Success Stories

Client was the loan out corporation for a major Hollywood writer/director. The client was entitled to specified contingent compensation based upon a film’s success as measured by its total gross revenue without deduction of the studio’s distribution fees, costs or expenses. Unbeknownst to the client, the defendant studio was only reporting to the client its contingent compensation share based upon 20% of the film’s gross home video revenue versus 100% of the revenue. The defendant studio’s position was that it’s omission of the remaining 80% was “industry custom” and proper under “Hollywood’s” accounting principles. The studio also challenged the client’s ability to audit its books beyond California’s four (4) year statute of limitations for breach of written contract (C.C.P. §337). The firm successfully argued since nothing in the studio’s previously supplied accounting statements indicated to the client that any home video revenue was omitted from the contingent compensation calculation, the client’s claims for additional funds were governed by California’s delayed discovery rule and not the state’s four (4) year statute of limitations.