[ Pretrial Discussion Closed ] AEG files summary judgment motion to dismiss Katherine's lawsuit

[8701girl]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

Jail time is much is harder time than prison. Prisons you have more freedom. You can buy your own TV , visit the library, gym and weight room, music room, educational classes. ect. You can roam free out of your cells .. etc etc. depending on what level you are in.

I thought prisons & jail were the same thing ...... :huh:




The legal system is all werid to me

 

[jaydom7]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

exactly jamba!

I've always found it hypocritical for Katherine to blame AEG when she was right there. She told Piers Morgan that all they cared about was money and they didn't care about Michael, well the same can be said of her couldn't it?

 

[Ashtanga]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

Katherine is adding even more lawyers to her team

02/28/2013 Ex-Parte Application ( granting pro hac vice Alinor Sterling )
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

02/28/2013 Ex-Parte Application ( granting pro hac vice carey reilly )
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

02/28/2013 Order ( order pro hac vice carey reilly )
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

02/28/2013 Order (order pro hac vice alinor sterling )
Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner

02/27/2013 Order
Filed by Judge

02/27/2013 Order
Filed by Judge

02/27/2013 Order
Filed by Judge

Why are so many lawyers? :wtf2 She must be desperate to win this case. :sigh:

 

[Bubs]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

Kenny Ortega talks about a psychologist. It's apparent that he believed the issue to be a mental issue such as nervousness and so on. Dileo's voice mail to Murray shows he might have suspected some sort of drugs but not given by Murray as he asks Murray to test him to find out.

I'm thinking at most AEG knew Michael not mentally being ready for the concerts and / or suspected Klein.

Actually a little correction, we don't know if AEG did a background check on Murray or not. At least I don't remember them stating that they did. I'm thinking their point is more like even if there was a background check there would be no red flags - which I agree. Murray was a real and licensed doctor, he had no history of Propofol or even pain killers, he had no history of malpractice plus AEG's contract with Murray required Murray to maintain all required licenses and a malpractice insurance. This again shows that they were making sure that Murray was a proper doctor and they weren't cutting corners or giving him passes.


edited to add: the more I think the more I wonder why don't the judge dismiss the whole case. She still might.

I finally found where I read that AEG did CM's background check, the leaked emails:


Phillips resisted the request for immediate psychiatric intervention. "It is critical that neither you, me or anyone around this show become amateur psychiatrists or physicians," Phillips wrote.

He added that Murray, "who I am gaining immense respect for as I get to deal with him more," was confident the singer was ready.

"This doctor is extremely successful (we check everyone out) and does not need this gig so he [is] totally unbiased and ethical," Phillips wrote.
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/sep/02/local/la-me-aeg-jackson-20120902/2

 

[Bubs]

Suit over hiring of Michael Jackson's doctor to go to trial
Published March 01, 2013
Associated Press

Nov. 29, 2011: Dr. Conrad Murray closes his eyes after he was sentenced to four years in county jail for his involuntary manslaughter conviction of pop star Michael Jackson in Los Angeles. (REUTERS)
LOS ANGELES – A judge has dismissed all but one count in a civil lawsuit by Michael Jackson's mother against concert giant AEG Live, which hired a doctor who was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in the singer's death.
Superior Court Judge Yvette Palazuelos' ruling Thursday means that Katherine Jackson will have a trial on her claim that AEG negligently hired and supervised former cardiologist Conrad Murray. The ruling dismisses claims that AEG could be held liable for Murray's conduct and breached its duty to properly care for the pop superstar.
AEG Live was promoting a series of comeback concerts by Michael Jackson in London titled "This Is It." Jackson died in June 2009 while in final preparations for the shows after Murray administered a lethal dose of the anesthetic propofol in the singer's bedroom.
Katherine Jackson's attorney Kevin Boyle was not immediately available for comment but argued at a hearing Monday that AEG controlled Murray's actions and failed to properly investigate him before agreeing to pay him to work as the singer's physician.
He cited Murray's debt problems as a red flag that AEG should have spotted and contends the company created a serious conflict between his responsibility to Jackson and his own financial well-being.
Jackson died at age 50 before a contract that would have paid Murray $150,000 a month was finalized.
AEG attorney Marvin Putnam has said Murray was not employed by the promoter and he expects the company to win at trial. He said Katherine Jackson's lawyers will be unable to prove that AEG should have foreseen that Murray was a danger to the "Thriller" singer.
A trial is scheduled to begin April 2.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainmen...-jackson-doctor-to-go-to-trial/#ixzz2MLYNbuGe

 

[ivy]

Judge has finalized her order.

