This is a "featured" topic! — From here you can jump to the « previous or next » featured topic.
New topic 
Printable | Author | Message |
|
Prince may appear in Dublin Court this week. From The Irish Independant 20.02.10
Prince to be witness in cancelled-gig case POPSTAR Prince is listed among the witnesses in a legal action next week over the cancellation of his Croke Park gig in the summer of 2008. The artist has also supplied a witness statement in the case, which will open before Mr Justice Peter Kelly at the Commercial Court next Tuesday. It is listed to run for four days. Mr Justice Kelly was told yesterday the case was proceeding and there was no application to give evidence from the US by video link. The judge was not told whether the artist would appear. MCD Productions brought the action seeking some €1.6m damages over the cancellation of the gig set for June 16, 2008. The action is against Prince Rogers Nelson and William Morris Endeavour Entertainment LLC, Beverly Hills, California. William Morris claims it entered into a contract with MCD on February 26, 2008, for Prince to perform at Croke Park on June 16, 2008, for "an artists' guaranteed fee of $3m (€2.2m)". MCD transferred $1.5m (€1.1m), half of the agreed fee, to an account of Mr Morris, it is pleaded. Mr Morris also admits that around June 6, 2008, MCD was notified by it that Prince wished to cancel the concert. Mr Morris alleges Prince refused to travel to Dublin and gave "no reason of substance" to it for the cancellation. He says the decision to cancel was outside the firm's control and it returned $1.5m (€1.1m) to MCD. They deny negligence, breach of duty or misrepresentation. MCD said it could not bring an insurance claim, had to refund some 55,126 tickets purchased and its total losses exceeded €1.66m. There is also a similar report in todays Sunday Times. |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
|
|
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
2 words..." As if"...they guy does what he wants when he wants and screw everyone so I doubt hed travel to an Irish court unless it was to collect a briefcse of money hed successfully sued soembody for | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
purpledoveuk said: 2 words..." As if"...they guy does what he wants when he wants and screw everyone so I doubt hed travel to an Irish court unless it was to collect a briefcse of money hed successfully sued soembody for
Everything you just said could apply to most of the free world.  [Edited 2/21/10 11:27am] Prince did an interview with a woman at Record World. They talked about whatever, then he asked her: "Does your pubic hair go up to your navel?" At that moment, we thought maybe we shouldn't encourage him to do interviews. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Sounds like Prince never saw the money in the first place and didn't seek to keep it after the cancellation. Come across as 2 businesses using his name to make the case more high profile. When  go 2 a Prince concert or related event it's all  up in the house but when log onto this site and the miasma of bitchiness is completely overwhelming! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
From what i read at the time MCD made a statement stating it was beyond their and Princes control...but now they are suing prince stating no reason was given...and as for prince turning up i dont think so he will get a rep to go and read out a statement  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
colm said: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/ireland/article7035138.ece
Interesting stuff there: The pop star, represented by Mason Hayes+Curran, a Dublin solicitor, is expected to argue in court that Tony Goldring of the William Morris agency, who claimed to be his agent, did not have his consent to contract him to perform in Croke Park on June 16, 2008, for a fee of $3m (€2.2m).
MCD has admitted it had no formal written contract with the artist but claims the deal was agreed through an “unambiguous email” from Goldring. The case could hinge on the contents of a series of email exchanges between Prince and Goldring, and Goldring and Denis Desmond, a director of MCD. The publication of the reclusive musician’s emails will allow fans an opportunity to hear what it sounds like when a pop star cries off. The promoter claims Prince, through Goldring, entered into an agreement with them on February 26 to perform at the GAA stadium but pulled out of the concert with only one week’s notice, providing “no reason of substance” for his decision not to travel to Dublin. [...] MCD has already recouped a $1.5m deposit it paid William Morris, but it is now seeking €1.6m in damages to cover its losses, including the cost of refunding the tickets that had been sold. While the company had insurance, it says it has been unable to make a claim because the musician cancelled on “a whim”. Gerald Kean, who previously acted for Prince in the case, stated at a hearing last year that MCD’s claim was “greatly inflated”. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Sounds like Prince never saw the money in the first place and didn't seek to keep it after the cancellation. Come across as 2 businesses using his name to make the case more high profile.
2 words..." As if"...they guy does what he wants when he wants and screw everyone so I doubt hed travel to an Irish court unless it was to collect a briefcse of money hed successfully sued soembody for
Shhhh - the grown ups are going to court. It's time for silly little fans to be quiet. [Edited 2/21/10 17:22pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
This could be juicy.
