Appeal denied / AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

Status
Not open for further replies.

ivy

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
16,074
Points
0
Location
USA
Court of appeals webpage

http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/dockets.cfm?dist=2&doc_id=2039633&doc_no=B247338

Court of appeals info

Date Description Notes
03/07/2013 Filed petition for writ of: Mandate/Stay Requested by AEG Live et al.

03/07/2013 Exhibits filed in support of: 13 Volumes of exhibits by Petr. AEG Live et al.

03/07/2013 Filed document entitled: Unredacted Petition for Writ of Mandate by Petr. AEG Live et al.

03/07/2013 Filed document entitled: Unredacted Exhibits in support of Petition for Writ of Mandate (13 Volumes) by Petr. AEG Live et al.

03/08/2013 Order filed. denying petitioner's request for immediate stay

03/11/2013 Order filed. re: Sealed Documents

03/12/2013 Order filed. Petitioners ordered by noon March 14 to file complete set of unredacted copies of exhibits and petition which only redact matters which are subject to respondent court's February 23 2013 sealing order. At present the exhibits and petition redact matters which exceed respondent court's February 27 2013 sealing order.

-----------------------------------------

Court of appeal filing document : http://amradaronline.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/jackson-doc.pdf

-----------------------------------------

Summary

The documents starts with saying Jacksons seek $40 billion damages from AEG Live.

AEG is stating that the Superior Court had made an error because it didn't explain how AEG should have foresee Murray would administer Michael fatal Propofol given that Murray "may" compromise his oath due to his debt and Michael had addiction to painkillers years ago. AEG states that the law requires a more direct relationship.

AEG's lawyer also states this ruling is also creates the notion that people in debt are morally suspect and unfit for positions of responsibility even if they have taken oaths and do not have history of wrongful conduct. It also creates legal negligence to hire licenses professional with personal debts. AEG states this is a problem for California employers and workers.

Some background

As we know AEG and Michael have agreed to do a tour. Salaries of tour personnel were being advanced by AEG but later will be recouped from Michael's share of profits.

In late March early April 2009 Murray moves to LA and starts to treat Michael 3 times a week. Late April early may 2009 Michael told AEG he intended to bring Murray with him to London. AEG started negotiations with Murray, they were going to advance Murray's salary from Michael's share. When Michael died no contract were signed. Drafts of the contract said Murray was an independent contractor, it required Michael's signature, it said the parties have no rights or obligations to each other until the contract was signed. Michael's signature block clearly said he wanted Murray and was paying him from his own share of profits. The contract also required Murray to administer services "professionally and with greatest degree of care expected". It required Murray to have licenses in US and UK and maintain malpractice insurance.

Michael died of Propofol overdose. DA charged Murray with manslaughter and a criminal court convicted him of manslaughter and gave him the maximum sentence.

Michael's mother and children sued AEG. 2 claims dismissed at demurrer, 3 remained. AEG filed a motion for summary judgement. 2 of the remaining claims dismissed, only negligent hiring claim remained.

AEG argued they could not foresee the risk Murray had because
- Murray held licenses in 4 states including CA
- Murray never been disciplined by medical board.
- Murray has been Michael's personal physician for 3 years.
- AEG had no knowledge of Murray's confidential medical treatment of Michael.
- Contract required Murray to show "greatest degree of care"
- Murray's administration of Propofol strayed so far from expected.
- jury in the criminal case ruled that Murray showed "criminal negligence", found him guilty and he was given maximum sentence.

Court mentioned the following when it ruled there was triable issues
- AEG did not conduct a background check on Murray to show he was in debt.
- AEG was told Murray told he closed his practice in LV to go to UK
- Concerts would be Murray's only income.
- Murray did not have a medical practice at LA.
- AEG had general knowledge that doctors sometimes compromise their oaths to administer drugs to artists.
- Other doctors were considered and rejected by parties before Murray.

AEG states that the Superior Court made a mistake by allowing negligent hiring claim and explains

- There's no dispute that Murray was a licensed physician.

- There's no dispute that Murray treated Michael for 3 years with no issues.

- AEG argues Murray's debt or Michael's past painkiller addiction would not make it foreseeable that Murray will commit criminal manslaughter by administering anesthesia to Michael in his bedroom. AEG states CA law requires a direct relationship between the "warning sign" and the harm suffered.

