Papers seek suit access
Variety, Daily Journal want in on Katzenberg vs. Disney
The motion, filed by Pierce O'Donnell and Christine Pagac of O'Donnell & Shaeffer, asserts that holding a closed trial and sealing the court record violates constitutional guarantees, well-established precedent and several court rules. In particular, the motion challenges the assumption that proceedings before a "private" judge or referee can be closed to the public by agreement of the parties.
Also joining in the motion by Variety and the Daily Journal are Dow Jones & Co., the Los Angeles Times and Time, Inc.Katzenberg filed a lawsuit in 1996 in L.A. Superior Court claiming that he was entitled to 2% of profits from Disney movies and TV shows produced during his decade as studio head. The case was assigned to L.A. Superior Court Judge John W. Ouderkirk. Disney conceded liability in 1997, just before the case was scheduled for trial. Based on an agreement between Katzenberg and Disney, it was decided that the damage phase of the case would be referred to retired Superior Court Judge Paul Breckenridge for a private proceeding.
In papers filed in opposition to the access motion, Disney attorney Robert Badal of Belin, Rawlings & Badal, argued that Breckenridge, not Ouderkirk, is best suited to decide the media access issue. Disney also argued that the damage phase should be closed to the public because "proprietary, confidential and trade secret information lies at the core of the ... proceeding."
A hearing to determine which judge has authority to decide the issue is scheduled before Ouderkirk for April 15, the same day the damage proceeding is set to begin. Either Ouderkirk or Breckenridge are expected to hear argument on the merits on that day.
