Case 3:16-cv-01442-SRU Document 1 Filed 08/24/16 Page 1 of 17

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

HORROR, INC., a Massachusetts corporation; and
MANNY COMPANY, a Connecticut Limited
Partnership,
Plaintiffs,

Case No.: _____________
COMPLAINT

- against -

VICTOR MILLER, an individual; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive,
Defendants.

Plaintiffs, HORROR, INC., a Massachusetts corporation, and MANNY
COMPANY, a Connecticut limited partnership (the “Plaintiffs”), by and through their
attorneys, Greenberg Glusker Fields Claman & Machtinger LLP and Ferdinand IP, LLC,
allege as follows:
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
1.

This lawsuit seeks, among other things, a declaration that Plaintiff Horror,

Inc. (“Horror”) is the exclusive owner of the copyright in and to the screenplay on which
the original horror film entitled Friday the 13th (the “Film”) was based.
2.

In 1979, Sean S. Cunningham (“Cunningham”) had the idea to capitalize on

the success of the then-recently released and hugely successful horror film Halloween.
Through the Manny Company, in which he was a general partner, Cunningham hired
defendant Victor Miller (“Miller”), a writer with whom he had previously worked, to
work with him in developing ideas for a new horror film and to thereafter draft a
screenplay based on the jointly developed ideas. Miller had never written a horror
screenplay prior to his being hired by Cunningham and was guided in the process, and
08226-00016/2594671.6

1

 Case 3:16-cv-01442-SRU Document 1 Filed 08/24/16 Page 2 of 17

directly supervised, by Cunningham. Accordingly, Miller entered into an employment
agreement with the Manny Company pursuant to which Miller wrote a screenplay for the
Film as a work for hire (the “Screenplay”).
3.

Thereafter, Georgetown Productions, Inc. (“Georgetown”), Horror’s

predecessor in interest, took a bold risk and financed the entire production budget of the
Film in exchange for the Manny Company’s assignment of all its rights in and to the
Screenplay, including without limitation any and all copyrights therein. Released in
1980, the Film was a breakout hit and spawned many sequels over the past 36 years.
4.

In spite of the fact that he voluntarily executed an employment agreement

and for 36 years has accepted the benefits flowing therefrom, Miller has now repudiated
his employment agreement and has improperly and deceptively purported to terminate
Horror’s copyright ownership in and to the Screenplay under Section 203(a) of the
United States Copyright Act. He cannot do so. Because the Screenplay was written as a
work for hire, Miller does not have any right to terminate Horror’s copyright interests
thereto and is not entitled to recapture any rights therein.
5.

As a result of Miller’s improper actions, a cloud has been placed on

Horror’s rights in and to the popular and lucrative Friday the 13th movie franchise and
has caused, and will continue to cause, both Horror and the Manny Company significant
damages. In addition to seeking a declaration of the parties’ respective rights, the Manny
Company seeks a determination that Miller has materially breached the Employment
Agreement, has slandered Horror’s title in Friday the 13th, and has engaged in unfair
trade practices.
6.

Since the initial release of the Film in 1980, Horror has invested substantial

time, money and effort developing and growing this singular independent horror film into
one of the most successful and iconic film franchises of all time. Miller’s attempt to recharacterize his initial work for hire efforts as an independent project 36 years after the
fact is nothing more than a transparently disingenuous money grab.
08226-00016/2594671.6

2

 Case 3:16-cv-01442-SRU Document 1 Filed 08/24/16 Page 3 of 17

JURISDICTION AND VENUE
7.

This action arises under the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201,

and the United States Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. §§ 101 et seq. Jurisdiction is based upon
28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a), and the principles of pendent jurisdiction pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1367(a).
8.

Venue in this Judicial District is proper under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1391(b) and (c),

and § 1400(a) because a substantial part of the events giving rise to the plaintiffs’ claims
occurred in this Judicial District, one of the plaintiffs resides and may be found in this
Judicial District, and defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction in this Judicial
District by virtue of their transacting and/or soliciting business in this Judicial District.

