UPDATE: This just gets better and better, especially when lawyers attack with poison pen letters. I’ve just been slipped this missive from Relativity’s Chicago-based attorney Carol Genis of K&L Gates to The Weinstein Co’s Century City litigator Bert Fields sent today. It outlines Relativity’s position on The Crow distribution vis a vis today’s Weinstein Co lawsuit:
Dear Mr. Fields:
As we have informed you, the project for which you are demanding representations from Relativity is not even in production. Relativity has no obligation whatsoever to produce or distribute The Crow, and certainly has no obligation to assure TWC of anything. Relativity will waste no further time engaging in a hypothetical dialogue with you about a potential dispute that may or may not arise in the future.
In addition to being premature, your letter smacks of delusion as it ignores TWCs multiple breaches of the parties March 25, 2009 agreement (Termination Agreement). TWC openly and undisputedly failed to meet its financial obligations relating to Nine and failed to meet the contractual minimum marketing spend and contractual minimum screens for that film. As TWC is well aware, its wrongful conduct led to serious financial and other damage to Relativity. On top of such breaches, your client has failed to make payments due to Relativity and to provide the required accounting statements. It takes gall for your client to make demands upon Relativity about The Crow, which has not even been greenlit, when TWCs failure to properly distribute Nine demonstrated that it will disregard and breach any and all of its distribution, marketing and financial obligations. If any party is entitled to seek legal remedies it is Relativity.
Further, your continued bluster about filing a lawsuit in an effort to force Relativity to distribute a nonexistent film through TWC is not only absurd, it is a blatant threat to breach the dispute resolution provision of the Termination Agreement. The Termination Agreement does not permit claims for injunctive relief to be brought in court. To the contrary, the Termination Agreement provides that [a]ny and all controversies, claims or disputes arising out of or relating to this Agreement shall be resolved exclusively in one or more confidential arbitration proceedings in accordance with the procedures set forth in the NDA. (§ 15 (emphasis added).) The arbitration procedures in the NDA are found at Section 5.2, which sets forth the arbitration forum, rules, and appeal process. Your erroneous claim that TWC can bring a lawsuit arising out of the Termination Agreement is presumably based upon a misapplication of Section 5.1 of the NDA, which permits claims for injunctive relief arising out of an alleged breach of [the NDA] to be brought in court. As you know, the NDA has been terminated and TWC does not and cannot claim that Relativity is breaching or will breach the NDA. There is no good faith reading of these agreements which would permit TWC to file a lawsuit in court for a dispute arising under the Termination Agreement. As such, any claim brought by TWC in court will immediately be met with a motion for dismissal and sanctions. Your client is forewarned and proceeds at its own peril.
Nothing in this letter is intended to waive any rights or claims Relativity may have against TWC, and Relativity expressly reserves all such rights and claims.
Regards,
Carol Genis
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.







This is like a crack head telling a heroin addict that they have an addiction problem.
Pretty much!
gold
“They come at you with a knife. You come at them with a gun… THAT’S the Chicago way.”
Dear Carol Genis,
I have no idea if your legal position is correct relative to the complex contract issues in this affair…but,
let me say that I would like you to be my counsel…if, of course…I am compelled to ever enter the bizarro world of litigation.
Carol, I am impressed with your command and use of the language. A+
You are easily impressed.
This needs to be resolved in a big arena with chains, giant hammers, and tigers!
Hey TRD,
Register the idea , “Litigation Death Match”… you’ll have a winner. I know I would buy a ticket.
Nice, TRD. If people knew they would have to duel to the death if they breached contract, Hollywood might be a nicer place.
I think a dance-off would be better. Seeing the Weinsteins strutting around the dance-floor in sequined shirts for money would be worth the price of admission, surely.
Ick, lawyers!
1. Teeeeechnically we aren’t making the movie we keep announcing we’re making;
2. You messed up a whole other movie.
These are arguments?
Dear Carol,
YOU ROCK!!
A future client.
This would make Judge Judy proud.
TWC, your response?
Two men enter, one man leaves.
Welcome to the Thunderdome!
Posturing by both sides for entertainment industry insiders rather than any legal argument from what I can see.
It’s wording like “I’ve just been slipped this missive” that makes Deadline THE destination for all things entertainment!
Now go away, or I shall have to taunt you a second time!
I always laugh when I see Weinstein Company filing suit about anything. There isn’t a contract that they’ve entered into that they haven’t breached in some manner or form. They ignore directors’ cuts, P&A spends, theater counts, release dates, progress to production steps, etc. Relativity definitely has the high ground in this standoff.
So interesting – Harvey and Ryan have been such good friends in the past – yachting together and whatnot. And now this awful ugliness. I guess they’ll have to figure out who gets to hang in St. Tropez when.
What bothers me about this letter, which really is a form of “cease and desist”, is that it doesn’t appear to be a one-to-one “missive”, but rather a document designed to vent a series of grudges, and then be leaked to the internet.
If you’re arguing about one project, keep the document tight and on-topic. Bringing in a second project just looks sloppy.
I agree. This is not a legal letter. It’s a rambling press release.
My favorite is when she states that Bert Fields’ letter was “premature” as opposed to “without merit”. In other words – We will be breaching the agreement in the future, but we haven’t just yet.
This is exactly why i read deadline. Trailers, casting etc i can get anywhere but Nikki gets gold like this that no other entertainment journalist would ever achieve
And furthermore, I’m not wearing any underwear.
If this is a nonexistent film for Relativity, does that mean it will be unable to produce nonexistent profits and nonexistent returns of 20% or more to investors?
This issue needs must be brought to the Thunderdome. “Two men enter, one man leaves!”
If that doesn’t work out, “he who breaks a deal must spin the wheel.”
I’m a lawyer myself, and I appreciate a well-written “fuck you” letter. My favorite part is at the end: “Regards, Carol Genis.”
Weinstein Group can now and always be considered the Douche-Bag of Hollywood and that’s saying a ton!!! The total garbage coming out of Hollywood with it’s inability to stop looking into it’s own mirror are some of the many reasons, I have not paid for a movie in 5 years and will not ever…Torrent is a word they should FEAR!!!
Hey – can all laywers agree to remove the “we reserve all rights” BS at the bottom of their letters?
Yes.