, there's a series of new changes that were just enacted last September. Under these rules, you inevitably run into potential conflict situations. Basically, these rules are not really designed or geared for transactional attorneys in a relatively small business like the record business. By small business, I don't mean dollar-wise but in terms of the number of key players."

What's an example of conflict of interest in the music business?

JB: "Say you are a consultant for a record company, and in that role you do not do any business affairs or any negotiating work on behalf of the label, any online work - you merely consult with them. And let's say you have a superstar you're making a deal for and you're talking to various labels - technically, that's already a conflict of interest. The fact that you are not representing the label in that transaction, or in any transaction, but are merely a consultant to the label doesn't change the fact that a potential conflict of interest exists. The rules are very specific about what you then have to do. In certain situations, you have to make full disclosure, and in other situations you have to have written consent from each party potentially affected by the transaction."

Have you found yourself in this type of situation, and how do you avoid it?

JB: "These things are unavoidable. They happen from time to time. If either party is uncomfortable, or if we feel we cannot do justice and represent the best interests of our clients we do not do it. Because we're very careful about these situations, we have an ethics law firm on retainer to advise us about nothing but potential conflict of interest situations. We take these things very seriously."



Can anyone shed more light on the extent of the involvement of Sony with either Branca (or any other attorney that worked for the firm Branca belongs to) which is allowing Oxman/Jackson to challenge the executors re 'conflict of interest'? (Other than Branca having had a share of the Sony/ATV catalogue)
 
elusive moonwalker said:
u dont have to work for mj to be an executor. mclain wasnt hired. hadnt worked for mj in donkeys years yet he was an executor
Click to expand...

What was McClains last project with MJ? He is credited as executive producer on the Number Ones album. Is that the last projet?
 
apparently, Branca was still one of MJ's lawyers in 2008, for both Thriller 25 DVD and Essential Michael Jackson, Limited Ed 3.

http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pw...5t2SH2tQwLF6jc_vRa1c&SEQ=20100323090620&SID=1


THRILLER (25TH ANNIVERSARY EDITION) (CIRCUIT CITY EXCLUSIVE) DVD / by...
Type of Work: Motion Picture
Registration Number / Date: PA0001607247 / 2008-06-03
Application Title: THRILLER (25TH ANNIVERSARY EDITION) (CIRCUIT CITY EXCLUSIVE) DVD / by MICHAEL JACKSON (88697-17986-2-D2)
Title: THRILLER (25TH ANNIVERSARY EDITION) (CIRCUIT CITY EXCLUSIVE) DVD / by MICHAEL JACKSON (88697-17986-2-D2)
Description: Videodisc (DVD)
Copyright Claimant: MJJ Productions Inc.. Address: c/o Zifferen, Brittenham, Branca & Fischer, 1801 Century Park East, Los Angeles, CA, 90067, United States
Date of Creation: 2008
Date of Publication: 2008-02-08
Nation of First Publication: United States
Authorship on Application: MJJ Productions Inc., employer for hire; Domicile: United States. Authorship: Compilation of video tracks including sounds.
Pre-existing Material: Basic video tracks including sounds.
Basis of Claim: Compilation of video tracks including sounds.

Names: MJJ Productions Inc.
 
ivy said:
More importantly check the date on the document February 2003 . Yes Branca has been fired and rehired over the years. and guess what he was rehired after Feb 2003. He was again working for Michael between 2003-2006. (during the trial as Michael's business people he attended meetings, rallies).
Click to expand...

Are there any official documents available about him being rehired? Or any articles? I need them to show them to a person who doesn't believe me and wants proof.

honeysucklejasmine said:
Can anyone shed more light on the extent of the involvement of Sony with either Branca (or any other attorney that worked for the firm Branca belongs to) which is allowing Oxman/Jackson to challenge the executors re 'conflict of interest'? (Other than Branca having had a share of the Sony/ATV catalogue)
Click to expand...

I'd like to know that to. Thanks!

mj_forever said:
apparently, Branca was still one of MJ's lawyers in 2008, for both Thriller 25 DVD and Essential Michael Jackson, Limited Ed 3.

http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pw...5t2SH2tQwLF6jc_vRa1c&SEQ=20100323090620&SID=1


THRILLER (25TH ANNIVERSARY EDITION) (CIRCUIT CITY EXCLUSIVE) DVD / by...
Type of Work: Motion Picture
Registration Number / Date: PA0001607247 / 2008-06-03
Application Title: THRILLER (25TH ANNIVERSARY EDITION) (CIRCUIT CITY EXCLUSIVE) DVD / by MICHAEL JACKSON (88697-17986-2-D2)
Title: THRILLER (25TH ANNIVERSARY EDITION) (CIRCUIT CITY EXCLUSIVE) DVD / by MICHAEL JACKSON (88697-17986-2-D2)
Description: Videodisc (DVD)
Copyright Claimant: MJJ Productions Inc.. Address: c/o Zifferen, Brittenham, Branca & Fischer, 1801 Century Park East, Los Angeles, CA, 90067, United States
Date of Creation: 2008
Date of Publication: 2008-02-08
Nation of First Publication: United States
Authorship on Application: MJJ Productions Inc., employer for hire; Domicile: United States. Authorship: Compilation of video tracks including sounds.
Pre-existing Material: Basic video tracks including sounds.
Basis of Claim: Compilation of video tracks including sounds.

Names: MJJ Productions Inc.
Click to expand...

This is interesting. Does it mean Branca was still MJ's attorney in 2008? I thought he quit in 2006 because he couldn't work with Tohme and the Nation of Islam people.
 
opyright Claimant: MJJ Productions Inc.. Address: c/o Zifferen, Brittenham, Branca & Fischer, 1801 Century Park East, Los Angeles, CA, 90067, United States
Click to expand...
i think thats prob to do with copy right claiment for the songs that are on the album and branca was working for mj when those songs were originally released.

when was it said branca left for the last time. i thought he left when weisner and co were on the scene which is the early 00's
 
Vici said:
What was McClains last project with MJ? He is credited as executive producer on the Number Ones album. Is that the last projet?
Click to expand...

not sure possibly. there were reports he was working as part of mjs management time in the early 00's
 
elusive moonwalker said:
when was it said branca left for the last time. i thought he left when weisner and co were on the scene which is the early 00's
Click to expand...

According to an interview he gave the AP - he resigned in 2006:

'By 2006, Branca says, his relationship with Jackson was troubled once again. The star was listening to an increasingly odd set of advisers — a revolving door of characters who Branca feared did not have the singer’s best interests at heart.

“He was surrounded and I had to resign,” he said. “He did not ask me to stay. I resigned amicably.”'

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32418795/ns/entertainment-celebrities/page/2/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top