Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

New York Real Estate Law ReporterKickerFeaturesSectionsNewsLJN Newsletters

A Word To The Wise

By Alfred G. Feliu

It is often said that bad facts make bad law. A corollary to that principle may be that notorious clients make for problematic verdicts. Such was the case in Bell v. Helmsley, 2003 WL 1453108 (Sup.Ct. N.Y.Cty. 3/4/03), a trial dominated by the ever-entertaining presence of the Queen of Mean, Leona Helmsley. Her testimony, according to the court, lasted only approximately 21 minutes, yet so inflamed the jury that the court felt required to reduce the resulting punitive damages award from $10 million down to $500,000.

Are there any lessons to be learned from the Bell case? The facts, by now, are well-known. Charles Bell worked at a Helmsley hotel, the Park Lane, in Manhattan. He alleged that Mrs. Helmsley discriminated against him because he is gay. This alleged discrimination led to Helmsley regularly berating him, on occasion pulling on his goatee, lightly slapping his face twice, and ultimately terminating him because of his sexual orientation. The hotel responded that Bell was terminated for performance reasons, including his alleged propensity to give free rooms to his friends. The jury found for Bell and awarded him back pay in the amount of $321,000, $800,000 in future lost wages and benefits, $30,000 in pain and suffering, $24,000 in future pain and suffering, and $10 million in punitive damages. The court struck down the back and front pay awards based on Bell's failure to mitigate (see accompanying box) and, as already noted, reduced the punitive damages award (see “Punitive Damages Take a Beating,” page 1).

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Beach Boys Songs Written Decades Ago Triggered Current Quarrel With Lawyers Image

There's current litigation in the ongoing Beach Boys litigation saga. A lawsuit filed in 2019 against Nevada residents Mike Love and his wife Jacquelyne in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada that alleges inaccurate payment by the Loves under the retainer agreement and seeks $84.5 million in damages.

Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Transfer Tax Implications on Real Property Leases Image

The real property transfer tax does not apply to all leases, and understanding the tax rules of the applicable jurisdiction can allow parties to plan ahead to avoid unnecessary tax liability.