The case could hinge on the contents of a series of email exchanges between Prince and Goldring, and Goldring and Denis Desmond, a director of MCD. The publication of the reclusive musician’s emails will allow fans an opportunity to hear what it sounds like when a pop star cries off. If prince.org were to be made idiot proof, someone would just invent a better idiot. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| Moderator
|
squirrelgrease said: This could be juicy.
The case could hinge on the contents of a series of email exchanges between Prince and Goldring, and Goldring and Denis Desmond, a director of MCD. The publication of the reclusive musician’s emails will allow fans an opportunity to hear what it sounds like when a pop star cries off. An early peek: Prince: no said  , but  when  .
Morris: What the fuck are you trying to say? I'm not going to be out 1.6 mil cause you can't type like an adult. Studies have shown the ass crack of the average Prince fan to be abnormally large. This explains the ease and frequency of their panties bunching up in it. |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
moderatorMars23 said: squirrelgrease said: This could be juicy.
An early peek: Prince: no said , but when .
Morris: What the fuck are you trying to say? I'm not going to be out 1.6 mil cause you can't type like an adult.  
We all should know that diversity makes for a rich tapestry, and we must understand that all the threads of the tapestry are equal in value no matter what their color. Maya Angelou | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Mars23 said: squirrelgrease said: This could be juicy.
An early peek: Prince: no said , but when .
Morris: What the fuck are you trying to say? I'm not going to be out 1.6 mil cause you can't type like an adult. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Mars23 said: squirrelgrease said: This could be juicy.
An early peek: Prince: no said , but when .
Morris: What the fuck are you trying to say? I'm not going to be out 1.6 mil cause you can't type like an adult.  RIP, mom. I will forever miss and love you. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
The pop star, represented by Mason Hayes+Curran, a Dublin solicitor, is expected to argue in court that Tony Goldring of the William Morris agency, who claimed to be his agent, did not have his consent to contract him to perform in Croke Park on June 16, 2008, for a fee of $3m (€2.2m).
MCD has admitted it had no formal written contract with the artist but claims the deal was agreed through an “unambiguous email” from Goldring. The case could hinge on the contents of a series of email exchanges between Prince and Goldring, and Goldring and Denis Desmond, a director of MCD. The publication of the reclusive musician’s emails will allow fans an opportunity to hear what it sounds like when a pop star cries off. The promoter claims Prince, through Goldring, entered into an agreement with them on February 26 to perform at the GAA stadium but pulled out of the concert with only one week’s notice, providing “no reason of substance” for his decision not to travel to Dublin. [...] MCD has already recouped a $1.5m deposit it paid William Morris, but it is now seeking €1.6m in damages to cover its losses, including the cost of refunding the tickets that had been sold. While the company had insurance, it says it has been unable to make a claim because the musician cancelled on “a whim”. Gerald Kean, who previously acted for Prince in the case, stated at a hearing last year that MCD’s claim was “greatly inflated”. Just from my vast television law drama arm chair education, i will say MCD have a weak case against our purple rock star. 1. No contract, c'mon who doles out 1.5 mil with no contract to a prissy, sparkly, dove loving, purple rock star who spells out contract as "CON-tract" anyways. I would have dotted all the pupils on those 's when dealing with someone like Prince. Its kinda like a lawsuit against an underage juvenile or special needs person.
2. The agent supposedly had no consent to contract him. 3. And most importantly, if the insurance company found a way not to reimburse them, they probably did not follow procedure to the letter, letting the insurance company squeak out of it. If there was a case, the insurance would have paid out and then gone after Prince. I have no idea what i am talking about, but it sounds like another interesting addendum to any book by Per Nielsen [Edited 2/21/10 19:07pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Well at least Purple and Gold's not at the top of the list no more... Take it - like Clarence said:
"I got a million of them - all different U know." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
violetblues said: I would have dotted all the pupils on those
's when dealing with someone like Prince.
THAT WAS GOLD! Take it - like Clarence said:
"I got a million of them - all different U know." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
violetblues said: The pop star, represented by Mason Hayes+Curran, a Dublin solicitor, is expected to argue in court that Tony Goldring of the William Morris agency, who claimed to be his agent, did not have his consent to contract him to perform in Croke Park on June 16, 2008, for a fee of $3m (€2.2m).
