New ‘Man Of Steel’ Television Spot #6 
UPDATE: At Least Seven Bidders For Hulu 
Hammond On Cannes: Suspense Builds To Sunday’s Palme … 
Cannes: Un Certain Regard Winners Include ‘The … 
SAG-AFTRA Sued For Witholding Foreign Residuals And … 
Harvey Weinstein Closes Prolific Cannes With Deals For … 
Cannes: Competition Movies Divide Critics; How Much Do … 
Zach Braff Ends $3+M Kickstarter Campaign 
Fox Unscripted TV Czar Mike Darnell To Exit 
NBC Sets Oklahoma Tornado Benefit Concert For May 29 
Cannes: Directors’ Fortnight Honors ‘Les … 
SHOCKER: Tom Cruise Exits ‘Man From … 
A+E Rebuild: BBC’s Jana Bennett To Run Bio And LMN … 
RATINGS RAT RACE: ‘Hannibal’ Hits Low, … 
‘Katie’ Shakeup: Rachel Miskowiec Replaces … 
Hammond On Cannes: French Hero Jerry Lewis On His Return To … 
Cannes: Another Jewelry Heist? $2.6M Necklace Missing After … 
Hammond On Cannes: Leo DiCaprio’s Moon Trip Tops … 
Specialty B.O. Preview: ‘Before Midnight’, … 
2012-2013 Season Network Rankings: CBS Sweeps In Final … 
Full 2012-2013 TV Season Series Rankings 
UPDATE, 11:21 AM: Judge Michael Johnson today issued a final ruling denying the state’s attempt to dismiss a lawsuit from Ashton Kutcher’s production company against the California DMV. A trial date has been set for June 8. Katalyst Media and Soda and Pop Inc. filed the suit on June 19, alleging that the DMV dropped out of a reality series the Two And A Half Men star’s company was developing.
PREVIOUSLY, FRIDAY PM: Ashton Kutcher’s production company’s lawsuit against the California DMV for dropping out of a reality series moved one tentative step in the actor’s favor today. Judge Michael Johnson issued a tentative ruling Friday denying the state’s request to dismiss the breach of contract and promissory estoppel suit. Kutcher’s Katalyst Media and Soda and Pop Inc. filed the suit on June 19, 2012. The Los Angeles Superior Court judge also noted today that the contract between production companies Katalyst and Soda and Pop Inc. and the California DMV is enforceable, something the state has disagreed with. Katalyst is seeking $1.4 million in damages, claiming that it had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in pre-production for the proposed show. In June 2010, the Two and a Half Men star’s company and the DMV reached an agreement to work on a series featuring Motor Vehicle employees and patrons in various “humanizing and entertaining situations that arise on a daily basis” in DMV offices throughout California. In May 2011 that agreement was put into writing. However six weeks later the state agency “abruptly and without justifiable excuse, changed course,” according to the initial suit. This change refused the production companies access to DMV offices, something they deemed essential for the show. Not long after, DMV Deputy Director Mike Marando told Katalyst producers that the proposed series was not in the agency’s “best interests.” Lawyers for both sides will give oral arguments at a hearing on Monday before Judge Johnson issues his final order. If the judge does make his tentative official, the case could quickly move toward either trial or settlement. Katalyst Media Inc. and Soda and Pop Inc. are represented by Marty Singer, Michael Weinsten and Michael Mancini of LA’s Lavely & Singer
Deadline's Dominic Patten - tip him here.
Loading ...
What a dick. He thinks he has the legal right to compel an agency of our state government, one that has a real mission and purpose, to instead spend its time helping him launch some faux “reality” show for his own enrichment. Hey, if the thing does go forward after all, I might sue on behalf of CA taxpayers to stop it. Dick. Why doesn’t he just concentrate on bungling the Steve Jobs role?
The DMV agreed to the show and signed enforceable contracts, then later tried to pull out of the contracts it had already agreed to. Sounds cut and dry to me. Katalyst deserves compensation. As taxpayers, we should be mad at the DMV on this one for failing to communicate internally.