- AEG states there's no direct connection between Michael's 2009 anesthesia overdose and Murray's debt and Michael's past painkiller addiction.

- Courts ruling creates a legal inference that people with debt are morally suspect and unfit for positions of responsibility even if they have taken oaths and have no history of wrong conduct. This will be problematic for workers and organizations.

- AEG states CA law states a person has no duty to protect a person from a third party's actions, especially these are criminal conduct. Negligent hiring is a small exception but it requires knowing the employee causes a particular risk and that particular harm happening.

AEG states that Jacksons did not present any counter evidence to AEG's claims. Jacksons showed
- an extensive credit and judicial records would show that Murray was in debt
- Murray was not board certified
- this part is redacted but it's apparent that they are talking about Gongaware being aware of Michael's 1993 painkiller addiction
- Gongaware had a general understanding that physicians inappropriately prescribe drugs to musicians.

- Jacksons argue that as AEG knew Michael's 1993 painkiller addiction, they should have undertaken a through investigation into Murray, run a credit check / financial background check, or hire a private investigator.

- Jacksons argue that Murray closing his practice might make him act unethical. Therefore they arguee that AEG should have refused Michael's insistence to bring his own doctor to UK.

- AEG argues that Superior Court was wrong in saying Michael's 1993 painkiller addiction required AEG to run a investigate Murray's finances and AEG might be negligent in hiring Murray without knowing his financial condition.

- AEG says according to law what AEG knew about Michael is irrelevant. The negligent hiring claim is about the agent hired and caused harm. So the only relevant issue what AEG knew or should have known about Murray. AEG states they knew nothing that would put them on notice that Murray might overdose Michael with surgical anesthesia in his bedroom.

- AEG says there's no law that evaluates a physicians competence based on pressure their patients could assert. AEG states it's wrong to question credentials of doctors because they treated former addicts or famous people. AEG says if this is the case no doctor would treat former addicts or famous people.

- AEG states law says that a doctors competence is determined by licenses unless there's specific evidence of incompetence.

- AEG states Superior Court also made a mistake in saying Murray's debt could be a factor in determining his competence.

- AEG states personal debts do not make a person professionally incompetent. There was no reason to think Murray's debt would cause him perform poorly or commit manslaughter.

- AEG states there's no direct connection between the alleged warning (debts) and the actual harm (criminal manslaughter due to anesthesia overdose). There's no relationship between debt and medical malpractice.

- AEG says even though they have invaded Murray's financial privacy and did a credit check on him and uncovered his debts, they couldn't have anticipated that Murray would overdose Michael with anesthesia in his bedroom.

- AEG states that Jacksons claim they should have known Murray was not board certified and this should show that Murray was unfit to deal with Michael's sleep and dependency issues. AEG states Jacksons could not show that AEG knew Michael's sleep issues, they were able to demonstrate Gongaware knew Michael's 1993 painkiller addiction issues, Jacksons did not show any evidence that AEG knew Michael had dependency issues 16 years later in 2009.

- AEG states board certifications is voluntary, there are a lot of doctors that aren't board certified but more than capable.

Public policy

- AEG states the two factors - Michael's 1993 addiction and potential for bad ethics in entertainment industry - would mean they could not hire any doctor in connection with the tour.

-AEG states this would create an impossible situation for concert promoters to never work with anyone that has a history of drug abuse.

- AEG also states courts ruling mean that people with debt should never be hired as they can compromise ethics. AEG states this will make the current employment system fall.

- AEG mentions recent laws that bars employers run financial credit checks or request credit reports on employees except exceptional situations. This law was amended because people who lost their jobs had no income to pay their debts would not be able to get jobs due to low credit scores.

- AEG goes on hypothetical and asks should they refuse Michael's long term physician and force him to see someone he didn't know, how much debt is too much debt, should they not hire a recent graduate with substantial student loans, should they only hire doctors with no debts, but wouldn't any doctor closing their practice to go on tour with Michael wouldn't be subject to financial pressure,

Requests

- AEG wants the court of appeal to stay the court proceedings.