MCD has admitted it had no formal written contract with the artist but claims the deal was agreed through an “unambiguous email” from Goldring. The case could hinge on the contents of a series of email exchanges between Prince and Goldring, and Goldring and Denis Desmond, a director of MCD. The publication of the reclusive musician’s emails will allow fans an opportunity to hear what it sounds like when a pop star cries off. The promoter claims Prince, through Goldring, entered into an agreement with them on February 26 to perform at the GAA stadium but pulled out of the concert with only one week’s notice, providing “no reason of substance” for his decision not to travel to Dublin. [...] MCD has already recouped a $1.5m deposit it paid William Morris, but it is now seeking €1.6m in damages to cover its losses, including the cost of refunding the tickets that had been sold. While the company had insurance, it says it has been unable to make a claim because the musician cancelled on “a whim”. Gerald Kean, who previously acted for Prince in the case, stated at a hearing last year that MCD’s claim was “greatly inflated”. Just from my vast television law drama arm chair education, i will say MCD have a weak case against our purple rock star. 1. No contract, c'mon who doles out 1.5 mil with no contract to a prissy, sparkly, dove loving, purple rock star who spells out contract as "CON-tract" anyways. I would have dotted all the pupils on those 's when dealing with someone like Prince. Its kinda like a lawsuit against an underage juvenile or special needs person.
2. The agent supposedly had no consent to contract him. 3. And most importantly, if the insurance company found a way not to reimburse them, they probably did not follow procedure to the letter, letting the insurance company squeak out of it. If there was a case, the insurance would have paid out and then gone after Prince. I have no idea what i am talking about, but it sounds like another interesting addendum to any book by Per Nielsen [Edited 2/21/10 19:07pm] Ok Jack McCoy! Now offer them a deal we can both live with and let's move on to putting some real criminals in jail. When go 2 a Prince concert or related event it's all up in the house but when log onto this site and the miasma of bitchiness is completely overwhelming! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Mars23 said: squirrelgrease said: This could be juicy.
An early peek: Prince: no said , but when .
Morris: What the fuck are you trying to say? I'm not going to be out 1.6 mil cause you can't type like an adult. If prince.org were to be made idiot proof, someone would just invent a better idiot. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
violetblues said: The pop star, represented by Mason Hayes+Curran, a Dublin solicitor, is expected to argue in court that Tony Goldring of the William Morris agency, who claimed to be his agent, did not have his consent to contract him to perform in Croke Park on June 16, 2008, for a fee of $3m (€2.2m).
MCD has admitted it had no formal written contract with the artist but claims the deal was agreed through an “unambiguous email” from Goldring. The case could hinge on the contents of a series of email exchanges between Prince and Goldring, and Goldring and Denis Desmond, a director of MCD. The publication of the reclusive musician’s emails will allow fans an opportunity to hear what it sounds like when a pop star cries off. The promoter claims Prince, through Goldring, entered into an agreement with them on February 26 to perform at the GAA stadium but pulled out of the concert with only one week’s notice, providing “no reason of substance” for his decision not to travel to Dublin. [...] MCD has already recouped a $1.5m deposit it paid William Morris, but it is now seeking €1.6m in damages to cover its losses, including the cost of refunding the tickets that had been sold. While the company had insurance, it says it has been unable to make a claim because the musician cancelled on “a whim”. Gerald Kean, who previously acted for Prince in the case, stated at a hearing last year that MCD’s claim was “greatly inflated”. Just from my vast television law drama arm chair education, i will say MCD have a weak case against our purple rock star. 1. No contract, c'mon who doles out 1.5 mil with no contract to a prissy, sparkly, dove loving, purple rock star who spells out contract as "CON-tract" anyways. I would have dotted all the pupils on those 's when dealing with someone like Prince. Its kinda like a lawsuit against an underage juvenile or special needs person.
2. The agent supposedly had no consent to contract him. 3. And most importantly, if the insurance company found a way not to reimburse them, they probably did not follow procedure to the letter, letting the insurance company squeak out of it. If there was a case, the insurance would have paid out and then gone after Prince. I have no idea what i am talking about, but it sounds like another interesting addendum to any book by Per Nielsen [Edited 2/21/10 19:07pm]
This drama could have been a Pay-Per-View Judge Judy episode. I'd pay $77 for that. If prince.org were to be made idiot proof, someone would just invent a better idiot. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
squirrelgrease said: violetblues said: Just from my vast television law drama arm chair education, i will say MCD have a weak case against our purple rock star. 1. No contract, c'mon who doles out 1.5 mil with no contract to a prissy, sparkly, dove loving, purple rock star who spells out contract as "CON-tract" anyways. I would have dotted all the pupils on those 's when dealing with someone like Prince. Its kinda like a lawsuit against an underage juvenile or special needs person.
