DeVito Artworks v. Legendary Pictures - King Kong Skull Island complaint.pdf

8/17/2019 DeVito Artworks v. Legendary Pictures - King Kong Skull Island complaint.pdf

1/34

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16.

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

2^

25

CD

So

26

fs J

27

N J

28

0 >

ORDINAL

FILED

Superior Court ofCalifornia

County

ofLos

Angeles

RANDYR;MERRITT(SBN 187046)

[email protected]

LAW OFFICE OFRANDY R.

MERRITT

9245

Laguna Springs

Dr.,

Suite

200

o*Z

Elk

Grove,

CA

95758

'ft.

Tel.

(916) 870-8320 CfoOl 2^

Fax 888) 507-7030

fl&PT

>

^ S

Attorney for

Plaintiff

DEVITO ARTWORKS,

LLC

m

272016

Executive Officer/Clerk

l^^^r^

SUPERIOR

COURT

OF

CALIFORNIA

COUNTY

OF

LOS ANGELES

DEVITO ARTWORKS, LLC,

Plaintiff,

vs .

LEGENDARY PICTURES..LLC,

LEGENDARY ENTERTAINMENT LLC,

LEGENDARY TELEVISION, LLC,

WARNER BROS. ENTERTAINMENT, INC.,

and DOES 1-100 inclusive,

Defendants.

Case No. _

CD

COMPLAINT: -<

(1) Breach of Contract T|

(2) Breach

ofContract )>

(3) Intentional Interference with X

Contractual Relat ions

JURY DEMAND

m

n

m rn

—

m

m —i

o o

I> X X-

S g v> m

q

-

7?

m .

•

K )

O -i

»-

TO

m

o

m

•1 -

*V fct *v CJ


2/34

J* .

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

.23

.24

25

' 26

27

28

Plaintiff

DeVito

ArtWorks LLC ( Plaintiff' or DeVito ArtWorks )

alleges as follows:

TNTt tOn iTCTION

1.

More than

80

years

have

passed since

the

public

was

introduced

to

Merian

C.

Cooper s King

Kong.

In

that entire

time,

not

one motion picture or television

program

has told

the story of the

iconic

creature s origin or his relationship

to

the mysterious island

on

which he

was

found. Moreover, no

motion

picture

or

television

program

has told the

story ofhow the

human and non-human

inhabitants

ofthat

island

came into

contact

with

one

another or indeed

how

they

got there in the

first place.

For 80

years,

Skull Island has remained shrouded in

mystery.

2.

For

decades

the

questions

unanswered

by the

entertainment industry

have been

fertile

ground

for

the work of respected artist, Joe DeVito. Over

many

years Mr. DeVito, with the full

endorsement of

the

family

of King

Kong s original

creator,

created

-

in word and picture

- a

Skull Island

universe

that answered those questions by means ofa

single comprehensive

and

detailed story

that tied

together

the events

and context at the heart

of

King Kong

with

related

events taking place both before

the

beast's capture by

Carl

Denham and

after

his fatal fall from

theEmpireStateBuilding.

3.

By March

2014,

after

years

of

developing

his

Skull Island universe,

Mr.

DeVito

-

through his company, PlaintiffDeVito ArtWorks LLC, had partnered with

the

production

company ofone ofthe most influential producers in the industry -Lorertzo di Bonaventura - to

develop the Skull Island Property

(as

defined herein)

as

a

high-budget television program.

With

Mr.

di

Bonaventura

and his company

on board,

DeVito ArtWorks had

been invited to

make a

pitch

of

the Skull

Island Project (as defined herein) to executives for Defendant Legendary

Entertainment. After hearing DeVito ArtWorks' vision

for

the Project, Legendary's initial

response was

positive,

except that some business/deal issues needed

to be

ironed

out.

4. Mr. DeVito expected

that

the sacrifices

and

the dedication

and

the years

of

hard work

finally would be rewarded. This expectation did

not

arise from a sense

of

entitlement after his

years

ofwork; rather, it derived from his

belief that

agreements were binding

commitments

between those entering them and his - soon,

to

be shattered - belief that others shared that

same

2

COMPLAINT


3/34

©

.Cat

©

o>

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

level

of

respect

for

those

agreements. Having

oneof

the leading producers

in

the entire

entertainment

industry

asa

working partner

forhis

lifelong

project solidified his

expectation.

Obtaining

a positive

response

from

a

respected production

company to hispitch

furthered

strengthened his expectation. Mr. DeVito knew - because California law held - that once the

Skull Islandpitchwasmade to Legendary, Legendary couldnot use the ideas disclosed to it to

produce its own Skull Islandproject without DeVitoArtWorks's involvement and fair

compensation.

5. As

alleged

in this Complaint,

however,

Legendary chose touse the

ideas

andconcepts

that DeVito

ArtWorks

had

disclosed

toit about the

Skull

Island Project, while refusing topay

DeVito ArtWorks thecompensation owed to it for such

use.

Building on DeVito ArtWorks's

ideas andconcepts, Legendary began production of a feature motion picture based on Skull

Island,

theorigins of

King

Kong, and

taking audiences deeper

into this

mysterious

and

dangerous place (the Feature Film ).

6. Moreover, not satisfied with using

DeVito

ArtWorks's Skull Island Property without

authorization,

Legendary

attempted to

eliminate

DeVitoArtWorks from

competing with

Legendary's project

by

preventing

DeVitoArtWorks from

developing

the

Skull

Island Project

as

a

high-budget television

series. Legendary first

used

its

influence

to

strong

arm

DeVito

ArtWorks' production partner, di Bonaventura Pictures Television to stand down from

participating

in the Skull Island

Project,

and then, when

DeVito

ArtWorks found other

production

partners in JerryBruckheimer Television andDefendantWarner Bros.Entertainment, Inc

( Warner Bros. ), Legendary

wielded its

position to cause

Warner Bros, to abandon

the project

after

using less than its

best

efforts to

produce

and

develop

the

Skull

Island Property asa

high-

budget television series. Indeed, Warner

Bros,

ultimately joined

with Legendary

inthe

production

and

planned distribution

ofthe

Feature

Film,

in

spite

of its

own

agreement

with

DeVito Artworks not touse the Kong Skull Island ideas disclosed toit for itsown.Skull Island

project

widiout

the involvement ofandfair

compensation

to

DeVito ArtWorks.

As a

result,

DeVitoArtWorks has suffered significant financial harm.

•3 -

COMPLAINT


4/34

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

> 12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

\

25

©

ro

•v

©

26

27

28

an

THE

PARTIES

7.

PlaintiffDeVito ArtWorks

LLC

( DeVito

ArtWorks or

Plaintiff') is, and at

all

times

herein

relevant

is,

a

limited liability

company

formed

under

the laws

of

the

State

of

New Jersey,

located in

the

State ofPennsylvania

and

doing business within

the

County ofLos Angeles, State

of

California.

8. At

all times

relevant herein,

Plaintiff

isengaged in

the business

of

marketing and

selling licenses

to

use

intellectual

property that itowns.

9.

Plaintiff

is informed, believes,

and

thereon alleges

that

Defendant Legendary

Entertainment LLC ( Legendary Entertainment )

is,

and at

all

times herein relevant was, a

limited liability company

formed

under

the

laws

of

California, located

in

Burbank, California

and doing business within

the

County

of

Los Angeles, State

of

California.

