Law&Crime Sidebar - Clint Eastwood Wins $2M in CBD Lawsuit, Britney Spears Betrayed By Her Manager?

Episode Date: July 7, 2022

Clint Eastwood’s attorney and Jesse Weber discuss the actor's recent legal victories against companies using his likeness without his permission and what they have planned next. The New York Times' Liz Day breaks down the latest accusations that Britney Spears' former management team secretly set up the pop singer's conservatorship and profited off of it. PLEASE SUPPORT THE SHOW:Thanks to Established Titles for sponsoring this podcast! Get 10% off on any purchase with code LAW10. Go to https://establishedtitles.com/LAW10 and help support the channel!GUESTS: Jordan Susman, Clint Eastwood's Attorney Liz Day, Journalist at The New York Times LAW&CRIME SIDEBAR PRODUCTION:YouTube Management - Bobby SzokePodcasting - Sam GoldbergVideo Editing - Michael DeiningerGuest Booking - Alyssa FisherSocial Media Management - Kiera BronsonSUBSCRIBE TO OUR OTHER PODCASTS:Court JunkieThey Walk Among AmericaCoptales and CocktailsSpeaking FreelyLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Wondery Plus subscribers can binge all episodes of this Law and Crimes series ad-free right now. Join Wondry Plus in the Wondery app Apple Podcasts or Spotify. Agent Nate Russo returns in Oracle 3, Murder at the Grandview, the latest installment of the gripping Audible Original series. When a reunion at an abandoned island hotel turns deadly, Russo must untangle accident from murder. But beware, something sinister lurks in the grand. View Shadows. Joshua Jackson delivers a bone-chilling performance in this supernatural thriller that

will keep you on the edge of your seat. Don't let your fears take hold of you as you dive into this addictive series. Love thrillers with a paranormal twist? The entire Oracle trilogy is available on Audible. Listen now on Audible. So you don't want to get in Clint Eastwood's bad side. The actor is racking up legal victories against companies using his likeness without his permission. Eastwood's lawyer Jordan Sussman explains what will happen next. And new accusation. in Brittany Spears case that her business managers may have secretly set up the pop singers conservatorship and profited off of it. New York Times, Liz Day, breaks it all down. Welcome to Sidebar, presented by Law and Crime. I'm Jesse Weber. A major, major win for actor Clint

Eastwood, the 92-year-old won his lawsuit against Norrick. innovation after it improperly used his likeness for marketing purposes without his consent. Now, the company had used the Dirty Harry Star's image to drive online users to a site selling CBD products, particularly through these shady marketing techniques that made it look like Eastwood had endorsed the products when he never did. This involved deliberately inserting Mr. Eastwood's name within blog posts and web page meta descriptions. U.S. District Judge Hormick Carney granted default judgment in favor of Eastwood. they basically this happens when the defendants don't answer they don't show up they don't do anything in the case eastwood and the agency that owns the rights to his name and image were awarded two million dollars the court said in its order quote two million dollars is a reasonable representation of the fair market value of mr eastwood's services in lending his influential and no name to a hidden meta tag campaign for products he likely would have been unwilling to endorse in the first place now this is actually the second time this has happened eastwood

won $6.1 million judgment against a Lithuanian company that had fabricated articles to make it look like the actor endorsed CBD products. But it doesn't even end there because Eastwood is now apparently going after the CBD companies themselves. Joining me now is Clint Eastwood's attorney Jordan Sussman. Jordan, thanks so much for coming on the program. Thank you for having me, Jesse. Pleasure to be here. Let's just, I know you're going to, it's tough with attorney client privilege, but the best you can do, can you tell us what Mr. Eastwood's reaction was to this verdict? Thrilled. Mr. Eastwood has a very passionate sense of what is right and what is wrong, and he believes that those that do wrong should be held accountable. So these judgments have

thrilled him because they are holding accountable those that are trying to illegally profit off of his name and or likeness. Why are these companies doing it? I mean, why are they getting Clint Eastwood's name or likeness to sell CBD products? I'm not. sure I understand the connection there. Sure. They're doing it because they can because there is very lax enforcement, the FTC level. There's very little incentive right now at the governmental level to do anything about this problem. It's something I call the fake endorsement industrial complex where companies, particularly companies on the shadier in the business that might be selling products that aren't necessarily legal everywhere, use a celebrity's name or likeness to create