2. The agent supposedly had no consent to contract him. 3. And most importantly, if the insurance company found a way not to reimburse them, they probably did not follow procedure to the letter, letting the insurance company squeak out of it. If there was a case, the insurance would have paid out and then gone after Prince. I have no idea what i am talking about, but it sounds like another interesting addendum to any book by Per Nielsen [Edited 2/21/10 19:07pm]
This drama could have been a Pay-Per-View Judge Judy episode. I'd pay $77 for that. Me too, I love Judge Judy | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
Mars23 said: An early peek: Prince: no said , but when .
Morris: What the fuck are you trying to say? I'm not going to be out 1.6 mil cause you can't type like an adult. "How embarrasing to be human!"
- Kurt Vonnegut, 'Hocus Pocus' |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Kick his ass Ireland  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
violetblues said: The pop star, represented by Mason Hayes+Curran, a Dublin solicitor, is expected to argue in court that Tony Goldring of the William Morris agency, who claimed to be his agent, did not have his consent to contract him to perform in Croke Park on June 16, 2008, for a fee of $3m (€2.2m).
MCD has admitted it had no formal written contract with the artist but claims the deal was agreed through an “unambiguous email” from Goldring. The case could hinge on the contents of a series of email exchanges between Prince and Goldring, and Goldring and Denis Desmond, a director of MCD. The publication of the reclusive musician’s emails will allow fans an opportunity to hear what it sounds like when a pop star cries off. The promoter claims Prince, through Goldring, entered into an agreement with them on February 26 to perform at the GAA stadium but pulled out of the concert with only one week’s notice, providing “no reason of substance” for his decision not to travel to Dublin. [...] MCD has already recouped a $1.5m deposit it paid William Morris, but it is now seeking €1.6m in damages to cover its losses, including the cost of refunding the tickets that had been sold. While the company had insurance, it says it has been unable to make a claim because the musician cancelled on “a whim”. Gerald Kean, who previously acted for Prince in the case, stated at a hearing last year that MCD’s claim was “greatly inflated”. Just from my vast television law drama arm chair education, i will say MCD have a weak case against our purple rock star. 1. No contract, c'mon who doles out 1.5 mil with no contract to a prissy, sparkly, dove loving, purple rock star who spells out contract as "CON-tract" anyways. I would have dotted all the pupils on those 's when dealing with someone like Prince. Its kinda like a lawsuit against an underage juvenile or special needs person.
2. The agent supposedly had no consent to contract him. 3. And most importantly, if the insurance company found a way not to reimburse them, they probably did not follow procedure to the letter, letting the insurance company squeak out of it. If there was a case, the insurance would have paid out and then gone after Prince. I have no idea what i am talking about, but it sounds like another interesting addendum to any book by Per Nielsen [Edited 2/21/10 19:07pm] Well, from my expansive experience in law garnered through LA Law and John Grisham books I would beg to differ. Prince may not have signed a contract with said company, but he did accept the gig as he himself was promoting it. Therefore I would argue that the emails between the two parties can constitute an agreement to perform. I submit items one through 24 as evidence - the emails exchanged. Also, the insurance company has already made its statement and states that the claim will not be paid as there was no reason for cancellation contained within its terms and conditions. I submit item 25 as evidence, the on-a-whim clause contained within said insurance contract. This may prove to be something ol' Princey boy may have to face up to. In this case it is the law of the ROI, not the USA. So it may prove harder to defend than he is used to. Especially if he is due to show up as a witness and doesnt show up. He has provided no reason for him not to show up or reschedule so it sounds like he is expected. [Edited 2/22/10 1:31am] |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
i have mixed feelings about this. on the 1 hand, i wouldn't want for Prince to be "used." on the other hand, i wish he didn't have to go through this legal shit. depending on his state of mind, if he thinks he was wronged, then i can see him standing up for his rights...then again, a part of me wishes he would just pay the cash...he has mo' than enough, so that the fuckers can shut the fuck up and then he can go on with his life and music
 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MCD have a stranglehold over concert promotion in Ireland so they think they're above it all. You show them Prince! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
if we can muster another handful of headlining prince"news" like this no matter how weak we can banish "prince pens fight song" forever | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Rebeljuice said: violetblues said: Just from my vast television law drama arm chair education, i will say MCD have a weak case against our purple rock star. 1. No contract, c'mon who doles out 1.5 mil with no contract to a prissy, sparkly, dove loving, purple rock star who spells out contract as "CON-tract" anyways. I would have dotted all the pupils on those 's when dealing with someone like Prince. Its kinda like a lawsuit against an underage juvenile or special needs person.