- Grant AEG's summary judgment - meaning dismiss the remaining negligent hiring claim

- or make the superior court explain their cause as why it did not dismiss the claim
 
Re: [Disscussion] AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsui

^40 billion? I hope they get not a dollar. Greedy *%^&@!!!$%
 
From radaronline

document here : http://amradaronline.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/jackson-doc.pdf

Katherine Jackson’s Wrongful Death Lawsuit Suffers Major Legal Setback
Posted on Mar 12, 2013 @ 16:31PM | By Jen Heger


Katherine Jackson‘s suffered a huge legal setback this past week in her wrongful death lawsuit for her son Michael Jackson when a California court dismissed all of her claims against AEG and its President Tim Leiweke RadarOnline.com is exclusively reporting.

Additionally all but one of her claims against the remaining defendants were dismissed and the California Court of Appeals ordered Michael’s medical records unsealed.


Those remaining defendants have filed legal documents with the Court of Appeal in California to dismiss that one remaining claim on the question of whether AEG Live negligently hired Dr. Conrad Murray, Jackson’s long time personal physician. Murray was convicted in 2011 of the involuntary manslaughter death of Michael Jackson after administering a fatal dose of propofol to help the pop singer sleep. Murray hadn’t signed formally signed his employment contract with AEG at the time of Jackson’s death.

In response to the filing, the Court of Appeal indicated that it would be unsealing certain records of the late pop singer, including Jackson’s medical records.

In court documents obtained by RadarOnline.com, AEG Live asserts, “absent this Court’s immediate intervention, defendants will shortly begin a long trial based on the trial court’s fundamental misapplication of California law. Plaintiffs seek more than $40 billion in damages from defendants arising from the 2009 death of pop music star Michael Jackson….On February 27, 2013, Respondent Court summarily adjudicated all of the Jackson’s claims except negligent hiring….Specifically, Respondent Court held that there was a triable issue of fact as to whether AEG Live should have suspected Dr. Murray “may compromise his Hippocratic Oath” because Dr. Murray was in debt, and because Mr. Jackson was known to have had a prior problem with painkiller abuse. Respondent Court provided no explanation as to how such knowledge would have made it legally foreseeable that Dr. Murray would administer a fatal dose of anesthesia to Mr. Jackson in his home for sleep.”

When contacted by RadarOnline, com, Marvin Putnam, attorney for AEG Live responded, “The Court of Appeal rarely grants these extraordinary requests, although I am confident, whether before or after trial, that the courts of this state will find the law does not allow Mrs. Jackson’s claim. Any other outcome would wreak havoc on California’s business community.”

If the case does proceed to trial, Putnam told us, “AEG Live had no idea Jackson was looking for a doctor to give him propofol or that Dr. Murray had agreed to provide the dangerous drug to him. Mr. Jackson’s death was a horrible tragedy for which AEG Live is simply not responsible.”

Murray is going to be deposed on Monday, March 18 at the Los Angeles County Men’s Central Jail in connection with Katherine’s wrongful death lawsuit.

The trial is expected to begin on April 1.

http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2...uit-major-legal-setback/#.UT-8xPc5V-w.twitter
 
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

Omg that says billion? Damn I thought it said million
 
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

40 billion? Hahaha why am i not surprise. Typical Jacksons.
 
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

greedy sons of bitches....:mad: AGAIN...this proves that Michael was nothing more than just a dollar sign to them. If they REALLY wanted the truth then they would be asking for $1.00.. The SAME truth is going to be revealed if they ask for ONE OR FORTY BILLION...so its NOT truth they are seeking here...its Money. Disgusted by them once again,
 
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

Who decides on the amount being awarded?
 
the California Court of Appeals ordered Michael’s medical records unsealed.

Is this a typo? I thought his medical records were sealed.
 
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

$40 billion? The Jacksons are delusional. Can't believe this.
 
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

Do we have any estimation on when could the appeal judge rule on this?

Can I still have hope that this claim can be dismissed and the trial be canceled?

I don't know if I'll be able to handle this trial well. I just want it to disappear...
 
