Morrill

Morrill v. the Smashing Pumpkins

Good Law
157 F. Supp. 2d 1120·2001 WL 1002409·2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16720
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaAugust 30, 2001CV00-06818CM(JWJX)California3,985 words

Opinion

Opinion

Moreno, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Presently before the Court is Defendants The Smashing Pumpkins, Billy Cor-gan, Virgin Records America, and Modi-vational Films’ Motion for Summary Judgment. Having considered the moving papers, the opposition, the reply, and oral argument in support thereof, the Court hereby grants Defendants’ Motion for the following reasons.

I.

Statement of Facts

The allegations in this case arise from events transpiring in St. Petersburg, Florida in 1986. At that time, Plaintiffs Jonathan Morrill and J.M. Productions (“Morrill”) completed an “original music video/documentary” entitled “Video Marked,” which depicted Defendant Cor-gan and his then-existing music group, The Marked. See Compl. ¶ 13. “The purpose of this endeavor was to create an assortment of music videos for Corgan and his bandmates in order to help them get started with their musical careers.” See Compl. ¶ 12.

Video Marked was created around the time when Corgan and The Marked were staying at Morrill’s home in St. Peters-burg. Upon completion of the video, Video Marked was played at some clubs where The Marked performed, as a promotional tool for the band. At some point…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.