Source: https://www.scribd.com/doc/74953621/Nina-Simone-Lawsuit
Timestamp: 2017-01-18 16:15:02
Document Index: 715459511

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 1332', '§ 1391', '§ 2201', '§3439', '§3439', '§3439', '§3439', '§ 1651']

BrowseInterestsBiography & MemoirBusiness & LeadershipFiction & LiteraturePolitics & EconomyHealth & WellnessSociety & CultureHappiness & Self-HelpMystery, Thriller & CrimeHistoryYoung AdultBrowse byBooksAudiobooksArticlesSheet MusicBrowse allUploadSign inJoin·.
DOROTHY M. WEBER SHUKAT ARROW HAFER WEBER & HERBSMAN, L.L.P. 111 West 57th Street, Suite 1120 New York. NY 10019 Telephone: (212) 245-4580 Facsimile: (212) 956-6471 Attorneys for Lisa Simone Kelly, Duly Appointed Administrator for The Estate of Nina Simone UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO
LISA SIMONE KELLY, duly appointed
administrator Simone, of the Estate of Nina
).-J
CiV'fL NO.
ALLY ROKER, an individual, and ROKER MUSIC; ANDY STROUD, INC)
and ANDREW B. STROUD. Defendants,
la ICU ENT. DIST.; d/bla WALLY
AND VENUE of the
Plaintiff, Lisa Simone Kelly, the duly appointed administrator
Estate of Nina Simone ("Kelly"), is an individual who resides in Florida.
Wally Raker is a natural person and a citizen and resident of the State
Ent Dist.
("reU") is,
upon information and belief, a business
designee owned. operated and controlled by Wally Raker, located at 15925 Victory Blvd. #104, Van Nuys, California 91406, and through which Wally Raker conducts his various business enterprises. Upon information and belief, Wally Raker is the
dominant force behind the acts complained of herein; he owns and controls the activities of Defendant
and profits from them.
Wally Raker Music C'WRM") is, upon information and belief, a busines
designee owned, operated and controlled by Wally Raker, and through which Wally Raker conducts his various business enterprises and is located in California. Upon information and belief, Wally Raker is the dominant force behind the acts complained of herein; he owns and controls the activities of Defendant WRR and profits from them.
Defendants Wally Raker,
WRM shall
be collectively
hereinafter be referred to as "Hoker." 6. Andrew B. Stroud ("Stroud") is a natural person and a citizen and
resident of the State of New York. 7. Andy Stroud, Inc. ("ASI") is a corporation organized under the laws of
the State of New York which, upon information and belief, is owned, operated and controlled by Stroud, and through which Stroud conducts his various business enterprises. Upon information and belief, Stroud is the dominant force behind the acts complained of herein; and Stroud owns and controls the activities of Defendant
ASI and profit from them.
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332. The property in controversy exceeds $76,000.00 in value, exclusive of interest and costs. 9. Pursuant to the Rule 3-12 of the Local Civil Rules for the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California, this action is related to Brown v. Stroud, Cv. 08-2348 (JSW) (the "Stroud Action") in that (1) the actions
concern substantially
the same parties, property, transaction or event; and (2) it
appears likely that there will be an unduly burdensome duplication of labor and expense or conflicting results if the cases are conducted before different Judges. 10. Venue is proper in the Northern District of California pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1391. The parties all transact business in this judicial district and a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred here,
upon information and belief. NATURE OF THIS ACTION AND ITS EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES
The Fraudulent Transfers Qf the Nina Simone Masters and Materials 11. This lawsuit arises from the fraudulent conveyance(s), disposal
and/or spoliation of the actual res of Stroud Action - the very same Nina Simone
Materials and the Nina Simone Recordings (as defined in the related Stroud Action and herein below referred to as "NSM") which are the subject of that separate, ongoing litigation. 12. The Nina Simone Materials ("NSM"), as claimed by the Plaintiff,
encompass not only Simone's intimate, personal, unpublished diaries, but also other personal property which belonged to Nina Simone during her lifetime and should have passed to her Estate subsequent to her death, which may include the Master Recordings in Roker's possession. The NSM encompass a much broader universe than the claims of Sony and Brown in the Nina Simone Recordings. 13. On September 21,2005 Roker, acting as an expert engaged by Stroud,
appraised the NSM as having a present fair market value of $155,625,000.00 Stroud and Roker both believed that was the fair market value of the NSM as of that date. 14. Plaintiff herein was roade aware by Stroud's counsel, Melissa Newel of
