JURY AWARDS LADD $3.2M IN DAMAGES FROM WARNERS (VAR, THR, LAT)

By Nancy Vialatte

An LA jury sided with producers Alan Ladd Jr and Jay Kanter in a decision that awarded the duo $3.2 million on Thursday. The damages are in support of Ladd and Kanter's claim against Warner Bros. that when 11 of their films - including "Blade Runner," "Body Heat," "Chariots of Fire," "Night Shift" and the "Police Academy movies" - were licensed to the domestic and international television and cable market, they were packaged with inferior films and the fees attributed to their films were unfairly under-allocated. The suit began in 2003. "We are very happy with the verdict," said Ladd's attorney. "The evidence supported Laddie and Jay�s claim. Laddie and Jay contributed greatly to Warner Bros. with the making of these great films and they were owed the money that has been awarded to them." Warners' lawyer, however, insisted, "We have not yet begun to fight," reported Variety.

The case is one of the first to reach a verdict in challenging studio allocations of lucrative package fees collected for film licenses. Ladd and Kanter sued the studio in 2003, claiming that Warners improperly directed revenue away from packaged films on which the duo were owed profit participations. "I'm thrilled," Ladd said of the verdict. "I hope it makes a difference in the accounting process in this business. The studios should stop being corrupt. When they start being honest, this business will change." (THR)

A spokesman for Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. said, "While we are disappointed by the jury�s verdict, we understand their confusion over damages. We will now look at this entire proceeding and hope to rectify this erroneous decision at this level or on appeal."

At the end of Ladd�s case, L.A. Superior Court Judge Ricardo Torres dismissed the credit claim on the grounds that the damages were too speculative. A claim involving profit participation on "Blade Runner" also was dismissed because it breached a prior settlement with the studio. (VAR)

After the verdict, several jurors told a reporter that the studio clearly breached its contract with the producers and its duty to act in good faith. Deliberations focused only on assigning a fair amount of damages, they said. "Most definitely, there was some manipulation going on," juror Don Prudhomme said. He added that the studio's experts failed to convince the panel that the revenue allocations among the various films were justified. "They control all the money and the paperwork, and they say, 'We'll keep all the money and allocate it however we like,' " he said. (THR)

Juror Mark Spearin said the studio accounting process seemed "slipshod" and "arbitrary. It seems to be a bottom-line process," Spearin said. "Divide the money in whatever way to make the (film) buyer happy and close the deal. The participant suffers, of course." (THR)