Multiple Documents - prawfsblawg.blogs.comprawfsblawg.blogs.com/files/mockingbird-orig.pdf ·...

Multiple DocumentsPart Description1 16 pages2 Exhibit A3 Exhibit B4 Civil Cover Sheet5 Civil Cover Sheet

Carter v. Rudinplay, Inc., Docket No. 1:18-cv-00117 (S.D. Ala. Mar 13, 2018), Court Docket

© 2018 The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Service // PAGE 1

https://www.bloomberglaw.com/ms//product/blaw/document/X1Q6NVCKJHO2?imagename=1-1.pdf










http://www.bna.com/terms-of-service-subscription-products

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION TONJA B. CARTER, in her capacity as Personal Representative of the ESTATE OF NELLE HARPER LEE, Plaintiff, v. RUDINPLAY, INC., a New York Corporation, Defendant.

))))))))))))

Civil Action No. 18-cv-117

COMPLAINT Plaintiff Tonja B. Carter, in her capacity as Personal Representative of the

Estate of Nelle Harper Lee, makes the following complaint for a declaratory

judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201 against Defendant Rudinplay, Inc.:

The Parties

1. Plaintiff Tonja B. Carter (“Ms. Carter”) brings this action in her

capacity as the Personal Representative of the Estate of Nelle Harper Lee. Ms.

Carter is a citizen of Monroe County, Alabama.

Case 1:18-cv-00117-WS-B Document 1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 1 of 16

2

2. Nelle Harper Lee (“Ms. Lee”) was a citizen of Monroe County,

Alabama at all times relevant to this action, up to and including her death on

February 19, 2016. She was the author of the novel To Kill a Mockingbird.

3. Defendant Rudinplay, Inc. (“Rudinplay”) is a New York corporation

with its principal place of business in the State of New York. Rudinplay is a theater

production company whose principal is producer Scott Rudin (“Mr. Rudin”).

Jurisdiction and Venue

4. This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 1332(a) because there is diversity of citizenship between the parties and the

amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.00.

5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Rudinplay because the claim

asserted in this Complaint arises out of and relates to Rudinplay’s contacts with the

State of Alabama, and Rudinplay purposefully availed itself of the privilege of

conducting activities within the State of Alabama.

6. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2)

because a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claim occurred in this

district and a substantial part of the property that is the subject of this action is

situated in this district.


3

Facts

7. To Kill a Mockingbird is a Pulitzer Prize winning novel that has sold

more than 40 million copies and been translated into more than 40 languages since

it was published in 1960. About 1 million copies of the novel are sold each year.

The novel was made into an Oscar-winning movie starring Gregory Peck with a

screenplay by Horton Foote in 1962. The novel was also adapted as a play by

Christopher Sergel. The novel was a valuable asset of Ms. Lee during her lifetime

and is now a valuable asset of her estate.

8. Atticus Finch, the central figure in To Kill a Mockingbird, is an iconic

character in American literature. Based on Ms. Lee’s own father, a small-town

Alabama lawyer who represented black defendants in a criminal trial, Atticus Finch

is portrayed in the novel as a model of wisdom, integrity, and professionalism. He

took on a representation that was unpopular in his community, stood up for his client

in the face of a lynch mob, and provided zealous advocacy at trial—knowing that a

jury in fictional Maycomb, Alabama in the 1930s likely would convict a poor black

man accused of raping a white woman. Not just a courageous lawyer, Atticus Finch

was also a wise and compassionate father. In 2002, Book magazine named Atticus

Finch the 7th best character in fiction since 1900.1 In 2003, Atticus Finch was the

1 See https://www.infoplease.com/arts-entertainment/literature-and-books/100 -best-characters-fiction-1900 (visited Mar. 12, 2018) (ranking by a panel of 55 authors, literary agents, editors, and actors).


4

Number 1 Hero on the American Film Institute’s 100 Greatest Heroes & Villains

list.2 The Alabama State Bar even placed a monument to Atticus Finch, the “lawyer-

hero,” in Monroeville, Alabama in 1997.