Yeah, with massive state budget deficits, and with truly needy California residents having their vital state services slashed, we should spend California’s tax money “compensating” Ashton Kutcher because the DMV finally came to its senses and pulled out of this dumb project. Are you one of his attorneys? If so, tell him to have an assistant dash out and buy him a sense of shame.
So if I understand you correctly, Francis, you’re saying that a major department of the State of California that’s responsible for handling an important thing like driving and licensing and several laws related to such, signs a contract that I assume was vetted by attorneys (or should have been). Then, when they decide it might be a bad idea, they break the contract and that’s okay?
I’m willing to bet that if the roles had been reversed and Kutcher had signed a contract to be a spokesman for the DMV then backed out because he felt it was a mistake, someone like you would be posting all about: “How much a scumbag he is for signing a contract and not honoring it!”
He had a signed agreement. What more do you want?
And no, I’m not his lawyer or friend or mother or whatever lame excuse might come in handy here.
What I’m saying is:
(a) The DMV is empowered by law to administer car registrations, drivers’ licences, and related matters. It is not empowered to use its resources and facilities as a TV production entity, for the private enrichment of some Hollywood douche, and in a way that will make an already overburdened bureaucracy even harder for average Californians to navigate;
(b) Therefore, if the DMV entered into the sort of contractural arrangement that Kutcher’s attorneys allege, those contracts were, prima facie, invalid–much as it is invalid, say, to enter into a contract with a minor. Such contracts simply exceed the DMV’s statutory power, and are antithetical to the best interests of California motorists, as any trier of fact would eventually find;
(c) On that basis, among others, I expect that Kutcher ultimately will not prevail in court, nothwithstanding this initial and minor victory;
(d) And so, for strategic and pragmatic reasons, as well as for considerations of common decency that apparently have little sway over Mr. Kutcher, I would hope that this unseemly attempt to divert desperately needed tax funds to the bank account of a wealthy actor could now come to an end.
That’s what I’m saying. And I’m encouraged that the vast majority of other posters on this site seem to understand these points, even if you do not.
Look, this isn’t a show that I would even consider watching but if they signed the contract then they should have to go through with the deal. The time to pull out would have been before the contract was signed.
What the hell, Kutcher?
Are you not lucky enough to have the dream life you live and enjoy the millions you make to just let this go?
Who cares if they signed a contract and then it didn’t work out for whatever reason? Call it a wash and move on!
Sheesh if you can’t see how much damage you’re doing to your shaky reputation then you’re more of an idiot than you appear to be.
And everyone in my circle shares that opinion whether you care or not.
In my trips to the DMV- I’ve NEVER noticed anything humanizing or entertaining about it.
I know, right? I can’t imagine the brain power that determined a reality show based on the DMV would have that much – or any – appeal.
Kutcher is such a tool, I have to root for the DMV on this one.
The only thing I can imagine that’s worse than going to the DMV is watching a show about it.
Hysterical!
this won’t go anywhere… government agencies cancel on tv productions all the time
doubt judge will set a precedent that will favor the producers… and if he does we can thank Ashton and his moron partner for making it more likely government agencies will say NO from the gitgo
Everyone remember this arrogant display of selfishness on the part of Kutcher and his pals. To even suggest this show (much less have some entities at the DMV or in Sacto) is the height of insanity, but to bring a lawsuit against the state that has given him a home when schools are being shuttered and public services kaput is frigging outrageous. But then he’s the idiot who supported Joe Paterno against molested children until his publicist explained things to him. Really stupid Ashton. Call off your dumb dogs.
Compared to you. Kutcher is a rocket scientist.
It’s people like you that make Cali the “Utopia” it is. Soon you will look like Detroit.
No matter what the situation or scenario, I wish this moron the very worst.
Ashton will never get his driver’s license renewed here in California. He’ll have to get an out of state license whenever his current license expires. They can refuse to renew anyone’s license but they should have gone forward with the show they singed a contract and it would have been income they could use however they wanted to. The DMV was badly advised they should have at least let Kutcher film a pilot episode at one of their offices.
Yes, you’re right. Often when I’m standing in those endless lines at the DMV, I wonder: “What would make this operation run more smoothly, for the benefit of all Californians?” And the answer, of course, is to crowd the DMV with Ashton Kutcher and his film crew. Surely that would make the place vastly more efficient for us all.