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

40 billion? What do the Jacksons expect to do with that money? 99.9% of people would never see that kind of money. It's a ridiculous amount. Even 40 million would be a ridiculous amount. Even 1 dollar would be a ridiculous amount. But I doubt they would be granted anything close to that anyway. I'm still hoping the judge dismisses this case and laughs in their face, for Michael's sake :no:
 
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

$40 billion is an unbelievable number. MJ Estate averages $150 Million in gross revenues a year if we assumed Michael lived to be 90 years old (40 more years) that would bring his gross income to $6 billion. So I'm wondering on what basis Katherine's experts have came up with that number.
 
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

I think AEG has made an excellent argument that there is no direct connection between a medical doctor being in debt, not board certified, treating an entertainment star, and killing them. They make a great case that being in debt does not mean you are a murderer and that CA law requires a direct connection. So many people are in debt these days (maybe everyone??) that this does not seem to be a sign of a criminal??? I agree that logically and legally, there is no way AEG could have foreseen what Murray was doing to MJ, how totally irresponsible and incompetent he was, and the consequences for this lawsuit to damage law re hiring and company negligence is great.

On the other hand, I have seen a lot of really bad judge's decisions. Michael had his share of bad judges, like the one in 93 that let the civil trial proceed with a concurrent criminal investigation, along with other bad rulings. I also was not happy with Melville in 05. We got way lucky with Judge Pastor in the CM trial and I loved his comments before sentencing--wow--that guy was incredible. I have a feeling Palazuelos is not up to par to let this negligent hiring idea proceed.
 
Last edited:
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

tumblr_mh9a4jdtm71rhk2w1o2_250.gif
tumblr_min1azEQq71r116s7o1_400.gif
:blink:




Billion? :wtf: They're all crazy! :crazy:
tumblr_mdxt67va7v1qh7ov5o2_r1_250.gif
 
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

YES!! That is the best news I have heard since the judge allowed the case to continue. I agree with AEG 100%, especially this: - AEG states there's no direct connection between Michael's 2009 anesthesia overdose and Murray's debt and Michael's past painkiller addiction. Exactly. It seems to me the judge is buying the argument that because Michael was an addict the act of taking prof is something an addict will do, so AEG should know about it. Somehow the information that Michael took prof to sleep is lost & all you see is addict taking prof, so it leaves the idea that prof is an addictive drug.

I hope AEG wins this appeal, & if they do not, I hope the family loses the trial. Here there are asking for billions, in a case that is not geared to learn the truth about the tragic night, because based on the witness list, there is no one there that can give information about the tragic night. This case is about drugs & money and nothing else.

Finally, I could thank AEG for something--using the words "past painkiller addiction." YES. Michael was not a raving addict at his death.

The only negative I see from this is the unsealing of the medical documents. Does anyone know if it is unsealed only for the justices to review, but not for public viewing? I am hoping they look at it and seal it back. I don't want to see stories coming from the papers misrepresenting the information in his medical record.
 
Last edited:
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

I can see the whole thing being dismissed, makes no sense.
 
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

AEG stated to Radar in that article above, that they really don't expect it will be dismissed as it very rare, but they at least want a ruling or more detailed explaination of the how the Judge came to that decision. I think Once this goes to trial AEG will be able to show all these fact and show it is unreasonable and impossible for them to forsee such a thing. or even suspect Murray would compromise his oath and commit manslaughter.

Is this going to be a jury trial or bench trial ? If its a Jury trial I think AEG may win this case.
 
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

40 billion ?? !!



It has to be a typo ???
 
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

jury trial bee.. is that 40 bill an actually provern figure? where did AEG get it from.is it written in some documents from the family??


=================================
AEG states there's no direct connection between Michael's 2009 anesthesia overdose and Murray's debt and Michael's past painkiller addiction.
=================================

i find it ironic how AEG are changing their opinion to suit their claims. before it was mj was a raving druggie for the last 20 years and now its all about PAST addiction in 93 on painkillers which is irrlevent to the case as painkillers had nothing to do with mjs death.re gongaware so the family are claiming because gongaware knew about mjs 93 addiction he should have known that murray was giving mj diprivan?? so they arent even claiming gongaware knew about diprivan in 93 or 97? hows that logical


there are some excellent arguments in the appeal.re drs being in debt and all drs who basically work for pop stars are dr feels goods going by the judges arguement that means u could never hire a dr at all . personally imo the judge obviously has a bias opinion of mj becasue her arguments are not logical but of a person that thinks mj was a druggie and O/D like other typcial pop stars when there is no evidence to support that. i dont hold out much help for the appeal.the courts never seem to have the balls to go with them regardless of the argument
 
Last edited:
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

$40 billion is an unbelievable number. MJ Estate averages $150 Million in gross revenues a year if we assumed Michael lived to be 90 years old (40 more years) that would bring his gross income to $6 billion. So I'm wondering on what basis Katherine's experts have came up with that number.

and that is assuming that he would have been making that kind of money each year until 90, which is at best inaccurate.

Plus, MJ did not make that kind of money in the last 10 years of his life even before the 2003 allegations, he was averaging at most $50m - $75m per album release.
 
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

The documents starts with saying Jacksons seek $40 billion damages from AEG Live.

The amount of money asked is so ridiculous that I was wondering if Jackson's side plays tactical game? They put huge amount out there in hoping to settlement from AEG, and if AEG offers 20 million, still big money for Jacksons and they take it?

AEG is stating that the Superior Court had made an error because it didn't explain how AEG should have foresee Murray would administer Michael fatal Propofol given that Murray "may" compromise his oath due to his debt and Michael had addiction to painkillers years ago. AEG states that the law requires a more direct relationship.

I agree with that statement.

AEG's lawyer also states this ruling is also creates the notion that people in debt are morally suspect and unfit for positions of responsibility even if they have taken oaths and do not have history of wrongful conduct. It also creates legal negligence to hire licenses professional with personal debts. AEG states this is a problem for California employers and workers.

That is so well put. I found it offensive that Jacksons side thinks people with debt are more risk that the people who has no debt. They should go and fins a mirror. No Jackson would work if that was the case, as most of them has bankruptcies and money problems behind/or still has. Heck, I don't understand how Jackson 4 is touring as all of them has money problems, has their tour not checked their background as they might go and do something stupid like kill someone?


AEG states that the Superior Court made a mistake by allowing negligent hiring claim and explains
- There's no dispute that Murray was a licensed physician.
- There's no dispute that Murray treated Michael for 3 years with no issues.
- AEG argues Murray's debt or Michael's past painkiller addiction would not make it foreseeable that Murray will commit criminal manslaughter by administering anesthesia to Michael in his bedroom. AEG states CA law requires a direct relationship between the "warning sign" and the harm suffered.
- AEG states there's no direct connection between Michael's 2009 anesthesia overdose and Murray's debt and Michael's past painkiller addiction.
- Courts ruling creates a legal inference that people with debt are morally suspect and unfit for positions of responsibility even if they have taken oaths and have no history of wrong conduct. This will be problematic for workers and organizations.
- AEG states CA law states a person has no duty to protect a person from a third party's actions, especially these are criminal conduct. Negligent hiring is a small exception but it requires knowing the employee causes a particular risk and that particular harm happening.

Even if AEG doesn't get their appeal dismissing the remaining claim, but if they put a pressure on these issues during the trial, especially people in debt, I bet there is people in a jury that has debts and they will not be happy to hear they are categorized as a risk.


- Jacksons argue that as AEG knew Michael's 1993 painkiller addiction, they should have undertaken a through investigation into Murray, run a credit check / financial background check, or hire a private investigator.

To be honest, I think the whole world knew MJ's 93 painkiller addiction, including "family".
Did they hire a private investigator to check out Klein and other docs?


- Jacksons argue that Murray closing his practice might make him act unethical. Therefore they argue that AEG should have refused Michael's insistence to bring his own doctor to UK.

???? They know damn well that no one can say what MJ should/or shouldn't do.
Jackson's knows first hand when he says no to tour with brothers, that means no.


- AEG argues that Superior Court was wrong in saying Michael's 1993 painkiller addiction required AEG to run a investigate Murray's finances and AEG might be negligent in hiring Murray without knowing his financial condition.

I agree.


- AEG says there's no law that evaluates a physicians competence based on pressure their patients could assert. AEG states it's wrong to question credentials of doctors because they treated former addicts or famous people. AEG says if this is the case no doctor would treat former addicts or famous people.

True.

- AEG states law says that a doctors competence is determined by licenses unless there's specific evidence of incompetence.
- AEG states Superior Court also made a mistake in saying Murray's debt could be a factor in determining his competence.
- AEG states personal debts do not make a person professionally incompetent. There was no reason to think Murray's debt would cause him perform poorly or commit manslaughter.

