RONNIE VAN ZANT, INC., et al. v. ARTIMUS PYLE (a/k/a THOMAS D. PYLE), et al.

Filing 73

OPINION AND ORDER: The annexed Judgment, dated September 13, 2017, is appropriate to ensure continued adherence to the Consent Order's strictures, which include circumscribed use of the name Lynyrd Skynyrd and name, likeness, portrait, pictu re, performances, or biographical material of Ronald Van Zant or Steven Gaines. This relief is focused on the protection of Plaintiffs' rights, which have been violated by Defendants' film in its present form. Defendants were appropriat ely charged with the clear terms of the Consent Order by July 2016. The actions of all Defendants thereafter continued to violate the "in concert or participation with" portions of the Consent Order as detailed in the Opinion and, as violators of the Consent Order, they are bound by its terms, including with respect to attorneys' fees. (See Opinion at 4-6, 40-42, 61-62.) It is so ordered. (Signed by Judge Robert W. Sweet on 9/13/2017) (anc)

--]
·------1

------··""'

USDCSDNY
DOCUME~ !T

rJ FiL
"-"""~
••. ·-

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

rj ELECTRON1CA
f"i('(' •
·'-" } _, #'. Tl: ,ft ··· -..,

DA ..

17 Civ. 3360 (RWS)
Plaintiffs,
OPINION AND ORDER
- against ARTIMUS PYLE, et al.,
Defendants.

----------------------------------------x
Sweet, D.J.

In its Opinion and Order dated August 23, 2017 (the "Opinion,"
Dkt.

No.

61),

Cleopatra

the Court determined,

Records,

Inc.

("Cleopatra

(together with Cleopatra Records,

that Defendants

inter alia,

Records") ,

"Cleopatra"),

Cleopatra

Films

and Artimus Pyle

("Pyle" and, together with Cleopatra, the "Defendants") engaged in
actions in violation of the Consent Order,

Judgment,

and Decree

dated October 11, 1988 (the "Consent Order"). The Court concluded
further that Plaintiffs Ronnie Van Zant, Inc., Gary R. Rossington,
Johnny Van

Zant,

Collins Trust,
the

personal

(collectively,

Barbara Houston,

as

the

Trustee

of the Allen

and Alicia Rapp and Carinna Gaines Biemiller,
representatives
the

of

"Plaintiffs")

the
were

estate

of

entitled

injunction and an award of reasonable attorneys'
(See Opinion at 1.)

Steven
to

a

lt1
I

1

. . ~t"W:.J

----

RONNIE VAN ZANT, INC., et al.,

1

11

gJ

l·. ,J;.L,,. .

Lo-

~D

·

as

Gaines

permanent

fees and costs.

On August 30,

2017,

the Court requested the parties submit

proposed judgment language and attorneys'
No.

68. )

( Dkt.

The conflicting proposed judgments and authorities

support have been received.

The

fees and costs.

annexed

Judgment,

in

(See Dkt. Nos. 69, 71, 72.)

dated

September

13,

2017,

is

appropriate to ensure continued adherence to the Consent Order's
strictures,

which include circumscribed use of the name Lynyrd

Skynyrd and name,

likeness,

portrait,

picture,

performances,

biographical material of Ronald Van Zant or Steven Gaines.
relief is focused on the protection of Plaintiffs'

rights,

or

This
which

have been violated by Defendants' film in its present form.

The requested destruction of Defendants'

film is denied at

this time without prejudice to renewal in the event that any use
of the film is alleged to violate the Judgment.

Defendants were appropriately charged with the clear terms of
the Consent Order by July 2016.

The actions

of all

thereafter continued to violate the "in concert or

Defendants

participat~on

with" portions of the Consent Order as detailed in the Opinion
and,

as violators of the Consent Order,

they are bound by its

terms, including with respect to attorneys'
4-6,

40-42,

fees.

(See Opinion at

61-62 . )

It is so ordered.

New York, NY
September

/J , 2017

U.S.D.J.