THE PARTIES
9.

Horror Inc. (“Horror”) is a corporation organized and existing under the

laws of Massachusetts, with its principal place of business located in Newton,
Massachusetts. Horror is the owner of certain rights in and to the Friday the 13th movie
franchise, including without limitation the copyright in the Screenplay. Horror acquired
its rights in the Screenplay, among other things, from its predecessors-in-interest,
Georgetown Productions, Inc. (“Georgetown”), Jason Productions Inc., Friday Four Inc.
and Terror Inc.
10.

The Manny Company is a limited partnership organized and existing under

the laws of Connecticut, with its principal place of business located in the state of
Connecticut. Sean S. Cunningham Films, Ltd. (“SSCF”) is the general partner of the
Manny Company, and its principal is Sean S. Cunningham (“Cunningham”). Horror and
the Manny Company are sometimes referred to herein as “Plaintiffs.”
11.

Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that Miller is

an individual who, at all times relevant to the events at issue herein, was a citizen of and
08226-00016/2594671.6

3

 Case 3:16-cv-01442-SRU Document 1 Filed 08/24/16 Page 4 of 17

resided in the state of Connecticut. Plaintiffs are further informed and believe, and based
thereon allege, that Miller currently is a citizen of and resides in the state of California.
12.

Plaintiffs are unaware of the true names and capacities of the defendants

sued herein as Does 1 through 10, inclusive, and therefore sue these defendants by
fictitious names. Plaintiffs will seek leave of this Court to amend this Complaint to
allege their true names and capacities when ascertained. Plaintiffs are informed and
believe, and based thereon allege, that each fictitiously named defendant is responsible in
some way for the acts, occurrences and events alleged in this Complaint, and is liable to
Plaintiffs therefor. Defendant Miller and Does 1 through 10 are sometimes referred to
collectively herein as “Defendants.”
13.

Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that at all

times relevant herein, each of the Defendants was the agent, servant, or employee of each
other Defendant, and at all times relevant herein was acting within the scope of such
agency.

FACTS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS
14.

Miller and Cunningham first began working together in or about 1976 on a

series of motion picture projects. The first motion picture on which they worked together
was entitled Here Come the Tigers. Although both of them jointly worked on developing
the ideas for the story line, Cunningham produced Here Come the Tigers and Miller
wrote the screenplay. Shortly thereafter, and in keeping with their prior method of
working together, Cunningham and Miller began development on another motion picture,
entitled Manny’s Orphans. For Manny’s Orphans, Cunningham hired Miller through his
newly created company, the Manny Company, which was a signatory to the Writer’s
Guild of America, Inc. (“WGA”). Regardless of the hiring entity, however, their method
of working together remained the same – they met frequently to develop ideas for
Manny’s Orphans and Cunningham produced the film while Miller, under Cunningham’s
08226-00016/2594671.6

4

 Case 3:16-cv-01442-SRU Document 1 Filed 08/24/16 Page 5 of 17

supervision and direct control, wrote the screenplay which embodied their joint ideas.
Neither of these family friendly films performed well at the box office.
15.

In or about 1979, the low-budget horror film Halloween became a huge box

office success. The surprising success of Halloween prompted Cunningham to focus on
the horror films genre for his next project. Having worked on two film projects together
already, Cunningham and Miller embarked on this next film project using the same
method of script development. They met several days a week to discuss potential ideas
for a horror film with the intention of Cunningham going on to produce the film and
Miller writing the Screenplay for the Manny Company under Cunningham’s supervision
and direct control. Cunningham had previously produced a horror film, whereas Miller
had no previous experience in the horror genre. Eventually, Cunningham came up with
the idea to make a horror film called Friday the 13th. Cunningham began investigating
whether the title was available for use and hired Miller to write the Screenplay based on
the ideas they had been and were continuing to discuss.
16.

Accordingly, on or about June 4, 1979, the Manny Company and Miller

entered into a Writer’s Flat Deal Contract, pursuant to which the Manny Company
employed Miller to “write a complete and finished screenplay for a proposed motion
picture . . . presently entitled or designated Friday 13” (the “Employment Agreement”).
17.