Leave it to California to fuck themselves out of free TV money. Dumb asses. Hope Kutcher kicks the crap out of them.
Whatever you think of Kutcher, government agencies shouldn’t be above the law. They signed an agreement. They should live by it or pay up.
It’s not “they” who pay up. It’s the taxpayers who pay up into that smarmy dirtbag’s already overflowing pockets. The DMV and the entire state of California are barely functioning as it is. It was a boneheaded ill-advised tv show idea and Kutcher is a negligent moron for thinking it was a good idea or additive in any way. He likely sees an easy score of settlement money (to pay for his divorce?) and is quite the bottom feeding parasite and bad citizen. Hopefully the judge has some sense.
Hey, Kutcher attorney: Remember, all your posts here are billable time.
Im still in disbelief that this man makes $1 million an episode.
This, from a guy who is willing to pony up $300,000 to take a 1-minute ride into space — and then has the gall to actually force a million dollar lawsuit on the State of California? Yikes.
nobody wants to sit down in front of the television and find out what happened at the DMV that day… idiotic show idea
Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.
Obviously we all know most state run agencies are run by idiots and in this case the DMV probably deserves this lawsuit. Nonetheless, Ashton might have underestimated the shit storm of negative PR this is going to create (thanks to deadline). By suing the DMV, you’re suing the tax payers of this broke state we call california. Those same tax payers that tune into your crappy tv shows and feature films that net you at least 15-20M a year. For a chance to net another million, you are now perceived as more of a douche. Worth it? Doubt it.
I wish the DMV never agreed to this. Now we will be stuck paying for the state’s contract breach. And who wants to watch a show about the DMV anyway?
@ Francis
If you say that the contract claim is prima facie invalid, the judge would have ruled this way and granted the dismissial. Clearly there is still some validity to Kuther’s claim or the lawsuit would cease at this point. Further, even if the DMV does not have actual authority to enter into this sort of contract, apparent authority seems reasonable. Kutcher and the DMV reached a point in the negotiations where he felt the DMV had the power to enter into this deal, evidenced by the spending of large sums of money. Don’t know why the DMV got involved in this sort of thing from the get-go.
Dustin–
The confidence you place in judges (in rhis case, a judge on a very low rung) is touching but misplaced. A lot of dumb asses sit on the bench–the appointment process is a political one, after all–and a lot of them magnify their inherent stupidity by being as starstruck as a teenage girl (The Hon. Lance Ito, etc.). So Judge Jognson gave this first round to Kutcher. Means nothing. The state will win in the end, as well it should. The bad news for us taxpayers is that it’ll likely cost a ton of our tax $$ in legal fees to get from here to there. The good news is, Kutcher is likely to be stuck paying big legal bills as well. And all of this will accomplish precisely nothing….except, as Joe notes above, the further deterioration of Ashton Kutcher’s already shaky reputation.
If the jury is smart they will award Kutcher the total sum of $1.00. That’s one dollar for Ashton. A jury can award any amount of money they want and sometimes they reduce the amount to the lowest possible legal minimum. The DMV should not have to pay AK all that he’s asking for since the state is bankrupt and spending borrowed money. This way they can do the right thing because DMV definitely breached the contract but they can also punish Kutcher for filing this suit and wasting tax money in court.
So Francis you apparently know that the DMV – or whatever part of state government that makes decisions for the DMV – legally CANNOT sign contracts or agreements regarding film production on state property? You seem very sure of this, but I don’t think it’s in any way true.
Bob:
I take your point. For my next film, I’m gonna find some bored, starstruck DMV bureaucrat and see if he’d like to invest some of the department’s discretionary funds–tax dollars, but let’s not get too hung up on that–on this terrific script I’m developing about a murder mystery that revolves around a road test for a commercial transpo license. As I now infer from your post that such toadies have the unfettreed ability to bind the state to business contracts that exceed their statutory mission….well, I see nothing but blue skies! Many thanks.
Ashton Ducher will benefit from this at the expense of California tax payers