10. Plaintiff is informed, believes, and

thereon alleges that

Defendant

Legendary

Pictures

LLC

( Legendary

Pictures ) is, and

atall

times herein

relevant

was,

a limited liability

company formed

under the

laws ofCalifornia,

located

in Burbank, California and doing business

within

the

County

ofLos

Angeles,

State of

California.

11.

Plaintiff

is informed, believes, and thereon alleges

that

Defendant Legendary

Television LLC

( Legendary Television )

is,

and

at

all

times herein

relevant

was,

a

limited

liability company

formed

under the laws

of

California, located

in

Burbank, California

and doing

business within

the

County of

Los

Angeles, State ofCalifornia. Hereinafter, Legendary

Television, Legendary Pictures, and Legendary Entertainment

shall

be referred

to

collectively

as

Legendary .

12.

Plaintiff is

informed, believes,

and

thereon alleges that Defendant Warner Bros.

Entertainment,

Inc. ( Warner Bros. ) is,

and

at all

times herein relevant,

was a

Delaware

corporation, and has been

at

all times, herein relevant, located

in

Burbank California

doing

business within

the

County

of

Los Angeles, State

of

California.

13. At

all times mentioned in this complaint, unless otherwise alleged,

each defendant

was

the

agent ofevery other defendant, and in doing the acts

alleged

in

this

complaint, was

COMPLAINT


5/34

©

N J

©

1

2

.3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

25

acting within the course, scope and authority of that agency, and with the knowledge

and

consent

of each of the

other

defendants.

.14.

Plaintiff

is

unaware

of

the

true names or

capacities

of

the

Defendants sued

herein

as

Does 1

through 100,

and therefore

sue

them under such fictitious names.

Plaintiff is

informed

and

believes,

and

thereon alleges,

that each of

the

defendants

sued

herein

as

aDoe is in

some

manner responsible or liable for the acts

and

damages alleged

in

this complaint. Plaintiffwill

seek

leave ofthe Court

to amend

this complaint

to state the true names and capacities

ofthe Doe

defendants when they have beenascertained.

•TTTttTSmrTION

AND

VENUE

15.

The

Court

has

personal

jurisdiction

over

the

Defendants because

they are

residents

ofand/or

doing

business inthe State of

California.

16.

Venue is

proper

in this

County under California Code

of

Civil

Procedure

section

395.5 as Defendants' principal

places

of

business

are situated in LosAngeles County. Venue is

proper in this District pursuant to Los Angeles County Court Rule 2.0(c).

FACTS COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION

17.

Joe

DeVito is a respected artist who,

over

the past three decades, has painted

and

sculpted

many

of

the most

recognizable

icons

of

American

pop

culture, including

Tarzan,

Superman,

Batman, Wonder Woman,

Spiderman,

MAD magazine's Alfred E. Newman, Doc

Savage and

various

characters in World ofWarcraft.

He

has

illustrated hundreds

ofbook and

magazine

covers

for

authors

such

as

Jules Verne, H.G. Wells,

Piers

Anthony,

Terry

Bisson,

Robert

Bloch, Jonathan Carroll,

Robert Heinlein, and Katherine

Kurtz. In

addition,

Mr. DeVito

has

painted several notable posters, including those

ofLobo,

Supergirl, Robin, Catwoman.'and

numerous trading cards

for

the major

comic book and

gaming

houses such

as

DC Comics,

Fleer

and

Upper

Deck.

Mr.

DeVito's

artwork

has been

exhibited

in

museums

and

galleries

throughout

the

United States. Mr. DeVito

has

also created concept

art

and

toydesigns for television

and

for

motion

pictures.

In

2005, Mr.

DeVito was

selected

for membership in the prestigious Society of

Illustrators..

In

2005, Mr. DeVito's artistic

show, TheArt

ofKONG: King of

Skull

Island was

COMPLAINT


6/34

©

. to.

CD

CD

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16.

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

hosted

by the

Museum of

American Illustration at the Society

of

Illustrators in New York City

and was the

longest one

man show

in the

100 plus years oftheir history.

18..

Beginning

in

1992,

Mr.

DeVito

began

working

on

a

major project

to

create

the

prequel to the

public

domain story

ofMerian

C.

Cooper's King

Kong

leading up

to the discovery

and capture ofKong

by Carl Denham,

as well

as

the

sequel

to the story after Kong's death at the

base

of

the Empire State Building. Working in conjunction

with

the Cooper family and relying

on his knowledge ofmodern and prehistoric human and animal anatomy, flora, and architecture,

Mr. DeVito

created

- through

text

and

illustration

- an entire universe that tied

together

the events

and

individuals from

before Kong's capture

to

those events and

individuals

important

to

the story

after Kong's death

in

a

single comprehensive

and

detailed story (the Skull Island Property ).

The Skull Island Property was embodied

in

awork

entitled Skull

Island, which was registered

with theUnited

States

Copyright Office in 1997.

19. InMarch 2002, Mr.

DeVito formed

the limited

liability

company

DeVito ArtWorks,

LLC

to which he transferred

his

ownership rights to the Skull Island Property.

A

portion

of

the

Skull Island

Property

was incorporated into

an illustrated

novel,

co-authored by

Brad

Strickland,

and published

by

Dark Horse Press in

2004,

entitled KONG:

King

ofSkull Island.

20.

Also

in

2004, DeVito ArtWorks

created

and

published the

website,

kongskuHisland-Com, on

which he offered KONG:

King of

Skull Island

for

sale, as

well

as

assorted

prints of

Mr. DeVito's King Kong artwork.

For

the

past

decade, DeVito ArtWorks

has

continued

to operate the

kongsku11is1and.com website,

expanding the products

offered

for

sale, as

well as

incorporating

reviews, interviews, and

news

concerning Mr.

DeVito

and the

KONG:

King

ofSkull

Island

property.

21. In August2013, DeVito ArtWorks retained DannieFestaof FestaEntertainment to

represent

the

Skull

Island

Property

in

all

media

space and

licensing,

in

particular

by

creating

a

media and

licensing platform for the Skull

Island

Property to package

and

market it to

production houses, networks,

and

studios

for

development

asa

television series

or feature film.

22. In

furtherance ofthe packaging and marketing of

the Skull

Island

Property, DeVito

ArtWorks and

Ms. Festa

retained

the

services ofexperienced Hollywood

scriptwriters

Jonathan

6

COMPLAINT


7/34

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

©

-

26

O

27

©

28

an

Penner and Stacy Title (the Writers ), to

create

written pitch materials for a television series

incorporating

the

Skull

Island

Property. Mr.

Penner

and

Ms. Title were at

all

relevant times

represented

by

Bill

Douglass

of

Paradigm

Talent and

Literary

Agency.

The written

pitch

materials

and artwork prepared by Mr. DeVito established the narrative framework, universe, and

events of

the origin and

growth of

Skull

Island and King

Kong

for

the development

ofa

television

series

or feature

film (the

Kong

Skull

Island Project ).

.23.

On

or about January

29, 2014,

Mr.

Douglass spoke with Dan McDermott,

President

of

Di Bonaventura Pictures

Television

( di Bonaventura Television )

- a

television production

company

led

by

Lorenzo di Bonaventura, widely considered within the entertainment industry as

anA-list

producer,

and

Mr.

