12/2/2016

www.lacourt.org/tentativeRulingNet/ui/ResultPopup.aspx

DEPARTMENT51LAWANDMOTIONRULINGS

CaseNumber:BC633764HearingDate:December05,2016Dept:51
Background
InDecember2012,singerJenniRiveradiedinaplanecrash.Thislawsuitwasbroughtbyalimited
liabilitycompanythatcontrolsherassetsandismanagedbyherchildrenagainst(1)herformer
businessmanager,defendantPeteSalgado,and(2)threeentitiesandoneindividual(the
ProductionDefendants)thatarejoiningwithSalgadoscompanytoproduceatelevisionseries
aboutRiveratobeshownontheUnivisionnetwork.
Plaintiffisseekingtoenjointhereleaseofboththetelevisionseriesandthepublicationofabook
beingwrittenbySalgado,aspartofageneralinjunctionondisclosureofalltheprivateinformation
SalgadohasaboutRivera.Plaintiffalsoseeksunspecifiedmonetarydamagesduetothedisclosure
ofinformation,aswellasthedisgorgementofprofits.
IntheCourtsview,eachpartyhas,atbottom,astraightforwardandfairlysimpleviewofthiscase.
PlaintiffallegesthatSalgadosignedaNonDisclosureAgreement(NDA)onSeptember17,2013
thatprohibits(amongotherthings)thedisclosureofallinformationaboutRiveraspersonalaffairs
andrequireshimtoholdallsuchinformationasafiduciary.Thus,theComplaintallegesthat
Salgadohasbreached(andwillcontinuedtobreach)theNDAbydisclosinginformationthroughthe
productionofthebookandtheseries,aswellasbreachinghisfiduciarydutybydoingso.Salgado
allegesthatheneversignedanysuchagreement,sotherecanbenobreachofcontractorbreach
offiduciaryduty.
PlaintiffaccordinglyallegesthattheProductionDefendantsinterferedwiththeNDA,orinduceda
breachofitbyobtaininginformationfromSalgadofortheseries.TheProductionDefendantsargue
(inpart)thatbecausetherewasnosuchvalidcontract,asSalgadocontends,therecanbeno
breach.
OnOctober14,2016,theProductionDefendantsfiledaMotiontoStriketheComplaintunderthe
AntiSLAPPstatute.OnOctober28,2016,Salgadojoinedinthatmotion.OnNovember8,2016,
plaintifffiledtheinstantnoticedmotionseekingcertaindiscoverytoopposethemotion.TheCourt
deniedplaintiffsNovember10,2016,exparteapplicationtoexpeditethehearingonthismotion,
thoughtheCourtcontinuedthehearingdateonthatmotiontoDecember19,2016,andcontinued
thedateonwhichtheoppositionisdue,inordertoensuretheabilitytoaccommodatediscoveryif
thismotionisgranted.
Standard
UnderCodeofCivilProcedureSection425.16(g),discoveryisstayedbythefilingofanantiSLAPP
motion,butdiscoverymaybeallowedonnoticedmotionandforgoodcauseshown.The
discoverymustbenecessaryfortheplaintifftoopposethemotionand[]tailoredtothatend.Britts
v.SuperiorCourt,145Cal.App.4th1112,1125(2006).
Application
PlaintiffsMotionisDENIED.
Itappearsthat,atthisposture,thiscaseisprimarily,ifnotexclusively,aboutinjunctiverelief.Plaintiff
http://www.lacourt.org/tentativeRulingNet/ui/ResultPopup.aspx

1/3

12/2/2016

www.lacourt.org/tentativeRulingNet/ui/ResultPopup.aspx

wishestoenjoinSalgadosbook,theUnivisiontelevisionseries,andallsimilardisclosuresof
informationaboutRiverafromSalgado,basedontheNDA.
Plaintiffsproofnecessarytoobtainsuchaninjunctionappearstoturnnearlyentirely(ifnot
completelyentirely)onestablishingthattheNDAisavalidcontract.PlaintiffcontendsthattheNDA
isanauthenticagreementsignedbySalgadoSalgadoclaimsthatheneversignedit,sothe
contractisnotauthenticagreementthatbindshim.
FromtheinformationtheCourthasbeengiven,thedeterminationofwhethertheNDAisauthentic
willturnon,ataminimum,(a)thetestimonyofpercipientwitnesses,whichwouldinclude,atleast,a
witnessfromplaintiff,whowouldtestifytowitnessingSalgadosigntheNDA,andSalgado,who
presumablywouldtestifythathedidnotdoso,and(b)documentexpertsoneachsideofthecase
whohaveexaminedtheNDA.
Thediscoverysoughtappearsneithernecessarynornarrowlytailoredtothisdetermination,and
thusitneednotbeobtainedinordertolitigatetheantiSLAPPmotion.Thereisnoreasontothink
thatanyoftheinformationplaintiffseekswouldbearmeaningfullyonthequestionofwhetherthe
NDAisauthentic.PlaintiffisseekingfromtheProductionDefendantsinformationabout(1)their
communicationswithSalgadoabouttheNDA,(2)theircommunicationswithSalgadoaboutRivera,
(3)theiragreementswithSalgado,and(4)sevendepositions(threeofwhicharepersonmost
knowledgeabledepositions)abouttheotherthreecategoriesofinformation.IftheProduction
DefendantshaveanyinformationthatbearsontheauthenticityoftheNDA,itappearsthatitwould
deriveentirelyfromSalgado.Tothatend,theProductionDefendantshaveofferedtheMarch1,
2016,agreementthattwoofthemsignedwithSalgadoinwhichherepresentedthathehadnot
enteredanyagreementinconsistentwiththedevelopmentandproductionoftheseries.Given
Salgadospositioninthislitigationandhissameday(June3,2016)denialoftheauthenticityof
theNDAwhenitwasfirstraisedbyplaintiffthereisnoreasonablebasisforconcludingthatthe
ProductionDefendantshavesomeusefulinformationbearingupontheauthenticityoftheNDA.
Nordoesthediscoverysoughtappeartobenecessarytoshowingthelikelihoodthataninjunction
willissueafterthequestionoftheNDAsauthenticityissettled.IfplaintifffailstoprovetheNDAis
authentic,therewillbenobasisforaninjunctionoranyreliefontheComplaint.Ifplaintiffsucceeds
inprovingtheNDAisauthentic,theinformationwillnotrelatetowhetheraninjunctionshouldissue
astoSalgado,astherewillbenodoubtthatanydisclosuresbyhimofprivateRiverainformation
willbreachtheNDA.Therealsowillbenodoubt(atthatpoint)thatdisclosuresbytheProduction
Defendants(whoareproducingtheUnivisionseriesalongwithSalgadoscompany)ofinformation
fromSalgadowillintentionallyinterferewiththeNDA,anditdoesnotappearthatdemonstratingthe
likelihoodthattheinjunctionwill(equitably)applytothemaswellwoulddependonsomeevidence
thatplaintiffmightgetthroughthisdiscovery.
Finally,evenifthiscasebecomesprimarilyaboutmonetarydamages(ratherthaninjunctiverelief)
becausethebookand/orepisodesoftheseriesarereleasedbeforetheNDAauthenticity
determinationismadeorbeforeanyinjunctionisissued,theinformationplaintiffseeksdoesnot
appearnecessaryornarrowlytailoredfortheshowingneededinanantiSLAPPopposition.
Becauseitlikelywillbeapparentthatsomeportionofthebookand/ortelevisionepisodescame
fromSalgadoinbreachofthatagreement,theinformationsoughtwillnotbearonwhetherthere
shouldbesomerecoveryfromhim,evenifitarguablycouldbearontheextentoftherecoverysince
(perhaps)theseriesmaygetinformationaboutRiverafromothersourcesaswell.
AstotheProductionDefendantsinthesamesituation,therealsomaybesomerelevanceofthe
informationsoughtastoextentofanymonetaryrecoveryagainstthem,yet(iftheNDAisauthentic)
thelikelihoodofdemonstratingthefactofmonetaryrecoveryappearstodependoverwhelminglyon
whetherthosedefendantsrequisitestateofmindcanbedemonstratedbasedonthebasicfacts
currentlyknowntoplaintiff.SeeCACI2201(requirementisthatthedefendantintendedtodisrupt
http://www.lacourt.org/tentativeRulingNet/ui/ResultPopup.aspx

2/3

12/2/2016

www.lacourt.org/tentativeRulingNet/ui/ResultPopup.aspx

theperformanceofthecontractor,alternatively,knewthatdisruptionofperformancewascertain
orsubstantiallycertaintooccur.)TheProductionDefendantsknewoftheNDAasofJune3,2016
andalmostsimultaneouslyknewthatSalgadowascontestingitsauthenticity.Thiswasjustabout
threeweeksaftertheyenteredintotheirbroadcastagreementwithUnivisiononMay12,2016,and
theystateintheiroppositionthat[t]hereaftertheyexpendedconsiderablefinancialtimeand
financialresourcesdevelopingandproducingtheseries.Thereisthusnodoubtthatsome
disclosuresfromSalgadointhecourseofproducingtheseriesoccurredafterJune3,2016(andthe
futuredisclosuresthatmayoccuruponthebroadcastofepisodesalsowilloccurafterthatdate.)It
appearsthatthelikelihoodof(some)monetaryrecoveryagainsttheProductionDefendantswill
dependoverwhelminglyonwhethertheirrequisitestateofmindcanbeprovenbasedonthe
ProductionDefendantsknowledgeoftheexistenceofNDAalongwiththeirbeinggivenadenialof
itsauthenticitybySalgado.ItispossiblethatthetrialcredibilityofwitnessesfromtheProduction
Defendantscouldberelevanttothisdetermination(e.g.,thetrieroffactsevaluationoftheextentto
whichtheyinfactbelievedSalgado),butitseemsunlikelythattherecouldbesomeevidencethat
thisdiscoverywouldreveal(suchasanadmissionbySalgado)thatwouldchangethelikelihoodthat
thestateofmindcanbeshown.
Plaintiffscounseltogivenotice.

http://www.lacourt.org/tentativeRulingNet/ui/ResultPopup.aspx

3/3