these false endorsements. And the irony is, the better your reputation, the more likely they are to use your name or likeness. So therefore, we've seen this happen with Oprah Winfrey, Sandra Bullock, and Clint Eastwood. People who are known and trusted by the public are the very ones that are targeted for these ads. My understanding is Mr. Eastwood doesn't even really endorse products. I mean, I think there was only one time maybe during a Super Bowl ad, right? That's right. So, Mr. East was one of the rare celebrities who has no interest in trying to profit off his name and likeness in, you know, the commercial setting. The only previous ad he's ever done in his entire 70-year career was I, what was it called? I want to say morning in America.

It was, it will come to me, but it was an ad. What was that? No, no, it was for a car, right? It was the car. It was a car, but it was about, it was in 2012, you know, the resilience of America coming back from the recession of 2000. he took a greatly reduced salary because he really believed in the message the resurgent America. So here's my question to you. And again, if I understand it correct, this company, Norik Innovation just didn't show up, right? They didn't answer the complaint. It was a default judgment.

If that's correct, how are you going to collect the judgment now against them? Sure. So these, what happened was there's actually more interesting than that is that when we originally sued, we sued the companies whose CBD products were being sold, who were using Clint Eastwood's name in hidden meta tags or in hidden fields on these marketplace websites to sell CBD products. And what happened was when we sued the CBD companies, all of them came forward and said, hey, I'm not involved in this. This is not me. These are just my products. And I say, great, prove it to me and we'll drop you from the case. We actually got contacted by an attorney for Norrock Innovation and its manager Eric Popowitz. And we said, great, give us exonerating information. And

they wouldn't. And then they went dark. And then they ceased all communication with us. And they decided not to contest the lawsuit and would rather risk getting a default judgment, which is what's happened to them. Do you think you'll be able to collect? Absolutely. No Rock Innovation is still an operating company in Florida. We got people on the ground in Florida tracking down Mr. Popowitz as we speak. Before I let you go, I want to ask you real quick about what now the future is. Is Mr. Eastwood planning to go after these other companies now? I mean, it seems that this is just, you know, he's won against these two different companies that were using his name, image, and likeness without his permission, but now what are the next steps? Future litigation. Sure. Well, first, in the $6.1 million judgment

against the Lithuanian company, we are actively pursuing collecting on that in Lithuania. There's a civil case pending. And in fact, as a result of the pressure and the media tension that this case is brought, there's actually a criminal case pending against Mediatonis and its owner in Lithuania. We are actively pursuing collecting that. We're actually actively pursuing this current judgment, the two million dollar judgment in Florida against Norrock and Obowitz. And the great thing about it is by taking a stand is that these fake ads have come down. There's not that many fake ads featuring Clint Eastwood anymore because they know he's not someone to be trifled with. And what about going after the CBD companies?

The CBD companies, which ones are, I don't know which ones you're referring to. In general, though, are there any companies that Mr. Eastwood's going to be pursued and going after because of what's happening? Let's put it this way. If there are other companies, illegally use his name and or likeness to sell their products. I think they should be worried about the lawsuit that's coming for them. Mr. Sussman, I don't want to call you Mr. Sussman. You told me before the interview, Mr. Sussman's your father. Jordan Sussman, thanks so much for coming on. Really appreciate you taking the time and congratulations on the wind. Thank you so much for having me. My pleasure.

Today is a great day. It's a great day for Britney Spears. And it's a great day for justice. There's definitely something to celebrate, but it's also a solemn day. Brittany Spears has been faced with a decade-long nightmare, a Kafkaesque nightmare, orchestrated by her father and others. Now over to Britney Spears. As you may recall, the pop star's 13-year conservatorship ended last year, but that's not stopping the legal drama. Spears' attorney Matthew Rosengard, who you just heard, is now making some serious claims in a new court filing. It includes that Spears' former business management company, TriStar, helped to create the conservatorship and that it earned $18 million off of it.

