Posts
The Settlement That Says Nothing
// 2009–2013 — the rare profit-participation fight that actually reached a jury, and the settlement that ended it one step before any court could set a rule for the next contract
This case starts differently from every other one in this series. Riding his fame from Miami Vice, Don Johnson negotiated a 1995 deal for Nash Bridges that didn't hinge on a percentage of "net profits" or "adjusted gross receipts" at all — it gave him a 50 percent copyright interest in the show outright, triggered automatically the moment CBS ordered a 66th episode. The show ran to 122 episodes across six seasons, generating more than $325 million in revenue, over $150 million of it from worldwide syndication. On paper, this looked like the cleanest possible deal: not a formula to argue over, but an ownership stake that either existed or didn't.
Rysher didn't dispute that the copyright trigger had been met. It disputed what Johnson's half of the show was actually worth — arguing, in terms this series has heard in every prior post, that Nash Bridges had lost as much as $160 million once Johnson's own salary, the cost of shooting on location in San Francisco, and standard distribution deductions were applied against the show's revenue. In 2009, Johnson sued.
The mechanism the case actually turned on wasn't the general accounting argument — it was a single, specific number. Before selling Rysher in 2001, the company's then-owner, Cox Media, had performed a $71.4 million write-down of the show's production costs, effectively erasing that amount from the books entirely. When Rysher later tried to use the show's original, higher production costs to reduce the profit pool Johnson was entitled to half of, the jury found that the write-down meant those costs no longer existed to be counted — a studio couldn't erase an expense for its own accounting purposes and then reinstate it specifically to shrink a participant's share.
This is the one post in the series where the conversion runs in the opposite direction. Rysher's claimed $160 million loss did not survive contact with an actual jury: Johnson was awarded $23.2 million in damages, which prejudgment interest pushed toward $50 million before an appellate court trimmed the total to $15 million over a miscalculation in how that interest had been applied. The final number, paid out in January 2013, settled at roughly $19 million. The formula that produced zero in Posts I through IV produced an eight-figure recovery here — but only because the case reached a jury and a judge willing to look past the accounting to the underlying contract, a step none of the studios in this series' earlier posts were ever forced to take.
The jury read the contract the way I understood it.
Don Johnson, quoted by The Hollywood Reporter · 2010Both sides could have carried the case one step further, to the California Supreme Court — the one venue whose ruling on "adjusted gross receipts" accounting would have bound every other studio contract that uses the same language. Neither side did. Rysher wired Johnson approximately $19 million in January 2013; Johnson signed a satisfaction of judgment; the case ended there, a settlement in substance if not in name, one rung below the court that could have turned this into a rule rather than a result.
The insulation didn't stop at that decision. Later the same year, Rysher, 2929 Entertainment, and Qualia Capital — the studio's successive owners — turned around and sued Cox Media, the company that had performed the original $71.4 million write-down, for more than $44 million, arguing Cox had concealed the resulting liability when it sold Rysher in 2001. The exact accounting question that had decided Johnson's case was relitigated in a completely different lawsuit, between entirely different parties, in a different courtroom, the same year the first case closed. The underlying dispute over how to treat that write-down has never, as of this writing, reached a court whose decision binds anyone beyond whichever two parties happen to be arguing about it at the time.
All three conditions fire in Post V — including, for the first time in this series, an instance of the mechanism attempted and rejected.
Interpretive Capital — fires, with a twist. Rysher attempted the identical maneuver documented in every prior post — reclassify costs, claim a loss despite real revenue — and a jury didn't accept it. That the maneuver can fail in front of a jury is a real finding. That it still took a multi-year trial and an appeal to make it fail even once is the more durable one.
Enforcement Asymmetry — fires. Reaching a jury at all required a plaintiff with the standing and resources to sustain years of litigation risk — a top-tier law firm, the fame to keep the case newsworthy, the financial cushion to wait out an appeal. Most participants holding a similar clause could never sustain the fight long enough to get a jury to look at it at all.
Temporal Capital — fires. Eighteen years separate the 1995 contract from the 2013 indemnity suit that reopened the same $71.4 million write-down in a different courtroom, between different parties. That question has still never reached a court whose ruling binds anyone beyond whoever is in front of it at the time.
The 1995 contract terms, the 66-episode trigger, and the show's revenue and syndication figures are drawn from Kirkland & Ellis LLP's 2010 press release announcing the jury verdict, treated as Tier 1 though representing Johnson's own trial counsel. The jury verdict amount, Rysher's $160 million loss claim, and Don Johnson's and Rysher counsel Bart Williams's on-record statements are drawn from The Hollywood Reporter's 2010 coverage of the verdict, treated as Tier 1. The appellate reduction to $15 million, the January 2013 settlement at approximately $19 million, and the decision not to pursue a California Supreme Court petition are drawn from The Hollywood Reporter's 2013 follow-up report, treated as Tier 1. The jury-misconduct finding regarding the prejudgment interest calculation is drawn from Horvitz & Levy LLP's case summary, treated as Tier 2 and flagged as an interested-party account, since the firm represented Rysher on appeal. The $71.4 million Cox Media write-down, the 2001 sale terms guaranteeing the buyers the first $191 million in revenue before any participant claims, and the subsequent Rysher/2929/Qualia indemnity suit against Cox Media are drawn from Courthouse News Service's contemporaneous 2013 report, treated as Tier 1.
Series note: this is Post V of The Paper Loss. Post VI turns to the streaming era — and Scarlett Johansson v. Disney, the dispute now beginning to break the model this series has traced from a 1950 handshake deal through a $71.4 million write-down still being fought over three lawsuits later.
No comments:
Post a Comment