Latest on MJJC

Official: AllGood Entertainment Sues Michael Jackson

Superstition said:
The shows aren't going to stopped. Don't let the crafty wording of these lawsuits sue you: these are baseless claims and no different than if you or I went to the local courthouse to sue MJ.
Click to expand...

Okay, I won't let them sue me. :lol:
 
all i can say is i cant wait for these concersts to start. Honestly I'm learning now not to get so emotionally involved in these things, will all the times suing occurs, it's just not worth the stress anymore. Keep prayin' guys.
 
mjfan4ever2009 said:
Yes. So why is Michael the only Jackson family member being brought up in this if AGE were on the legal level with this case? Frank signed for the whole family. So wouldn't it be Frank Dileo and the Jackson Family as defendants here? Me thinks something stinks.
Click to expand...

I think that MJ is the only defendant here because the deal with AllGood clarified that Michael was prohibited to sign to any deal/perform the next 18 months ( starting from november 2008). So according to them, he breached a contract. That's why they are only suing him and not his family.


It sure is very stressfull to be a Mj-fan. Heartattack after heartattack.. Lol ;)
 
Sifa_Dias said:
Swiftly, like the Raymone case? His legal team doesn't SEEM very capable to be honest, but we'll see. I'm not wishing any setback to MJ, but his affairs are so murky. It's very simple really. IF Dileo IS working for Michael, and has the authority to broker deals in his name, and IF he signed something, then yes, they surely do have grounds to stop the UK concerts, as was part of the contract. These are all big if's, but it is possible.
Click to expand...

Big difference between these two cases (Baine and AllGood).

Baine has the benefit of actually having been on MJ's team and possibly being owed some money (though I doubt that's anywhere in the $44million range).

With this AllGood/Dileo thing.... it's a bit more cut and dry.
 
But what does Allgood have to gain by having MJ delay or stop the shows? If Allgood is right...Michael probably pays them the 20 million...if they are not right, they won't even get a case against him, if they do...and MJ needs to stop the shows...nobody gets anything. Mike doesn't get the money from the shows, AEG will be pissed and Allgood won't get shit.
 
Staffordshire Bullterrier said:
But what does Allgood have to gain by having MJ delay or stop the shows? If Allgood is right...Michael probably pays them the 20 million...if they are not right, they won't even get a case against him, if they do...and MJ needs to stop the shows...nobody gets anything. Mike doesn't get the money from the shows, AEG will be pissed and Allgood won't get shit.
Click to expand...
Yeah... couldn't MJ countersue them for preventing him doing the shows and thus losing earnings?? So complicated! Uh!
 
Big Apple2 said:
Oh and here's one more tidbit to throw in the mix.

According to those "papers" TSCM told us about some weeks back, Mr. DiLeo also signed on behalf of REBBIE & LATOYA.

Yes, even Rebbie and Latoya. LOL!
Click to expand...

The thing is, despite what AGE is now trying to claim, Frank Dileo's signature on the original agreement in no way indicated that he had the power of authority to sign for ANY of the Jacksons, let alone the whole clan. The agreement did not even try to imply that Frank's signature was a binding agreement for all of the Jacksons to perform, as this clause from the original agreement indicates:

---
PURCHASER shall allow "Company [Frank Dileo]" 120 days to acquirer [sic] written confirmation from all family members involved including Michael Jackson. If more time is needed to confirm the participation of the Artists, the parties shall discuss, and agree in writing upon, a reasonable extension (Purchaser and Company).
---

He signed an agreement simply to verify that he would attempt to get all of the Jacksons on board, and was given 120 days to get their authorization and signatures for the concerts. He obviously failed as many of the Jacksons weren't even aware of the plans when details of this case surfaced back in March. None of this has anything to do with Michael Jackson, yet AGE would like to make it about him.

Vici said:
I think that MJ is the only defendant here because the deal with AllGood clarified that Michael was prohibited to sign to any deal/perform the next 18 months ( starting from november 2008). So according to them, he breached a contract. That's why they are only suing him and not his family.
Click to expand...

Yeah, a contract which simply does not exist. Good luck to AGE on producing any contract or agreement that is actually signed by Michael Jackson, or for that matter any legal document signed by all of the Jacksons and Frank Dileo to give him power of authority to sign them into any agreements without their knowledge. None of this exists, it is a non-case with regards to Michael Jackson.
 
---
PURCHASER shall allow "Company [Frank Dileo]" 120 days to acquirer [sic] written confirmation from all family members involved including Michael Jackson. If more time is needed to confirm the participation of the Artists, the parties shall discuss, and agree in writing upon, a reasonable extension (Purchaser and Company).
---

He signed an agreement simply to verify that he would attempt to get all of the Jacksons on board, and was given 120 days to get their authorization and signatures for the concerts. He obviously failed as many of the Jacksons weren't even aware of the plans when details of this case surfaced back in March. None of this has anything to do with Michael Jackson, yet AGE would like to make it about him.
Click to expand...


I think this will toss the case out. They are attention whores. Their 15 minutes are up soon.
 
Staffordshire Bullterrier said:
But what does Allgood have to gain by having MJ delay or stop the shows? If Allgood is right...Michael probably pays them the 20 million...if they are not right, they won't even get a case against him, if they do...and MJ needs to stop the shows...nobody gets anything. Mike doesn't get the money from the shows, AEG will be pissed and Allgood won't get shit.
Click to expand...


I agree. The Allgood show is not supposed to be until July 3, 2010. (as Allgood has been saying for at least the last month or so). If that was the case, why should they sue when they have made an agreement with Michael to just have the show after the 02 concerts were finished? It doesn't make any sense to me. And Michael would also be inviting a lawsuit by AEG if he has to scrap the 02 shows for this.
 
Well, if they dare touch the London shows they deserve a sabotage by the whole Michael Jackson fan community. No one but go to their f@cking show IF it happens. They can't do this to us. We are just 32 days away from premiere. I'm freaking out now!!! AGE go and f@ck yourself!!!
 
mjfan4ever2009 said:
I agree. The Allgood show is not supposed to be until July 3, 2010. (as Allgood has been saying for at least the last month or so). If that was the case, why should they sue when they have made an agreement with Michael to just have the show after the 02 concerts were finished? It doesn't make any sense to me.
Click to expand...

'Cuz they are bitchin about the fact that Mj agreed (according to them) that he would not sign up to anything else within the next 18 months. They wanted to be the first with the news that Mj was back in the game, they wanted to be THE organisation that broke the news that Mj is touring again after 12 years. The excitment to announce the shows and the massive Michael-mania. Headlines after headlines etc. It would be good for their publicity. Their plan backfired heavinly and they are just pissed for not being the one.
 
they just want money and some free publicity for their company. money money money money money money money money. Mj does need to be careful what he signs and verbally "promises". you can sue for anything these days.
 
Their claims are so weak. I wouldn't think this lawsuit will go through.

Plus I thought Dileo wasn't Michael's manager now????
 
sometimes a verbal contract does not stand in a court. if mj did say it and not write it then its DiLeo's word against Michael's.

i do not see how ALLgood can STOP the concerts. if they did that then it would also make them look bad. to them and to everyone looking in its "It's my way or the highway" which shouldn't be. they are going to find that they picked a fight with the wrong person.
 
I just hope you guys are right about that, we don't and can't know for sure if his manager at the time or Mike himself(even though he declined any concerts with his brothers)didn't sign an agreement. If he did....his manager and/or MJ is wrong in this.
 