McDermott,

formerly

the

first

president of

DreamWorks Television

and widely respected television executive - about the

Kong Skull

Island Project. At that time,

Mr. McDermott agreed to

hear

a(pitch for the Kong Skull Island Project. Mr. McDermott was

familiar with Mr. DeVito's work and agreed that the prequel/sequel story ofKong and Skull

Island would be a great basis for a television series.

24. Subsequently, Mr. McDermott contacted Mr. Douglass and invited

DeVito

ArtWorks

andthe

Writers

topitch the Kong

Skull

IslandProjectto Mr. diBonaventura. Onor about

February 18, 2014, Ms. Festa,Mr.Penner, and Ms. Title met with Mr.McDermott and Mr. di

Bonaventura andpitched the

Kong

Skull Island Project.

Atthe

time

of

this pitch,

di

Bonaventura

Television had a

contractual

relationship with

ABC

Studios

as

a production company.

25.

On orabout February 21, 2014,

Mr.

McDermott informed Mr. Douglass that

Mr.

di

Bonaventura

and

di Bonaventura Television agreed to

partner

with DeVito ArtWorks

to

develop

and

market

the Kong Skull Island Project

as a


series. Subsequently, Mr.

McDermott and

Mr.

di Bonaventura requested tomeet with

Ms.

Festa, Mr. Penner, and Ms. Title

to

refine

the

pitch.

On

February

28, 2014,

Mr.

McDermott,

Mr.

di

Bonaventura,

Ms.

Festa,

Mr.

Penner, and Ms. Title (collectively,

the

Skull Island Team ) met and the Kong Skull Island

Project pilch was refined and

improved

inanticipation.of presenting

the

project

to

potential

network or studio partners.

- 7


8/34

CD

.t o

©

n

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26-

27

28

26. On or

about

March 4, 2014, Mr.

McDermott

informed Mr.

Douglass that

di

Bonaventura

Television would be ending its business relationship with

ABC

Studios. During

this

conversation,

Mr.

McDermott reassured

Mr.

Douglass that

he

and

the

rest

of

the

Skull

Island

Team

wouldbe happywith the newproduction

company. Mr.

McDermott asked

that,

theSkull

Island Team refrain from

pitching

the

Kong

Skull Island

Project

to any

other

potential network or

studio partners

while

he and Mr. di

Bonaventura

finalized anew

overall

agreement with the new

unidentified studio.

The

rest of the Skull Island

Team

agreed to hold offon arranging for any

further pitches for the project until

after

Mr. di Bonaventura finalized

the new

agreement.

27.

Inor

around the last

halfof

March and first

halfof

April 2014,

di

Bonaventura

Television

entered

into

a

new

agreement

with

Legendary

to

move

their television production

company from ABCStudios to

Legendary.

28.

On or

about

April

15,

2014, Mr.

McDermott

informed

Mr.

Douglass that di

Bonaventura Television

had

completed its agreement with

Legendary. At that

time,

Mr.

McDermott and Mr. di Bonaventura arranged for theSkull IslandTeamtomeet,with Peter

Johnson and Noah

Greenshner

ofLegendary Entertainment's

television division

-Legendary

Television

- on April 22,

2014,

to

pitch

the

Kong

Skull Island Project. Plaintiff is

informed,

believes and

thereon

alleges that,

at

the time

of

this

pitch meeting,

Peter

Johnson was

the

executive

vice

president ofScripted Series Development for Legendary Television and that

Noah

Greenshner was the vice president

ofScripted

Series

Development for

Legendary

Television.

Plaintiff is further

informed,

believes, and thereon

alleges

that at all relevant times Mr. Johnson

and Mr. Greenshner reported

directly to Bruce Rosenblum, the President ofLegendary's

television division - who reported directly

to

Legendary's

CEO

Thomas Tull.

29.

On or about April 17, 2014, Mr. Rosenblum and Mr; Douglass discussed the Kong

Skull

Island Project.

At

that

time,

Mr.

Douglass informed

Mr.

Rosenblum

thatthe

Skull Island

Team was

bringing the

Kong Skull Island

Project

into

Legendary

through di Bonaventura

Television andits

deal

with

Legendary.

30. During this, conversation,

Mr.

Rosenblum

represented

to

Mr.

Douglass that

Legendary

had no

King Kong-relatcd

project in development atLegendary,

whether

as a

8

COMPLAINT


9/34

©

to

©

On

1 '

2

3

4

5

6

.7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

•

26

27

28

television

series

orasa

feature film. Mr. Rosenblum

then

invited

and

authorized the Skull Island

Team to

make the

pitch

for

the Kong

Skull

Island Project to Legendary's executives.

31. OnApril 21, 2014,

Mr.

McDermott sent an e-mailto the rest of the Skull Island

Team to confirm that everything was ready for the pitch

meeting

with Legendary. Mr.

McDermott

wrote, SO

looking

forward to

moving forward

on

KONG

32.

On the

afternoon of

April

22,

2014,

the

Skull Island

Team met

with Legendary

executives Peter Johnson and Noah Greenshner

at

Legendary's office

in

Burbank, California.

In

addition

to

Legendary's two executives, a female Legendary

representative

was

present

who

spent

the

entire meeting taking copious notes.

During

this meeting, the

Skull

Island Team

presented visually

and

verbally

its

vision

of

the Kong


In

particular,

the

Skull Island Team revealed to Legendary's executives, its

story of

what happened

after

Kong

died on

the

streets ofNew

York

City

and

how those events will

transport

viewers into further

exploration of the mysterious Skull Island

and the

disclosure of its secrets in the process.

An

integral component of the Skull Island Team's presentation was their explanation ofhow events

taking place AFTER King Kong's death could be crafted to form a bridge to events

that

took

place on

Skull

Island BEFORE his discovery by

Carl Denham.

Inaddition, the

Skull

Island

Team

stressed

the

concept that

the

island

itself

would

be

a

leading

character,

as its

secrets

were

explored

and

revealed. Mr. di Bonaventura introduced the project

by

expressing

his

excitement over being involved with the Skull Island Project and his belief in its future success.

33.

At

no

time before, during, or after the Skull

Island Team presented the

Kong Skull

Island

Project

to Legendary on April

22,

did

anyone

from Legendary inform any member ofthe

Skull Island

Team,

or any

other

representative ofDeVitoArtWorks that

Legendary

was

contemplating

or

developing

a

motion picture based on

a

sequel/prequel to the

King

Kong story

or

telling

the

story

of

the

exploration

of

Skull Island and

the

history

of

its

inhabitants, including

butnot limitedto,King

Kong.

34. Plaintiff


and


Mr.

Johnson and

Mr.

Greenshner reported

the

results of the pitch meeting with the Skull Island Team to their direct

•9 -

COMPLAINT


10/34

1

2

3

4

..

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

-

21

22

23

24

CD

•to

25

26

©

27

28

supervisor, Mr.

Rosenblum

and that Mr. Rosenblum shared that information

with

Legendary's

CEO, Thomas Tull.

35. On Monday morning, April 28, 2014,

Mr.

McDermott sentan e-mail toMs. Festain

which he expressed his belief based on

Mr.

Johnson's

e-mails

that

Legendary's response

to the

Kong Skull Island

Project

had

been

very

positive, in particular stating

that the

project was

' really cool, well done Nevertheless, Mr. Johnson had informed

Mr.

McDermott that,

we

have some

business/deal

issues

to discuss

which I'll

elaborate

on on Monday.

36. The following day,

April

29,Mr. McDermott sentanother e-mail to

Ms.

