Pay Per View Piracy Settlement Details Revealed After Defendant Defaults on Payments

Posted: November 22, 2016 in Uncategorized
Tags:

While reasons for judgement reveal litigation strategies when Joe Hand Promotions sues commercial establishments for UFC pay per view piracy details of cases that settle out of court are rarely revealed.  Recent reasons for judgement, however, detail a settlement agreement Joe Hand Promotions accepted after a Defendant defaulted on payments.

In the recent case (Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Alzaghari) the Defendant displayed a Pay Per View program in their commercial establishment without paying the commercial sub licencing fee.  They were sued for damages but prior to trial the parties reached a settlement for $5,000 to be paid in installments with an agreement that the amount would increase in the event of default.  The Defendant failed to make the agreed payments and the Plaintiff succeeded in securing judgement for $13,000.  In doing so District Judge Graham Mullen provided the following reasons:

1. That the Defendants and Plaintiff were represented by counsel during the mediation that took place on July 18, 2016.

2. That a settlement agreement was executed and entered into by both Defendants’ and Plaintiff’s counsel on behalf of their respective clients.

3. That a true and correct copy of the agreement was attached as Exhibit A to the Plaintiff’s motion to enforce mediated settlement agreement [DE30].

4. That the terms of the agreement called for $5,000 in payments to be made in the following manner:

a. $1,000 payment from Defendant to Plaintiff by August 8, 2016;

b. $1,000 payment from Defendant to Plaintiff, by August 29, 2016; and

c. $3,000 payment from Defendant to Plaintiff by January 18, 2016.

5. That the terms of the agreement called for a confession of judgment in the amount of $13,000 to be executed by the Defendants in favor of the Plaintiff in case of any default in the payments by the Defendant.

6. That the first two payments were not made by the Defendants to the Plaintiff as set out above.

7. That a $13,000 confession of judgment was not executed by the Defendants as agreed to in the settlement agreement.

The Court makes the following conclusions of law:

1. That the agreement attached as Exhibit A to the Plaintiff’s motion to enforce mediated settlement agreement is valid and enforceable against the Defendants.

2. That the Defendant has defaulted in their obligations to pay as agreed above and to execute a $13,000 confession of judgment in favor of the Plaintiff.

IT IS ORDERED:

1. That the Plaintiff’s motion to enforce settlement agreement is GRANTED.

2. That the Court will entered a judgment in the instant case for $13,000 in favor of the Plaintiff and against all defendants, jointly and severally, as a result of the default.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s