The Employment Agreement was entered into and executed in the state of

Connecticut, both parties to the Employment Agreement were residents of the state of
Connecticut at the time of its execution, and all of the writing services performed by
Miller pursuant to the Employment Agreement were performed in the state of
Connecticut. A true and correct copy of the Employment Agreement is attached hereto
as Exhibit 1.
18.

In the Employment Agreement, Miller expressly warranted and represented

that he was a member in good standing of the WGA, and that he would maintain his
membership in the WGA in good standing “during the term of this employment.” The
08226-00016/2594671.6

5

 Case 3:16-cv-01442-SRU Document 1 Filed 08/24/16 Page 6 of 17

Employment Agreement is the standard WGA short form complete screenplay agreement
issued by the WGA at the time, and provides that it is to be governed by the provisions of
the WGA 1977 Theatrical and Television Basic Agreement (also known as the
“Minimum Basic Agreement” or “MBA”). Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based
thereon allege, that under the terms of the Employment Agreement (which incorporated
the MBA requirements), Miller collected employee benefits, including without limitation
pension, health and welfare benefits. In addition, as a result of the Employment
Agreement, on information and belief, Miller has collected residual payments in
accordance with the MBA over the past thirty-six (36) years.
19.

As an employee of the Manny Company, Cunningham met with Miller

several times a week to discuss ideas and to develop the script and story line of the Film.
Sometimes Miller would pitch ideas for the film to Cunningham, and Cunningham would
either approve or veto the ideas. Other times, Cunningham would direct Miller to
incorporate certain ideas into the Screenplay even when Miller did not approve of those
ideas.
20.

Before a draft of the Screenplay was completed, and based solely on

Cunningham’s idea to produce a horror film entitled Friday the 13th, Cunningham took
an ad out in Daily Variety to determine if there was sufficient interest to secure funding
for the proposed film. The ad stated, in pertinent part, “Friday the 13th, The Most
Terrifying Film Ever Made! Available December 1979.” Immediately, Cunningham
began receiving calls from distributors who were interested in distributing the film based
solely on the title.
21.

Thereafter, Cunningham and Miller began furiously working on the

development of the Screenplay. At all times, Cunningham exercised control and
authority over the development of the story line, scenes, characters, plots, themes, and
other creative elements of the Screenplay.

08226-00016/2594671.6

6

 Case 3:16-cv-01442-SRU Document 1 Filed 08/24/16 Page 7 of 17

22.

One of the people who responded to Cunningham’s Daily Variety ad was

Phil Scuderi (“Scuderi”), a principal of Georgetown. On behalf of Georgetown, Scuderi
offered to finance a portion of the Film’s budget, but at this time Cunningham did not
have a completed draft of the Screenplay. Thereafter, in or about mid-August 1979,
when Cunningham was able to provide an early draft of the Screenplay, Georgetown
offered to invest the entire $500,000 budget for the Film, on the condition that
Georgetown would have complete control over the Screenplay and the Film.
Cunningham agreed.
23.

The Film began pre-production in mid-August 1979 and principal

photography occurred in or about October 1979. Beginning in mid-August 1979 and
throughout the pre-production and production process, Scuderi, on behalf of Georgetown,
provided extensive notes, mark-ups and ideas which were incorporated into the final
shooting script and Film itself – many of which never appeared in any drafts of the
Screenplay written by Miller.
24.

Pursuant to an agreement dated as of May 7, 1980, Georgetown

documented its investment in the Film and the Manny Company sold to Georgetown all
of its right, title, and interest in and to the Screenplay (the “Rights Agreement”),
including without limitation its copyright in the Screenplay. Among other things, the
Rights Agreement specifically states that Miller wrote the Screenplay “as author for The
Manny Company” and provides that Georgetown may copyright the Screenplay in its
own name.
25.

The Film was released on or about May 9, 1980, and was an immediate hit,

enjoying unprecedented box office success for a horror film.
26.