I agree all of above.


- AEG states that Jacksons claim they should have known Murray was not board certified and this should show that Murray was unfit to deal with Michael's sleep and dependency issues. AEG states Jacksons could not show that AEG knew Michael's sleep issues, they were able to demonstrate Gongaware knew Michael's 1993 painkiller addiction issues, Jacksons did not show any evidence that AEG knew Michael had dependency issues 16 years later in 2009.
- AEG states board certifications is voluntary, there are a lot of doctors that aren't board certified but more than capable.

Whether CM was board certified or not, it wouldn't have made any difference on CM actions. He would have killed MJ anyways the way he was carrying on.



- AEG states the two factors - Michael's 1993 addiction and potential for bad ethics in entertainment industry - would mean they could not hire any doctor in connection with the tour.
-AEG states this would create an impossible situation for concert promoters to never work with anyone that has a history of drug abuse.
- AEG also states courts ruling mean that people with debt should never be hired as they can compromise ethics. AEG states this will make the current employment system fall.
- AEG mentions recent laws that bars employers run financial credit checks or request credit reports on employees except exceptional situations. This law was amended because people who lost their jobs had no income to pay their debts would not be able to get jobs due to low credit scores.
- AEG goes on hypothetical and asks should they refuse Michael's long term physician and force him to see someone he didn't know, how much debt is too much debt, should they not hire a recent graduate with substantial student loans, should they only hire doctors with no debts, but wouldn't any doctor closing their practice to go on tour with Michael wouldn't be subject to financial pressure,

Very strong points.
 
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

The documents starts with saying Jacksons seek $40 billion damages from AEG Live.

The amount of money asked is so ridiculous that I was wondering if Jackson's side plays tactical game? They put huge amount out there in hoping to settlement from AEG, and if AEG offers 20 million, still big money for Jacksons and they take it?

AEG is stating that the Superior Court had made an error because it didn't explain how AEG should have foresee Murray would administer Michael fatal Propofol given that Murray "may" compromise his oath due to his debt and Michael had addiction to painkillers years ago. AEG states that the law requires a more direct relationship.

I agree with that statement.

AEG's lawyer also states this ruling is also creates the notion that people in debt are morally suspect and unfit for positions of responsibility even if they have taken oaths and do not have history of wrongful conduct. It also creates legal negligence to hire licenses professional with personal debts. AEG states this is a problem for California employers and workers.

That is so well put. I found it offensive that Jacksons side thinks people with debt are more risk that the people who has no debt. They should go and fins a mirror. No Jackson would work if that was the case, as most of them has bankruptcies and money problems behind/or still has. Heck, I don't understand how Jackson 4 is touring as all of them has money problems, has their tour not checked their background as they might go and do something stupid like kill someone?


AEG states that the Superior Court made a mistake by allowing negligent hiring claim and explains
- There's no dispute that Murray was a licensed physician.
- There's no dispute that Murray treated Michael for 3 years with no issues.
- AEG argues Murray's debt or Michael's past painkiller addiction would not make it foreseeable that Murray will commit criminal manslaughter by administering anesthesia to Michael in his bedroom. AEG states CA law requires a direct relationship between the "warning sign" and the harm suffered.
- AEG states there's no direct connection between Michael's 2009 anesthesia overdose and Murray's debt and Michael's past painkiller addiction.
- Courts ruling creates a legal inference that people with debt are morally suspect and unfit for positions of responsibility even if they have taken oaths and have no history of wrong conduct. This will be problematic for workers and organizations.
- AEG states CA law states a person has no duty to protect a person from a third party's actions, especially these are criminal conduct. Negligent hiring is a small exception but it requires knowing the employee causes a particular risk and that particular harm happening.

Even if AEG doesn't get their appeal dismissing the remaining claim, but if they put a pressure on these issues during the trial, especially people in debt, I bet there is people in a jury that has debts and they will not be happy to hear they are categorized as a risk.


- Jacksons argue that as AEG knew Michael's 1993 painkiller addiction, they should have undertaken a through investigation into Murray, run a credit check / financial background check, or hire a private investigator.