The Contract

9. Ms. Lee entered into a contract with Rudinplay as of June 29, 2015, in

connection with the live stage and ancillary rights in and to the novel titled To Kill

a Mockingbird (the “Contract”). A copy of the Contract is attached as Exhibit A.

10. “Novel” is defined in the Contract to be the novel To Kill a

Mockingbird.

11. “Play” as used in the Contract means a live stage play based on and

using the Novel and any and all elements thereof.

12. “Author” as used in the Contract means Ms. Lee.

13. In the Contract, Rudinplay agreed to pay $100,000.00 to obtain an

exclusive agency from Ms. Lee to procure a playwright to create a dramatic adaption

of her Novel and to acquire the sole and exclusive option to acquire exclusive

worldwide live stage rights in and to the Novel (with a specified limitation). For her

part, Ms. Lee agreed that during the period when Rudinplay held live stage rights,

she would not authorize the development, marketing, and/or production of any live

2 See www.afi.com/Docs/100Years/handv100.pdf (visited Mar. 12, 2018).


5

stage production or other live show or audiovisual production that is based on the

Novel or any portion thereof.

14. Rudinplay expressly agreed that there would be an annual professional

performance of the Play in Monroeville, Alabama and a restriction against any

license for performances of the Play within 60 miles of Monroeville, Alabama.

15. Rudinplay further agreed that Ms. Lee would receive billing credit for

the Play, with certain exceptions. The billing credit would appear in substantially

the following form: “Based on the novel ‘To Kill a Mockingbird’ written by Harper

Lee.”

16. The Contract provides that Rudinplay would pay Ms. Lee certain

royalties and certain net profits resulting from presentation of the Play.

17. Rudinplay also agreed to certain limitations on its selection of the

Playwright and the substance of the Play to be produced.

18. Paragraph 12 of the Contract provides that Ms. Lee shall have “the

absolute and unconditional right to approve the Playwright for the Play,” and “the

exercise of such right shall be within her sole and unfettered discretion.”

19. Paragraph 12 of the Contract further provides that Ms. Lee “shall have

the right to review the script of the Play and to make comments which shall be

considered in good faith by the Playwright.”


6

20. Paragraph 12 of the Contract further provides that “the Play shall not

derogate or depart in any manner from the spirit of the Novel nor alter its characters.”

The Present Controversy

21. Rudinplay procured Aaron Sorkin (“Mr. Sorkin”) as the Playwright for

the Play and submitted his name to Ms. Lee for the necessary approval. Ms. Lee

approved Mr. Sorkin as the Playwright for the Play on November 4, 2015.

22. Following the approval of Mr. Sorkin, Rudinplay sent a check dated

November 4, 2015, for $100,000.00 payable to Ms. Lee.

23. After Ms. Lee’s death in February 2016, the Estate became the

successor to Ms. Lee as “Author” under the Contract.

24. On September 13, 2017, Vulture reported on an interview that Kyle

Buchanan conducted with Mr. Sorkin at the Toronto Film Festival. When asked

“how the younger characters Jem, Scout, and Dill are going to speak Sorkin,” Mr.

Sorkin responded, “Well, they’re gonna have to. Because I didn’t write their

language like they were children.”

25. According to Vulture, Mr. Sorkin in the interview also said, “As far as

Atticus and his virtue goes, this is a different take on Mockingbird than Harper Lee’s

or Horton Foote’s. He becomes Atticus Finch by the end of the play, and while he’s

going along, he has a kind of running argument with Calpurnia, the housekeeper,

which is a much bigger role in the play I just wrote. He is in denial about his


7

neighbors, and his friends and the world around him, that is as racist as it is, that a

Maycomb County jury could possibly put Tom Robinson in jail when it’s so obvious

what happened here. He becomes an apologist for these people.”

26. The Vulture article also reports, “That adjustment not only gives Atticus

a character journey from naivete to righteousness, it ties the 1930s-set Mockingbird

to today’s social climate.”

27. On September 13, 2017, Playbill published an article about the

interview that Mr. Sorkin gave about the Play. Based on the interview, Playbill

reported, “When the curtain rises on the world premiere of Sorkin’s To Kill a

Mockingbird, audiences won’t encounter the morally sound Atticus Finch they

know.” Playbill also reported that Mr. Sorkin had previously said that it “doesn’t

work at all” to take the scenes that Ms. Lee wrote in the Novel and to dramatize

them.

28. On September 14, 2017, the Estate’s literary agent Andrew Nurnberg

(“Mr. Nurnberg”) sent an email to Mr. Rudin expressing concern about the interview

that Mr. Sorkin had given “before sharing his thoughts (and text) with Nelle’s

family.” Mr. Nurnberg also wrote, “I am aware that this is early days, and that the

current script is not definitive, that you will still be working on this with Aaron. But

for this classic, it is really important that any spin put on the characters, not least

Atticus, does not contradict the author’s image of them and their Weltanschaung.”


8

29. On September 14, 2017, Mr. Rudin sent an email responding to Mr.

Nurnberg. Mr. Rudin assured Mr. Nurnberg that “[t]he Atticus of the book is the

Atticus of the novel,” and that “I am never going to fall anywhere outside the

agreement.”

30. Ms. Carter (the Personal Representative of the Estate) first saw a draft

of the Play in mid-September 2017.

31. On or about September 22, 2017, Mr. Nurnberg had a telephone

conversation with Mr. Rudin in which he underlined the importance of sticking to

the original storyline and the characters as in the Novel. Mr. Rudin assured Mr.

Nurnberg that the script was only in draft form and that the text would evolve.

32. On September 25, 2017, Mr. Rudin telephoned Ms. Carter in

Monroeville, Alabama. During that telephone conversation, Ms. Carter expressed

concerns about the script. Among other things, Ms. Carter discussed her concerns

pertaining to the alteration of characters, including Atticus Finch and Calpurnia. Ms.

Carter also expressed a concern about the impact of the addition of two characters

who were not in the Novel. In addition, Ms. Carter expressed a concern that the

script was not consistent with the setting of 1930s small-town Alabama. Mr. Rudin

assured Ms. Carter that he wanted to do the Play right and that he would make sure

that the Estate would be satisfied with the final product.


9

33. On September 28, 2017, after speaking with Ms. Carter about her

telephone conversation with Mr. Rudin, Mr. Nurnberg sent an email to Mr. Rudin.

In it, Mr. Nurnberg summarized his understanding that Mr. Rudin was in agreement

with a basic premise: “We are all agreed that the Atticus in the play must remain

the Atticus of the book.”

34. On September 29, 2017, Mr. Rudin responded by email to Mr.

Nurnberg. Mr. Rudin said, “We’re not looking to make any wholesale changes from

what [Ms. Lee] did but simply to dramatize the book, which is sometimes very

passive and more ruminative than dramatic.” He also said, “Remember you are

reading a first draft of this material and that the process of making a play happens in

workshops and rehearsals and previews. It will change and grow as it should.”

35. Mr. Rudin did not send an updated version of the script to Ms. Carter

or Mr. Nurnberg until February 13, 2018, even though Mr. Nurnberg had requested

an updated version prior to that date. Mr. Rudin waited to send the revised script

until shortly before a scheduled meeting with Ms. Carter. Ms. Carter read the entire

revised script on the day that she received it. Rather than addressing the concerns

that Ms. Carter had expressed in September 2017, the new version of the script

exacerbated her concerns.

36. On February 16, 2018, Ms. Carter met with Mr. Rudin for one to two

hours and again expressed serious concerns about the script. At times, the


10

conversation was heated. Ms. Carter again expressed her view that the script altered

the characters of Atticus Finch and Calpurnia. She also expressed concerns about

alteration of the characters of Jem Finch and Scout Finch. Ms. Carter also again

stated her view that the script did not present a fair depiction of 1930s small-town

Alabama (as Ms. Lee depicted it in the Novel), and she expressed concerns about

significant alterations of the story pertaining to the legal proceedings against Tom

Robinson. During the meeting, Mr. Rudin resisted the comments that Ms. Carter

was making. At the conclusion of the meeting, Mr. Rudin said that the version of

the script that had been sent to the Estate was a “working draft,” and that the Estate’s

concerns would be considered at a number of upcoming “workshops.”

37. Between February 16, 2018, and March 5, 2018, Rudinplay did not send

a new version of the script to Ms. Carter or Mr. Nurnberg. Nor did Rudinplay

express a willingness to make the substantial revisions to the Play required to bring

it into compliance with Paragraph 12 of the Contract.

38. As a follow-up to the verbal notifications to Mr. Rudin of the Estate’s

concerns that had been provided in September 2017 and February 2018, Ms. Carter

sent a letter to Mr. Rudin on March 5, 2018, giving written notification of the

Estate’s position that the Play derogates or departs from the spirit of the Novel and

that it alters five of the Novel’s characters – Atticus Finch, Calpurnia, Tom


11

Robinson, Jem Finch, and Scout Finch (the “March 5 Letter”). A copy of that letter

will be filed under seal as Exhibit B.

39. On March 9, 2018, an attorney for Rudinplay sent a letter to Ms. Carter

responding to the March 5 Letter (the “March 9 Letter”). With regard to the

provision in Paragraph 12 of the Contract that “the Play shall not derogate or depart

in any manner from the spirit of the Novel nor alter its characters,” Rudinplay’s

lawyer asserted that “[e]ven if the Author believes that the Play derogates or departs

from the spirit of the Novel, or alters its characters, the Author’s remedy is that the

Author ‘will be afforded an opportunity to discuss with the Owner [Rudinplay]

resolutions of any such concerns. The Author is therefore not the final arbiter of

what ‘derogates or departs from the spirit of the Novel, or alters its characters.’”

Rudinplay thus takes the position that the Estate has no remedy if Rudinplay

breaches this provision of the Contract other than the opportunity for the Estate to

discuss its concerns with Rudinplay.

40. In the March 9 Letter, Rudinplay’s lawyer also denied that the Play

derogates or departs in any manner from the spirit of the Novel, and he denied that

the Play alters any of the Novel’s characters.

41. In the March 9 Letter, Rudinplay’s lawyer, having indicated that the

second and final actors’ workshop with regard to the Play would occur in five weeks,

also stated that “it is unreasonable to expect that extensive changes can be achieved


12

five weeks before the second workshop. It simply is no longer possible, even if [Mr.

Rudin] were in agreement with everything in your March 5 letter.”

COUNT ONE – DECLARATORY JUDGMENT

42. Plaintiff incorporates and realleges as is set forth in full herein the

allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 41.

43. There is an actual controversy between the Estate and Rudinplay

concerning:

a. Whether Paragraph 12 of the Contract requires that the Play not

derogate or depart in any manner from the spirit of the Novel nor

alter its characters;

b. Whether Rudinplay has final authority to determine whether the

Play derogates or departs in any manner from the spirit of the

Novel or alters its characters;

c. Whether the Play derogates or departs in any manner from the

spirit of the Novel in its depiction of the legal proceedings against

Tom Robinson;

d. Whether the Play derogates or departs in any manner from the

spirit of the Novel in its depiction of a small Alabama town in the

1930s;


13

e. Whether the Play derogates or departs in any manner from the

spirit of the Novel in connection with the other issues raised in the

March 5 Letter;

f. Whether the Play alters the character of Atticus Finch;

g. Whether the Play alters the character of Calpurnia;

h. Whether the Play alters the character of Tom Robinson;

i. Whether the Play alters the character of Jem Finch; and

j. Whether the Play alters the character of Scout Finch.

44. The Estate maintains that:

a. Paragraph 12 of the Contract requires that the Play not derogate or

depart in any manner from the spirit of the Novel nor alter its

characters;

b. Rudinplay does not have final authority to determine whether the

Play derogates or departs in any manner from the spirit of the

Novel or alters its characters;

c. The Play derogates or departs from the spirit of the Novel in its

depiction of the legal proceedings against Tom Robinson;

d. The Play derogates or departs from the spirit of the Novel in its

depiction of a small Alabama town in the 1930s;


14

e. The Play derogates or departs from the spirit of the Novel in

connection with the other issues raised in the March 5 Letter;

f. The Play alters the character of Atticus Finch;

g. The Play alters the character of Calpurnia;

h. The Play alters the character of Tom Robinson;

i. The Play alters the character of Jem Finch; and

j. The Play alters the character of Scout Finch.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff prays that the Court

will award the following relief:

1. A declaratory judgment that:

a. Paragraph 12 of the Contract requires that the Play shall not

derogate or depart in any manner from the spirit of the Novel nor

alters its characters, and Rudinplay does not have final authority to

determine whether the Play complies with that requirement.

b. The Play derogates or departs from the spirit of the Novel and

thereby violates Paragraph 12 of the Contract in connection with

its depiction of the legal proceedings against Tom Robinson.

c. The Play derogates or departs from the spirit of the Novel and


its depiction of a small Alabama town in the 1930s.


15

d. The Play derogates or departs from the spirit of the Novel and


the other matters identified in the March 5 Letter.

e. The Play alters the character of Atticus Finch and thereby violates

Paragraph 12 of the Contract.

f. The Play alters the character of Calpurnia and thereby violates


g. The Play alters the character of Tom Robinson and thereby violates


h. The Play alters the character of Jem Finch and thereby violates


i. The Play alters the character of Scout Finch and thereby violates


2. An award of attorneys’ fees pursuant to Paragraph 13 of the Contract.

3. An award of costs.

4. Such additional relief as the Court may deem equitable and just.

s/ Matthew H. Lembke Matthew H. Lembke Attorney for Plaintiff


16

OF COUNSEL Matthew H. Lembke Jeffrey M. Anderson Ellen Presley Proctor Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP 1819 Fifth Avenue North Birmingham, Alabama 35203-2119 Telephone: (205) 521-8000 Facsimile: (205) 521-8800 SERVE COMPLAINT BY CERTIFIED MAIL TO:

Rudinplay, Inc. c/o Mr. Scott Rudin Citrin Cooperman & Co. 529 Fifth Avenue, 4th Floor New York, New York 10017


EXHIBIT A

Case 1:18-cv-00117-WS-B Document 1-1 Filed 03/13/18 Page 1 of 6

EXHIBIT B To Be Filed Under Seal


JS 44 (Rev. 06/17) CIVIL COVER SHEETThe JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except asprovided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for thepurpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)

I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff County of Residence of First Listed Defendant(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)

NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.

(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)

1 U.S. Government 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEFPlaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State 1 1 Incorporated or Principal Place 4 4

of Business In This State

2 U.S. Government 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State 2 2 Incorporated and Principal Place 5 5Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State

Citizen or Subject of a 3 3 Foreign Nation 6 6 Foreign Country

IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only) Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES

110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY 625 Drug Related Seizure 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 375 False Claims Act120 Marine 310 Airplane 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 423 Withdrawal 376 Qui Tam (31 USC 130 Miller Act 315 Airplane Product Product Liability 690 Other 28 USC 157 3729(a))140 Negotiable Instrument Liability 367 Health Care/ 400 State Reapportionment150 Recovery of Overpayment 320 Assault, Libel & Pharmaceutical PROPERTY RIGHTS 410 Antitrust

& Enforcement of Judgment Slander Personal Injury 820 Copyrights 430 Banks and Banking151 Medicare Act 330 Federal Employers’ Product Liability 830 Patent 450 Commerce152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability 368 Asbestos Personal 835 Patent - Abbreviated 460 Deportation

Student Loans 340 Marine Injury Product New Drug Application 470 Racketeer Influenced and (Excludes Veterans) 345 Marine Product Liability 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations

153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY 480 Consumer Credit of Veteran’s Benefits 350 Motor Vehicle 370 Other Fraud 710 Fair Labor Standards 861 HIA (1395ff) 490 Cable/Sat TV

160 Stockholders’ Suits 355 Motor Vehicle 371 Truth in Lending Act 862 Black Lung (923) 850 Securities/Commodities/190 Other Contract Product Liability 380 Other Personal 720 Labor/Management 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) Exchange195 Contract Product Liability 360 Other Personal Property Damage Relations 864 SSID Title XVI 890 Other Statutory Actions196 Franchise Injury 385 Property Damage 740 Railway Labor Act 865 RSI (405(g)) 891 Agricultural Acts

362 Personal Injury - Product Liability 751 Family and Medical 893 Environmental Matters Medical Malpractice Leave Act 895 Freedom of Information

REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS 790 Other Labor Litigation FEDERAL TAX SUITS Act210 Land Condemnation 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: 791 Employee Retirement 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff 896 Arbitration220 Foreclosure 441 Voting 463 Alien Detainee Income Security Act or Defendant) 899 Administrative Procedure230 Rent Lease & Ejectment 442 Employment 510 Motions to Vacate 871 IRS—Third Party Act/Review or Appeal of240 Torts to Land 443 Housing/ Sentence 26 USC 7609 Agency Decision245 Tort Product Liability Accommodations 530 General 950 Constitutionality of290 All Other Real Property 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION State Statutes

Employment Other: 462 Naturalization Application446 Amer. w/Disabilities - 540 Mandamus & Other 465 Other Immigration

Other 550 Civil Rights Actions448 Education 555 Prison Condition

560 Civil Detainee - Conditions of Confinement

V. ORIGIN (Place an “X” in One Box Only)1 Original

Proceeding2 Removed from

State Court 3 Remanded from

Appellate Court4 Reinstated or

Reopened 5 Transferred from

Another District(specify)

6 MultidistrictLitigation -Transfer

8 Multidistrict Litigation - Direct File

VI. CAUSE OF ACTIONCite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):

Brief description of cause:

VII. REQUESTED IN COMPLAINT:

CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTIONUNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P.

DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:JURY DEMAND: Yes No

VIII. RELATED CASE(S) IF ANY (See instructions):

JUDGE DOCKET NUMBERDATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE

Tonja B. Carter, in her capactiy as Personal Representative of the Estateof Nelle Harper Lee

Monroe County, Alabama

Matthew H. Lembke, Jeffrey M. Anderson, Ellen Presley Proctor; BradleyArant Boult Cummings LLP, 1819 Fifth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL35203; (205) 521-8000

Rudinplay, Inc.

New York, New York

Jonathan Zavin; Loeb & Loeb LLP, 345 Park Avenue, New York, NY20154; (212) 407-4161

28 U.S.C. 1332(a)

Declaratory judgment concerning compliance with contractual provisions

03/13/2018 /s/ Matthew H. Lembke


JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 06/17)

INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44Authority For Civil Cover Sheet

The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers asrequired by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, isrequired for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk ofCourt for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:

I.(a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, useonly the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and then the official, giving both name and title.

(b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land condemnation cases, the county of residence of the "defendant" is the location of the tract of land involved.)

(c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, notingin this section "(see attachment)".

II. Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.Cv.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an "X" in one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below.United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an "X" in this box.Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment to the Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes precedence, and box 1 or 2 should be marked.Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the citizenship of the different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversity cases.)

III. Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark thissection for each principal party.

IV. Nature of Suit. Place an "X" in the appropriate box. If there are multiple nature of suit codes associated with the case, pick the nature of suit code that is most applicable. Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.

V. Origin. Place an "X" in one of the seven boxes.Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts.Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441.When the petition for removal is granted, check this box.Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filing date.Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date.Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or multidistrict litigation transfers.Multidistrict Litigation – Transfer. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1407. Multidistrict Litigation – Direct File. (8) Check this box when a multidistrict case is filed in the same district as the Master MDL docket. PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE IS NOT AN ORIGIN CODE 7. Origin Code 7 was used for historical records and is no longer relevant due to changes in statue.

VI. Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553 Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service

VII. Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "X" in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.Demand. In this space enter the actual dollar amount being demanded or indicate other demand, such as a preliminary injunction.Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded.

VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pending cases, if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket numbers and the corresponding judge names for such cases.

Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.


lB-CU- I tl-,.!S- B

JS44 (Rev.06n7) CIVIL COVER SHEET

iurpose of''initiaring the civil docket sheet. (S]aE INS'/IRUCIIONS ON Nlixl' PAGli o]t 'I HIS R)ltM)

I. (a) PLAINTIFFS

Tonja B. Carler, in her capactiy as Personal depresentative of the Estateof Nelle Harper Lee

(b) County of i{esidence of First i-isted I'laintiff ltSrySe 9oLl4y-A!9!gmC(EXCIrI'|',IN U.S. PLNN1 ll:t C:ASIIS)

(c) Attornevs (Firu Nome, Atldrass, orul'l alephotc Nilmbcr)

tUdt(trew H. lembke, Jeffrey [\il. Anderson, Ellen Presley Proctor; BradleyArant Boult Cummings LLP, 1819 Fifth Avenue North, Birmingham, AL35203, (205) 521-8000

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION 1r'tu"e on "x" inore Boxotltt)

DIIFENDANTS

Rudinplay, lnc.

County of Resiclence o{ First Listed Defendant New York, New York(IN T!.5. PLAINIl},\: (:ASES ONI-Y)

NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASE-S. USE TIIE LOCATION OFTTIE TRACT OF I-AND INVOI.,VED-

Attorlleys (lJ Knovn)Jonathan Zavin; Loeb & Loeb LLP, 345 Park Avenue, New York, NY2A154: (212) 407-4161

III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES Otdce dn "x" in onc tloxltr I'taintiJf0;or Dn'ertit)t (.hses (hrlt) and Onc Box-fit- I)efendant)

PTI| DEF I'1-r DElr

Citizen of'l'his State fX t 13 I Incoqroratetl or Princ\ral Place 3 4 J 4ofBusiness In This State

Citizetr ofAtrother State 3 2 O 2 lncorporated ard Pliflcipal Place

ofBusiness [n .Another State

Citizetr or Subjeot ofa D 3 tl 3 fioreign Nation

,l -s ds

Click here for:

I 375 False (llairrrs Actf, 376 C)ui'Iam (31 USC

3'129(t\))a-l 400 State RcapportkrnmentI 4 l0 ,A.ntitrust

5 430 Banks and Bankingi'l 450 CornrnerceD 460 Deportalion3 470 Rackcteer Influenced md

Cotrupt Orgmizations3 480 Consursr Credit

:-l

490 Cableisat TV850 SecuritieJComrnoditiesl

Exchange890 Other Statutory Actions891 ,Agricnltural Acts893 Environlnental Matte$895 lrreedorr of Inlbfl nation

Act896,{rbitration

,l 899 Adrninistrativc Procedure

.ActlReview or Appeal ofAgency Decision

I 950 Constitutionaliry olState Statutes

D I U.S. Goverrunent

Plaintiff

O 2 U.S. GovemnentDefendant

IV. NATURE SUIT

fJ I l0 InsurmceD 120 MarineO 130 Miller ActO 140 Negotiable lrstrumentO 150 ltecovery ofoYeryayment

& Rlforcement ofD 151 N,IedictroAct0 152 Reoovery ofDefaulted

Student l,oans(Excludes Veterans)

D 153 Recovery ofOverpaylrentofvetemn's Benefits

D 160 Stockholdets' Suits

c( 190 other clontract0 195 Contact Product Liability0 196 Franchise

D 210 L,and Condemnation

D 220 Foreclosure

O 230 Rent Lease & EjectnentD 240 Torts to L,and

ll 245 Tort I'roduct LiabilityI 290 A1l 0ther Real Property

C} 3 Federal Question(,!.5. Governnrcnt Nol a P.tfly)

E 4 oiversity(lnd,catc Citkcnship o{Pdrties in lteilt IIA

un "X" iu One []ox

36 36

v.xr

ORIGIN (Plece ail "x' in One Box Onls)

OriginalProceedrng

D 2 Removed fromslate couft

Remanded frornAppellate Court

3 6 lvtultidistrictt,itigation -Transler

J 8 Multidistriclt.itigation -l)ircct !'ile

n3 IJ 4 Reinstated or B 5 'I'ransfened frornReopened Another District

VI. CAUSE OF ACTION

VTI. REQUESTED INCOMPLAINT:

Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing 1Do not citeJiltis{lictional statiltes unless diversit!):

Brief description of causeance with contractual ions

CHECK IF THIS IS A CT,ASS Z\CTIONUNDER RUl-El 23, F.R.Cv.P.

DtrMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded tn complairtt:

JLIRY DIiMAND: 3 Yes XNo

BAN.KIII IP'TCI,

J 422 Appeal 28 USC I 58

il 423 Withdrawal28 USC 1 s7

3 625 Drug Related Seizueofl'roperty 2l USC 881

n 690 Other

I 820 Copydghts{] l]30 Patetrt

3 835 l'atent - Abbreviat€dNew Drug Applioation

3 840 I'rademark

PI,RSONAI, INJTIRY0 310 AirylaneO 315 Airplane Product

Liability0 320 Assault, Libel &

Slander

D 330 Federal Ernployers'Liability

O 340 Mrinefl 345 Maritre Product

t,iabilityil 350 Motor VehicleO 355 Motor Vehicle

Product I"iabilityO 360 Other Personal

Ittjuryil 362 Personal lfiury -

Mediol Maloractice

PI'RSONAI, INJURY0 365 Personal L{ury -

Product l.iabilityO 367 l'{calth Care/

Phmaceuticall'ersonal lnjuryProduct t,iability

D 368 Asbestos PersonalInjuy ProductLiability

PERSONAI, PROPERTYlf 370 Other FraudO 371 thrth inLendirg0 3S0OtherPersonal

Property DarnageO 385 Property Datnage

lkrduct Liability

.:.saG[4&spsgEIDL-ft 861 l.lrA (139511)

U S62BlackLung(923)n 863 DIWC/DIWW (40s(g))3 864 SSID Title X\il3 86s RSI (40s(g))

ESNNPAT- TAY RItrTS',-IIJTI, RII:IITS

ActO 720 Labor'/h4anagement

RelationsD 740 Raihvay Labor Aotll 751 tanily zurd Medical

Leave ActLJ 790 Other L,abor L,itigation

79I EmployeB RettemefltIrcome Security Act

?10 Fair Labor

D 440 Other Civil RightsO 441 Votingi 442 EmploymentO 443 Ikrusinl

Accornmodations

il 445 Arner. w/DisabilitiesEmplo)anent

3 446 Amer. w/DisabilitiesOther

f] 448 Educatior

Ilabeas CorpuslIll 463 Alien Detairrce

n 510 Motions to VacateSentetrce

fl 530 GeneralD 535 Death Penalty

0ther:D 540 Mandannrs & OtlrerD 550 Civil Rightsl, ))) Pnson (lurdrhon

D 56Cl Civil Detainee -Couditions ofConfinemetrt

fl 462 Naturzrlization ApplicatkrnD 465 Other lnurigration

Actions

3 8?0'l'axes (U.S. Ptsinti{Tor Detbndart)

3 871 IRS-Third I'arty26 tJSC 7609

YIII. RELATED CASE(S)III ANY .TUDGE DOCKET NTJMBER

I'UIT UFI'ICII UJb UI\LY

RII.CEIP # AMOTJNI'

(See instruction.t):

APPI-YINC IT.P JUDGL: MAG. JUDCts

DATE

03t13t2018SIGNATLIRE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD

/s/ Matthew H. Lembke


General Information

Court United States District Court for the Southern District ofAlabama; United States District Court for the Southern Districtof Alabama

Federal Nature of Suit Contract - Other[190]

Docket Number 1:18-cv-00117

Carter v. Rudinplay, Inc., Docket No. 1:18-cv-00117 (S.D. Ala. Mar 13, 2018), Court Docket

© 2018 The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Service // PAGE 28

http://www.bna.com/terms-of-service-subscription-products

Multiple Documents - prawfsblawg.blogs.comprawfsblawg.blogs.com/files/mockingbird-orig.pdf ·...

Documents

Transcript of Multiple Documents - prawfsblawg.blogs.comprawfsblawg.blogs.com/files/mockingbird-orig.pdf ·...