On or about September 4, 1980, Georgetown filed with the U.S. Copyright

Office an application for copyright registration of the Film, in which it claimed, inter
alia, authorship of the Film and the Screenplay. This application matured into U.S.
copyright registration no. PA 81-093, for which the U.S. Copyright Office issued a
08226-00016/2594671.6

7

 Case 3:16-cv-01442-SRU Document 1 Filed 08/24/16 Page 8 of 17

certificate of registration having an effective date of September 26, 1980. A true and
correct copy of the Certificate of Registration is attached hereto as Exhibit 2. Because
this certificate of registration was issued within five years of the first publication of the
Film, in accordance with 17 U.S.C. § 410(c), the certificate constitutes prima facie
evidence of the validity of the underlying copyright as well as the facts stated in the
certificate, including, without limitation, Georgetown’s exclusive ownership of copyright
in and to the Film, and Georgetown’s original authorship of the Film and the Screenplay.
27.

Horror, as the successor-in-interest to Georgetown, currently holds all right,

title, and interest, in and to the Screenplay, the Film, and any and all elements contained
within the Film. Although Georgetown and/or its successors in interest, including
Horror, have licensed certain distribution rights to third parties in and to the Film, at no
time has Horror assigned to any third parties any of its copyright(s) in and to the
Screenplay and/or the Film.
28.

Notwithstanding that the Employment Agreement was governed by the

WGA and that Miller’s screenwriting services were therefore provided to the Manny
Company as an employee on a work-for-hire basis, and on information and belief, that
Miller has received employee benefits as a result of performing his screenwriting services
on the Screenplay, on January 26, 2016, Miller issued a purported Notice of Termination
of the copyright(s) in and to the Screenplay under Section 203(a) of the United States
Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. § 203(a)) (the “Termination Notice”). However, although the
Termination Notice was directed to the Manny Company and several of Horror’s
licensees, it was not served on Horror, the current copyright holder, and was therefore
defective on its face. On June 27, 2016, Miller re-issued his purported Notice of
Termination (the “First Amended Termination Notice”), which included Horror and
purported to be effective on July 1, 2018. Further, on July 14, 2016, Miller once again
re-issued his purported Notice of Termination, modifying some of the recipients’
addresses (“Second Amended Termination Notice”). The Second Amended Termination
08226-00016/2594671.6

8

 Case 3:16-cv-01442-SRU Document 1 Filed 08/24/16 Page 9 of 17

Notice purported to take effect on July 15, 2018. The Termination Notice, the First
Amended Termination Notice and the Second Amended Termination Notice are
sometimes referred to collectively herein as the “Termination Notices.”
29.

When Miller issued the purported Termination Notices, Miller knew and

understood that he had been employed by the Manny Company to write the complete and
finished Screenplay on a work-for-hire basis, knew or should have known that Horror
was the copyright owner of the Screenplay, and therefore knew or should have known
that the purported Termination Notices were false and without legal basis.
30.

Horror and the Manny Company dispute the validity of the Termination

Notices, dispute that Miller has any termination rights under Section 203(a) of the United
States Copyright Act or otherwise, and dispute that Miller has the right to seek to
terminate Horror’s copyright(s) in and to the Screenplay.
31.

Moreover, Miller’s Termination Notices constitute a material breach and

repudiation of his Employment Agreement with the Manny Company, and accordingly
have placed a cloud on Horror’s copyrights in the Screenplay, which has caused damage
to Horror and the Manny Company. Unless and until this dispute is resolved and the
Court issues a declaration regarding the parties’ respective rights in and to the
Screenplay, including whether Miller is entitled to terminate Horror’s copyright interests
therein, Horror will no longer be able to exploit its copyrights in and to the Screenplay.

CAUSES OF ACTION
COUNT I – DECLARATORY JUDGMENT
(By All Plaintiffs Against All Defendants)
32.

Plaintiffs repeat and reallege, and incorporate herein by reference, the

allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 31, above, as though fully set forth herein.
33.