To be honest, I think the whole world knew MJ's 93 painkiller addiction, including "family".
Did they hire a private investigator to check out Klein and other docs?


- Jacksons argue that Murray closing his practice might make him act unethical. Therefore they argue that AEG should have refused Michael's insistence to bring his own doctor to UK.

???? They know damn well that no one can say what MJ should/or shouldn't do.
Jackson's knows first hand when he says no to tour with brothers, that means no.


- AEG argues that Superior Court was wrong in saying Michael's 1993 painkiller addiction required AEG to run a investigate Murray's finances and AEG might be negligent in hiring Murray without knowing his financial condition.

I agree.


- AEG says there's no law that evaluates a physicians competence based on pressure their patients could assert. AEG states it's wrong to question credentials of doctors because they treated former addicts or famous people. AEG says if this is the case no doctor would treat former addicts or famous people.

True.

- AEG states law says that a doctors competence is determined by licenses unless there's specific evidence of incompetence.
- AEG states Superior Court also made a mistake in saying Murray's debt could be a factor in determining his competence.
- AEG states personal debts do not make a person professionally incompetent. There was no reason to think Murray's debt would cause him perform poorly or commit manslaughter.

I agree all of above.


- AEG states that Jacksons claim they should have known Murray was not board certified and this should show that Murray was unfit to deal with Michael's sleep and dependency issues. AEG states Jacksons could not show that AEG knew Michael's sleep issues, they were able to demonstrate Gongaware knew Michael's 1993 painkiller addiction issues, Jacksons did not show any evidence that AEG knew Michael had dependency issues 16 years later in 2009.
- AEG states board certifications is voluntary, there are a lot of doctors that aren't board certified but more than capable.

Whether CM was board certified or not, it wouldn't have made any difference on CM actions. He would have killed MJ anyways the way he was carrying on.



- AEG states the two factors - Michael's 1993 addiction and potential for bad ethics in entertainment industry - would mean they could not hire any doctor in connection with the tour.
-AEG states this would create an impossible situation for concert promoters to never work with anyone that has a history of drug abuse.
- AEG also states courts ruling mean that people with debt should never be hired as they can compromise ethics. AEG states this will make the current employment system fall.
- AEG mentions recent laws that bars employers run financial credit checks or request credit reports on employees except exceptional situations. This law was amended because people who lost their jobs had no income to pay their debts would not be able to get jobs due to low credit scores.
- AEG goes on hypothetical and asks should they refuse Michael's long term physician and force him to see someone he didn't know, how much debt is too much debt, should they not hire a recent graduate with substantial student loans, should they only hire doctors with no debts, but wouldn't any doctor closing their practice to go on tour with Michael wouldn't be subject to financial pressure,

Very strong points.

@Bubs You took the words right out of my mouth, great post.
 
The 3rd factor, then CM financial debt, must be the basis for Respondent Court’s holding. But from a policy perspective, it is even more problematic. In essence, Respondent court found that a professional in debt might foreseeable compromise his ethics and therefore should never been hired in the first place. This is contrary to law and cannot be good public policy. If the law places liability on a company for an independent contractor’s negligence simply because the independent contractor had debt, and therefore could be subject to compromised ethics, it is not an exaggeration to say that the system as we know it will fall apart.

In any number of areas, we trust professionals (docs, nurses, lawyers, judges, financial advisers). We hire them because their specific, professional obligations are a quarantee from both the professional and the organizational that regulate them that those professionals adhere to a specific ethical code. We do not, when we are choosing a doctor or a lawyer, conduct a financial background check to ensure their ethics will not be compromised by debt. Instead, we choose to believe, as a society, that personal finances do not destroy professional competence.

This is not merely a moral belief. It is necessary because if personal finances are assumed to render a person professionally incompetent, those who most need work will never find it.

