Warner Bros’ long legal battle with the heirs of Superman co-creator Jerry Siegel moved closer to a final resolution this week. On Wednesday US District Judge Otis Wright III issued an order (read it here) granting the studio and its subsidiary DC Comics a partial summary judgment in cases brought by Laura Siegel Larson and the estate of Joanne Siegel. The order confirms WB and DC’s long contention that a 2001 agreement with
the heirs granted them the rights to the Man from Krypton. In a sense, it is a bit anti-climactic. A January ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a 2008 ruling that the Siegel heirs still controlled the lucrative rights to Superman and his younger self Superboy because a binding agreement was never reached by the parties in 2001 as WB and DC claim. The studio has been incrementally fighting that ruling over the last four years and getting some real traction in the last several months. In a February filing for summary judgment, WB and DC asked the judge to reconfirm the earlier ruling of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that basically gave them full rights to the superhero character and the freedom to move forward with its Superman big screen reboot Man Of Steel and other related properties without the threat of any more legal action by the creators’ heirs and estates. “DC brings the issue back before the Court on remand by way of its February 7, 2013 Motion for Summary Judgment. DC contends quite simply that the ‘Ninth Circuit’s binding ruling compels judgment in DC’s favor on its Fourth Counterclaim in both Siegel cases; renders DC’s remaining counterclaims in the cases moot . . . While DC perhaps overstates the simplicity of the matter, it is nevertheless correct that the Ninth Circuit’s ruling obliges the Court to grant its fourth counterclaim,” wrote Judge Wright on March 20.
Related: Warner Bros Sanctions Of Superman Heirs Lawyer Rejected By Court
The case however isn’t entirely over. The heirs and their lawyer Marc Toberoff could file a further suit. There’s also the issue of some advertisements. “What may preclude immediate closure of this chapter of the continuing Superman saga, however, is the lingering issue of what to do with Superboy and the early Superman ads,” noted Wright. The judge wants an “additional briefing on the effect of the October 19, 2001 agreement on the Superboy and early Superman ad works.” Warner Bros is represented by Daniel Petrocelli and Matthew Kline of LA firm O’Melveny & Myers. Laura Siegel Larson and the estate of Jerry Siegel are represented by attorney Toberoff and Richard Kendall of Kendall Brill & Klieger.
Deadline's Dominic Patten - tip him here.


There will be another round of courtroom visit and still no wanted to be happy with the decision. Time Warner got the time and money on their side.Good luck to the future.
Superboy, eh? Well that is a lucrative property all on its own, as just seen in 10 years on TV. People love that character. They love young Clark Kent. Honestly, the split of Superman and Superboy never made any sense to me. It is still Clark Kent. It is still the same character, just at two different ages in his life. I can’t think of any other character split this way. So, is the new Superman movie, which takes place largely before he becomes Superman and in Smallville, partly a Superboy movie? How does a judge parse that? It’s the same Clark Kent. This legal division needs to end, because it makes no rational sense.
Is it ever a good idea to re-make Hitchcock? His entire auteurist persona trumps all these individual efforts at re-making him. In that HE is the reason for the re-make happening you can’t even discuss the new work without discussing him. I once asked a film critic friend : “do you think you can be a young aspiring film director today and not be influenced by Hitchcock?” I’ll never forget what she said : “no; and in ways that they don’t even particularly understand or are conscious of.” Meaning his originality and innovations are now by rote manifestations and reflexes so effective and yet so seemingly effortless (as how one storyboards for instance) that they became common practice conventions in film narrative storytelling. Forever advanced form and syntax permanently so that filmmakers start with those conventions as…you know, this is how it’s done or you don’t know what you’re doing.
If DC had simply done the honorable thing years ago and given them some kind of cut or at least an occasional lump-sum payment, none of this would have been necessary. But corporate greed runs roughshod over us all.
DC has been giving both the Siegel and Schuster estates royalties for Superman for decades now. DC was on the verge of having another deal with the Siegels that would have given them even more money in return for not attempting to reclaim the rights until Toberoff stepped in and meddled with things.
Yeah, DC treated the creators of Superman quite horribly, but the current management has been working on rectifying that injustice. It’s not like they’re the bad guys in this case. The bad guy in this case was that greedy ass lawyer who wanted the Superman copyright for himself.
DC and Warner Brothers did exactly that, several times, but the heirs keep coming back for more.
It’s easy to judge a big company like Warner Bros. and DC but you have to take a look at it from their point of view. If you as a company purchased the rights to a product and agreed to pay a certain amount for that product than it is yours. This family can’t negate that agreement even if years down the line, they felt they were undersold or undervalued.
DC didn’t have to buy the rights. Siegel was an employee when he created Superman. Therefore, Superman is and always has been their property. That’s the law!
Superman was not work for hire – it existed before “DC” purched it, or even before Jerry & Joe sold a single feature to the company.
I’m not sure if the Superboy in the case is actually in reference to a young Clark Kent or if it is actually Conner Kent who are actually two different people.
Hah! This is why we have judges on our secret payroll we bribe all the judges in California whenever we get sued this is why we always win!
If you’re the real Jack Warner, what was hell like?