Tony Moore Sues Robert Kirkman over Walking Dead Proceeds

[BeerThirty]

With respect to the 6 year delay in filing suit. Under common law in most states the statute of limitations for breach of contract is 10 years and breach of an oral contract is 5 years. Torts like fraud are generally 2 years with some states having a 4 year statute of limitations. Fraud tolls the statute of limitation when someone is not aware that they were the victim of fraud and it is reasonable that they didn't know they were the victim of fraud or some other tort. Again, if someone would share a link to the Complaint and/or any of the relevant contracts I would appreciate it.

 

 

 

Yay, we've got another lawyer on the boards.

 

I think that means there's one of us for every one non lawyer here.

 

It's a good think you put the Esq. right there in the title. Fingh's name told everyone what he was too before he changed it, but Sean Rumphumper never really caught on.

 

I'm not a lawyer, but I work for one of the economic consulting shops (expert witness reports), so I get to read a few complaints here and there.

[comix4fun]

With respect to the 6 year delay in filing suit. Under common law in most states the statute of limitations for breach of contract is 10 years and breach of an oral contract is 5 years. Torts like fraud are generally 2 years with some states having a 4 year statute of limitations. Fraud tolls the statute of limitation when someone is not aware that they were the victim of fraud and it is reasonable that they didn't know they were the victim of fraud or some other tort. Again, if someone would share a link to the Complaint and/or any of the relevant contracts I would appreciate it.

 

 

 

Yay, we've got another lawyer on the boards.

 

I think that means there's one of us for every one non lawyer here.

 

It's a good think you put the Esq. right there in the title. Fingh's name told everyone what he was too before he changed it, but Sean Rumphumper never really caught on.

 

I'm not a lawyer, but I work for one of the economic consulting shops (expert witness reports), so I get to read a few complaints here and there.

 

 

That's probably more valuable than what most of the lawyers on this board contribute regularly.

 

 

[Nico Esq]

Would you belive that I'm not an attorney and that I just play one on TV or on the CGC boards? How do you change your name?

[BeerThirty]

Did you sleep in a holiday in Express last night? That could also explain it...

[Nico Esq]

The reason that no one is willing to provide info is because every attorney is afraid of being sued for anything they say in public. Also the law is different in every state and when you give advice you create an attorney-client relationship. Don't be too hard on attorneys. Most attorneys went to law school to help people.

[Thomas Nielsen]

Most attorneys went to law school to help people.

 

[Nico Esq]

For those of you who are interested. One of the key issues in this case will probably be whether or not there was consideration for the transfer of property rights. Moore can argue that there was undue influence or that he was under duress or that the terms of the contract are unconscionable but these are all hard arguments. Also google the parole evidence rule for whatever state the case is in becuase that will be important to what facts are or are not admissible.

[comix4fun]

Would you belive that I'm not an attorney and that I just play one on TV or on the CGC boards? How do you change your name?

 

 

I think you ask Arch.

[Nico Esq]

For those of you who are interested. One of the key issues in this case will probably be whether or not there was consideration for the transfer of property rights. Moore can argue that there was undue influence or that he was under duress or that the terms of the contract are unconscionable but these are all hard arguments. Also google the parole evidence rule for whatever state the case is in becuase that will be important to what facts are or are not admissible.

[fastballspecial]

Would love to see the contract when this comes out. At least this is getting out in the open while they are still alive.

 

[400yrs]

It's possible to say that, if Tony Moore had continued to stay on "The Walking Dead" as an artist, it may never have gained the momentum due to a potentially slow or inconsistant publishing schedule related to his ability or inability to keep up with a monthly title, and therefore the success may never had occurred beyond being a critical success as opposed to the current commercial success.

 

I hope Charlie Adlard has some sort of compensation plan that is considerate of his contributions, since in a way, his ability to hit deadlines as well as relay the gritty mood of "The Walking Dead" essentially created the more popular look and feel to the title.

 

There's no trademark on Zombies... maybe Tony Moore should get competitive and create a similar book to creatively go head to head against Kirkman's The Walking Dead... maybe call it "The Running Dead"

 

That's the way I see it as well. With Moore as the artist, it would've been cancelled by 10.

[400yrs]

Moore's complaint further alleges Kirkman and his company "have not issued a single statement or allowed access to their books and records in accordance with the reporting obligations of the agreement."

 

Now why would Robert and his company not allow this unless they were just playing hard ball or felt Tony was not allowed anything? Wouldn't it be best to just follow the agreement fully and be done with it or is this a move done on purpose? Who knows, but I would have to imagine there is plenty of money to around.

 

To me this is what a lot of it hinges on. Again, I have heard more and not quite sure what the deal is with hearing that Robert had to have 100% interest in order for a deal to go through, but vaguely remember hearing something to that extent if memory serves.

 

As I said earlier...

There are a lot of moving parts (which our lawyer friends can speak to, I certainly can't with any confidence), such as likeness for toys, merchandising, credits for television etc.

 

Why did it take so long to see Walking Dead toys?

Why were there awful busts of zombies not based on Tony's work that came out with ridiculous names such as Vince?

Where is the Michonne T-Shirt or any other Tony Moore Walking Dead art on a shirt? Clearly anyone in marketing would see the interest and capitalize on it if it could be done.

A WD 19 cover shirt on light blue...instant sell out...

 

There is a back story here that will either come to light or will be settled, but I can tell you that Tony is a very honorable person. Some many not like that they charge high prices for art, or sketches or what have you, but at the end of the day we all know he was co-creator of Walking Dead and hopefully that will go further and he will get more credit financially for that.

