"1984" and the Estate of George Orwell

Estate of George Orwell v. CBS INC. et al, Case #00C5034 (ND 211). We represented the owner of the television and movie rights to George Orwell's classic novel "1984", and the Estate of Mr. Orwell, in a copyright and trademark suit against CBS, Viacom, and its subsidiary "Orwell Productions, Inc." based on the television series "Big Brother"

The suit alleged that the series caused viewers to believe that it is affiliated with or based on Mr. Orwell's novel, that it diluted the reputation of the novel and derivative works, and infringed the copyright in "1984", which is valid until the year 2044. This case was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

On December 21, 2000, U.S. District Court Judge James Holderman issued a 14 page Memorandum and Opinion denying CBS's motion to dismiss the federal counts. The Court ruled that plaintiffs stated valid copyright and trademark claims. Jury trial was set for September 24, 2001.

On September 12, 2001, after full discovery, the Court ruled that Defendants could not raise any "genericness" defense, because Defendants had utilized "Big Brother" as a trademark. On September 20, 2001, after a full-day evidentiary hearing, the Court excluded from testifying two of Defendants' experts - Dr. Seymour Lieberman (a survey expert), and Mr. Andrew Safir (a damage expert). The Court ruled that their testimony would not be relevant or helpful to the jury.

On September 24, 2001 the litigation was resolved to the parties' mutual satisfaction pursuant to a confidential settlement.

For a Copy of Rosenblum v. Orwell Productions

Owners of Rights to Orwell’s “1984” Novel
Speaks Out on Political Controversy

CHICAGO, Illinois, March 27, 2007 – Rosenblum Productions, Inc., owners of the exclusive television and motion picture rights to the George Orwell novel  "1984", said today that it is monitoring closely the controversy surrounding a political ad posted on You Tube that, according to one Chicago newspaper, is “a takeoff on George Orwell's ‘Big Brother’ 1984 theme used in an Apple ad.”

To See Full Article Click here

James Brown v. Corbis Corp

In James Brown v. Corbis Corp we filed, on behalf of the world renowned entertainer, "The Godfather of Soul", Mr. James Brown, case #02 L 005872, in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois.
The lawsuit involves claims for violation of rights of publicity, violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, and a claim for profiteering on the name and likeliness of James Brown without his consent based on Corbis’ sale and offering for sale over the internet of James Brown’s photographs for commercial purposes.. On 3/23/06 the Circuit Court of Cook County denied the motion of Corbis to reconsider its 7/23/2004 denial of a motion to Dismiss. That order was being appealed to the Illinois Appellate court. On August 2, 2007 the Illinois Appellate Court Affirmed this Decision for Brown, and the Illinois Supreme Court denial Corbis’ petition for leave to appeal. 735 Ill.App.3d 276, 873 N.E.2d 954 (1st Dist. 2007); 226 Ill.2d 580 879 N.E.2d 929 (2007).

After its defeat in the Illinois Courts, Corbis introduced legislation in the Illinois Legislature to amend the Rights-of-Publicity Act to legalize Corbis’ conduct. Gold & Coulson have lobbied hard against this legislation, and testified against it before the Senate Judiciary Committee in Springfield.

For a Copy of the Motion to Reconsider - Leading to Court's Denial of Motion to Dismiss
For a Copy of the order granting James Brown’s motion for reconsideration.
For a Copy of the order Denying Corbis’ motion for Reconsideration of the 7/23/04 order
For a Copy of August 2, 2007 Appellate Decision

Eddie Johnson v. Chicago Tribune

In Eddie Johnson v. Chicago Tribune, et al., No. 06-L-10771 (Circuit Court of Cook County, IL), Gold and Coulson represents former Illini and NBA basketball star Eddie Johnson in a defamation action against the Tribune, the "Jim Rome Show" and guest host Skip Bayless on nationwide radio, a Minnesota internet photograph supplier, and an Atlanta, Georgia television station. These defendants, the complaint alleges, defamed Johnson by falsely reporting that he had been arrested in Florida for child molestation and residential burglary. We have settled the case as to five of the six defendants, including Skip Bayless. The case is pending against the Tribune.

Gold & Coulson has obtained the following results:

U.S. v. LaGrou Distribution System, Inc

In U.S. v. LaGrou Distribution System, Inc., 466 F.3d 585 (7th Cir. 2006), Gold and Coulson represented a Chicago food warehouse company on appeal from criminal convictions for the improper storage of food items. We were successful in persuading the Seventh Circuit to reverse the $1 million fine imposed on LaGrou. This was the first appellate reversal of a federal criminal sentence post-U.S. v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), which invalidated the mandatory nature of the federal sentencing guidelines, and required jury findings to enhance a criminal sentence.

