In response to a June 4, 2018 story in entertainment industry trade publication Deadline (HERE) regarding Relativity Media and its former Co-President Adam Fields, a spokesperson for Ryan Kavanaugh and Relativity issued this statement:
"Deadline editor Anita Busch has been and remains one of Adam Fields’ very close friends. This story shows both parties’ attempts to skew findings that are subject to a Confidential Arbitration. Ryan Kavanaugh was personally exonerated in this matter, despite Field’s year-long attempt to disparage him. Without breaching the confidentiality of the Arbitration, we cannot respond beyond this statement except to state the story is inaccurate and editorially unsound owing to Busch’s friendship with Mr. Fields.
"Relativity would have appealed the result of this Arbitration had Mr. Fields won anything of value; rather, he won a single count of breach of contract. Contrary to Deadline's statement that Fields won a judgement of $8 million dollars, he in fact has no judgement and will most likely receive nothing. Had Fields won anything but a single count of breach of contract against Relativity, where an appeal would have been more costly than anything Fields may yet be paid, Relativity would have appealed.
"During the Arbitration, more than seven witnesses testified to the validity of the documents in question, including the author of the document herself Terry McAlpine, Relativity’s COO, its president of production, and others. All confirmed their validity and accuracy, and all testified to Mr. Fields’ behavior at Relativity. Conversely, Mr. Fields’ sole witness was Ms. Genis.
"Deadline’s reporting crucially omits that Genis continues to work directly with Mr. Fields in an attempt to collect money from Relativity for herself, after being the highest-paid employee there. Her testimony was tainted owing to it possibly bringing her personal benefit.
"By testifying, however, Ms. Genis violated attorney-client privilege, and failed to disclose her adversity towards Relativity. An arbitrator cannot waive this for a lawyer. Her testimony and her breaking of this privilege is being addressed in a separate proceeding. It is especially egregious for an attorney who served as both Kavanaugh and Relativity’s counsel during the entire period in question.
"Deadline’s assertion that Kavanaugh introduced 2,000 documents late is also false. Relativity, not Kavanaugh, turned in 2,000 documents within the discovery period, and the arbitrator decided to disallow them without merit. As mentioned above, had Relativity lost anything meaningful, and had Mr. Kavanaugh not prevailed, Relativity would have appealed the case on this basis.
"Ms. Genis’ failure to recall the memo Deadline references (though its author testified to giving it to her), her denial of having a "hot topics" file on the company server, and her denial of the existence or knowledge of multiple emails have been and are easily proven false; they can be shown to have been created directly by her. Again, as Mr. Fields’ sole witness, she failed to disclose her financial relationship with Mr. Fields and her potential financial windfall from the arbitration action.
"In conclusion, this Arbitration was not about sexual harassment. To attempt to mute the accounts of several women, who each took risks and courage to share their own independent accounts of Mr. Fields’ alleged sexual harassment or predatory behavior towards them by inferring this arbitration was related to those accusations is both wrong and disappointing. The Arbitration was simply Fields’ attempt to collect for wrongful termination by Relativity and multiple false accusations against Ryan Kavanaugh.
"We urge Ms. Busch’s editors to check for conflicts of interest before publishing stories like this. It is a serious step backwards in today’s environment.
“Neither Kavanaugh, his lawyers nor any representatives were contacted prior to or after publication of the story. Kavanaugh's lawyers are seeking immediate legal remedies, including but not limited to: sanctions for this blatant violation of the arbitration, misrepresenting findings, and breach of confidentiality by Mr. Fields and his counsel. They are confident it will be met with swift justice."
Comments