the law firm of Methven & Associates ("Newel") on October 17, 2011, that all or the NSM in Stroud's possession custody and control had been "sold" to a third party: Roker. A copy of the "Music and Artifact Agreement" dated October 1, 2011 is annexed hereto as Exhibit A (the "MAA"). 15. It is the rights to these NSM which have been the subject matter of the
Stroud Action - and about which numerous parties have been involved in costly litigation for the past almost four (4) years. 16. Newel has further advised that, notwithstanding the "terms" of the
purported agreement between Roker and ASI, no consideration whatsoever was paid in exchange for the NSM which are now in a Reker's possession. 17. This sudden "disposal" of property comes on the heels of an ongoing
shell game manipulated by Stroud in order to move these assets - presumably his
most valuable asset - first between and among himself and his various shell companies, and now to a third party: Raker. 18. Upon information and belief, Stroud's initial "transfer" of the NSM to
ASI was fraudulent. Stroud has exercised such dominion and control over ASI that ASI has no separate will of its own. Stroud used his dominion and control of ASI to effect the fraudulent transfers of these valuable assets between them in order to
frustrate Plaintiff, a future judgment creditor. 19. This Court has already determined in the Stroud Action that a viable
cause of action has been asserted against Stroud that his possession of any and all NSM was the direct result of his wrongfully conversion of those items. 20. At Stroud's direction, ASI's "sale" of the NSM to Raker was done with
the specific intent to once again defraud the Estate - a probable judgment creditor and to further deplete any and all assets which the Estate would be able to attach thus rendering himself judgment-proof. 21. In fact, on November 21,2011 Stroud declared, under oath, that he
was aware that Mr. Roker did not have the funds, was and is in the process of seeking "financing" to pay for the NSM, but Stroud caused AS! to transfer the material to him anyway. B. Estate's Efforts to Contact Roker 22. For the period October 25,2011 to November 28, 2011, the Estate
made numerous attempts in writing and by phone messages to Raker in an effort to
ascertain the location, integrity and condition of the NSM and in order to discuss the terms of a standstill agreement in order to preserve the NSM. 23. Roker and
leu were served with
subpoenas duces tecum on November
7,2011. Notwithstanding that the date for production of documents and appearance for depositions was November 16, 2011, on November 14th, Raker sent an email stating that he would not be available for the date set for this deposition but he
failed to (1) give alternative dates or (2) to provide any documents. 24. Numerous attempts by phone and in writing subsequent to Mr. Roker's
November 14th email have gone unanswered. To date, Mr. Roker has refused to return calls or respond to written communications. 25.
It is undisputed that Roker and Stroud have had a relationship for
forty-seven (47) years. On information and belief, based upon his past relationship with Stroud and Stroud's New York counsel, and because of the express disclosures of the dispute over the NSM referenced in paragraph 3 of the MAA, Roker had actual knowledge of the Estate's claims to the NSM before he took possession thereof. Their relationship is clearly not arms' length. 26. Finally, on its face, the MAA is void for complete failure of
consideration. Roker is not a transferee who took possession of the NSM in good faith or for a reasonably equivalent value - in fact he took it in exchange for no value. As a matter of law this transaction was not bona fide.
BACKGROUND A. 27.
The Nina Simone Masters and Materials Nina Simone - the "High Priestess of Soul" - recorded dozens of
albums and sang countless classics: "To be Young, Gifted and Black," "I Put a Spell on You," "Don't Let Me be Misunderstood," and "Ne Me Quitte Pas" (from Jacque BreI).
She was not only a legendary performer but a seminal figure in the
civil rights and women's movements. Her music and message made a vivid and lasting impact on generations of musicians including John Lennon, Aretha Franklin and Patti LaBelle. 29. Nina Simone's legacy is comprised not only of her music, but a lifetime
of personal writings, diaries, letters, photographs, personal effects, movies, videos and other performances. It is this legacy she left behind after her untimely death at the age of 70 in 2003, and it is the legacy now championed by her daughter, the Plaintiff herein, Lisa Simone Kelly on behalf of her estate. 30.