Dr. Paul Zidel et al. v. Allstate Insurance Company

One June 19, 2006, Gold & Coulson, as co-lead counsel, obtained approval, of a settlement in a Rico class action case in the United State Federal District court for the Southern District of Florida. In Dr. Paul Zidel et al. v. Allstate Insurance Company et. al. 00-6061, the defendants were allegedly engaged in a scheme to improperly deduct large percentages in payment of medical providers’ bills in the state of Florida. Money benefits to medical providers total $11,941.667.

This settlement causes a total of $42,691,667 in benefits from the RICO cases filed by Gold & Coulson in 2005 and 2006 on behalf of Florida medical providers as follows:

On January 18, 2006, Dr. Andrew Elowitz v. American International Insurance Company, case No. 018549, and Dr. Salvador D. LaRusso v. Hartford Insurance Company, case No. 01-8111. In these two cases, the two defendant insurance companies were alleged to have engaged in a scheme whereby they improperly deducted large percentages in the payment of medical providers’ bills in the State of Florida. Money benefits, not coupons, to medical providers in these two cases approximated $1,750,000.

Dr. Salvador D. LaRusso, and all other medical providers in the State of Florida against Nationwide Insurance Company for having taken improper Preferred Provider Organization discounts and improper and usual customary deductions on bills submitted by Florida medical providers. The settlement was for $13,450,000 in cash benefit to the class.

Open MRI Corp. v. Integon National Insurance Group, case No. 01-6780, Open MRI Corp v. Prudential Property Casualty Company, case No. 01-6778, and Dr. Salvador D. LaRusso v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., case No. 00-7692. In these three cases, the three defendant insurance companies were alleged to have engaged in a scheme whereby they improperly deducted large percentages in the payment of medical providers’ bills in the State of Florida. Money benefits, not coupons, to medical providers in these three cases approximated $3,805,000.

Marc J. Browner, D.C., v. Allstate Indemnity Company, Beech Street Corporation, and ADP Integrated Medical Solutions, Inc., case #00-7163,

Mote Wellness & Rehab, Inc. v. American International Insurance Company - Settled

American International South Insurance Company, case #01-8549. Ultra Open MRI Corporation v. Progressive American Insurance Company, case #01-6776 - Settled

Ultra Open MRI Corporation v. Deerbrook Insurance, case #01-6777

Ultra Open MRI Corporation v. Prudential Property and Casualty Insurance Company, case #01-6778 - Settled

Ultra Open MRI Corporation v. Integon National Insurance Company and Integon General Insurance Company, case #01-6778 - Settled

Ultra Open MRI Corporation v. Fidelity and Casualty Company of New York and The Continental Insurance Company, case #01-6779

The Chiropractic Centre, Inc. v. Superior Insurance Company, case #01-6782 - Settled

The Chiropractic Centre, Inc. v. Metro Insurance Company, case #01-6783 - Settled

For a Copy of the Amended Complaint
For a Copy of the Judge's Decision

Tamoxifen

In Morse v. Bankers Life Insurance Company and PCS Inc.,case #99C193, pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, we filed a RICO class action lawsuit to attack the practice of an insurance company and its prescription drug management company to classify Tamoxifen, a generic drug, as a brand name drug thus causing the patient victim to make a co-payment that would not be necessary if the drug were properly classified as generic.

These patients suffer from breast cancer and are typically elderly and on a fixed income. Judge Joan Gottschall denied the motion of Defendants to dismiss the RICO charges and certified a nationwide class of Tamoxifen users under RICO. She appointed Gold & Coulson as lead class counsel. A settlement was reached with both defendants. Judge Gottschall approved the class settlement wherein all class members received, without the necessity of filing any claims, a check in the mail for 100% of any co-payment a class member paid for Tamoxifen. Any costs and attorneys fees, as a part of the settlement, did not come out of the class members' reimbursement.

For a copy of the Complaint
For a copy of the Order Certifying the RICO Class Action.
For a copy of the Order Appointing Gold & Coulson Lead Class Counse


Bauer v. PCS: We have filed another tamoxifen case against PCS in the State of Georgia seeking to certify a national class of breast cancer patients who have been victimized by PCS' classifying tamoxifen as a brand name drug. Deborah R. Bauer, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Advanced PCS, PCS Health Systems, INC., PCS Mail Services of Fort Worth, INC., and PCS Mail Services of Birmingham, INC. case # 2003CV70172. PCS' Motion To Dismiss for lack of jurisdiction was denied by the trial court. The Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed and Mr. Gold argued the case before the Georgia Supreme Court on 3/27/06. The Georgia Supreme Court reversed and was appealed to the United States Supreme Court which denied certiorari.