 

No one can deny that Tony and Robert both created Walking Dead. What is sad to me is that Robert is not willing to give a piece of that to Tony and just be fair and upfront with it.

 

I think from reading this that people are turning on Tony for pushing this further, but I think in the end it is only going to hurt Robert in the court of public opinion.

 

We are seeing it with the Ghost Rider situation over $17,000 or the Kirby Estate, Siegel/Shuster and all of the aforementioned were works for hire, this clearly was not.

 

I think Tony is going to do very well when this is all said and done and he should.

 

 

I don't know the contract they worked out, but it seems like he should be getting a piece of anything that prints the material from issues 1-6 - trades, HCs, omnis since that was what he worked on.

 

Obviously, he drew the initial characters, but I'd think most of the character concepts as well as the story came from the mind of Kirkman.

 

Maybe he should just kill off Rick, Carl and Andrea and be done with all the characters that Moore touched within the pages of the book.

 

 

[brendanb438]

It all makes sense now, lawyers charge hundreds an hour so that they can purchase tons of expensive comics.

 

 

I wish all lawyers could be as cool and honest as Sean and Chris.

 

Unlike others who for some odd reason wanna play lawyer in every post they make to these boards.

 

 

 

[Nico Esq]

It all makes sense now, lawyers charge hundreds an hour so that they can purchase tons of expensive comics.

 

 

I wish all lawyers could be as cool and honest as Sean and Chris.

 

Unlike others who for some odd reason wanna player lawyer in every post they make to these boards.

 

 

 

That's a really crude insult when I was clearly just trying to help people understand the issues in the Court case better to improve the discussion for those who were interested in the litigation. P

[N/A]

Insecure much?

[maloney414]

Moore's complaint further alleges Kirkman and his company "have not issued a single statement or allowed access to their books and records in accordance with the reporting obligations of the agreement."

 

Now why would Robert and his company not allow this unless they were just playing hard ball or felt Tony was not allowed anything? Wouldn't it be best to just follow the agreement fully and be done with it or is this a move done on purpose? Who knows, but I would have to imagine there is plenty of money to around.

 

To me this is what a lot of it hinges on. Again, I have heard more and not quite sure what the deal is with hearing that Robert had to have 100% interest in order for a deal to go through, but vaguely remember hearing something to that extent if memory serves.

 

As I said earlier...

There are a lot of moving parts (which our lawyer friends can speak to, I certainly can't with any confidence), such as likeness for toys, merchandising, credits for television etc.

 

Why did it take so long to see Walking Dead toys?

Why were there awful busts of zombies not based on Tony's work that came out with ridiculous names such as Vince?

Where is the Michonne T-Shirt or any other Tony Moore Walking Dead art on a shirt? Clearly anyone in marketing would see the interest and capitalize on it if it could be done.

A WD 19 cover shirt on light blue...instant sell out...

 

There is a back story here that will either come to light or will be settled, but I can tell you that Tony is a very honorable person. Some many not like that they charge high prices for art, or sketches or what have you, but at the end of the day we all know he was co-creator of Walking Dead and hopefully that will go further and he will get more credit financially for that.

 

No one can deny that Tony and Robert both created Walking Dead. What is sad to me is that Robert is not willing to give a piece of that to Tony and just be fair and upfront with it.

 

I think from reading this that people are turning on Tony for pushing this further, but I think in the end it is only going to hurt Robert in the court of public opinion.

 

We are seeing it with the Ghost Rider situation over $17,000 or the Kirby Estate, Siegel/Shuster and all of the aforementioned were works for hire, this clearly was not.

 

I think Tony is going to do very well when this is all said and done and he should.

 

 

I don't know the contract they worked out, but it seems like he should be getting a piece of anything that prints the material from issues 1-6 - trades, HCs, omnis since that was what he worked on.

 

Obviously, he drew the initial characters, but I'd think most of the character concepts as well as the story came from the mind of Kirkman.

 

Maybe he should just kill off Rick, Carl and Andrea and be done with all the characters that Moore touched within the pages of the book.

 

 

There is another thread in comics general. I just posted this there that relates to your post.

 

You may be right about killing off the existing characters if this turns nasty.

 

Just curious what is the general thought process here in terms of who created Walking Dead.

 

Did Kirkman come up with the whole story-line and characters and Moore just drew what Kirkman said?

 

or

 

Did they both 50/50 collaborate and create together all characters and story-lines to begin with?

 

We as outsiders have no clue what the truth is.

 

Did he just draw the 1st 6 issues? If so, I think he's already made his money. Just my opinion, don't want to argue.

 

But what if he did more? Did they talk about the direction of the future issues including the Governor of Woodbury character? He may have contributed more than we think.

 

AND here is more food for thought. IF the info in the 1st post is true about Tony Moore signing an agreement that he get's 60% of the comic money moving forward, that may be proof that he DID contribute more than just art for the 1st 6 issues. If Kirkman was willing to continue to pay him 60% of the comic profits, that may be used to legally show Tony had a big role in the creation of the WD. Again just my opinion.

 

[Nico Esq]

Insecure much?

 

I can't believe the guy who posts pictures of his comic books on a leather couch asked me if I'm insecure.

[N/A]

Should I call your secretary?

[BeerThirty]

[Nico Esq]

That was a little bit better, but remember It's not P.C. to call someone a secretary they are administrative assistants (unless they are secretary of state).