Just got this message

Anthony McCartney ‏@mccartneyAP
.@Ivy_4MJ Ruling was issued yesterday, but hadn't been put into the court's public system when we exchanged tweets earlier.

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

Detailed story

SUIT OVER HIRING OF JACKSON DOCTOR TO GO TO TRIAL
By ANTHONY McCARTNEY
— Mar. 1 8:09 PM EST

Calif. A judge ruled Thursday, Feb. 28, 2013 that Katherine Jackson's lawsuit against AEG Live can continue on a single claim of negligent hiring and supervision of the doctor convicted of involuntary manslaughter in her son Michael's June 2009 death. (AP Photo/Matt Sayles, File)

LOS ANGELES (AP) — A judge has dismissed all but one count in a civil lawsuit by Michael Jackson's mother against concert giant AEG Live, which hired a doctor who was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in the singer's death.

Superior Court Judge Yvette Palazuelos' ruling Thursday means that Katherine Jackson will have a trial on her claim that AEG negligently hired and supervised former cardiologist Conrad Murray. The ruling dismisses claims that AEG could be held liable for Murray's conduct and breached its duty to properly care for the pop superstar.

AEG Live was promoting a series of comeback concerts by Michael Jackson in London titled "This Is It." Jackson died in June 2009 while in final preparations for the shows after Murray administered a lethal dose of the anesthetic propofol in the singer's bedroom.

Katherine Jackson's attorney Kevin Boyle was not immediately available for comment but argued at a hearing Monday that AEG controlled Murray's actions and failed to properly investigate him before agreeing to pay him to work as the singer's physician.

He cited Murray's debt problems as a red flag that AEG should have spotted and contends the company created a serious conflict between his responsibility to Jackson and his own financial well-being.

Jackson died at age 50 before a contract that would have paid Murray $150,000 a month was finalized.

AEG attorney Marvin Putnam has said Murray was not employed by the promoter and he expects the company to win at trial. He said Katherine Jackson's lawyers will be unable to prove that AEG should have foreseen that Murray was a danger to the "Thriller" singer.

A trial is scheduled to begin April 2.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/suit-over-hiring-jackson-doctor-go-trial

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

some exchanges

Anthony McCartney ‏@mccartneyAP

.@lmt4mj There was lots of discussion at hearing about whether this is more of an independent contractor-type case or an employee case

.@lmt4mj One challenge is that the pleadings have been sealed, and the order issued isn't the full text of the judge's ruling.
View conversation

.@lmt4mj At some point hopefully we'll get redacted filings that will lay out explanations for the ruling in greater detail.

Yes, and instructions (cont) RT @lmt4mj: @mccartneyAP Can she potentially limit testimony allowed if it attempts to prove claims dismissed?

.@lmt4mj ... Instructions to jury on the law will be pretty crucial. As we get closer to trial, we'll see what limitations are placed.

 

[ivy]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

Hopefully we will see the order Monday to understand it better.

I think it's also time to search a little bit about negligent hiring lawsuits.

 

[Bubs]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

Hopefully we will see the order Monday to understand it better.

I think it's also time to search a little bit about negligent hiring lawsuits.

I think the judge let hiring claim to continue because (I think) AEG took some steps that could be considered what employer would do, such as background check. If they thought that CM wasn't their employee, why do background check at all, especially when CM was the one MJ wanted to hire?

 

[ivy]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

^^

If / when we get the order, we will see the judge explain her decision by referencing older cases and rulings.

 

[jamba]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

I think the judge let hiring claim to continue because (I think) AEG took some steps that could be considered what employer would do, such as background check. If they thought that CM wasn't their employee, why do background check at all, especially when CM was the one MJ wanted to hire?

But DID they actually do any checks? Or did Phillips just say that?