Festa in

which

he expressed

his frustration with Legendary and

its

response to the Kong Skull Island

Project.

He

stated that

he

had

had

a

very difficult

time

pinning

[Mr.

Johnson] down.

He

expressed

his hope

that

if

for some

business reason

they

[Legendary] are not able to

proceed

(I

don't

think

there's

any lack

ofenthusiasm

creatively) then we

[di

Bonatenvura Television] will

ask for a

carve-out

sowecan do this independently of them.

37.

On

that

same day,

April

29,

Mr.

Johnson informed

Mr.

Douglass

that

Legendary

was

formally

passing on the

Kong

Skull

Island

Project. When asked why Legendary had made

this

decision,

Mr.

Johnson did

not

tell Mr. Douglass that Legendary was

contemplating

or developing

a

motion

picture

based

on

a

sequel/prequel

to

the King Kong

story

or

telling

the

story

of

the

exploration

ofSkull

Island and the

history of

its inhabitants, including but

not limited

to, King

Kong. Rather, Mr.

Johnson stated that Legendary's

plan to

extend

its Godzilla

feature

film

franchise through

Guillermo

del Toro would conflict

with

Legendary's involvement

with

the

Kong Skull Island Project.

38. OnMay 1,

2014, Mr.

McDermott sent an

e-mail

toall the members of the

Skull

Island

Team expressing real disappointment

that

Lorenzo

and

I, due to circumstances beyond

our

control, must stand

down

from

participating

in

the

Kong

project. According

to Mr.

McDermott, for di

Bonaventura Television to

continue

working

with the

Kong

Skull

Island

Project

in

light

of

the uniquely complicated situation

with

Legendary,

would send

the wrong

message and caus[e]

potential

upset at

the

start ofour deal.

Mr.

McDermott

expressed

his

sincere apologies to his honorable and

good

partners .

10 -

COMPLAINT


11/34

©

. to .

©

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

.1 4

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

39. Plaintiff is informed,

believes, and

thereon alleges that Legendary pressured di

Bonaventura

Television to stand down

from continuing

its

involvement

with

the'Kong

Skull

Island Project.

Plaintiff

is

further informed, believes,

and

thereon alleges that Legendary applied

this

pressure because ithad decided that itwould use the ideas presented

by

the Skull Island

Team on April 22,

in

particular the conceptual framework

for

a

story

telling the origins ofSkull

Island and/or King Kong through aprequel/sequel

to

the original King Kong

story,

to produce

and

distribute

its own feature film, without

involving

orpaying DeVito ArtWorks.

40.

Having lost their production

partner, di


- and unaware

that

Legendary

had

engineered

the break up for

its

own wrongful

purposes, the remaining

members

of

DeVito

ArtWorks's Skull Island

Team

(the New Skull Island

Team )

pitched the Project

to

other potential production partners. In

particular,

the

New

Skull Island Team pitched the Kong

Skull

Island Project

to

executives

from Jerry

Bruckheimer

Television ( JBTV )

on

or

about

May

7,2014, including JBTV's president

Jonathan

Littman and executive

vice

president,

KristieAnne

Reed.

In addition

to JBTV, the New Skull

Island Team - over

the

course of

May and

the

first

week

of

June

- participated in

pitch meetings with

executives

from other potential production

partners,

including Davis

Entertainment and Sony Pictures

Television ( Sony )

New

Regency

Television

and

20th Century

Fox

Television

( Fox

TV ),

and MGM

Television.

41. Plaintiff is informed, believes,

and

thereon alleges thatJBTV

was

so

taken

with

the

Kong

Skull

Island Project as a

high budget feature television

series

that,

consistent

with the

production overall

deal

( POD )

between

JBTV and Warner Bros., JBTV insisted that Warner

Bros, acquire the

rights to

develop

and produce

the

Kong Skull Island Project from

DeVito

ArtWorks.

42. On

orabout July

21, 2014,

after considering offers

from

Sony and others,

DeVito

ArtWorks

closed

an

agreement

with,Warner Bros,

for

the

development

and

production

of

the

Kong Skull Island Project as a

high-budget

television

series JBTV

expressed its

excitement

and

commitment to the

Project,

noting

their hope

that

Kong Skull

island Project would be

for the ,

Bruckheimer

television

brand what

Pirates of the

Caribbean

was for

its

feature film brand.

JBTV demonstrated that

commitment

by immediately

taking

steps

to move

that

development

1 1

COMPLAINT


12/34

©

.to

©

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

forward. Plaintiff is

informed, believes, and thereon

alleges that among the

steps

taken by JBTV

to move the development ofthe Kong Skull Island Project forward was the hiring ofRockne

O'Brien

to

serve

as

the show

runner

for

the

Kong


43. OnJuly23,

2014,

theNew

Skull

Island Team met

with

Wamer

Bros, executives

Susan Rovner, Clancy Collins White, and

Ashley

Cole

and

JBTV executives,

Mr.

Littman, Ms.

Reed,

and

Mike Azzolino (the Warner

Bros.

Pitch Meeting ). During the Warner Bros. Pitch

Meeting,

the

New Skull

Island

Team

presented visually

and

verbally

its

vision of

the Kong Skull

Island Project. Inparticular,

the New

Skull Island

Team

revealed

to

Warner Bros.'s executives,

its

story of

what

happened after Kong died on the streets ofNew York City and how those events

will

transport

viewers

into

further exploration

of

the

mysterious Skull Island

and the

disclosure

of

its

secrets

in the

process.

An

integral component of

the New

Skull Island Team's presentation

was their

explanation of

how

events taking place after

King

Kong's

death

could

be crafted

to

form abridge to

events that

took

place

on Skull Island before his discovery by Carl Denham. In

addition, the

Skull

Island

Team

stressed the concept

that

the island

itselfwould be a leading

character, as its

secrets

were explored and revealed.

44. At no time

before,

during, or after the Wamer Bros. Pitch Meeting, did anyone

from

Warner Bros,

inform

any

member

of

the

New

Skull Island

Team,

or any

other

representative

of

DeVito

ArtWorks

that Warner Bros,

was contemplating

or

developing amotion

picture based on

a

sequel/prequel to the King Kong

story

or telling

the story of

the exploration

ofSkull Island

and

the history of its inhabitants, including but not limited to,

King Kong.

45.

On or about July 25, 2014, at the San Diego Convention

Center during

the national

Comic-Con 2014,

Legendary

announced that itwas-going to release a feature

film to

be

produced by

Legendary's

CEO Thomas Tull called Skull Island,

a

film promising

to

take

audiences

deeper

into

the

rich world

of

Skull

Island

by

exploring

the.

mysterious

and dangerous

place (the

Feature

Film ). Legendary gave a release date for the Feature Film inNovember

2016..

46. After

the Legendary announcement atComic-Con 2014, JBTV contacted Plaintiff to

express its concern that Plaintiff

had licensed

the Skull Island Property to Legendary, while

1 2

COMPLAINT


13/34

©

-to-

©

o n

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9 '

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

licensing

the same

property

to JBTV

at

the same

time.

DeVito

ArtWorks -

through its

representatives - explained the situation to JBTV and Warner Bros., noting that they

had

made

the same

pitch

presentation

to

Legendary and

JBTV,

butthat

Legendary

had

stated

that

it was

going topass on the

Skull

Island

Project. JBTV

and

Warner

Bros,

were

also

informed

that

Legendary had not mentioned to DeVito

ArtWorks

any

intention

to produce

a

motion picture

regardingKingKongand/or SkullIsland.