For a Copy of the Brief of Appellees on Appeal
Click here for a copy of the decision of the Georgia Court of Appeals

In Lederman v. Holy Family Hospital case number 04 L 2546 in Circuit Court of Cook Country we recently settled a medical malpractice case for a 70 year old decedent, suffering from heart problems and having had prior heart surgery, for $750,000 alleging the improper administration of Coumadin.

In Rossi and Bramwell v. American Ambassador Casualty Company, case #00 CH 15534, and In Gaston v. Founders Insurance Company, case #00 CH 17451, and ROBERT KARLIN Jr individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. AMERICAN FREEDOM INSURANCE CO., case #02 CH 19558 all pending in the Circuit Court ofCook County, Illinois, we filed class actions to attack the practices bycertain insurance companies of forcing their policyholders who filed claims for automobile repairs to accept below standard labor rates resulting in substantial co-payments by insureds. Rossi has been settled subject to court approval and claimants, may get 100% of their co-payment. The court gave final approval on 4/21/05.

For a Copy of the SECOND AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT-INCLUDING REQUEST FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

Henderson v. Supreme Medicar

In Henderson v. Supreme Medicar case number 01 L 12939 also in the Circuit Court of Cook Country, we recently were able to obtain $250,000 for a quadriplegic whose femurs were fractured when she was tossed from her wheelchair. The defense in that case claimed that because she had been a quadriplegic since her childhood, she could suffer no pain. We retained the services of Dr. Paul Meyer, a world authority on quadriplegia, and former head of the rehabilitation Institute of Chicago to inform the jury of the manner in which a quadriplegic experiences pain. After one week of evidence presented to the jury, the case settled prior to closing arguments.

Re Szafernich

In re Szafernich, we petitioned the International Organization for Migration and won a monetary award for a survivor of Nazi slave labor camps during World War II. Petition was pursuant to the German Foundation Act, and required the submission of affidavits and other proof regarding the client's captivity and exploitation as a slave laborer on Nazi merchant ships in the Baltic Sea.

Myers v. Levy

In 2001, Gold & Coulson filed, on behalf of former Lake Forest High School Football Coach Tommy Myers, a defamation lawsuit against Lake Forest resident Nelson Levy. On December 4,2003, the Illinois Appellate Court reversed a dismissal of this lawsuit and sent it back to the Lake County Circuit Court for trial. The trial was set for 2/22/05.

Coach Myers claimed in his lawsuit that Levy defamed him and led the campaign to oust Myers as Head Football Coach. Myers was removed as Coach in January, 2001. Coach Myers' lawsuit contended, among other things, that Levy described him to school administrations as a "buffoon," a "joke" and a failure as an educator; falsely listed prominent citizens as supporting the Coach's firing; exaggerated the breadth of parental unhappiness; threatened the Lake Forest Athletic Director; and falsely stated to Chicago newspapers that Coach Myers' football program lacked respect, suffered from "widespread discontent" involving "hundreds of people," and had an "incompetent coach in place for a decade." Myers' suit also contended that Levy was motivated to oust the Coach due to Levy's son's competition with Myers' son for the starting quarterback position. In previous years, Levy had praised Coach Myers, calling him a "great coaching role model for character, kindness, and fairness."

The trial court had dismissed Coach Myers' case in December, 2002, ruling that Levy's conduct was protected because he was exercising a constitutional right to petition public officials at the high school. In the 12/4/03 Appellate Court reversal, the Appellate Court found that there was ample evidence to show that Levy had acted with "actual malice," which would trump any Constitutional privilege.

Gold & Coulson believe this is a victory for coaches everywhere. There clearly are legal limits to abusive behavior directed at coaches by overzealous parents.

The case is Tom Myers v. Nelson Levy, 2-02-1334 (Ill.App.2d District, December 4, 2003). The case was settled for $90,000 paid to Coach Myers. Cite: 348 Ill. App.3d 906, 808 N.E.2d 1139 (2D 2004).

Tom Myer's Appellate Briefs and The Appellate Court Slip Opinion can be viewed below.

For a Copy of the Appellate Court Decision
For a Copy of the Opening Brief
For a Copy of the Reply Brief

Aaron Patterson v. Chicago Former Lt. John Burge

Aaron Patterson v. Chicago Former Lt. John Burge, case number 03 C 4433, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois. Recently, Gold & Coulson began representing Wallace “Gator” Bradley, an “Urban Translator”, in his request to obtain compensation for his services in obtaining a $5,000,000 settlement for Aaron Patterson, previously on Death Row for a murder he did not commit but to which he confessed as a result of torture by the infamous Police Commander Burge. Patterson along with 3 others were innocent and were pardoned by Governor Ryan.