 

[Bubs]

I remember reading it after Katherine's suit against AEG was published, that the lawyers will take their fees from "winnings", and if they lose, they get nothing, but I cannot find the article any longer.
Also didn't Randy complain that the estate didn't join to Katherine's lawsuit against AEG, as the estate saw no base for it?
I suppose Randy wanted the estate to join in for the case to foot the bills.

Anyways,in case I'm mistaken, I'm hoping MJ's estate doesn't pay a penny to Katherine's lawyers and PPB's GAL will oppose any such an attempts, as she did once before in different case.

MJ's will said: The Trustee may distribute as much of the net income and/or principal of the trust estate the Trustee deems necessary or desirable, in his absolute discretion, for Katherine’s care, support, maintenance, comfort and well-being.

In which part does it say to pay for all sort of stupidities? Lawyers can send their bill to Janet, or better yet, to Randy.

 

[ivy]

Some news stories

Law360's Weekly Verdict: Legal Lions & Lambs


Law360, New York (February 28, 2013, 8:01 PM ET) -- Our weekly roundup of the best and the worst of the legal world is a star-studded affair, with our list of lions featuring a late mega-pop star and a Hollywood tabloid regular who doesn't think all press is necessarily good press. Our lambs include Disney lawyers who failed to get a lifeline on a case involving a blockbuster game show and a high-profile securities lawyer who just couldn't wait for his federal sentence to end before tying one on.

This Week's Legal Lions

Lawyers for the company promoting Michael Jackson's "This Is It" tour moonwalked past a suit related to the King of Pop's overdose death in 2009. On Monday, a California judge tentatively dismissed all claims from Jackson's family against Anschutz Entertainment Group Inc., which hired Conrad Murray as Jackson's personal physician. Murray, who delivered a fatal dose of the powerful sedatives he was giving Jackson, was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter in 2011. The judge ruled that AEG wasn't liable because Murray didn't work for the company, but said a negligent hire claim could proceed. Marvin Putnam, Jessica Stebbins and Kathryn Cahan of O'Melveny & Myers LLP represented AEG.

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

AEG Escapes Suit Over Michael Jackson's Death

Law360, Los Angeles (February 25, 2013, 7:50 PM ET) -- A California judge Monday tentatively dismissed all claims brought by Michael Jackson's family over Anschutz Entertainment Group Inc.'s decision to hire the doctor convicted in the performer's death, but indicated she would allow a negligent hiring claim against the company's live show subsidiary.

At a two-hour hearing Monday, Judge Yvette M. Palazuelos indicated she would allow a jury to decide whether AEG Live negligently hired, trained or supervised Conrad Murray, who was convicted in 2011 of delivering a fatal overdose of the drug propofol to Jackson on June 25, 2009. Murray currently is serving a four-year prison sentence.

Marvin S. Putnam of O'Melveny & Myers LLP, a lawyer for AEG, said he was pleased that Judge Palazuelos tentatively dismissed the other claims brought by Jackson's mother Katherine Jackson against AEG, including negligence and those that would have found the company liable for Murray's conduct if he had been its employee.

“This is a simply matter that shouldn't have been filed,” Putnam said after Monday's hearing.

But if Judge Palazuelos allows her tentative ruling to stand, Katherine Jackson's lawyers would be allowed to present to a jury their theory that AEG Live controlled Murray, who later killed Jackson.

Kevin Boyle of Panish Shea & Boyle LLP, an attorney for Katharine Jackson, said during the hearing that AEG Live agreed to pay Murray $150,000 per month and was his true master, not his patient Jackson.

“They had him in this situation where his loyalty became divided,” Boyle said.

Jackson's mother lodged the civil lawsuit in September 2011 on behalf of herself and Jackson's children. She claims that in the run-up to the tour, AEG Live breached contractual duties with the pop star by putting its financial motives ahead of Jackson's health and safety.

AEG Live's alleged disregard for Jackson's well-being and the company's insistence that Murray alone treat Jackson contributed to the star's death, Katharine Jackson claims, arguing that AEG Live failed to perform due diligence in hiring Murray, and recklessly and intentionally ignored her son's personal health.

