Since 1996, Judge Judy Sheindlin has been a staple on our televisions —and there’s a good likelihood that we are all aware of Judy Sheindlin’s stern demeanor, whether we’ve sat down and watched complete episodes or have only sometimes seen the show. She doesn’t put up with idiots and has spoken her strong sentiments to many of the people she interacts with on television but It’s quite regretful to think that Judge Judy’s show’s ended.
However, it seems that Judge Judy is returning to court, but not in the way that the viewers of the ended syndicated series undoubtedly anticipate, it appears that Judge Judy dealt with setbacks. Because the 79-year-old TV personality is the subject of a lawsuit by Rebel Entertainment.
Judge Judy and CBS are being sued by talent agency Rebel Entertainment Partners for the judge’s profits. Following Sheindlin’s purchase and subsequent sale of the show’s library rights to CBS for around $95 million, the talent agency asserts that they are entitled to 5% of the profits.
In an effort to avoid disgrace at the hands of CBS executives, Moonves and CBS programming chief Armando Nunez allegedly made a poorly managed agreement to sell Sheindlin the library of previous “Judge Judy” episodes for much less than they were worth, the report said.
“Disgraced media mogul Les Moonves may have been shown the door at CBS in 2018, but not before he conspired with other CBS executives, including former CBS programming chief Armando Nuñez, to avoid embarrassment over his colossal mismanagement of the sale and repurchase of the back-episode catalog for the Judge Judy television program,” claims the breach of contract complaint filed.
“In 2015, Moonves and his loyal lieutenant Nuñez seriously underestimated the value of the episode library and sold the rights to these episodes to series star Judith Sheindlin for a song,” the filing adds.
The “net profits” of the program, Rebel Entertainment said, are essentially the “gross receipts” of the program after production and distribution costs have been computed and subtracted. The show’s producer, Big Ticket Television, sold the episodes, but only “subject to the rights of Participant” or “including any or all rights of Participant,” according to Rebel Entertainment, which claims it is the “Participant.”
“Accordingly, a sale or assignment by Producer subject to the rights of Participant would contractually obligate the purchaser/assignee, in the same manner that Big Ticket had been obligated, to provide Rebel its concordance,” says Rebel.
“But through all of this industry intrigue and deception, both CBS and Sheindlin lost sight of one important group of people: the Judge Judy profit participants,” the suit adds.
The lawsuit was filed a few months later after Sheindlin’s contract expired in 2021 and left the show after 25 years.
Sheindlin, however, clarified in a statement that she is absolutely confident the contract in question doesn’t exist.
“I have not seen the complaint and can therefore only comment on what I have read which suggests that I am being sued for ‘breach of contract,’” Sheindlin said in a statement. “If that is the basis of Mr. Lawrence’s lawsuit, here is my challenge: If Mr. Lawrence can produce a contract, signed by me and Mr. Lawrence on the same page, at any time in history from the beginning of time, I will toast that contract, smear it with cream cheese and eat it on national television.”
Sources: Awm, Hollywoodreporter, Forbes
Leave a Comment