It is the recordings of Nina Simone (the "Nina Simone Masters") and
the personal effects including, but not limited to her writings, diaries, letters, photographs, personal effects, movies, videos and other performances (the "Nina Simone Materials"), which are the subjects of this litigation and the Stroud Actionand this action as well.
The Stroud Action
Andrew B. Stroud was married to Nina Simone for nine (9) years,
during which period of time ~and at times thereafter - he also served as her manager, agent and producer. Stroud and Simone had one child together: Plaintiff herein, Lisa Simone Kelly ("Kelly"). 32. The Stroud Action was commenced on or about May 7. 2008. The
Plaintiff therein, Steven A. Brown served a complaint (Dkt. No.1) on Andrew B. Stroud C'Stroud") - and his business entity Stroud Productions & Enterprises, Inc.
("SPE") in which he asserted various claims in connection with the ownership rights - including copyrights - in certain sound recordings of the late Nina Simone (the "Nina Simone Masters"). 33. On July 22,2009, Stroud and SPE filed counterclaims, naming the
(Dkt, No. 72),
Estate of Nina Simone (the "Estate") as a counterclaim-defendant.
and asserted various claims against the Estate including, but not limited to, copyright infringement of the same Nina Simone Masters. 34. In or about July of 2010, Kelly became aware of an Article published
entitled "The Secret Diary of Nina Simone"(the "Article"), in which Stroud revealed that he possessed a "cache" of materials including, but not limited to, diaries, writings and photographs belonging to the late Nina Simone (the "Nina Simone Materials") . 35. On July 12, 2010, the Estate filed counterclaims against Stroud in
which it also sought a declaratory judgment as to the right in and to the Nina
Simone Masters and the Nina Simone Materials, and additionally stated claims for, inter alia, conversion, replevin and an accounting with respect to the Nina Simone Materials. 36. On August 10, 2011 this Court denied Stroud's motion to dismiss those
claims on statute of limitations grounds, finding, in pertinent part:
It is undisputed that Stroud is Kelly's father, and the Estate alleges that
after [Nina] Simone's death, he advised Kelly in her efforts as Administrator of the Estate. On these facts, the Court concludes that the Estate has alleged facts demonstrating fiduciary duty ...The Estate also alleges that prior to 2008, Stroud never disclosed to Kelly that he has these materials in his possession, and ...he failed to make a full and fair disclosure of the other materials in his possession .... Order of Judge Jeffrey S. White dated August 10, 2011, P 5 (Dkt. No. 309) (citations omitted). 37. Finally, and most recently, on October 3, 2011, the Court dismissed
with prejudice all of Stroud's claims against the Estate. Dkt. No. 337. Therein, this Court addressed the very essence of Stroud's "shell game" amongst himself and his various entities: Through their amendments, [Stroud and SPE) have now made it clear that they contend it is [Andy Stroud, Inc.], not Stroud or SPE, that owns the rights to the disputed materials ... in light of the duration and scope of this and the other litigation between the parties regarding the ownership rights over the disputed recordings and the number of times [Stroud and SPE] have amended their claims and switched between them as to who is asserting ownership rights, the Court agrees that dismissal with prejudice is warranted .... In light of Stroud's knowledge of his own companies (see Andy Stroud, Inc., 2009 WL 539863, *10 (noting that ASI and SPE, while it was in existence, were wholly owned companies of Stroud), and the fact that Stroud and his attorneys actually filed a lawsuit three years ago by ASI regarding the same
disputed recordings, the Court finds that the failure to name ASI sooner in this action was not an "understandable mistake." Order of Judge Jeffrey S. White dated October 3, 2011, p. 4 and 6 (Dkt. No. 337) (emphasis not added).
Federal Declaratory Judgment Act 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201, 2202
Declaratory Judgment Against Roker and ASI "Agreement" to Purchase NSM is Void ab initio 38. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of the
Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 39. The rights in the NSM belonged to solely and exclusively to Nina
Simone. 1 Subsequent to her death, the Plaintiff is and always has been the rightful owner of the copyrights and other intellectual property rights, including, but not limited to, rights of publicity and privacy to the Simone Materials and the owner of the physical objects in which such intellectual property is embodied. 40. Nevertheless. Stroud has publicly disseminated, and now putatively
sold, the NSM, and has usurped the copyright (both common law and federal) and other intellectual property rights to the NSM, and transferred possession of them to Roker.