John Weber and Willie Kid

In John Weber and Willie Kid individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, case # 04 CH 4816 in the Circuit Court of Cook County we filed a class action on behalf of Metropolitan Insurance agents who have been denied renewal commissions on property and casualty policies procured as a result of their efforts. It is alleged Metropolitan unilaterally changed the commission structure after the policies were written.

For a Copy of the AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Dr. and Mrs. Kapelanski v. Scott Johnson

On June 24, 2002, the firm obtained a jury verdict in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in favor of the plaintiffs in Dr. and Mrs. Kapelanski v. Scott Johnson, case #00 C 2131, for $431,250, including $331, 250 in punitive damages for investment fraud. All defendant's post-trial motions were denied on October 3, 2002. The case was appealed to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals and on 11/24/04 the 7th Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed the verdict, case # 02-3878.

Kopach et. al. v. First USA Bank

In Kopach et. al. v. First USA Bank, case #98-C8238, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, on 4/6/2000, approved a class action settlement, with Gold & Coulson as lead class counsel.

The settlement enjoins First USA Bank from sending unsolicited credit cards in violation of the Truth-in-Lending Act. The settlement required First USA Bank to pay statutory damages, and make charitable contributions. The charitable contributions were to the following organizations:

$100,000 to the Jump$tart Coalition for Personal Financial Literacy.
The Jump $tart Coalition seeks to improve the personal financial literacy of young adults.

$100,000 to the National Consumers League.
The NCL works to protect and promote the economic and social interests of America's consumers.

$50,000 to the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.
The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington is America's national institution for the documentation, study and interpretation of Holocaust history. The USHMM serves as this country's memorial to the millions of people who were victims of the Holocaust.

For a Copy of the PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS COUNTS II AND III OF THE AMENDED COMPLAINT

R. Kelly v. Carthon

In R. Kelly v. Carthon, No. 00 C 3110 (USDC ND ILL), we represented defendant Lafayette Carthon, a prominent gospel musician. Plaintiff R Kelly, a well known R&B singer, sued for alleged music copyright infringement and breach of a confidentiality agreement, all arising out of Mr. Carthon's tenure as studio manager for R Kelly. Judge Paul Plunkett denied Kelly's request for a preliminary injunction, finding that the drum sounds in issue were not copyrightable as a matter of law. Judge Plunkett entered a restraining order against Mr. Carthon based on the confidentiality agreement, but vacated it after Kelly refused to permit Mr. Carthon access to a master tape to correct the problem. After disallowing the TRO based upon a copyright infraction, Judge Plunkett ruled as follows on 11/21/00 relative to the 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss filed by Mr. Carthon:

As the Supreme Court has stated 'the requisite level of creativity [for copyright protection] is extremely low; even a slight amount will suffice.' Id. at 345. It is not clear, however, that Kelly's sounds vault even this modest hurdle. Neither the amended complaint nor the tape submitted with it suggests that Kelly did anything more than hit a drum with a stick or press a button on an electronic device to create these sounds. If the former is true, Kelly's sounds would lack that 'something irreducible, which is one man's alone,' that is required for copyright protection. Bleistein v. Donaldson Lithographin Co., 188 U.S. 239, 250 (1903). If the latter is true, Kelly's role would be more that of a producer who 'fixed [the sounds] by some purely mechanical means without originality of any kind,' which would not merit a copyright. H.R. Rep. No. 94-1476, 1976 WL 14045, at 23-24 (1976). It may be, however, that neither is true. It may be, as unlikely as it seems, that the sound library is the product of great creativity that is not apparent to a lay person. In any event, we cannot say, based solely on the tape, that Kelly's copyright in the sound library is invalid for lack of originality. Carthon's motion to dismiss the copyright claims in Counts I and II of the amended complaint is, therefore, denied.

The case was ultimately settled.

Worthy v. Gary Jones

In Worthy v. Gary Jones, individually and d/b/a Construction Management Services, case No. 99 CH 07258, Gold & Coulson obtained a jury verdict of $2,050,335.00 against a real estate developer who defrauded the plaintiff having taken $600,000 and failing to do proper construction work. The verdict was itemized as $1,200,000.00 punitive damages and $850,335.00 actual damages.

Keating v. Winston & Strawn

In Keating v. Winston & Strawn, case #96 L 9718, Gold & Coulson obtained a trial verdict of $887,895.87 for legal malpractice against Winston & Strawn in connection with the law firm's representation of Joseph Keating, a real estate developer, who was represented by Winston & Strawn.

The trial court found that Winston & Strawn failed to properly protect the real estate developer's interest in an apartment complex in excess of 100 units. The appellate court of Illinois reversed the trial court verdict finding that the contract to develop the real estate was illegal.