NJ promoter sues Michael Jackson, alleging breach
By DAVID PORTER – 1 hour ago


NEWARK, N.J. (AP) — A New Jersey concert promoter has sued entertainer Michael Jackson for $40 million for allegedly breaching a contract to play a reunion concert with other family members.
In a lawsuit filed Wednesday in federal court in Manhattan, Allgood Entertainment claims it made a deal with Jackson's then-manager to produce a reunion concert with the Jackson family this summer and possibly a pay-per-view Jackson family reunion event.
The deal called for Jackson not to perform elsewhere before the event or for at least three months after it. The lawsuit says Jackson, manager Frank DiLeo and event promoter AEG broke the contract by signing to do a series of concerts in London this summer, which may also include a pay-per-view event.
According to the lawsuit, AEG knew of the agreement between AllGood, Dileo and Jackson, "but due to their dominance and power in the live performance industry, coerced and/or induced Dileo and Jackson to disregard the agreements with AllGood and to work with it instead."
"We've given Michael Jackson and AEG every opportunity, publicly and privately, to resolve this matter and to date we have not heard from anyone," said Patrick Allocco, Allgood managing partner.
Allocco said the last contact with either camp was May 22 in Beverly Hills.
Representatives for Jackson and AEG could not immediately be reached Wednesday.
Allgood attorney Ira Meyerowitz said the company isn't looking to stop Jackson from performing.
"What were looking for," Meyerowitz said, "is for our clients to be involved in the London concerts or be compensated for agreements they entered into."


http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jcVT1QJugVoU6MUY0abRKuZGSoWAD98O23F81
 
I haven't read the briefs, but based on what I read earlier about this case the lawsuit seems tenuous, at best. I highly doubt DiLeo ever had power to represent Michael Jackson. Moreover, even if it turns out that the suit does have validity AEG will just pay AGE to settle. They aren't going to sacrifice 250 million, or whatever it is they're making from the concerts, for the 20 (absolute max they'd give) AGE wants. They'd essentially be leaving 230 million, or whatever the amount is, on the table.

Also, AGE may have jurisdiction over AEG's HQ, but do they have power to enforce an injunction in the UK? I'm not sure of this.
 
Why did AllGood Entertainment attached an UNSIGNED copy of their complaint with their press release? I was just wondering if that was the norm.

(The attached complaint is also filled with typos and incomplete information concerning MJJ Productions, but that's another story.)
 
I'm positive it will all be fine.

You don't hire a band, dancers, Ortega, have AEG live backing you, rehearse for months for the biggest stage show of the decade and get stopped by something like this a month before it start's. Either it will all amount to nothing, or AEG or MJ will settle with them. There is no way they will let this stand in there way. Besides, considering AllGood are willing to dissapoint over a million fans, it's not like they care about MJ or us anyway, they just want money. If they get it they will shut up. Anything for money, lie for you, die for you, even sell your soul to the devil.
 
I don't think for one moment the London concerts will not happen because of this, there is no signed contract, no proof that they ever spoke directly to Michael, and unless he has given Frank power of attorney to sign on his behalf, and please god he hasn't then I can't see that they have a leg to stand on.

It is the usual story, Michael has a long history of settling law suits and I am sure they are hoping for easy money from him just to get rid of them. It is the usual story, people believing they can speak for Michael. What he needs to do is a statement making it clear who can speak for him and make deals.

This case has no legs at all.
 
athina_livadi said:
According to the lawsuit, AEG knew of the agreement between AllGood, Dileo and Jackson, "but due to their dominance and power in the live performance industry, coerced and/or induced Dileo and Jackson to disregard the agreements with AllGood and to work with it instead."

"We've given Michael Jackson and AEG every opportunity, publicly and privately, to resolve this matter and to date we have not heard from anyone," said Patrick Allocco, Allgood managing partner.
Click to expand...

Funny that they have not produced said "agreements." Those so-called agreements should have been attached to the complaint they filed. That's #1.

It also appears that AEG is not too concerned, since AllGood Entertainment sent AEG a "cease and desist" letter way back in March. That's #2.

And now their lawyer is talking about them being a part of the O2 concert dates. PLEASE!
 
Maybe Michael got confused with the company names? :lol: AGE is short for All Good Entertainment while the O2 concerts are promoted by AEG! :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top