|
COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION FOUR
No. A094272
First paragraph:
"Jello Biafra, the former lead singer of the Dead Kennedys band,
appeals from a judgment upon a concurrent jury and court trial finding
in favor of the other three former members of the band on their complaint
against him. Former band member, East Bay Ray, cross-appeals from the
judgment entered against him for fraud damages. And, plaintiffs cross-appeal
from the trial court"s judgment ordering dissolution of the partnership.
We reverse the judgment finding that East Bay Ray defrauded Biafra and,
consequently, the dissolution order. In all other respects, we affirm
the judgment."
p.10
"Biafra ... argues that the 1991 agreement does not assign the
exclusive right to control the Catalog to Decay Music, and that Schedule
C to the agreement does not set forth the parties" ownership interests
in the Catalog. But the extrinsic evidence offered on these issues and
the 1991 agreement itself demonstrate otherwise. The agreement not only
gave Decay Music the exclusive right to exploit the sound recordings of
the Dead Kennedys, it also provided for the allocation of royalty payments
among the members and any associated artists on the recordings."
"Biafra's testimony that
the ownership interests in the recordings were documented on the albums
lacked credibility. The evidence showed that the band worked collectively
on the creation of its musical compositions and that they agreed to share
the compositions as memorialized in their 1991 agreement."
p.14
"Here, the evidence showed that ATR continually insisted that its
payment of royalties to respondents was accurate, that there was no discrepancy
in the multiplier rate paid to them as opposed to other bands on the label,
and that respondents' attempts to obtain an increase in the rate
amounted to "greed." The evidence further showed that ATR
continually misrepresented the discrepancy, and that respondents relied
on ATR's representations ... To their detriment, respondents continued
to negotiate in good faith for a royalty increase while ATR knowingly
deceived them of the amounts due under their contract. In fact, Stott,
the attorney for Biafra and ATR, who negotiated with respondents, did
not acknowledge the underpayment of royalties but instead tried to gain
a new licensing agreement from Decay Music, proffering a payment of a
royalty rate increase in exchange. He maintained that Decay Music was
not owed an arrearage on royalties as it had been paid every dime
it has earned from ATR over the last ten years. In sum, the evidence
amply supported the jury's fraud verdict."
p.19
"In light of our decision reversing Biafra's fraud claim,
we conclude that we must also reverse the trial court's decision
granting Biafra's request to dissolve the partnership. Inasmuch
as Biafra defrauded the partnership and respondents were opposed to dissolution,
we remand the matter to the trial court to reconsider whether dissolution
is an appropriate remedy."
"[T]he record demonstrates that
Biafra's fraudulent actions precipitated the rift in the partnership,
and made it impossible for the partnership to carry on its business as
it had in the past. As in Bates v. McTammany, 'no serious contention
may be made that [Biafra], himself at fault, may prevail on his application
for a dissolution if it would cause loss to the partnership.'"
Link to complete
text:
Dead Kennedys v. Jello Biafra, Cal.App.1 Dist.,2003 A094272
top of page |