2. The agent supposedly had no consent to contract him. 3. And most importantly, if the insurance company found a way not to reimburse them, they probably did not follow procedure to the letter, letting the insurance company squeak out of it. If there was a case, the insurance would have paid out and then gone after Prince. I have no idea what i am talking about, but it sounds like another interesting addendum to any book by Per Nielsen [Edited 2/21/10 19:07pm] Well, from my expansive experience in law garnered through LA Law and John Grisham books I would beg to differ. Prince may not have signed a contract with said company, but he did accept the gig as he himself was promoting it. Therefore I would argue that the emails between the two parties can constitute an agreement to perform. I submit items one through 24 as evidence - the emails exchanged. Also, the insurance company has already made its statement and states that the claim will not be paid as there was no reason for cancellation contained within its terms and conditions. I submit item 25 as evidence, the on-a-whim clause contained within said insurance contract. This may prove to be something ol' Princey boy may have to face up to. In this case it is the law of the ROI, not the USA. So it may prove harder to defend than he is used to. Especially if he is due to show up as a witness and doesnt show up. He has provided no reason for him not to show up or reschedule so it sounds like he is expected. [Edited 2/22/10 1:31am] Indeed. He was promoting the show, so it seems he did consent into contracting him. Then it seems he bailed out on a whim. At least he still hasn't given a proper explanation. Looks like he could be in for some trouble. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
By our calculations, if Prince loses the case, at least 20,779 fams will need to be tricked into signing up for lotusflow3r.com to pay the settlement.
The best thing is, he probably has that many fams willing to do that. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
well, if he was promoting the show himself there could well be a case against him...i'm sure h knows what he's doing though. no chance he'll show up in court. his personal fee was to be $3 million. eh that means prince can earn about 1 million an hour, so it is kinda like saying you spilled my glass of kool-aid, now pay for it! [Edited 2/22/10 3:38am] Got my mojo working...it just don't work on you!
____________________________ stichdoll: Lord of Mushrooms For All to See...Brother Leader...etc. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Rebeljuice said: violetblues said: Just from my vast television law drama arm chair education, i will say MCD have a weak case against our purple rock star. 1. No contract, c'mon who doles out 1.5 mil with no contract to a prissy, sparkly, dove loving, purple rock star who spells out contract as "CON-tract" anyways. I would have dotted all the pupils on those 's when dealing with someone like Prince. Its kinda like a lawsuit against an underage juvenile or special needs person.
2. The agent supposedly had no consent to contract him. 3. And most importantly, if the insurance company found a way not to reimburse them, they probably did not follow procedure to the letter, letting the insurance company squeak out of it. If there was a case, the insurance would have paid out and then gone after Prince. I have no idea what i am talking about, but it sounds like another interesting addendum to any book by Per Nielsen [Edited 2/21/10 19:07pm] Well, from my expansive experience in law garnered through LA Law and John Grisham books I would beg to differ. Prince may not have signed a contract with said company, but he did accept the gig as he himself was promoting it. Therefore I would argue that the emails between the two parties can constitute an agreement to perform. I submit items one through 24 as evidence - the emails exchanged. Also, the insurance company has already made its statement and states that the claim will not be paid as there was no reason for cancellation contained within its terms and conditions. I submit item 25 as evidence, the on-a-whim clause contained within said insurance contract. This may prove to be something ol' Princey boy may have to face up to. In this case it is the law of the ROI, not the USA. So it may prove harder to defend than he is used to. Especially if he is due to show up as a witness and doesnt show up. He has provided no reason for him not to show up or reschedule so it sounds like he is expected. [Edited 2/22/10 1:31am] [b] How was he promoting it?? As far as I remember MCD claimed that they had forked out x amount for the ad campaigns etc. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
New topic Printable This is a "featured" topic! — From here you can jump to the « previous or next » featured topic.