By reason of the foregoing facts, an actual controversy has arisen between

the parties as to whether Miller has the right to terminate Horror’s copyright interests in
08226-00016/2594671.6

9

 Case 3:16-cv-01442-SRU Document 1 Filed 08/24/16 Page 10 of 17

and to the Screenplay pursuant to Section 203(a) of the United States Copyright Act (17
U.S.C. § 203(a)) or otherwise, and whether Miller’s Termination Notices are valid.
Specifically:
a.

Horror and the Manny Company contend, and Miller disputes, that

the Screenplay was written as a work-for-hire pursuant to the Employment
Agreement;
b.

Horror and the Manny Company contend, and Miller disputes, that

Miller does not have any right to terminate Horror’s copyright interests in
the Screenplay pursuant to Section 203(a) of the United States Copyright
Act (17 U.S.C. § 203(a)) or otherwise, nor to otherwise interfere with
Horror’s exclusive rights in connection with the Screenplay;
c.

Horror and the Manny Company contend, and Miller disputes, that

Miller’s Termination Notices are improper, invalid, and of no force and
effect;
d.

Horror and the Manny Company contend, and Miller disputes, that

Horror is entitled to continue to exclusively exploit the copyright in and to
the Screenplay throughout the entirety of the copyright term;
e.

Horror and the Manny Company contend, and Miller disputes, that

Miller’s Termination Notices constitute a material breach and repudiation
of the Employment Agreement; and
f.

Horror and the Manny Company contend, and Miller disputes, that

even if Miller’s Termination Notices or any of them are deemed valid
(which plaintiffs dispute), that Miller’s termination is limited solely to the
creative elements contained in the Screenplay which were created by
Miller, and not the entirety thereof, which will be determined after
discovery in this matter.

08226-00016/2594671.6

10

 Case 3:16-cv-01442-SRU Document 1 Filed 08/24/16 Page 11 of 17

34.

In view of the foregoing, an actual controversy has arisen and exists

between Horror and the Manny Company, on the one hand, and Miller, on the other hand,
within the meaning of the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201. Accordingly,
Horror and the Manny Company hereby request a declaration of this Court under the
provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 2201, setting forth the respective rights and other legal relations
of Plaintiffs and Miller. In particular, Horror and the Manny Company request a
declaration that:
a.

The Screenplay was written as a work-for-hire pursuant to the

Employment Agreement;
b.

Miller does not have any right to terminate Horror’s copyright

interests in the Screenplay pursuant to Section 203(a) of the United States
Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. § 203(a)) or otherwise and does not have any
right to interfere with Horror’s exclusive rights in connection with the
Screenplay;
c.

Each of Miller’s Termination Notices is improper, invalid, and of no

force and effect;
d.

Horror is entitled to continue to exclusively exploit the copyright in

and to the Screenplay throughout the entirety of the copyright term;
e.

Each of Miller’s Termination Notices constitutes a material breach

and repudiation of the Employment Agreement; and
f.

Even if any of Miller’s Termination Notices is deemed valid (which

plaintiffs dispute), Miller’s termination is limited solely to the creative
elements contained in the Screenplay which were created by Miller, and not
the entirety thereof, which will be determined after discovery in this matter.

08226-00016/2594671.6

11

 Case 3:16-cv-01442-SRU Document 1 Filed 08/24/16 Page 12 of 17

COUNT II – BREACH OF CONTRACT
(By Plaintiff Manny Company Against Defendant Miller)
35.

Plaintiffs repeat and reallege, and incorporate herein by reference, the

allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 34, above, as though fully set forth herein.
36.

As set forth in detail above, pursuant to the terms of the Employment

Agreement, Miller was employed by the Manny Company to write the complete and
finished Screenplay as a work-for-hire, and the Employment Agreement was governed by
the terms of the WGA’s MBA.
37.

At all relevant times herein, Miller knew and understood that he was

employed by the Manny Company to write the complete and finished Screenplay on a
work-for-hire basis, as a member in good standing of the WGA and pursuant to the terms
of the WGA’s standard employment agreement in use at the time.
38.