Katherine Jackson is represented by Brian Panish, Kevin Boyle, Peter J. Polos and Robert Glassman of Panish Shea & Boyle LLP, Michael Koskoff and Bill Bloss of Koskoff Koskoff & Bieder PC, and K.C. Maxwell.

The defendants are represented by Marvin S. Putnam, Jessica L. Stebbins and Kathryn Cahan of O'Melveny & Myers LLP.

The case is Jackson v. AEG Live LLC, case number BC445597, in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles.

--Editing by Andrew Park.

 

[Bubs]

But DID they actually do any checks? Or did Phillips just say that?

I would assume so, as by reading AEG summary judgement and their replies to Katherine side.

“Plaintiffs also contend that had defendants researched CM’s background in detail, two “glaring problems” would’ve emerged. But neither of these supposed “glaring problems” would have put any reasonable person on notice that CM posed safety risk to Jackson. First, plaintiffs contend defendants would have learned CM was not board certified in cardiology. There is no evidence, however that CM lack of board certification rendered him unqualified. Nor could it conceivably put a reasonable person on notice that CM was unfit to treat Jackson’s general medical needs."

“Second, plaintiffs contend a background check would have revealed CM was in debt, but debt doesn’t render a person unqualified to do his job. There was, and would have been no reason to suspect CM debt would cause him to perform poorly as a physician.”

 

[Autumn II]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

I think this remains incredibly complicated, and mixes both morals/ethics, and the law. Ultimately, it will be the law that prevails.

It's murky, at best. We do know, those of us who have read Michael's contract with AEG (and I have. . . .) , that they were fronting him the money, i.e. paying for things (house-rental, staff, etc.) with the understanding of being paid back through his revenues for the shows. That, in itself, is murky area. AEG was covering bills then, but not ultimately?

Michael CHOSE Murray as a doctor. He was not paying him, but AEG was, or at some point, intended to, with the goal of being reimbursed from Michael's earnings from TII in London. We do know that.

Then, there is the issue of the unsigned contract. The contract is THERE, with Murray's name on it, and Michael's name, and AEG. That is a limbo situation, not legally binding, because it was not signed.

Ethically, I do think that AEG bears some responsibility, but probably not legally.

What has not been mentioned much, is that email string, posted here, where CLEARLY Murray was reporting back to AEG, and requesting things, i.e. "CPR machine." He wanted AEG to pay for it (and eventually, Michael would reimburse) So whoever got that email at AEG, should have been alarmed at such a thing. A "debribrilator," is not uncommon at public venues, like airports and backstage at concerts. A "CPR machine" is a device that does. . . . CPR . . . in case of someone's heart stopping. I continue to wonder why that did not raise red-flags about why that was necessary?

So, in terms of the law, this will probably rest on what was signed/documented, and what was not. I think AEG will win and that the Jacksons do not have a legal leg to stand on. In terms of ethics? I think that AEG could have, and should have, done more, based on Murray's emails to them.

 

[ivy]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

^^

actually I think they might not have done a background check.

For example I went to California State Medical Board website and searched for Arnold Klein. Even that basic information shows that he's board certified.

So if Katherine's side is stating AEG didn't know he wasn't board certified then it seems like they didn't do that search.

Edited to add : I also checked Murray. It says there's no board certification. So anyone would know he's not board certified if they did that search.

 

[Bubs]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

Thanks Ivy.

 

[ivy]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

What has not been mentioned much, is that email string, posted here, where CLEARLY Murray was reporting back to AEG, and requesting things, i.e. "CPR machine." He wanted AEG to pay for it (and eventually, Michael would reimburse) So whoever got that email at AEG, should have been alarmed at such a thing. A "debribrilator," is not uncommon at public venues, like airports and backstage at concerts. A "CPR machine" is a device that does. . . . CPR . . . in case of someone's heart stopping. I continue to wonder why that did not raise red-flags about why that was necessary?

Probably because the people interacted with Murray did not have any medical expertise to understand the specifics. Or very simply they thought a 50 year old man performing for 2 hours having a heart attack was a possibility. Also I believe there have been either testimony or filings that stated AEG believed that the request for the CPR machine was for the venue and not the house.

I know people focus on the CPR machine but it's also important to remember that from medical standpoint it is not relevant to Propofol. From Dr. Shafer we have learned that propofol causes respiratory arrest and oxygen is needed - not cardiac arrest that requires a CPR machine.

 

[Bubs]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

What has not been mentioned much, is that email string, posted here, where CLEARLY Murray was reporting back to AEG, and requesting things, i.e. "CPR machine." He wanted AEG to pay for it (and eventually, Michael would reimburse) So whoever got that email at AEG, should have been alarmed at such a thing. A "debribrilator," is not uncommon at public venues, like airports and backstage at concerts. A "CPR machine" is a device that does. . . . CPR . . . in case of someone's heart stopping. I continue to wonder why that did not raise red-flags about why that was necessary?

That is kind of interesting thing, CPR machine came up in CM trial, and it was requested to London.
Funnily enough, CM asked AEG to pay and order CPR machine to London, but all the medicines, and "accessories" needed to his nightly care for MJ, was charged to his (CM) own credit card or his company check. If he was AEG's employee, wouldn't he had sent med bills to AEG too?

I
It's murky, at best. We do know, those of us who have read Michael's contract with AEG (and I have. . . .) , that they were fronting him the money, i.e. paying for things (house-rental, staff, etc.) with the understanding of being paid back through his revenues for the shows. That, in itself, is murky area. AEG was covering bills then, but not ultimately?

Michael CHOSE Murray as a doctor. He was not paying him, but AEG was, or at some point, intended to, with the goal of being reimbursed from Michael's earnings from TII in London. We do know that.

I was thinking this way, lets say I want to start my own company and I need to take loan from the bank to get going. After my company runs smoothly, and I start paying back to bank in monthly instalments. Not in any stage, the bank owned my company or was my employer, even though, they paid everything in my company.

PS, if I hurt myself, or someone kills me during running my company, I wouldn't consider bank to being responsible for it.

 

[ivy]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

For everyone as reference

From Katie Jorrie Testimony

Jorrie had a conversation on Jun 18th with CM about medical equipment needed to be included as a provision in the contract.

Jorrie wanted to know why he needed this equipment including a CPR machine.

CM said when MJ was performing at the O2 arena he was going to be performing extraordinary things. Also considering his age, CM wanted the machine.

Jorrie asked wouldn't this be at the arena?

CM told her he didn't want to take any chances.

Jorrie was worried MJ might have a heart problem or was unhealthy.

CM assured her he was healthy. CM told Jorrie three times that MJ was in perfect health.


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

CM told Jorrie he would need the equipment in London. First time Jorrie talked to CM was on the June 18th. When she received the information from Tim Wooley, the CPR machine was already on the list of machines CM needed.

Kathy: "Murray said he needed the CPR machine for MJ at the venue. He did not indicate home use."

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

They also discussed where CM was licensed to practice medicine. Murray told Kathy he was licensed to practice in CA, TX, NV, Hawaii.

 

[Bubs]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

^^

actually I think they might not have done a background check.

For example I went to California State Medical Board website and searched for Arnold Klein. Even that basic information shows that he's board certified.

So if Katherine's side is stating AEG didn't know he wasn't board certified then it seems like they didn't do that search.

Edited to add : I also checked Murray. It says there's no board certification. So anyone would know he's not board certified if they did that search.

What about Philips or Gonga saying to CM that he has no licence to practise in UK, in which CM replied he'll take care f it (or something similar)?
They knew he had no licence for UK, so I would assume something was checked.
I just don't know what and where.

 

[Autumn II]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

Probably because the people interacted with Murray did not have any medical expertise to understand the specifics. Or very simply they thought a 50 year old man performing for 2 hours having a heart attack was a possibility. Also I believe there have been either testimony or filings that stated AEG believed that the request for the CPR machine was for the venue and not the house.

I know people focus on the CPR machine but it's also important to remember that from medical standpoint it is not relevant to Propofol. From Dr. Shafer we have learned that propofol causes respiratory arrest and oxygen is needed - not cardiac arrest that requires a CPR machine.

Yes, that all makes sense. I don't think that KJ and crew have a chance of winning.

 

[jamba]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

What would be the expected outcome in terms of penalties if AEG is found guilty of negligent hiring?? I assume negligent hiring is different from plain negligence? I guess it means they didn't check him out thoroughly enough? Can someone with a legal knowledge explain more about negligent hiring??

 

[passy001]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

Ethically, I do think that AEG bears some responsibility, but probably not legally.

That's really unfair. because AEG had no say on who MJ can use as a doctor. In fact AEG wanted MJ to find another doctor, but MJ insisted on having Murray. so how come ethically AEG should share responsibility when MJ was the man with the last word. all the payments requests mean nothing really because AEG was merely fulfilling its contractual obligation towards MJ of footing the bills with the understanding that they will be recouped later from MJ. in other word AEG was merely acting as a bank.

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

Am i missing something but isnt the below a total contridiction. trying to work out the final ruling as im getying ready for work so im just scanning the thread. so the judge through out an additional count ontop of her provisional ruling?


*The judge ruled that AEG wasn't liable because Murray didn't work for the company, but said a negligent hire claim could proce*

 

[Bubs]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

What would be the expected outcome in terms of penalties if AEG is found guilty of negligent hiring?? I assume negligent hiring is different from plain negligence? I guess it means they didn't check him out thoroughly enough? Can someone with a legal knowledge explain more about negligent hiring??

Here is one case of negligent hiring
http://hr.toolbox.com/blogs/backgro...mily-of-victim-in-negligent-hiring-case-49415

and some more
http://www.apscreenemploymentscreening.com/articles/case_samples.pdf

 

[gerryevans]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

I think the judge let hiring claim to continue because (I think) AEG took some steps that could be considered what employer would do, such as background check. If they thought that CM wasn't their employee, why do background check at all, especially when CM was the one MJ wanted to hire?

Excellent point.

 

[passy001]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

If they thought that CM wasn't their employee, why do background check at all, especially when CM was the one MJ wanted to hire[/B]?.

They did background check because they thought CM was asking for an exorbitant fee ($150, 000). With this kind of billing you can't help but check why this dude thinks he's so special. you wanna find out about his previous work and accomplishments. but AEG found nothing. no record of misconduct or disciplinary action. nothing. Plus, AEG had no idea of what CM was doing to MJ. He practically fooled everyone including MJ and AEG.

 

[Autumn II]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

That's really unfair. because AEG had no say on who MJ can use as a doctor. In fact AEG wanted MJ to find another doctor, but MJ insisted on having Murray. so how come ethically AEG should share responsibility when MJ was the man with the last word. all the payments requests mean nothing really because AEG was merely fulfilling its contractual obligation towards MJ of footing the bills with the understanding that they will be recouped later from MJ. in other word AEG was merely acting as a bank.

I can't see that AEG bears any legal responsibility, and we don't know what they did or didn't know, for sure, about "treatments" he was giving Michael. In a personal sense -- I mean as individuals -- it's possible that some felt that there were problems, and ultimately they did have the capacity to fire CM -- if they intended to pay him, and to be reimbursed by Michael from the shows' revenues? I just wish that there had been someone -- anyone -- looking out for Michael. . .

 

[ivy]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

and ultimately they did have the capacity to fire CM

I don't think so. I believe it was Michael who could fire CM not AEG.



Edited to add: Here's the contract for reference

http://www.scribd.com/doc/128116431/CM-AEG-Agreement

[scribd]128116431[/scribd]

 

[ivy]

Re: AEG files their summary judgment motion asking to dismiss Katherine Jackson lawsuit

^^

This contract is not going to help Katherine at all.

"independent contractor" (mentioned a lot of times)
"At the artist's (MJ) request , producer (AEG) has agreed to retain the services of Murray".
"Murray represents he's a licensed cardiologist"
"Murray will provide general medical care"
"such services will be administered professionally and with the greatest degree of care to be expected"
"adhere to all laws, policies, rules, regulations applicable to the services provided"
"obtain, maintain, comply with all licenses"
"present within 2 weeks proof of all licenses"

Termination
- by producer for breach of contract after giving a written notice and no changes after 5 days
- if the concert series are cancelled or postponed
- if Michael for whatever reason says he no longer wants murray
- if Murray fails to have all the licenses
- if murray cannot show proof he's licensed to practice medicine at US and UK