Live / EK Mediation Day, Dec 14, 2012 Options

[OutToDry]

Guess this is all the reason for Nick's anti CCP rants the past few days......PIPER MAN is coming for the PAIN

Live mediation rescheduled for Dec. 14

Posted: 11/28/2012 10:59:50 AM EST


A mediation between parties in a lawsuit involving the band Live has been rescheduled for Dec. 14 in New York. An initial mediation, which was slated for Nov. 1, was postponed because of Hurricane Sandy.

John J. Rosenberg, lawyer representing former Live lead singer Ed Kowalczyk, confirmed the new date of the mediation - an informal and confidential process often taken to resolve disputes without the need for lengthy and costly litigation.



A lawsuit filed in May 2010 in New York by Live band members Patrick Dahlheimer, Chad Gracey and Chad Taylor alleges Kowalczyk and the band's longtime manager, David Levin, violated terms of a contract.



The members of Live grew up together in York and graduated from William Penn Senior High School before going on to make multiplatinum albums and tour the globe in the 1990s. By 2009, the members parted ways. Dahlheimer, Gracey and Taylor pursued other musical projects and recently began performing as Live again.



"We have exhausted every effort known to man to try and reach some sort of peaceful accord with Ed," Taylor said in July. In a text message, he added "the legal drama ... pales in comparison to the personal nature and disappointment of losing a childhood friend."



Kowalczyk pursued a solo career. He performed an acoustic show Nov. 9 at Penn State York's Pullo Family Performing Arts Center.



"As to the details of the legal proceedings, for now I will only say that both suits are baseless and totally without merit," Kowalczyk wrote via email in August. Kowalczyk as well as Dahlheimer, Gracey and Taylor have declined subsequent interview requests.



Read more about Live, which got its start in York, and lawsuits involving group members at www.flipsidepa.com/live

I know they won't talk to this reporter anymore because she has twisted some things in her other articles....she's gonna have to beg for crumbs.

This post has been edited by OutToDry: Nov 28 2012, 8:38 pm

[Bremang]

Everything isn't clear, but the primary points about the rights to the songs/music is pretty clear contractual language.

We don't even have the contracts available. Whatever language you are referring to is unknown.

CCP walking out indicates that Ed didn't offer up enough at mediation.

This put the ball in Ed's court. He could come back with a better offer or let it go to court.

Ed didn't necessarily have to offer anything if he's standing by his Answer which denies any liability. Like a settlement, it's just as feasible that no resolution was reached from the mediation.

The silence indicates a settlement because with brands there is usually an NDA with settlements.

Both sides have been quiet about the details for the past three years despite any final conclusion or settlement. The band's silence at this point does not indicate much to me. On the other hand, I've never heard of a settlement that says that you cannot even mention that the dispute was settled. If it was settled, it means that Ed was forced to give something to CCP. Do you think someone would have at least mentioned that CCP won their moral victory in mediation, especially the WD members?

Do I 100% know? No. One can use logic and common sense to err on the more probable outcome.

I respectfully disagree sir.

While you're right that one lawyer (or team) was going to lose, I doubt that CCP's lawyer(s) would have suggested making the case if they didn't have a fair chance of winning, that combined with reading the contract verbiage on the claim, pointed to them having the higher odds of winning. For them to file the case, go to mediation, walk out of mediation, then to drop the case without settlement from Ed is strange to dubious.

This is the third time you're mentioning the concept that a lawyer's advice must indicate a likelihood of merits. Everytime you mention it, you refuse to see that from Ed's camp as well. Why would Ed's lawyers have him pursue mediation, or presumably advise Ed to sign a million dollar bonus in the first place, if Ed didn't have the legal authority? That's what a lawsuit is often about; a highly nuanced issue, for which the rules are often very ambiguous, where both parties can make an excellent argument and have enough merit to their case to pursue it.

At the time that CCP made the claim, we don't even know if they were privy to the contracts that Ed had made on the side. The docket indicates that there was discovery of certain things after the complaint was filed. CCP's lawyers may not have even had all the information available before the suit, and may have basically made CCP pay to see it. In terms of reasons for CCP to have pursued their claims in mediation, there are other things to consider aside from acquiring damages that CCP may have found desirable, win or lose.

It was in everyone's best interest to settle this up and put it in the past. Ed would have been stupid to not just give them what they were owed per the clear contract. For all we know that was all it may have taken to drop it.

Again, that's entirely speculative. We don't know the contract. We don't know what's in Ed's best interest. We don't know the outcome.


Maybe someone who knows would be willing to shed light on the situation?