Respondents Court ruling, if allowed to stand, will seriously chill the hiring of those in debt. Moreover, it will create a vast new area of potential liability with no discernible limits. Respondent Court hold there is a “triable issue” as to whether AEG acted negligently, but provides no alternative as to what AEG should have otherwise done. Should they have refused to engage CM and forced MJ to use another physician with whom he didn’t have long-term preexisting physician-patient relationship? Agreed only to engage a physician with no debt whatsoever? Even that would not solve the problem, as any physician who had to leave his practice to go on tour with Jackson would theoretically be subject to financial pressure at the hands of his patient. And how much debt is too much debt? Would recent med school graduate with substantial student loans be allowed to be hired?
-------------------------------------------------------

Realistically, when you read this bit, do you find yourself agreeing with AEG? I did.
When you looking into obtaining a family physician, do you check doctors financial background or do you check if there are malpractice claims and whether doctor is licensed? And, even if you have chance to check financial status, will it stop you regaining this doctor even if doctor has some debts, does it make you think he is not doing his job because of his debts?

Lets say there is a situation that you hire a family doctor, you checked his background for malpractices, licenses and financial status. Then you family doctor makes a mistake and family member gets killed. There wouldn't be any malpractice suits against these doctors, because people would be busy suing themselves for not taking into consideration that your doctor was in debts and was a risk. I see where AEG is going with this, and makes perfect sense to me.
 
ivy;3789981 said:
Additionally all but one of her claims against the remaining defendants were dismissed and the California Court of Appeals ordered Michael’s medical records unsealed.


In response to the filing, the Court of Appeal indicated that it would be unsealing certain records of the late pop singer, including Jackson’s medical records.

I don't understand why Michael's medical records needed to be unsealed?
What they have to do with this appeal?
 
40 billion sounds totally surreal , it's more than the whole French social services deficit each year ! (which is around 10-15 billion €).
I find it hard to believe it's the real figure, there must have been a typo somewhere in tle legal doc, i would think it's rather 40 million , which is still a lot, and doesn't sound realisic either to me, but more realistic than 40 billion.
I can't believe a lawyer would ask for such a crazy figure. :bugeyed
 
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

^^^Restitution for CM was calculated 100 million, but we know Jacksons are so out there that the amount doesn't surprise me. They ask enough money to support for Katherine's cubs, cubs of the cubs, cubs of the cubs of the cubs, so none of them learn to make their own money.
 
Last edited:
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

to answer some questions

- this is a jury trial with jury selection expected to start at April 2nd

- $ 40 billion is mentioned in the document. It's in the very first paragraph. It's hard to say whether it's a typo or not.

- During discovery sides share their expert reports with each other. So probably AEG was given reports of Katherine's experts and they are now aware that Katherine will be claiming such a high amount of monetary damages.

- Jury decides the amount of monetary compensation - of course if Katherine wins. Jury will listen to both sides experts, AEG's experts will probably give much lower estimates, and then decide the monetary compensation not only based on the damages but the responsibility level. The judge can change the amount if she believes the jury gave a unrealistically high amount.

- About appeals. AEG can win the appeal but what the lawyer for AEG is trying to say is that odds are against them. Only 20 % of the appeals are successful.

and a personal opinion

- such a high amount could be tactic to scare AEG into a settlement but how do you settle a $40 Billion claim? I always thought we were looking to a $102 Million in damages (restitution number) and believed a $20-$30 Million settlement (less than half) as a possibility. but what's the amount to settle a $40 billion claim? I don't expect $20 Million for example will be enough. If the unnamed sources for the articles from last week are an indication, I think it's safe to say that Katherine's side are aiming for $500 Million or $1 billion. I'm thinking that's still too high of a number for AEG to consider. But you never know.
 
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

- Jacksons argue that as AEG knew Michael's 1993 painkiller addiction, they should have undertaken a through investigation into Murray, run a credit check / financial background check, or hire a private investigator.

To be honest, I think the whole world knew MJ's 93 painkiller addiction, including "family".
Did they hire a private investigator to check out Klein and other docs?

Exactly!! The family according to them tried interventions in the early 2000's. Since they knew of MJ's potential problems why didn't they have MJ's doctors investigated by the medical board. Katherine could've easily went to the CA medical board and had Klein and Hoefflin investigated for doing unnecessary cosmetic procedures and giving him demerol. Klein and Hoefflin were MJ's doctors for 25 years. Why didn't Katherine investigate them?
 
Re: AEG Live goes to Court of Appeal to dismiss remaining negligent hiring claim

40 BILLION DOLLARS!

What the heck is wrong with these people!

You know what, let me get out of this section before I say something that may get me banned.

Please excuse me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top