47.

Ultimately,

on

August

18,2014, Plaintiff

finalized

and

entered into awritten

option

purchase agreement with Wamer

Bros,

for the production

of

the Kong

Skull

Island Project as

a

high-budget

television series.

Under

the

agreement,

Warner Bros,

acquired

the exclusive right

to

market

the

anticipated

Skull Island series

to

broadcast and cable networks. Immediately after

Warner Bros, and Plaintiff entered into the agreement,, the New Skull Island Team and JBTV

began taking

steps

to produce the

television

series. Plaintiff- through its

representatives

-

discussed

the strategy

for getting the Kong Skull Island Project

to

be picked

up

for television

broadcast with executives

at JBTV and Wamer

Brothers. According to this

strategy, the

focus

would be

on getting the

show

on

the

broadcast

schedule ofthe

primary broadcasting networks,

such as CBS or ABC.

Nevertheless

ifattempts

to

reach

an agreement

with the

broadcasting

networks

were

unsuccessful, obtaining

a

deal with

cable networks would still

be

possible.

48. Pitch meetings between the

New Skull Island Team, JBTV,

and Warner Bros, and

ABC,

CBS, and Fox

TV

were

scheduled for September. In addition, on September 17, 2014,

Warner

Bros, fileda trademark application with theUnitedStatesPatentand Trademark Office

for the trademark Kong

King

of

Skull

Island,

in

connection with the production, distribution,

and display ofa television

series

and motion pictures, testifying to its bona fide

intention to

use

th e mark in commerce.

49. On

September

23,

2014,

the

New Skull Island

Team

-

accompanied

by

Mr.

Littman,

Ms. Reed, Mr. Azzolino, and Peter

Roth

-president

of

Warner Brothers

Television Group

and

Warner Brothers

Television,

with four additional executives from Warner

Brothers Television,

(collectively, the Kong

Skull

Island

Pitch Team ) met

with CBS executives to pitch the

Kong

SkulJ

Island

Project

asa

potential

program for theCBS

television schedule.

Later

that

same

1 3

COMPLAINT


14/34

©

.t o

fv .

©

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

afternoon, the Kong Skull Island Pitch Team

met

with

executives

from ABC to

pitch

the Project

for inclusion in the

ABC

schedule.

50.

On the following morning,

September

24,

2014, the Kong Skull Island Pitch

Team

.

met

with executives from

Fox

Television to pitch the

Kong

Skull

Island

Project

for

inclusion in

Fox Television's

schedule.

Plaintiff is informed,

believes,

and thereon

alleges that,

before

the

meeting with

Fox

Television,

Mr. Tull, CEO ofLegendary,

contacted Mr.

Roth ofWarner

Bros,

by telephone

to

complain about

Wamer Bros, commitment to and

participation in the

Skull

Island Project.

In

particular, Plaintiff is informed, believes, and thereon

alleges that

Mr. Tull

accused Mr. Bruckheimer ofstealing

the

idea of the

Kong

Skull Island

project from Legendary.

Plaintiff

is

further

informed, believes,

and


Mr.

Tull made

this telephone

call

to bully Mr. Roth and Mr. Bruckheimer into abandoning the Skull Island Project.

51. On or about September 27,2014,

Deyito ArtWorks

contacted Legendary to express

its expectation that Legendary

would

provide

fair

and appropriate compensation

for

its

use

of the

ideas

and conceptual framework of the Kong Skull Island Project that ithad pitched to

Legendary in

April 2014. Legendary refused

- and

continues

to

refuse

- to

make such

compensation.

52.

By

the

first week

of

October, 2014,

DeVito

ArtWorks

was

notified that

ABC, CBS,

and Fox Television had elected to pass on

the Kong


Consistent

with the

strategy for

the

development of the

Skull

Island Project,

DeVito ArtWorks

anticipated

that

Wamer

Bros,

and JBTV

would

move forward with pursuing the Skull Island Project through the

many cable

options

available, including many companies that were subsidiaries

of

Wamer

Bros.'s parent

company Time Wamer, Inc., including

TNT,

Cinemax, and others.

53. As

time

passed,

however,

DeVito ArtWorks

heard.nothing

from either JBTV or

Wamer

Bros.

After

weeks

of

constant

communication,

the

surprising silence

grew increasingly

disconcerting

to

DeVito ArtWorks. DeVito ArtWorks's representative

reached out

to

JBTV

to

inquire

into the

status

of

the

Kong Skull Island

Project

and

arrange the anticipated shift

of

focus

to

the various cable

television

options. DeVito ArtWorks

was

surprised to

hear from JBTV that

neither

JBTV nor Warner Bros, were interested

in

continuing with the Kong Skull Island Project.

1 4

COMPLAINT


15/34

©

©

cr>

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Rather than pursue

the

cable television options, Warner Bros, and JBTV were

going

to stop work

on

the Project, even though Wamer Bros, was

contractually committed to commission

ascript..

When

.reminded

that

the

agreement

for the

Kong Skull

Island

Project called

for

a

guaranteed

pilot, Warner Bros, negotiated a kill fee with

the

Writers and returned

the

rights to

the Kong

Skull Island Property to DeVito ArtWorks in accordance with an agreement between Wamer

Bros, and

DeVito

ArtWorks

terminating the option

purchase agreement

executed

on

December

16,2014

(the Termination Agreement ).

54. Plaintiff is informed, believes, and thereon alleges that

Wamer

Bros, 's decision not

to

pursue

the

Kong

Skull

Island

Project

after its

few

initial attempts

was in

response

to

pressure

applied by Legendary.

Plaintiff

is

further informed,

believes,

and


Legendary

applied thispressure on

Wamer

Bros, because it haddecided thatit

would

usethe ideas

presented by the Skull

Island

Team on April 22, in particular the conceptual framework for

a

story

telling the origins

ofSkull

Island and/or

King

Kong

through a

prequel/sequel to the original

King

Kong story,

to

produce

and

distribute its

own

feature film, without involving

or paying

Plaintiff. Moreover, Plaintiff is

informed,

believes, and


Legendary

applied

this pressure on Warner Bros, to eliminate competition for its development ofLegendary's

Feature Film.

55.

On

December 12, 2014, Legendary announced that

ithad

re-named

the

feature

film

as Kong:

Skull

Island and delayed its release until

March

2017. Legendary's decision to use

the

same name as that used by DeVito ArtWorks for its King

Kong

and Skull Island property has

resulted in consumer confusion over DeVito ArtWorks' relationship

to Legendary's

Feature Film.

Plaintiff

is

informed, believes,

and

thereon alleges that Legendary

has

used -

and

continues

to

use

-the name used

by

DeVito ArtWorks

intentionally to

cause

this

confusion.

56.

Plaintiff

is

informed, believes,

and thereon

alleges that Legendary

and.

Warner Bros,

have

used

-

and continues

to

use

- the

ideas

from the Kong

Skull Island

Project

presented

by the

Skull Island

Team

on

April

22 and

July 23, in particular the

conceptual

framework for a story

telling the origins of Skull Island and/or King Kong

through

a

prequel/sequel

to. the original King

1 5

COMPLAINT


16/34

©

•to

to

^4

©

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Kong

story, including

delving into the mysteries surrounding

Skull Island itself

by treating the

Island as

a virtual

character

in

the story, to produce

and distribute meFeafure

Film.

57.

Plaintiff

is

informed, believes,

and

thereon alleges that Legendary through

its

casting

director issued a casting

call for

roles in Legendary's

Feature Film. The

casting call, issued in

August

2015, sets

forth

a

summary description

of

the

Feature

Film

that is taken

virtually

verbatim

from

material provided

by

DeVito ArtWorks

to

Legendary

at

the Aprii

22nd

pitch

meeting.

58. InSeptember 2015,

Legendary announced that

itwas

moving

the production ofthe

Feature Film from Universal Studios to Wamer Bros.

59.

One

month earlier,

in

August

2015, Warner Bros, had

filed

a

petition

with

the

United

States

Patent

and Trademark Office to revive the previously abandoned

trademark

application for

Kong:

King

of

Skull

Island

for

use

irr

connection with the production, distribution,

and

display

ofa

television series

and

motion

pictures, testifying toits

bona

fide intention touse the

mark

in

commerce .

60.

Plaintiff

is

informed, believes,

and


filming for

Legendary

and

Wamer Bros.'s

Feature Film

has been ongoing and

recently concluded.

The Feature Film is

currently in post-production and continues to be on track for a release in March 2017.

61. Plaintiff is further informed, believes, and thereon

alleges

that Legendary and

Warner Bros, considers the Kong: Skull Island film to be an

important

tentpole property,

serving, asa franchise for

future films,

for

which

it

has

committed

significant financial resources

andwhich it expectswill generate hundreds ofmillionsof dollarsof revenue.

F IR ST CAUSE

OF

ACTION:

Breach Of (Implied-In-Fact) Contract

(Against Legendary

Entertainment,

Legendary

Pictures,

Legendary

Television)

62. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates

by

reference each and

every

allegation contained

in

Paragraphs

I to60as

though fully

set

forth herein.

63. Formore than20 years, JoeDeVito andDeVito

ArtWorks

haveworked on the

creation ofa

prequel to

Merian C. Cooper's King Kong story

leading

up

to

the discovery

and

1 6

COMPLAINT


17/34

©

,to

to

i©

a n

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

capture ofKong by Carl

Denham,

as

well

as the

sequel

to the story after Kong's death

at

the

base

of

the Empire State Building. Working in conjunction

with

the Cooper family

and

relying

on

his

knowledge

of

modem

and

prehistoric human and animal

anatomy,

Mr.

DeVito

created

-

through

textand illustration - an entireuniverse that tiedtogether theevents and individuals

from before

Kong's capture to those important to the story after Kong's death in a single comprehensive and

detailed

story

(the

Skull Island Property ).

Through

its representatives

and agents, DeVito

ArtWorks

prepared text

and

images establishing

the narrative

framework

and

events of the

Kong

Skull Island Project

for use.in marketing

the Skull

Island Property

toproduction houses,

networks, and studios for

development

of theProject as a television

series

or feature film.

64. On

or

about April

17,

2014,

Bruce Rosenblum,

the

head

of

Legendary's

television

division, discussed the Kong

Skull

Island Project

with

Mr.

Douglass. Mr. Douglass

informed

Mr. Rosenblum that the Skull Island Team was

bringing

the Kong Skull Island Project into

Legendary through

di

Bonaventura Television's deal

with Legendary.

65. OnApril

22, 2014,

therepresentatives andagents for

DeVito ArtWorks

met

with

representatives ofLegendary atat

Legendary's

office

inBurbank, California. During

this

meeting, DeVito

ArtWorks disclosed

the Kong


toLegendary. As a

professional artist

and

writer

and

licensing

company, DeVito and DeVito ArtWorks would never

have

disclosed

the ideas

and

conceptual

framework for

the Kong

Skull

Island

Project

to

Legendary for its consideration

to

use inconnection

with

its development of television series and

feature films without the expectation thatDeVito ArtWorks would receive bothcredit

and

compensation for Legendary's use of those ideas.

66.

As

a knowledgeable participant in

the

motion picture and

television

industry,

Legendary knew that DeVito ArtWorks would not have disclosed

the

ideas and

conceptual

framework.for

the Kong

Skull

Island Project

to

Legendary

but for the

mutual understanding

that

DeVito ArtWorks would

receive

both credit and financial compensation for Legendary's use of

those ideas. Widi

this understanding and inacceptance of

it,

Legendary requested,

authorized

and listened

to DeVito ArtWorks' pitch

of

the Kong

Skull

Island Project.

17

COMPLAINT


18/34

©

rt o

ro

©

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25.

26

27

28

67.

By

accepting

the

disclosure

of

the Kong Skull

Island Project,

Legendary's

conduct

implies

its

agreement to condition its receipt

of the information

on

Legendary's promise

to

provide

the

expected benefits

to

DeVito

ArtWorks. DeVito ArtWorks

and

Legendary, therefore,

both knew

that

any use of

the

ideas

and conceptual

framework of

the

Kong


pitched by

DeVito ArtWorks to

Legendary

that excluded

DeVito

ArtWorks

from

benefiting

from

such use would be an unauthorized useof the valuable information disclosed anda breachof the

implied-in-factcontract.

68. Shortly

after the

pitch

meeting, DeVito ArtWorks was informed that Legendary

had

passed on the

Kong Skull

Island Project

-

purportedly

because

Legendary's

planned

expansion

of

its

Godzilla

feature

film

franchise would

conflict

with

Legendary's involvement

with the Kong

SkullIslandProject.

69. In

addition,

on(or around May

1,

2014, di

Bonaventura

Television informed DeVito

ArtWorks

withdisappointment and regret that it needed to standdown fromits involvement

with the Kong

Skull Island

Project

due

to the uniquely complicated situation with

Legendary.

70. Plaintiff is informed,

believes

and thereon alleges that Legendary pressured di

Bonaventura Television to

stand

down

from continuing their involvement

with

the Kong Skull

Island

Project.

Plaintiff

is

further informed, believes,

and

thereon

alleges

that Legendary applied

this pressure because ithad decided that itwould use

the

ideas presented

by

the Skull Island

Team on April 22,

in

particular

the

conceptual

framework

for a story

exploring Skull Island and/

or the

origin

and history ofSkull Island and King Kong through a

prequel/sequel to the

original

King Kong

story,

to produce

and

distribute

its

own Kong

Skull

Island

project without involving

or paying DeVitoArtWorks.

71. During

the

second

half

of

2014,

Legendary

announced that

it

was going to

produce

and release

a

feature

film

that would take audiences deeper

into

the rich world

of

Skull Island

by

exploring

the

origin

story

of

Skull

Island and

King Kong.

Legendary

named the feature

film

Kong: Skull

Island,

the same name DeVito ArtWorks has long used for its King Kong and

Skull Islandproperty.

1 8

COMPLAINT


19/34

©

- to

N->

1.

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

72.

Plaintiff is informed, believes, and thereon

alleges

that

Legendary

has

used

- and

continues to

use

-

the

ideas from

the

Kong Skull Island Project presented by the Skull Island

Team on

April

22,

in

particular

the

conceptual

framework

for

a

story telling

the

origins'of

Skull

Island and/or

King Kong

through

a

prequel/sequel

to the

original King Kong

story,

including

delving

into

the mysteries surrounding Skull

Island itself by

treating the Island

as

a

virtual

character in the

story,

to produce anddistribute its

feature film.

73. In spite

ofrequests

by

DeVito ArtWorks

for

fair and

appropriate

compensation

from

Legendary

for its use of

the

ideas and conceptual framework ofthe Kong Skull Island Project as

alleged

herein, Legendary

has refused

to

make

such compensation.

Without

such.compensation

and

credit, Legendary's

use

is

unauthorized

and

thereby

a

breach

of

its

implied contract

with

DeVitoArtWorks.

74. As

a

direct result

of

Legendary's

breach of

its contract with DeVito ArtWorks,

DeVito ArtWorks has

suffered

injury in an amount subject to proof, but

in

any

case exceeding

$1,000,000.

SECOND

CAUSE OF

ACTION:

BreachOf (Implied-In-Fact) Contract

(Against

Warner

Bros.

Entertainment,

Inc.)

75. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference

each and every

allegation contained

inParagraphs 1 to 74 as

though

fully setforth herein.

76. For more than

20

years,

Joe

DeVito and DeVito ArtWorks have worked

on the

creation ofaprequel to Merian

C.

Cooper's King Kong story leading up to the

discovery

and

capture ofKong by Carl Denham, as well

as

the sequel

to

the

story after

Kong's death at the base

of the Empire State Building.

Working in

conjunction with the Cooper

family

and relying

on his

knowledge

of

modem and

prehistoric

human and animal anatomy,

Mr.

DeVito created

-through

text

and illustration - an entire universe that tied

together

the.events

and

individuals from

before

Kong s capture

to

those important

to die

story after

Kong's

deadi

in

asingle comprehensive

and

detailed story (the Skull Island Property ).

Through

its

representatives and

agents, DeVito

ArtWorks prepared

text and images establishing die narrative

framework

and

events

of the Kong

1 9

COMPLAINT


20/34

CD

-t o

ro

©

n

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

-2 7

28

Skull Island Project for use in marketing the Skull Island Property to production houses,

networks, and

studios for development of

the

Project as a television series or

feature

film.

77.

On

July

23,

2014,

the

New Skull

Island

Team

met

with Wamer Bros,

executives

Susan Rovner,

Clancy Collins

White, and

Ashley

Cole

and

JBTV

executives, Mr. Littman, Ms.

Reed, and Mike

Azzolino

(the WamerBros. Pitch Meeting ).

During the

Wamer Bros. Pitch

Meeting, the New Skull

Island

Team

presented visually and

verbally

its vision of

the

Kong Skull

Island Project.

In

particular,

the New

Skull Island

Team

revealed to Wamer

Bros.'s

executives,

its story ofwhat happened

after

Kong

died

on the streets of

New

York

City

and how those events

will transport viewers into further exploration ofthe mysterious Skull Island and the disclosure

of

its

secrets

in

the

process.

An

integral component

of

the

New

Skull

Island

Team's

presentation

was

their

explanation

of

how

events taking place after King

Kong's

death could be crafted

to

form a

bridge to,

events that took

place

on

Skull

Island before his discovery by Carl

Denham.

In

addition, the Skull Island Team stressed the concept that the island itselfwould be a leading

character,

as itssecrets

were

explored

and

revealed.

78. At

no

time before,

during, or

after the Wamer Bros.

Pitch Meeting, did

anyone from

Wamer Bros,

inform any

member

of the New Skull

Island Team, or any other representative

of

DeVito

ArtWorks

that

Wamer

Bros,

was

contemplating

or

developing

a

motion

picture

based

on

a

sequel/prequel to the

King

Kong story

or telling

the

story ofthe

exploration

ofSkull

Island

and

the

history

ofits

inhabitants,

including

but

not

limited to,

King Kong.

79.

During the Warner Bros. Pitch

Meeting,

DeVito ArtWorks disclosed

the

Kong Skull

Island Project to Legendary. As aprofessional

artist

and writer and licensing company, Mr.

DeVito and

DeVito ArtWorks

would never

have

disclosed

the ideas and

conceptual framework

for the Kong Skull Island Project to Wamer Bros,

for its

use

in

connection with its development

of

television series

and

feature

filmswithout

the

expectation, that DeVito ArtWorks

would

receive both

credit

and compensation for Wamer Bros.'s use of those ideas.

80. As aknowledgeable participant in

the

motion picture and television industry, Wamer

Bros,

knew

that

DeVito

ArtWorks would

not

have disclosed

the

ideas and

conceptual framework

for the Kong Skull Island Project to

Warner

Bros, but for the mutual understanding that DeVito

2 0

COMPLAINT


21/34

CD

• to

ro

to

©

an

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ArtWorks would receive both credit and financial compensation

for

Wamer

Bros.'s

use of

those

ideas.

With this

understanding and in acceptance

of it,

Warner

Bros,

requested, authorized and

listened

to

DeVito

ArtWorks' pitch

of

the Kong Skull Island

Project.

81.

By accepting the disclosure of

the

Kong Skull Island Project, Wamer Bros, 's

conduct

implies its

agreement

to

condition its

receipt ofthe information on Warner Bros.'s

promise

to

provide

the

expected benefits

to

DeVito

ArtWorks.

DeVito ArtWorks and Wamer

Bros., therefore, both

knew

that any use of

the

ideas and

conceptual

framework

ofthe

Kong


pitched by

DeVito ArtWorks

to

Wamer Bros, that excluded DeVito

ArtWorks from

benefiting from

such

use

would

beanunauthorized useof the valuable

information disclosed

and

a

breach

of

the

implied-in-fact contract.

82. By the first week ofOctober, 2014, DeVito ArtWorks was

notified

that ABC, CBS,

and Fox Television, having heard

pitches

for the Kong Skull

Island

Project had

elected to

pass on

the Project. Consistent with the strategy for the development ofthe Skull

Island Project,

DeVito

ArtWorks

anticipated

that

Wamer Bros,

and

JBTV

would move

forward with pursuing the

Skull

Island Project through the many cable options

available, including

many

companies

that were

subsidiaries

of

Wamer

Bros.'s

parent company Time

Wamer,

Inc.,

including

TNT,

Cinemax,

and

others.

83. As time passed, however, DeVito ArtWorks heard nothing from

either

JBTV or

Wamer

Bros. After weeks

of

constant communication,

the

surprising

silence

grew increasingly

disconcerting

to DeVito ArtWorks. DeVito ArtWorks's

representative

reached out

to

JBTV

to

inquire into the status ofthe Kong Skull Island Project and

arrange

the

anticipated

shift of focus

to

the various cable

television

options.

DeVito

ArtWorks was

surprised to

hear

from JBTV

that

neither JBTV nor Wamer Bros, were interested

in

continuing with the Kong Skull Island Project.

Rather

than

pursue

the

cable television options,

Wamer Bros, and JBTV were

going

to

stop

work

on the

Project, even

though

Wamer Bros,

were

contractually

committed to commission ascript..

When

reminded diat die agreement

for the

Kong

Skull Island

Project called lor

a

guaranteed

pilot, Wamer Bros, negotiated

akill fee with

the Writers

and

returned

the rights to the Kong

Skull Island

Property

to

DeVito

ArtWorks

m

accordance with

an agreement

between Warner

2 1

COMPLAINT


22/34

©

•t o

CD

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Bros,

and DeVito

ArtWorks

terminating

the option purchase agreement executed

on

December

16,

2014 (the

Termination Agreement ).

84.

During

the

second

half

of

2014, Legendary

announced that

it was

going

to

produce

and

release

afeature

film that

would take

audiences deeper

into the rich world ofSkull Island

by

exploring the origin story ofSkull Island and King Kong (the Feature

Film ).

Legendary

named the Feature

Film

Kong: Skull Island,

the.same

name DeVito ArtWorks has long used

for its King

Kong

and

Skull

Island property.

85. During the

fall

of

2015. Wamer

Bros, and Legendary announced that they were

joining togetherto produce anddistribute theFeature

Film.

86.

Plaintiff

is

informed, believes,

and

thereon

alleges that

Legendary

and

Wamer Bros,

have

used

-and continue to use -

the

ideas from

the

Kong

Skull

Island Project presented by

the

SkuU

Island

Team on

April

22 and

July

23, in particular

the conceptual

framework

for

a

story

telling the

origins

ofSkull Island

and/or

King

Kong

through

a

prequel/sequel

to

the

original

King

Kong story, including delving into the mysteries

surrounding

Skull Island itself by-treating the

Island as

a virtual

character

in

the story, to

produce

and

distribute

the Feature Film.

87. Wamer Bros,

has not

compensated DeVito ArtWorks

for its

use

of

the

ideas

and

concepts

regarding

the

Kong Skull Island

Project

disclosed

to

it

during

the Wamer Bros. Pitch

Meeting

and

during the period of

time

it held the option on

the

Kong Skull Island

Property.

Without

such

compensation

and

credit, Wamer Bros.'s use

is unauthorized and

thereby abreach

of its implied contract withDeVitoArtWorks.

88. As adirect result of

Wamer

Bros.'s breach

of its

contract

with

DeVito

ArtWorks,

DeVito ArtWorks has

suffered injury

in

an amount

subject to

proof,

but in any case exceeding

$1,000,000. second cause of action:

THIRD

CAUSE

OF ACTION

Intentional Interference

With

A

Contract

(Against LegendaryDefendants)

89.

Plaintiff

realleges and

incorporates

by

reference each and every

allegation

contained

inParagraphs to

88

as though fully set forth

herein.

-

22

-

COMPLAINT


23/34

©

.to

©

cr >

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

90. As alleged in greater detail

in

preceding paragraphs 1through 39, in February 2014,

DeVito

Artworks,

through

its

agents and

representatives,

pitched the

Kong

Skull Island Project to

Lorenzo

di

Bonaventura

and

Dan McDermott with

the

intent that

di


would

agree

to

work with DeVito ArtWorks

to

partner with DeVito ArtWorks

to

develop

and

market the Kong Skull

Island

Project as a


series. Shortly

after

hearing the

Kong

Skull

Island Project

pitch,

Mr.

McDermott informed

DeVito

ArtWork's Kong

Skull

Island

team that

di


had

agreed to work together

with

DeVito ArtWorks to

develop

and market the

Kong

Skull Island Project as

a

high-budget television series.

91. In accordance

with this oral agreement, at the

request

of di

Bonaventura Television,

the

Skull

Island

Team

met with

Mr.

McDermott

and

Mr.

di

Bonaventura

to

refine and improve

the pitch before taking the pitch

to market the Kong

Skull Island Project to the

networks.

Additionally, consistent

with

this

oral

agreement, di Bonaventura

Television

arranged

for

DeVito

ArtWorks' Skull Island

Team

to

pitch the

Kong Skull Island

Project

to its

new

contractual

partner,

Legendary. The existence of

the agreement

between

DeVito

ArtWorks

and

di

Bonaventura

Television was

further

evidenced

by

actions and

conduct

set forth in the allegations

of the preceding paragraphs 1

through

36.

92.

On

April

22,

2014, the

representatives

and

agents

for DeVito ArtWorks met

with

representatives

ofLegendary at

at Legendary's

office

in

Burbank, California.

During

this

meeting,

DeVito ArtWorks disclosed the Kong

Skull

Island Project to

Legendary. During

the

pitch meeting,

representatives

ofLegendary were

informed that DeVito

ArtWorks and di

Bonaventura Television had agreed to work together to

develop

and market

the

Kong Skull

Island Property as

a

high-budget television series. In addition, Plaintiff is informed, believes,

and

thereon alleges that at various occasions between February

21, 2014

and

May 1, 2014,

di

Bonaventura Television through

its

agents

and

representatives, informed Legendary

of

its

agreement with DeVito ArtWorks

to

work

together

to develop and market the Kong Skull Island

Project as a high-budget television series.

93. Plaintiff,

furthermore,


and

thereon

alleges

that Legendary -

with full

knowledge that

di

Bonaventura Television, and DeVitoArtWorks

had agreed to work

2 3

COMPLAINT


24/34

©

.to

©

0 >

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

I12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

together to

develop

and

market

the Kong Skull

Island Project

as

ahigh-budget television

series

-

used its influence and relationship with di Bonaventura Television

to

pressure di Bonaventura

Television

to

end

its

relationship

with

DeVito ArtWorks

and

stand

down

from

continuing

its

involvement with

the Kong

Skull

Island Project.

94.

Plaintiff is informed,

believes,

and thereon

alleges

that

Legendary intended

that

its

actions would disrupt the contractual relationship between DeVito ArtWorks and

di

Bonaventura

Television

by preventing DeVito ArtWorks from developing the Kong

Skull

Island Project

as

a

high

budget television series. Plaintiff is further informed, believes,

and

thereon alleges

that

Legendary

intended to prevent DeVito ArtWorks from developing

the Kong Skull

Island Project

because

it

had decided

that

it

would use

the

ideas

presented

by the Skull

Island

Team on

April

22,

in

particular the

conceptual

framework for

a

story exploring Skull

Island

and

telling

the

origins

ofSkull

Island and/or King

Kong

through

a

prequel/sequel to

the

original King

Kong

story,

to produce

and

distribute its own

feature film

( Legendary's Feature Film ), without

involving

or

paying DeVito ArtWorks.

Plaintiff

is informed,

believes,

and thereon alleges that

Legendary

disrupted the contractual relationship

between

DeVito

ArtWorks

anddi

Bonaventura

Television

to

eliminate competition for its development ofLegendary's Feature Film. Plaintiff is

informed,

believes,

and

thereon alleges that Legendary

intentionally deceived

di

Bonaventura

Television as

to the

actual reasons for

disrupting the

relationship between

DeVito ArtWorks and

di

Bonaventura

Television.

95?

As a result of the pressure applied by

Legendary,

di Bonaventura Television notified

DeVito

ArtWorks

and

the

Skull

Island Team

that,

due

to circumstances beyond

its control, it

needed to

stand

down

from

participating in

the Kong project.

Inaccordance with

this

decision

resulting from

Legendary's

pressure,

di

Bonaventura Television, including Mr. di Bonaventura

and

Mr.

McDermott,

ceased

its

involvement

in the

development

and

production

of

the

Kong

Skull Island Project thereby

disrupting

the

relationship

between di Bonaventura Television and

its

honorable and good partners

-

DeVito ArtWorks

and

the Skull Island Team.

96. The disruption of the contractual relationship between DeVito ArtWorks and di


resulted

in DeVito ArtWorks

being

deprived

of

the involvement

of

Mr. di

2 4

COMPLAINT


25/34

©

•to

~ 4

KJ

©

an

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Bonaventura and Mr. McDermott in the development

and

marketing of

the

Kong

Skull

Island as

a

Documents

DeVito Artworks v. Legendary Pictures - King Kong Skull Island complaint.pdf