We're continuing our discussion of a probate dispute between singer/songwriter Bo Diddley's heirs and his attorney and business managers/agents. Like so many musicians who started out in the '50s -- particularly African American musicians -- Diddley had been rooked early on by his recording company. The company's recording contract gave them, not Diddley, the royalties and copyrights to his songs. (See part 1 of this series for an explanation of how musicians make money.) Later in life, Diddley sold off his remaining rights, signing the last agreement several months after he'd suffered a debilitating stroke. His heirs have challenged his representatives on a number of grounds.
There is a will. Diddley gave both his attorney and his two manager/agents significant control over his estate. He appointed his attorney as his personal representative and made him trustee of an irrevocable trust. As personal representative, the lawyer can sell or transfer any part of the estate. The manager/agents were given control of just about everything else. The will states that the two will "continue to manage and perpetuate my entertainment business and affairs domestically and internationally in perpetuity according to acceptable industry standards they receive as compensation a total of 30 percent of all gross revenue collected by them."
The three of them had managed his career, booked his shows and managed his business affairs for 30 years. They had, all that time, been taking a 30 percent cut as payment. While an industry insider said the arrangement seemed fair, the judge in the case said he thought the fees seemed high.
The family's lawyer told reporters he "was shocked" when he saw the will. The singer had entrusted the care and well-being of his heirs to the three advisers "without any real accountability."
For their part, the family says that the trio took advantage of Diddley. As successful as he was, he was a black boy from small-town Mississippi with an elementary school education. The lawyer and manager/agents never explained what the will would mean for his family and his legacy.
To be continued.
Source: The Gainesville Sun, "Bo Diddley's estate in limbo," Kimberly C. Moore, 02/19/11
Comments: 1
1 Comment
Scott D. Smith
March 25, 2011 at 2:25 PM
You will read opinions about the family having no understanding about what is going on or the family is fighting over money. That is simply not true. We were told by the Library of Congress that copyrights "trump" all other rights. Fuji may own publishing and the Chess/Goodman heirs may own the writers, and the managers may own all right to use the image and likeness, and the "estate" may own the trademark, and what does the family own?
The family should gain possession of what would have COME BACK TO THEIR FATHER/GRANDFATHER if her were alive. He talked about regaining his rights with regularity.
If Fuji wanted to take Diddley's vocal track from 'I'm A Man' and remix it into a Lil' Wayne song, they can, if they have permission from the copyright holder. If Diddley were alive, he would have the opportunity to say "yay" or "nay" but he is not alive. His heirs are and they want to control the copyrights of their father's music. It is SO plain to see that others have maneuvered the system in such a way that in these days and times, Diddley's family is no better off than Diddley was.
Instead of having a "fire sale" (as Judge Roundtree called it) and selling the copyrights to Fuji, the family wanted to look at other options to pay a non-existent tax bill as the executor never filed the 706 with the I.R.S.
AND the I.R.S. has been known to work out a payment plan or two.
After the Gainesville Sun story, I thought I'd add some clarification the Sun missed.
The executor has not been Diddley's attorney for a long time. Diddley met the executor by chance as he met the executor while looking for a divorce attorney and not a probate attorney.
The executor was so friendly with Diddley and I, that he told me he "was a Christian" and the family had "nothing to worry about."
This executor honored the Power of Attorney held by Diddley's manager but refused to honor the Power of Attorney granted to me by Diddley's son.
The purpose of the family discussing this publicly is:
1.) as of March 25, 2011, the family has not seen the estate inventory. It is sealed.
2.) the executor's professional business statement claimed he spent hours on the telephone at $195.00 per hour. The family would like to know; what estate business actually took place while he was on the phone with the "managers" from New York?
The family requested a time sheet from the executor for the express purpose of matching "real" phone records with his business statement and he said "No." The managers were asked the same thing and they said "NO"
3.) the family gets conflicting information from the executor AND the managing partners. The end result is the misinformation turned out to be lies.
4.) the family contends that since 1992, when Margo Lewis and Faith Fusillo began to manage Diddley, there was no way they could not know that Diddley was illiterate AND he NEVER had an accounting nor was it offered by his managers.
5.) the family was told by the managers that the executor was stealing and the managers offered to give Diddley's granddaughter $1,500.00 with the stipulation/manipulation that the granddaughter MUST ask for the loan using these words: " Margo, I need a favor from you. Please advance to me the sum of $1500 and send directly to (here you put the name and address of your attorney) I will pay you back by December 2010. Jatonne"
Pure cunning to take advantage of a young person. She would have had an email that would have been used to say: The managers are angels
------Original Message------ 7/9/10 9:33 AM
from: margolewis@yahoo.com
to: ennotaj@boostmobile.blackberry.com
Cc: FAITH FASILLO
Subject: re:money
Jatonne, I am going to include in this email a copy of text I would like for you to send back to me. But I would like to say to you and your family that this $1500 is only a retainer and after about 7 hours of work for you she will be asking you for more money. Do not call us to help again. We will not. My partner Faith has spent many hours with you and members of your family trying to help you and the tone of your emails last night show a distrust that is very hurtful to us both. If you send me this email with the information requested we will send her a check. Please do not contact us again you will be notified when the check has gone out. " Margo, I need a favor from you. Please advance to me the sum of $1500 and send directly to (here you put the name and address of your attorney) I will pay you back by December 2010. Jatonne" Do not try to open a dialogue with me for I will not respond. If we do not receive the info requested we, I repeat, we will not give you this money. The ball is now in your court Jatonne.
Grubman Indursky & Shire, P.C. 212-554-0400
Does it sound like the managers AND executor should be sitting on the same side of the courtroom?
The family has had to deal with the managers lying about their "relationship" with Diddley, for example; when Diddley passed away, the managers took over and refused to let ANYONE assist the family in ANY way. The managers then turned around and told their attorney to write into a 'Memorandum In Support of Sale' - how they organized the funeral, bought flowers, organized a police motorcade, bought clothing and stopped the earth from spinning for 5 minutes.
6.) the family has asked for an "accurate" and "fully truthful" accounting from both the executor AND the managers and has STILL not gotten one.
7.) the family knows the executor "crafted" Diddley's will as Diddley could NEVER have come up with the concepts that are in the will and knows that Diddley DID NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT THE WILL ENTAILED AND DID NOT SPEND ANY TIME TO UNDERSTAND.
Leave a comment