Further, there was at all times relevant herein, an implied covenant in the

Employment Agreement that Miller would act in good faith and deal fairly with the
Manny Company in all aspects of their contractual relationship, and would refrain from
conduct that would result in destroying, frustrating, or injuring the Manny Company’s
rights under the Employment Agreement.
39.

Except as may have been excused or prevented by Miller, the Manny

Company has fully performed all conditions, covenants, duties and obligations required
to be performed on its part under the Employment Agreement.
40.

Miller has materially breached and repudiated the Employment Agreement

by, among other things: (a) issuing the Termination Notices; (b) sending the Termination
Notices to several of Horror’s licensees; and (c) falsely claiming that he is entitled to
terminate Horror’s copyright in and to the Screenplay, thereby exceeding the scope of his
rights under the Employment Agreement.
41.

For the reasons set forth hereinabove, Miller has also breached the covenant

of good faith and fair dealing implied in the Employment Agreement, thus depriving the
08226-00016/2594671.6

12

 Case 3:16-cv-01442-SRU Document 1 Filed 08/24/16 Page 13 of 17

Manny Company of the benefits for which it bargained under the Employment
Agreement.
42.

As a direct and proximate result of Miller’s acts of material breach and

repudiation, the Manny Company has suffered damages in an amount to be proven at
trial, but which the Manny Company is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges,
exceeds the jurisdictional minimum of this Court.

COUNT III – SLANDER OF TITLE
(By Plaintiff Horror Inc. Against All Defendants)
43.

Plaintiffs repeat and reallege, and incorporate herein by reference, the

allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 42, above, as though fully set forth herein.
44.

Although Miller either knew or should have known that Horror was the

copyright owner of the Screenplay, Miller intentionally served his Termination Notices
on certain of Horror’s licensees, including Paramount Pictures Corporation, New Line
Film Productions, Inc., and Warner Brothers Entertainment, Inc. (collectively, the
“Licensees”), for the purpose of disparaging and slandering Horror’s right, title, and
interest in and to the Screenplay. Miller’s Termination Notices are false, and constitute
false statements derogatory to Horror’s title in and to the Screenplay.
45.

On information and belief, Miller’s acts of purposefully sending the

Termination Notices to the Licensees were malicious and were intended to impugn the
integrity of Horror, diminish the value of Horror’s property in the eyes of its Licensees,
and to slander Horror’s title in and to the Screenplay.
46.

Miller’s actions have, in fact, impugned the integrity of Horror, diminished

the value of Horror’s property, and slandered Horror’s title in and to the Screenplay.
47.

As a direct and proximate result of Miller’s conduct, Horror has suffered

damages in an amount to be proven at trial, but which Horror is informed and believes,
and on that basis alleges, exceeds the jurisdictional minimum of this Court.
08226-00016/2594671.6

13

 Case 3:16-cv-01442-SRU Document 1 Filed 08/24/16 Page 14 of 17

48.

Furthermore, Horror is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges,

that Miller’s conduct as hereinabove alleged was not only knowingly false, but was also
malicious and oppressive. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of punitive and
exemplary damages.
COUNT IV – CONNECTICUT UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES ACT
(By Plaintiff Horror Inc. against All Defendants)
49.

Plaintiffs repeat and reallege, and incorporate herein by reference, the

allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 48, above, as though fully set forth herein.
50.

Miller’s acts of knowingly sending the false Termination Notices offend

public policy as has been established by the common law of the State of Connecticut,
including, without limitation, the common law of contracts and slander of title of the
State of Connecticut, and therefore constitute unfair or deceptive acts or practices in
violation of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, Conn.Gen.Stat. § 42-110
(“CUTPA”).
51.

Miller’s acts of knowingly sending the false Termination Notices constitute

an immoral, unethical, oppressive, and unscrupulous business practice, and therefore
constitute unfair or deceptive acts or practices in violation of CUTPA.
52.

