Creative Artists Agency CEO Bryan Lourd.

Getty Images

Share on Facebook

Share on X

Google Preferred

Share to Flipboard

Show additional share options

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Pinterest

Share on Reddit

Share on Tumblr

Share on Whats App

Send an Email

Print the Article

Post a Comment

Logo text

Lawyers at CAA were alarmed by the leaks, which could bring far more pain than bad publicity.

It was January, days after news spilled that it had lost a legal battle over the high-profile exits of four agents — Jack Whigham, Dave Bugliari, Michael Cooper and Mick Sullivan — who left to help Peter Micelli start management firm Range Media Partners in 2020.

By all appearances, it was an overwhelming defeat for the agency. An arbitrator had sided with the Range founders that CAA breached their contracts and fiduciary duties to them when it cancelled their equity in the wake of their departures, a ruling that could net the agents’ millions of dollars each.

Perhaps more importantly, CAA’s counterclaims accusing the agents of stealing trade secrets on their way out and starting a rival agency that masquerades as a management firm were rejected. Within a month, those details made the trades. “We think it’s wildly inappropriate that somebody has leaked — and we believe it’s on the other side — the decision,” said Bo Pearl, a lawyer for CAA, during a court hearing in January.

The arbitration was the subject of a contentious email exchange between the two sides. The Bryan Lourd-led CAA was looking for discovery on another issue but Range — vexed that the agency declined to address requests about turning over the ruling — pushed back.

“Why is your team repeatedly ignoring our emails about the arbitration decision and related documents?” asked Ilissa Samplin, a lawyer for Range, in a Jan. 12 message, later adding that the “delay on this is clearly tactical,” according to court documents. CAA attorney Stephen McIntyre was blunt: “The arbitration is far from over.”

Those proceedings are one of three battlefronts in a steadily escalating legal war targeting core parts of the representation business. Range accuses CAA of employing illegal noncompetes for top agents. CAA accuses Range of operating as an unlicensed agency. A win for either side could severely hamper the other’s operations.

Here’s where this whole saga gets dicey and why the leaks matter: Range’s legal team isn’t supposed to know the actual details of arbitration ruling.

The decision is currently covered by a court order barring disclosure, meaning that Range’s lawyers handling the ongoing case aren’t supposed to be in the know, only those four defecting agents. The Range founders were a party to the arbitration, not the management firm itself. But the leak, whose origin is unknown, was significant because it laid the groundwork for Range to say that it learned of the outcome in the press and get the ruling into the legal battle. Pointing to reports that the matter had been decided, the firm in March subpoenaed its own lawyer who won the arbitration, Bryan Freedman, for the decision.

It’s a clever bit of legal maneuvering, one that could lead to the dismissal of CAA’s claims sooner rather than later. The agency has challenged the subpoena, arguing the bid for the arbitration decision is an end-run around the confidential nature of the proceedings. If you ask Range, the arbitration decision is a critical part of its defense. It’s of the belief that the ruling can almost entirely do away with CAA’s case.

Still, it’s only a matter of time until the appeal of the ruling is decided. At that point, the court said it will consider the decision and whether CAA’s claims should be dismissed under that ruling.

For now, both sides are looking to narrow the scope of the allegations against them as they march toward trial. The court in March allowed Range’s unfair competition claim to proceed while dismissing its tortious interference claim, which accused CAA of undermining the firm’s potential recruitment of agency employees who wish to become managers by threatening to cancel the equity of defecting workers. Despite the animosity, Range and CAA maintain over 150 shared clients.

The dynamic puts the management firm in pole position to recruit more agents, though, as it currently stands, any agent looking to jump to Range may be looking over their shoulder for CAA’s lawyers.

This story appeared in the April 8 issue of The Hollywood Reporter magazine. Click here to subscribe.

THR Newsletters

Paramount

Jeff Shell Exiting as President of Paramount

CAA vs. Range Legal Battle Destabilized By Press Leak