Skip to main content

Everyone Can Agree 50 Cent Should Have Used Me

This is what I mean by it can be hard to enforce money judgments. Also, wow, that's a lot in hotel charges. 

From a NY Daily News article. After a trial in July, 50 Cent was found liable for posting a sex tape between himself and Lastonia Leviston online, in order to embarrass her and another rapper. 

Leviston got a $7 million verdict/judgment after the trial. And now has to try to enforce it. 50 filed for bankruptcy, so collecting on the judgment has now become difficult, and Ms. Leviston's lawyers have to fight things out in bankruptcy court.  

According to the article, 50's lawyers charged him $123,455.92 for defending the case, including $57,241.76 for hotel-room expenses in rooms that cost $1,000/night(!):
In a new court filing obtained by The News, Leviston asks the court to reject the $57,241.76 sought by Brewer for hotel fees because it includes charges for $1,000-per-night luxury rooms during a period stretching back into May.
Surely, both Ms. Leviston and 50 Cent would agree that 50 should have used this office to represent him. I don't know what the firm's hourly fees were, but I'm assuming mine are less. I'm also local and wouldn't need to stay in hotels. Maybe only during the trial. And even then I wouldn't stay in a room that cost more than $300/night. Okay, maybe $350/night and room service, but that's it.

Here's another article from TMZ, where they misspell the word "judgment". 

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Respond to Demands for Evidence or Be Prepared to Have Your Case Thrown Out!

The evidence or fact-gathering phase of a lawsuit is called "discovery". Each party is entitled to demand various kinds of evidence from the other party or parties in preparation for a possible trial. Two common kinds of discovery demands are a "Demand for Discovery and Inspection" and "Interrogatories" (which are written questions, answered in writing, under oath). (Psst: Interrogatories are basically a waste of time, but that will be left for another day.) In a recent decision , a New York appeals court affirmed the ruling of a lower court, throwing out a case for plaintiff's failing to respond to defendants' discovery demands. In that case, an LLC sued an architecture firm for malpractice and breach of contract. During the discovery phase, defendants architects served plaintiff with a Demand for Discovery and Inspection and Interrogatories. You only have 20 days to respond or object to discovery demands, or you lose a lot of rights in how yo...
Post a Comment
Read more

Know Your Rights: Money/Remedy at Law vs. Equitable Relief

When you bring a lawsuit (or some other kind of action or proceeding) in court, you are asking the court to give you some kind of relief. Generally speaking, that relief is either money (called "damages" or "money damages" or a "remedy at law") or equitable relief. Everyone knows what money is. What is "equitable relief"? It is relief other than money. Some examples of equitable relief (or "relief at equity" or an "equitable remedy") are:  specific performance of a contract -- you entered into a contract with another party for them to do something; they failed to do it; you sue them to force them to perform as they agreed to in the contract an injunction -- you bring an action to make another party do something or stop doing something rescission of contract -- you entered into a contract; you believe there is a problem with the contract, or the other side committed fraud, or the other side can't perform its oblig...
Post a Comment
Read more

Consumer Law Update: FTC sues DIRECTV for Deceptive Business Practices

I'm sure most people think that "of course" big businesses are constantly, intentionally, ripping people off and are engaged in deceptive business practices. As a lawyer, my inclination is I can't believe a big business, with lots of executives and lots of lawyers looking things over, could possibly offer promos or services that are so misleading or deceptive that they are illegal. They can't possibly be that dumb. Sometimes I'm wrong. For instance, the Federal Trade Commission has sued DIRECTV in San Francisco federal court for engaging in deceptive and misleading business practices in violation of federal law. DIRECTV was telling consumers, hey, look at our low monthly rates and look at all the great stuff you get, come sign up with us! However, DIRECTV failed to adequately disclose that, oh, by the way, in order to get that great deal, you have to sign a two-year contract; those low rates are only good for the first year; your monthly bill could go ...
Post a Comment
Read more