Bit Parts

Alleged Verbal Agreement For Promotion of Concerts Found Unenforceable

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York decided that an oral agreement between an artist and a booking agent/promoter couldn't be enforced under either New York or Puerto Rican law. Santos v. Medina, 18 Civ. 02685. Bachata artist Anthony "Romeo" Santos, who had been lead vocalist in the group Aventura, sued booking agent/promoter Publimagen De Asesores, a Puerto Rican corporation, and its owner Angelo Medina Mercado, alleging breach of contract for failure to pay $500,000 from concert fees. Santos had terminated an initial verbal artist/agent agreement with Publimagen as of 2016, though Publimagen claimed the parties entered into another oral agreement for Publimagen to "be the promotor of Santos' concerts in Puerto Rico, under the same terms and conditions of the existing agreement, that is a commission of ten percent (10%)." In response to Santos' lawsuit over the first agreement, Publimagen counterclaimed for breach of the alleged second contract, seeking $1,192,347 in commissions from Santos. The suit parties agreed their initial verbal agreement was valid, but Santos argued the second one wasn't under the statute of frauds. District Judge Edgardo Ramos applied Puerto Rican law, explaining: "Because Medina and Publimagen are merchants who engaged in commercial acts on behalf of Santos as a commercial commission, their contract falls exclusively under the [Puerto Rico] Commerce Code," P.R. Laws Ann. Tit. 10, §§1002, 1521. The code's statute of frauds enforces oral agreements that exceed $300, but requires evidence beyond witness testimony to do so. Thus, the district court ruled: "Medina did not, however, corroborate the contract's existence beyond oral testimony, nor deny that such non-oral testimony is required under the Commerce Code." The court also considered the second oral agreement under New York's statute of frauds, which requires the ability to be completed within one year to be enforceable. On this, Judge Ramos explained: "[Medina] claims that he was responsible for promoting at least one performance in Puerto Rico, and that the existence of Santos' five Puerto Rican concerts in 2016 demonstrate that the contract was capable of full performance within a year. Yet, Medina alleges that he was exclusively responsible for promoting all of Santos' Puerto Rican concerts indefinitely, not merely one concert."