Miller’s acts of knowingly sending the false Termination Notices has

directly and proximately caused Horror to suffer substantial and foreseeable ascertainable
harm, including, but not limited to, lost licensing revenues which Horror would have
realized from the exploitation of its rights in and to the Film but for Miller’s
aforementioned conduct, and therefore constitute unfair or deceptive acts or practices in
violation of CUTPA.
53.

Furthermore, on information and belief, Miller’s acts of knowingly sending

the false Termination Notices constitute intentional and wanton violations of Horror’s
rights under the Employment Agreement and Horror’s rights in and to the Film, and

08226-00016/2594671.6

14

 Case 3:16-cv-01442-SRU Document 1 Filed 08/24/16 Page 15 of 17

exhibit a reckless indifference to Horror’s aforementioned rights. Accordingly, Horror is
entitled to an award of punitive damages pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42-110g(a).
54.

Horror is entitled to recover its costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees

incurred in pursuing this matter pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42-110g(d).

REQUEST FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs claim relief as follows:
1.

On Count I:
a.

For a declaration that:
i.

The Screenplay was written as a work-for-hire pursuant to the

Employment Agreement.
ii.

Miller does not have any right to terminate Horror’s copyright

interests in the Screenplay pursuant to Section 203(a) of the United
States Copyright Act (17 U.S.C. § 203(a)) or otherwise and does not
have any right to interfere with Horror’s exclusive rights in
connection with the Screenplay.
iii.

Each of Miller’s Termination Notices is improper, invalid,

and of no force and effect.
iv.

Horror is entitled to continue to exclusively exploit the

copyright in and to the Screenplay throughout the entirety of the
copyright term.
v.

Each of Miller’s Termination Notices constitutes a material

breach and repudiation of the Employment Agreement.
vi.

Even if any of Miller’s Termination Notices is deemed valid

(which plaintiffs dispute), Miller’s termination is limited solely to
the creative elements contained in the Screenplay which were

08226-00016/2594671.6

15

 Case 3:16-cv-01442-SRU Document 1 Filed 08/24/16 Page 16 of 17

created by Miller, and not the entirety thereof, which will be
determined after discovery in this matter.
b.
2.

For Plaintiffs’ reasonable attorneys’ fees.

On Count II, for damages according to proof but which the Manny

Company is informed and believes, and on that basis alleges, exceed the jurisdictional
requirements of this Court;
3.

On Count III, for damages according to proof but which Horror is informed

and believed, and on that basis alleges, exceed the jurisdictional requirements of this
Court;
4.

On Count IV, for compensatory damages according to proof but which

Horror is informed and believed, and on that basis alleges, exceed the jurisdictional
requirements of this Court, as well as punitive damages and attorney’s fees as provided
for by law; and
5.

On all Counts,
a.

For Plaintiffs’ costs of suit herein; and

b.

For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and

proper.

08226-00016/2594671.6

16

 Case 3:16-cv-01442-SRU Document 1 Filed 08/24/16 Page 17 of 17

Dated: August 24, 2016
Respectfully submitted,
FERDINAND IP, LLC

Edmund J. Ferdinand, III

By:
EDMUND J. FERDINAND, III (ct21287)
jferdinand@24iplg.com
ALEXANDER R. MALBIN (ct29419)
amalbin@24iplg.com
JESSICA S. RUTHERFORD (ct27273)
jrutherford@24iplg.com
129 Post Road East
Westport, Connecticut 06880
Telephone: 203.557.4224
Fax: 203.905.6747
and
BONNIE E. ESKENAZI (SBN 119401)
BEskenazi@GreenbergGlusker.com
JULIA R. HAYE (SBN 198138)
JHaye@GreenbergGlusker.com
GREENBERG GLUSKER FIELDS
CLAMAN & MACHTINGER LLP
1900 Avenue of the Stars, 21st Floor
Los Angeles, California 90067-4590
Telephone: 310.553.3610
Fax: 310.553.0687
(Admission Pro Hac Vice Pending)
(i)

08226-00016/2594671.6

Attorneys for Plaintiffs,
Horror, Inc. and Manny Company

17