Exclusive: Four years after Judith Sheindlin, CBS and others were sued by a producer from the early seasons of the Judge Judy series and the estate of another producer over profits from the big bucks sale of the show’s library, the almost lucratively esoteric dispute looks to have come to the end of the legal road, at least for now.
“The Court, having taken the matter under submission on 02/15/2022 for Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment, now rules as follows: The Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Judith Sheindlin, Big Ticket Pictures, Inc., Her Honor, Inc., CBS Studios Inc. on 03/19/2021 is Granted,” said a one-page ruling yesterday by LA Superior Court Judge Kristin S. Escalante. (read it here).
First filed back in January 2018 by Kaye Switzer and the trust of the late Sandi Spreckman, this particular dust-up over profits from the long running and now shuttered Judge Judy was...
“The Court, having taken the matter under submission on 02/15/2022 for Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment, now rules as follows: The Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Judith Sheindlin, Big Ticket Pictures, Inc., Her Honor, Inc., CBS Studios Inc. on 03/19/2021 is Granted,” said a one-page ruling yesterday by LA Superior Court Judge Kristin S. Escalante. (read it here).
First filed back in January 2018 by Kaye Switzer and the trust of the late Sandi Spreckman, this particular dust-up over profits from the long running and now shuttered Judge Judy was...
- 3/29/2022
- by Dominic Patten
- Deadline Film + TV
Exclusive: Judge Judy is still on the air, but on Wednesday the long-running successful syndicated series launched a new spinoff – in court.
Just more than two weeks after Rebel Entertainment Partners filed a $5 million breach of contract complaint against former Manhattan family court judge Judy Sheindlin and a collection of CBS entities, the small-screen judicial heavyweight has instigated a big-bucks counteroffensive.
The salvo is a more than $22 million lawsuit seeking declaratory relief and claiming unlawful/unfair business practices and unjust enrichment, to be precise.
In a deft PR move, Judge Judy already has a plan if she wins the $4 million her lawyers estimate she personally has lost out in profit participation from successor-in-interest Rebel and talent agent Richard Lawrence. The Marty Singer-represented Sheindlin promises to give all the cash to “the charity Stand Up To Cancer,” declares the jury trial-seeking complaint filed this morning in Los Angeles Superior Court.
Just more than two weeks after Rebel Entertainment Partners filed a $5 million breach of contract complaint against former Manhattan family court judge Judy Sheindlin and a collection of CBS entities, the small-screen judicial heavyweight has instigated a big-bucks counteroffensive.
The salvo is a more than $22 million lawsuit seeking declaratory relief and claiming unlawful/unfair business practices and unjust enrichment, to be precise.
In a deft PR move, Judge Judy already has a plan if she wins the $4 million her lawyers estimate she personally has lost out in profit participation from successor-in-interest Rebel and talent agent Richard Lawrence. The Marty Singer-represented Sheindlin promises to give all the cash to “the charity Stand Up To Cancer,” declares the jury trial-seeking complaint filed this morning in Los Angeles Superior Court.
- 8/19/2020
- by Dominic Patten
- Deadline Film + TV
Updated with statement from Judy Sheindlin: Judge Judy is heading back to court, but not in the way the fans of the soon-to-end syndicated series probably assume, and it looks to partially be Les Moonves’ fault.
Less than six months after CBS and Rebel Entertainment Partners settled their long-running legal battle over big bucks in missed contractually obliged payments from the show that has aired for more than two decades, a new lawsuit is in the docket. Rebel is now suing former Manhattan family court judge Judy Sheindlin and a ViacomCBS division for more than $5 million over a seemingly sleight-of-hand $95 million sale of the show’s rich library.
“Disgraced media mogul Les Moonves may have been shown the door at CBS in 2018, but not before he conspired with other CBS executives, including former CBS programming chief Armando Nuñez, to avoid embarrassment over his colossal mismanagement of the sale and...
Less than six months after CBS and Rebel Entertainment Partners settled their long-running legal battle over big bucks in missed contractually obliged payments from the show that has aired for more than two decades, a new lawsuit is in the docket. Rebel is now suing former Manhattan family court judge Judy Sheindlin and a ViacomCBS division for more than $5 million over a seemingly sleight-of-hand $95 million sale of the show’s rich library.
“Disgraced media mogul Les Moonves may have been shown the door at CBS in 2018, but not before he conspired with other CBS executives, including former CBS programming chief Armando Nuñez, to avoid embarrassment over his colossal mismanagement of the sale and...
- 8/4/2020
- by Dominic Patten
- Deadline Film + TV
Nearly four years after Rebel Entertainment Partners took a CBS unit to court over millions in alleged missed contractually due payments from Judge Judy, the parties have come to a deal to dismiss the case.
Rebel attorney Sean Hardy of Freedman + Taitelman told Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Rupert Byrdsong on Wednesday that “the case settled at mediation and the settlement agreement has been signed” (read it here). As is usual in such matters, no details of the settlement have been made public.
Neither CBS nor lawyers for the plaintiffs, who first filed their case in March 2016, responded to request for comment on the agreement. Rebel Entertainment Partners is the successor-in-interest to the talent agency that originally packaged the Sheindlin-fronted series.
However, I hear that while the matter may be resolved in one sense, there could be more scrimmages to come in the well-publicized dust-up. Even though L.A. Superior...
Rebel attorney Sean Hardy of Freedman + Taitelman told Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Rupert Byrdsong on Wednesday that “the case settled at mediation and the settlement agreement has been signed” (read it here). As is usual in such matters, no details of the settlement have been made public.
Neither CBS nor lawyers for the plaintiffs, who first filed their case in March 2016, responded to request for comment on the agreement. Rebel Entertainment Partners is the successor-in-interest to the talent agency that originally packaged the Sheindlin-fronted series.
However, I hear that while the matter may be resolved in one sense, there could be more scrimmages to come in the well-publicized dust-up. Even though L.A. Superior...
- 2/6/2020
- by Dominic Patten
- Deadline Film + TV
Once again, Judge Judy finds herself on the other side of the bench with a new breach-of-contract complaint filed against the top TV judge and CBS. While the jury-trial seeking suit from Kaye Switzer and the trust of the late Sandi Spreckman doesn’t specify damages, it does state that the plaintiffs are owed $4.75 million from the $95 million sale of Judge Judy to the House of Moonves in August. Similar to the big-bucks legal action that Rebel Entertainment filed in March…...
- 1/23/2018
- Deadline TV
Judge Judy is in the middle of a lawsuit, but this time she's not presiding ... she's the defendant. The Estate of Sandi Spreckman along with Kaye Switzer are suing Judy and CBS, claiming they helped develop her insanely popular court show back in 1995 and they were cut out of all the profits ... especially when Judy sold the show's library to CBS for a reported $95 million. Switzer and Spreckman were actually staffers on "The People's Court...
- 1/22/2018
- by TMZ Staff
- TMZ
IMDb.com, Inc. takes no responsibility for the content or accuracy of the above news articles, Tweets, or blog posts. This content is published for the entertainment of our users only. The news articles, Tweets, and blog posts do not represent IMDb's opinions nor can we guarantee that the reporting therein is completely factual. Please visit the source responsible for the item in question to report any concerns you may have regarding content or accuracy.