See our LinkedIn page

http://www.linkedin.com/groups?mostPopular=&gid=3506009

Alexander Rufus-Isaacs is Interviewed about the Rachel Williams v Netflix Lawsuit

September 4th, 2022

Here is a link to Alexander’s interview on Law & Crime: https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=sdKPjr-p3qc

RIAG files Defamation Lawsuit Against Netflix For Defaming Rachel Williams in Inventing Anna.

August 29th, 2022

Here’s the complaint: D.I. 1 – Complaint

 

Download PDF

RIAG files defamation suit against Sumner Redstone’s granddaughter

August 25th, 2022

Here is the complaint that we filed in LA Superior Court: Redstone Complaint CF

Alexander Rufus-Isaacs Is Quoted In Hollywood Report article on the Jerry West Claim

May 27th, 2022

On April 25, 2022, The Hollywood Reporter published an article by Winston Cho entitled “If Jerry West Sued ‘Winning Time,’ Legal Case May Face Uphill Battle” https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/if-jerry-west-sued-winning-time-legal-case-may-face-uphill-battle-1235134802/. It analyzed the claim made by legendary Lakers’ coach Jerry West against HBO for libel as a result of the unfavorable depiction of him in the series, Winning Time. RIAG’s Alexander Rufus-Isaacs was quoted in the article.

Gaprindashvili v Netflix – Netflix’s anti-SLAPP Is Denied

January 27th, 2022

On December 3, 2021, we filed Nona Gaprindashvili’s opposition to Netflix’s anti-SLAPP motion. Here it is, along with the declarations and exhibits 1-3:

28. Opposition to anti-SLAPP

28.1 Nona Decl

28.2 Carlin Decl

28.6 ARI Decl

28.3 Exh 1 – Google

28.4 Exh 2 – Wikipedia

28.5 Exh 3 – chessgames

On January 27, 2022, the court issued its ruling denying the motion without oral argument.

.37. Order Denying SLAPP and 12b6 motions

JASON ZELIN JOINS RIAG

December 6th, 2021

Rufus-Isaacs Acland & Grantham LLP is delighted to announce that Jason Zelin has accepted an invitation to become Of Counsel to the firm. Jason has extensive experience in many facets of the entertainment industry, from both legal and business perspectives. In addition to working at private law firms, he has worked inhouse for Warner Bros. Television, Lorimar Entertainment, The Completion Bond Company, Village Roadshow Pictures, Miramax Films and others.

Jason has negotiated talent deals, network licensing agreements, literary acquisitions as well as scripted and unscripted television development and production. Working outside film studios, he bonded more than $100 million in budgeted new films, and served as a primary liaison with studios. When working as part of film studios, Jason also gained experience supervising all legal and business aspects of multi-national productions, and as COO of a production company he developed film projects at Paramount and Dreamworks with such notables as Ridley and Tony Scott, Will Smith, and Janet Yang.

RIAG managing partner Alexander Rufus-Isaacs says, “Jason and I have worked together in the past and become good friends. He is a superb lawyer whom I admire and like very much. I could not be happier that he has joined us, and he will be a great asset.”

For more information about Jason, see https://www.rufuslaw.com/jason-zelin/

Defamation Suit Against Netflix Re The Queen’s Gambit – Court Denies Netflix’s Anti-SLAPP motion

September 16th, 2021

On September 17, 2021, we filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California against Netfix for defaming our client, Nona Gaprindashvili, in the TV series, The Queen’s Gambit.

Netflix filed a Motion to Strike under the California anti-SLAPP statute and to Dismiss under FRCP 12(b)(6), which we opposed. On January 27, 2022, the Court denied Netflix’s motion. Here is the Order: 37. Order Denying SLAPP and 12b6 motions

A Remote Perspective On The Depp Trial

August 4th, 2020

Download PDF

Important Appellate Win Against The Hollywood Reporter

July 3rd, 2020

In 2017, we filed a libel case in Chicago against Prometheus Global Media, publisher of The Hollywood Reporter, on behalf of a client called Nicole Basile. In a disgraceful example of reckless journalism, THR published an article which clearly implied that Nicole was responsible for the Sony hack-attack. This was false, but the article devastated Nicole’s career.
After we beat all 4 of Prometheus anti-SLAPP and jurisdictional motions in the trial court, Prometheus appealed. On JUne 30, 2020, the Illinois Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s decisions, establishing some important issues. https://courts.illinois.gov/R23_Orders/AppellateCourt/2020/1stDistrict/1190602_R23.pdf
The case will now proceed to trial. The main facts are not in dispute – the disagreement is over whether the statements in the THR article are defamatory, and the appellate court found that they certainly are, e.g., ¶58: “the article clearly and unmistakably conveyed that plaintiff was the ex Sony-employee responsible for the cyber attack. Thus, the article is defamatory on its face.” It doesn’t come clearer than that.
Kudos to our co-counsel, Rod Smolla (author of Smolla on Defamation), for great work.

RIAG Receives Media Litigation Awards

June 7th, 2018

RIAG is pleased and proud to have received several awards this year for its media litigation practice.

CorporateINTL’s Media Sector Litigation Law Firm of the Year in California, US

AI’s Best Entertainment & Media Law Firm 2018 – California

International Advisory Experts’ Media Litigation award winner within California

Corporate LiveWire’s Media Sector Litigation Law Firm of the Year – California

Disclaimer

The purpose of this web site is to provide general information 
about Rufus-Isaacs, Acland & Grantham LLP and its attorneys’ qualifications 
and experience. It is intended, but not promised or guaranteed, 
to be correct, complete, and up-to-date.

The jurisdictions in which each of our lawyers is admitted to 
practice are indicated in each lawyer’s personal biography. This web site is not intended to be a source of advertising, 
solicitation, or legal advice.

Information provided in this web site shall not be deemed to be 
an invitation for an attorney-client relationship. The reader should 
not take or refrain from taking any action based on any information 
provided in this web site without seeking legal advice.

E-mail addresses of our attorneys are provided as a means 
for prospective clients to contact us or to submit information
to us, but the communication of any electronic inquiry does not,
 by itself, create an attorney-client relationship or contractually 
obligate us to represent readers of this web site, regardless 
of the content of such inquiry. Readers of this web site must 
have no expectation whatsoever of confidentiality with regard to 
any information contained in their e-mails.