No amount of consideration was paid by Raker for the NSM. It is likely that Roker is in possession of the NSM and other
1 While the Nina Simone Materials may encompass rights in and to the masters, which are owned by Sony, those rights are also in dispute among the other parties to the Stroud Action.
photographs, letters, recordings, videotapes or depictions of or including Nina Simone, and there is an imminent threat that he will attempt publish and claim
the copyright to those items, the copyright to which properly belongs to the Plaintiff. 43. By reason of the foregoing, an actual and justifiable controversy has
arisen and now exists between the Plaintiff, Roker and AS! concerning their
respective rights in the Simone Materials and Masters, and any and all other photographs, recordings, videotapes or depictions of or including Nina Simone that are now within Raker's ownership or control. 44. A declaration is necessary at this time so status quo ante can be
restored with respect to the NSM which are the subject of the Stroud Action and are now improperly in the possession of Raker. 45. Plaintiff will be irreparably harmed unless this Court determines the
Plaintiff desires a judicial determination and declaration that: a. The "Music and Artifact Agreement" dated October 1,2011
between Roker and ASI was a sham transaction made for no consideration and is void ab initio; b. rescinded; and c. Stroud Action. Roker has no rights to the NSM which are the subject of the The "Music and Artifact Agreement" dated October 1, 2011 is
Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law and will suffer irreparable
harm if the actions of Roker, ASI and Stroud are all allowed to continue in their course of action.
Fraudulent Transfer- Violation of Cal. Civ. Code §3439.04 Against ASI, Stroud and Roker of the
Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs
Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 49. The conveyances at issue: (1) the conveyance of all Nina Simone
Materials and Masters from Stroud to ASI; and (2) the conveyance of all Nina Simone Masters from AS! to Roker were both done in violation of Cal. Civ. Code §3439.04. 50. The conveyances of the Nina Simone Masters and Materials were
made with the actual intent to hinder, delay or defraud Plaintiff, was made without receiving a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the transfer or obligation, and Stroud and ASI were engaged in a business or a transaction for which Stroud's remaining assets and were unreasonably small in relation to the business or transaction and were intended to incur debts beyond his ability to pay as they became due. 51. The foregoing was done with actual intent as Stroud caused AS! (1) t to an insider, (2) concealed the transfers, (3) had been sue
make the transfers
before the transfer was made or obligation was incurred, (4) executed the transfer
for substantially all his assets to ASl and then cause ASl to transfer them to Roker
(5) removed or concealed assets, (6) received no value or consideration - much les
value or consideration which was reasonably equivalent to the value of the asset transferred or the amount of the obligation incurred, (7) is, upon information an belief insolvent or became insolvent shortly after transfers were made or th obligation was incurred, (8) executed the transfers occurred shortly after all of hi
claims in the Stroud Action were dismissed without prejudice and it became clea tha t a substantial debt was going to be incurred in connection with the defense the Stroud Action and no hope of any recovery to him. 52. Roker, the transferee, was not a person who took in good faith or for
reasonably equivalent value. 53. Defendants actions are fraudulent within the meaning of Cal. Civ
Code §3439.04. 54. Plaintiff, as a future judgment creditor, in addition to other relief, is
entitled to reasonable attorney's fees pursuant to Cal. Civ. Code §3439.04 since Plaintiff's claim arose before the transfer was made or the obligation was incurred. THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF Misappropriation 55. and Conversion Against Roker and ASI
Plaintiff incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of the
Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 56. Roker, ASI, and Stroud through fraud and deception,
deprived Plaintiff of the possession of property in w hieh Plain tiff claims legitimate right and title and which is presently the subject of the Stroud Action, thereby misappropriating 57. and converting Plaintiffs property to his own use and benefit.
At all times herein Plaintiff, at a minimum, possessed the rights of
ownership and title in and to the NSM which are superior to any rights of ASI and Roker and, accordingly, is lawfully entitled to immediate possession thereof.
All of these parties were on actual notice of the Plaintiff's claims of
both ownership of the physical materials (which are unique, irreplaceable personal items) and the copyrights therein belonging to the late Nina Simone. All are aware that the Estate claims ownership in all copyrights, both common law and statutory. 59. Defendants' unlawful exercise of dominion and control over this which
invaluable property constitutes a conversion or wrongful misappropriation
has ea used injury to Plain tiff. As a direct re sult of the foregoing, Plain tiff has been damaged in an amount which is not known at this time, but which will be proven at trial. 60. The conduct of the defendants' have deprived the Plaintiff of her ahilit
to copy these materials in order to register them for copyright protection. 61. The actions of the Defendants described above were done maliciously
and with the intent to harm Plaintiff, entitling Plaintiff to additional punitive damages in an amount to be determined by the Court, including costs, attorneys fees and interest as permitted by law.
AccountintZ Af!ainst Raker and ASI
Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 63. Due to the Defendants wrongful conduct described herein, the Estate i
entitled to an accounting of any and all proceeds of any of the Defendants relating to their activity in connection with their efforts to sell and distribute the Simone
Materials and Masters including, but not limited to an accounting of (a) any and all assets ostensibly owned or in the possession, custody or control of the Defendants of or relating to Nina Simone, (b) all transactions, acquisitions or transfers by the Defendants of or relating to Nina Simone; and (c) all deposits into and transfers out of any bank account maintained by the Defendants. 64. Upon such accounting, the Plaintiff is entitled to any and all assets of
or relating to Nina Simone, ostensibly owned or in the possession, custody or control of the Defendants. 65. The Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment against defendants, jointly
On the First Claim for Relief, Plaintiff respectfully requests a judicial
determination and declaration that:
The "Music and Artifact Agreement" dated October 1, 2011 between Roker and AS! was a sham transaction made for no consideration and is void ab initio; The "Music and Artifact Agreement" dated October 1, 2011 is rescinded; and Defendants ASI and Roker have no rights to the NSM which were the subject of the MAA and which are the subject of the Stroud Action. On the Second Claim for Relief, Plaintiff respectfully requests an
order: a.
restraining and enjoining Stroud, AS! and Roker from any further disposition. sale, transfer, lease, license or encumbrance affecting the NSM, or any interest therein; that the Plaintiffbe awarded judgment for possession of the items of personal property identified as the NSM and any proceeds therefrom; and that all court costs be taxed to Raker, Stroud and ASI, jointly and severally; for compensatory damages in the amount of $155,000,000.00, or such amount to be proven at trial; for punitive damages in an amount to be proven at trial; and for interest, costs of suit, and such other relief as the Court deems just and proper. On the Third Cause of Action, Plaintiff respectfully requests an order: restraining and enjoining Roker, Stroud and ASI from the sale. transfer, lease, license or encumbrance affecting the NSM, or any interest therein; that the Plaintiff be awarded judgment for possession of the items of personal property identified as the Simone Materials; and that all court costs be taxed to Raker, Stroud and ASI, jointly and severally; and that full restitution be made to the Plaintiff by Stroud of all amounts and materials and assets, including the NSM, which they have wrongfully acquired and by which they have been unjustly enriched by
their wrongful actions, the precise amount of which will be proved at trial;
for the imposition of a constructive trust on all assets ostensibly transferred by the MAA, or any and all NSM in the possession, custody or control of Roker; and pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651, the law of implied easements and in the exercise of the Court's general equitable jurisdiction to grant complete relief, Plaintiff is entitled to a judicial order requiring Roker, Stroud and ASI to identify and make all such recordings and the NSM available for digital copying andlor nondestructive restoration by the Plaintiff. for interest, costs of suit, and such other relief as the Court deems just and proper. On the Fourth Cause of Action, Plaintiff respectfully requests an
an order that Roker and ASI account for all profits, gains and advantages derived from their acts of conversion and for its other violations of law as well as a full accounting of any and all assets ostensibly owned by the Plaintiffs or in the possession, custody or control the Raker and ASI, including any transactions, acquisitions or transfers by Roker and ASI of or relating to Nina Simone;
accounting of any and all assets ostensibly transferred to Roker pursuant to MAA, from Stroud or AS!, and any and all NSM in the possession, custody or control of Roker.
JijRY DEMAND
2 J 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 11 12
December 2,2011 Shukat Arrow Hafer Weber & Herbsman, LLP
Dorothy . Weber* Attorne s for Plaintiff Lisa Simone Kelly, Duly Appointed Administrator for the Estate of Nina Simone *awaiting admission pro hac vice
Nina Simone Lawsuit by SharonWaxman477 viewsEmbedDownloadRead on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.Copyright: Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)Download as PDF, TXT or read online from ScribdFlag for inappropriate contentMore informationShow less