Now, Rosengar claims that TriStar and Spears' management team weren't telling the truth about their involvement. And a lot of focus is on Spears' former business manager, Louise Lou Taylor, who apparently had a close relationship and seeming direct communication about the matter with Jamie Spears, Brittany Spears' father. The discussion about secret payments. Well, to make sense of all this, I'm joined right now by Liz Day, a journalist at the New York Times who's been following the Britney Spears. case and even co-created the documentary framing Britney Spears. Liz, great to see you. Thanks so much for coming on. Thank you. Let's just start real quick with why Matthew Rosengart is doing this. So Matthew Rosengart issued a filing yesterday, which alleged that Britney Spears's former business manager, TriStar, was intimately involved and helped create the conservatorship that Brittany had

that they ultimately ended up making $18 million off of. And he issued this filing because in the next few weeks, there's a bunch of court hearings in Britney's case. And one of them is around whether or not TriStar has to comply with subpoenas and hand over documents and be deposed about their role in the conservatorship. And what has come out? I mean, these emails that Rosengarde has put in his filing, what evidence is there that TriStar was involved in getting the conservatorship and running and actually profiting off of it? So TriStar had long denied any role in creating the conservatorship. And they did this both to the court and to journalists like myself, you know, sending legal letters warning they had no role in creating the conservatorship. And yesterday, Brittany's lawyers filing

actually cited a string of emails that showed that Lou Taylor, the owner of TriStar, was intimately involved in helping to create the conservatorship. She was emailing Jamie and his lawyers about the judge selection for the conservatorship. She was, you know, talking about how excited she was for the opportunity. She apparently said that the plan was for her to be a co-conservator and even talked about wanting to be a trustee of Britney's trust. So this all conflicted with TriStar's long held public position that they held no role in creating the conservatorship. And there was something about a $40,000 loan, right, between Jamie Spears and TriStar.

What do we make of that? So around this time that Jamie and TriStar were talking about the conservatorship and creating it, TriStar loaned Jamie $40,000, which was a lot of money because he was a cook and struggled with severe alcoholism, never really held down. on a job. Matthew Rosengart, Brittany's lawyer in the filing yesterday, said it appears that this loan was never disclosed to the court and may have broken court rules about conflicts of interest for conservators at the New York Times had exposed it back in December. And when we did, both Jamie and TriStar's lawyers at first denied there was ever a loan before ultimately admitting it after repressed,

which raises a question to me as to if there was nothing wrong with this loan as they maintain, I mean, why weren't they up front about it? And what was it for? We don't know what it was for. I really want to know. And that's, I believe, a question that Britney's lawyers pursuing. You know, it's possible that that $40,000 went to the legal cost for creating the conservatorship, which, you know, would ultimately mean that TriStar funded the startup cost of creating the conservatorship.

What's amazes me, you said that TriStar's lawyers denied it. But like you said, Ms. Taylor also denied it and took kind of legal action against people who were coming forward against her, right? Yes, so Lou Taylor is known for being very aggressive legally. So she has, you know, sued Britney's fans. Brittany actually ended up paying some of those legal costs. As all journalists know, Lou Taylor has used Charles Harder to send a lot of legal letters to journalists saying, you know, Lou Taylor played no role in the conservatorship and it would be defamatory to say otherwise, which is why this filing yesterday from Brittany's lawyer showing emails of her being involved in creating the conservatorship We're really so shocked.

Any response since this filing from yesterday? So TriStar's lawyer, Scott Edelman, has given statements to media outlets saying that these are cherry-picked emails and that they're misleading and that the truth will come out once Brittany's records are unsealed. Anything from Brittany? I mean, she didn't know about this, right? It's unclear what Brittany knew and what she thinks about it. There's another important hearing.

I think that's happening at the end of July that might sort some of this out. Yes. So there are three hearings in the next few weeks in Brittany's case. And that one on July 27th will be where a judge decides whether or not TriStar has to comply with subpoenas and be deposed about their role in the conservatorship. All right, Liz Day. Maybe we'll have you back on to talk about the latest with it. We really appreciate you taking the time. Thank you.

And everyone out there, thanks for joining us here on Sidebar. Please subscribe on Apple Podcast, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcast. Sidebar is produced by Sam Goldberg. It's YouTube manager is Robert Zoki and Alyssa Fisher is our booking producer. I'm Jesse Weber. speak to you next time. You can binge all episodes of this long crime series ad free right now on Wondery Plus.

Join Wondery Plus in the Wondery app, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify.