[Editor's Note: This is Joan Collins' answer to the complaint in the
Random House lawsuit, wherein the publisher claims it is owed a
refund of the advance money it paid Ms. Collins for her latest book,
alleging that the manuscript she delivered was unusable.]
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
RANDOM HOUSE UK LIMITED,
Plaintiff,
-against-
GEMINI STAR PRODUCTIONS LIMITED and
IRVING PAUL LAZAR AGENCY,
Defendant.
Index No. 114874/94
ANSWER TO SECOND
AMENDED COMPLAINT
Defendant Joan Collins ("Collins"), by her attorney, Kenneth David Burrows, answering the second amended complaint:
1. DENIES KNOWLEDGE OR INFORMATION SUFFICIENT TO FORM A BELIEF as to the allegations contained in paragraphs 3, 4, 13 (except that she ADMITS that defendant Gemini entered into an agreement with Century Hutchinson Publishers), and 15-17 of the second amended complaint.
2. DENIES each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 6, 8, 10 (except DENIES ON INFORMATION AND BELIEF that Lazar transacted business in New York), 11, 12, 26, 28, 29 (except ADMITS that the specified sum has not been paid), 40-42, 47, 49, 50 (except ADMITS that the specified sum has not been paid), 56, 58, 59 (except ADMITS that the specified sum has not been paid), and 65 (except ADMITS that the specified sum has not been paid) of the second amended complaint.
3. ADMITS ON INFORMATION AND BELIEF the allegations of paragraph 9 of the second amended complaint.
4. ADMITS the allegations of paragraphs 1, 2, 5, 7, 18, 19, and 61 of the second amended complaint.
5. NEITHER ADMITS NOR DENIES the allegations of paragraphs 14, 20, 21, 23, 25, 37, 38 (except that she ADMITS payment of the sum specified), 39, 44-46 (except that she ADMITS payment of the sum specified), 52-55 (except that she ADMITS payment of the sum specified), 62, and 63 of the second amended complaint, and respectfully refers the court to the agreements, notices, guaranty and decision referred to for the meaning and contents thereof.
6. NEITHER ADMITS NOR DENIES the allegations of paragraphs 22, 30-36, 43, 51, 60 or 66-71 of the second amended complaint.
7. DENIES each and every allegation contained in paragraph 24 of the second amended complaint, except that she ADMITS that Random House UK advanced to Gemini a sum of money, and ADMITS ON INFORMATION AND BELIEF that $225,000 of such sum was paid for Lazar's commission.
8. DENIES each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 27, 48, 57, and 64 of the second amended complaint, except that she ADMITS that Gemini received letters and notices from plaintiffs purporting to terminate the Random House UK and the Random House, Inc. agreements.
AS AND FOR A FIRST COMPLETE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT
9. The court is without personal jurisdiction over Collins because she has not availed herself of the privilege of conducting activity within New York.
AS AND FOR A SECOND COMPLETE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT
10. The second amended complaint fails to state a claim or claims upon which relief can be granted against defendant.
AS AND FOR A FIRST COMPLETE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE FOURTH AND SIXTH CAUSES OF ACTION SET FORTH IN THE COMPLAINT
11. Gemini delivered the manuscript of Work #1 prior to March 1, 1992. By the terms of paragraph 27 of the Random House, Inc. Agreement, the $500,000 advance allocable to Work #1 was, by reason of such delivery, no longer "repayable."
AS AND FOR A SECOND COMPLETE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE FOURTH AND SIXTH CAUSES OF ACTION SET FORTH IN THE COMPLAINT
12. Paragraph 28(b) of the Random House, Inc. Agreement provides that if that agreement were terminated pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 28(a)(ii) or 28(a)(iv) Gemini's "... obligation to repay the amounts advanced hereunder shall be limited to repayment of the proceeds of the sale or licensing by the [defendant] of rights in the Work of the kind granted to the [Random House, Inc.] hereunder."
13. Gemini timely delivered a manuscript for Work #1 which was not, in Random House, Inc.'s judgment, satisfactory, and Random House, Inc. subsequently purported to exercise its right to terminate the Random House, Inc. Agreement.
14. There are no proceeds from the sale or licensing by Gemini of rights in Work #1. Therefore, plaintiff Random House, Inc. is not entitled to repayment of any amounts advanced in respect of Work #1.
AS AND FOR A THIRD COMPLETE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE FOURTH AND SIXTH CAUSES OF ACTION SET FORTH IN THE COMPLAINT
15. Defendant Gemini delivered a complete manuscript for Work #1 in a timely manner, which manuscript did not violate common law or statutory copyright or right of privacy of any person or contain libelous or obscene matter, but which was not acceptable to Random House, Inc. for publication. Pursuant to paragraph 31(a) of the Random House, Inc. Agreement, plaintiff was therefore not entitled to repayment of the advance.
AS AND FOR A FIRST COMPLETE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE FIFTH AND SIXTH CAUSES OF ACTION SET FORTH IN THE COMPLAINT
16. Gemini delivered the manuscript for Work #2 prior to September 1, 1993. By the terms of paragraph 27 of the Random House, Inc. Agreement, the $500,000 advance allocable to Work #2 was, by reason of such delivery, no longer "repayable."
AS AND FOR A SECOND COMPLETE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE FIFTH AND SIXTH CAUSES OF ACTION SET FORTH IN THE COMPLAINT
17. Paragraph 28(d) provides that if the Random House, Inc. Agreement is terminated pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 28(c)(ii) or 28(c)(iv), Gemini's "... obligation to repay the amounts advanced hereunder shall be limited to repayment of the proceeds of the sale or licensing by the [defendant] of rights in the Work of the kind granted to the [Random House, Inc.] hereunder."
18. Gemini timely delivered a manuscript for Work #2 which was not, in Random House, Inc.'s judgment, satisfactory, and plaintiff subsequently purported to exercise its right to terminate the agreement.
19. There are no proceeds from the sale or licensing by Gemini of rights in Work #2. Therefore, Random House, Inc. is not entitled to repayment of any amounts advanced in respect of Work #2.
AS AND FOR A THIRD COMPLETE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE FIFTH AND SIXTH CAUSES OF ACTION SET FORTH IN THE COMPLAINT
20. Gemini delivered a complete manuscript for Work #2 in a timely manner, which manuscript did not violate common law or statutory copyright or right of privacy of any person or contain libelous or obscene matter, but which was not acceptable to Random House, Inc. for publication. Pursuant to paragraph 31(b) of the Random House, Inc. Agreement, plaintiff was therefore not entitled to repayment of the advance.
WHEREFORE, defendant Joan Collins demands judgment:
1. Dismissing the complaint for want of personal and subject matter jurisdiction, and that plaintiffs take nothing thereby; or, in the alternative
2. Dismissing the complaint on the merits; and
3. The costs and disbursements of this action.
Dated: New York, New York
May 9, 1995
KENNETH DAVID BURROWS
Attorney for Defendant
Joan Collins
425 Park Avenue
New York, New York 10022
(212) 980-6922
VERIFICATION
STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
KENNETH DAVID BURROWS, being duly sworn, deposes and says:
I am attorney for defendant Joan Collins in the action herein; I have read the annexed answer to second amended complaint, and know the contents thereof; and the foregoing allegations of the answer to the second amended complaint are true to my own knowledge, except as to matters therein stated upon information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true. The grounds of my belief as to all matters not stated upon my knowledge are the review of correspondence and other writings and interviews with employees, agents and affiliates of defendant Collins.
The reason that this verification is not made by defendant Collins but by me is that defendant Collins is located outside of the county in which I make my office.
Kenneth David Burrows
Sworn to before me this
9th day of May, 1995.
SHEILA SALMAN
NOTARY PUBLIC, State of New York
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
SHEILA SALMAN, being duly sworn, deposes and says:
I am not a party to the action, am over 18 years of age and reside in New York, New York.
On May 10, 1995, I served a true copy of the annexed Answer to Second Amended Complaint by mailing the same in a sealed envelope, with postage prepaid thereon, in a post office or official depository of the U.S. Postal Service within the State of New York, addressed to the last known address of the addressees as indicated below:
