The Wonderful World of David Oneal


Magic Music

Administrator
Playlist Author
Attorney for the Plaintiffs Nicole L. Drey's declaration regarding the delayed filing of the joint report of the parties' Rule 26 conference, submitted on July 12, 2010:

Disney Enterprises, Inc. et al v. David Oneal et al

Declaration (non-motion)

Declaration_01.gif

Declaration_02.gif

Declaration_03.gif

Declaration_04.gif
 

almandot

Member
So he told her "I sent them a few weeks ago, really!" and said he'd love to send them again but wasn't in front of a computer at the moment.. and then later on after still not receeving anything she's again told he's not in front of a computer yet but will send them for sure later that day! And then she jumps to being assured he'll send her them? :)
 

Magic Music

Administrator
Playlist Author
So he told her "I sent them a few weeks ago, really!" and said he'd love to send them again but wasn't in front of a computer at the moment.. and then later on after still not receeving anything she's again told he's not in front of a computer yet but will send them for sure later that day! And then she jumps to being assured he'll send her them? :)
Yeah. Goofy. It gets better...
 

Magic Music

Administrator
Playlist Author
Plaintiffs Disney Enterprises, Inc. and Wonderland Music Company, Inc., by and through their counsel of record, Nicole L. Drey, of J. Andrew Coombs, A P.C., and Defendant David Oneal a/k/a David Oneil a/k/a David Collier a/k/a Daniel Lopez, submitted their Joint Report of the Parties' Planning Meeting on July 13, 2010:

Disney Enterprises, Inc. et al v. David Oneal et al

Joint Report Rule 26(f) Discovery Plan

Joint_01.gif

Joint_02.gif

Joint_03.gif

Joint_04.gif

Joint_05.gif
 

Magic Music

Administrator
Playlist Author
Defendant contends that he believed he had permission by Disney to sell the referenced material because several senior Current, Executives from Disney, participated in the creation of the materials, As well as helped promote the materials and work he was doing. In particular, The Disney studio archives were given a copies of the material for sale At their request on several occasions, from 2005 on. In addition, other executives Including Roy Disney, participated in the videos, and promotion of the items for Sale. Defendant has a list of numerous, current Disney executives who knew about, Worked with him, and even wrote letters condoning what he was doing as far back As 2004.
Please, God Tell, me that, Nicole L., Drey did not Write Or a edit, This paragraph! :)

Yes, indeed, Roy Disney and others knew that David Oneal was selling bootleg CDs and DVDs filled with music and video content that, in many cases, Disney doesn't even own the distribution rights for.

You know, David, getting a retired Imagineer to pose for a photo or answer a couple of questions into your camcorder does not mean that he knows anything about your business practices and/or is in any position to grant you rights to sell materials that do not belong to him.
 

Magic Music

Administrator
Playlist Author
Settlement Procedure documents, filed on July 13, 2010:

Disney Enterprises, Inc. et al v. David Oneal et al

Notice/Request of Settlement Procedure Settlement (Sp 1) - (ADR-1)

Notice_Request_01.gif

Notice_Request_02.gif

Proposed Order

Proposed_Order_01.gif

Proposed_Order_02.gif

Proposed_Order_03.gif
 

Magic Music

Administrator
Playlist Author
Judge George H. King's Order concerning the parties Settlement Procedure, filed on July 15, 2010:

Disney Enterprises, Inc. et al v. David Oneal et al

Order on Notice/Request of Settlement Procedure 1 - (ADR-1)

Order_on_Settlement_Procedure.gif
 

Magic Music

Administrator
Playlist Author
(In Chambers) Order vacating scheduling conference and setting scheduling dates, filed on July 22, 2010:

Disney Enterprises, Inc. et al v. David Oneal et al

Minutes of In Chambers Order/Directive (no proceeding held)

Minutes_01.gif

Minutes_02.gif
 

Magic Music

Administrator
Playlist Author
Judge George H. King's Order concerning summary judgment motions, filed on July 22, 2010:

Disney Enterprises, Inc. et al v. David Oneal et al

Order

Order_Summary_Judgement_01.gif

Order_Summary_Judgement_02.gif

Order_Summary_Judgement_03.gif

Order_Summary_Judgement_04.gif

Order_Summary_Judgement_05.gif
 

JimFromEastPA

New Member
Thanks, Jay, for keeping us informed. It is definitely an interesting read and we should (and want to) continue to follow this case. Also, thanks for the clarification about the extra documents. While everything is there in the documents, it can be very confusing trying to follow the different directions going on at the same time.
 

Magic Music

Administrator
Playlist Author
Did that say they agreed to a settlement?
No. It says they have agreed to a procedure for a settlement. No settlement discussions have taken place, yet, and Disney is still requesting a trial by jury.

In United States District Court, Central District of California, in every civil case, the parties, unless exempted by the trial judge, have to participate in one of the settlement procedures set forth in Local Rule 16-15.

As indicated in the [post=32834]Settlement Procedure Selection Request and Notice[/post], above, the Plaintiffs and the Defendant have chosen Settlement Procedure No. 1 (Local Rule 16-15.4), which states that the parties shall appear before the magistrate judge for settlement proceedings as the judge may conduct or direct.

In civil cases, the parties are always encouraged to settle. It is when no viable settlement can be reached, that a case moves on to the trial stage.
 

eyore

DLRP explorer
Premium Member
Playlist Author
Did that say they agreed to a settlement?
No. It says they have agreed to a procedure for a settlement. No settlement discussions have taken place, yet, and Disney is still requesting a trial by jury.

In United States District Court, Central District of California, in every civil case, the parties, unless exempted by the trial judge, have to participate in one of the settlement procedures set forth in Local Rule 16-15.

As indicated in the [post=32834]Settlement Procedure Selection Request and Notice[/post], above, the Plaintiffs and the Defendant have chosen Settlement Procedure No. 1 (Local Rule 16-15.4), which states that the parties shall appear before the magistrate judge for settlement proceedings as the judge may conduct or direct.

In civil cases, the parties are always encouraged to settle. It is when no viable settlement can be reached, that a case moves on to the trial stage.
Thanks for reminding those of us not familiar with the legal system in the US that this is a civil case where a settlement of some kind is going to be the outcome anyway. I presume I'm right in thinking that, in a civil case, it can be anything from millions in compensation to a "don't do it again" agreement but that if the settlement is broken, it can become a case again for breaking he court-agreed settlement order? (That's more or less what happens in the UK anyway - not abiding by the settlement can lead to a contempt of court case in which people can be jailed/fined for breaking the ruling of the court without that affecting the original settlement in any way).
That means that an award of compensation may never be paid if the person can prove bankruptcy but can still face prison for contempt of court if they do it again.
Is that the way it works there?
 

Magic Music

Administrator
Playlist Author
Thanks for reminding those of us not familiar with the legal system in the US that this is a civil case where a settlement of some kind is going to be the outcome anyway.
That's not what I said. Statistically speaking, yes, most cases will be settled before they reach the trial stage. But, when a settlement can't be reached, a case will go to trial. If I am convinced a jury is going to award me $3,000,000, I am not going to settle with you for $30,000, and we are definitely going to do battle in the courtroom.
 

eyore

DLRP explorer
Premium Member
Playlist Author
Thanks for reminding those of us not familiar with the legal system in the US that this is a civil case where a settlement of some kind is going to be the outcome anyway.
That's not what I said. Statistically speaking, yes, most cases will be settled before they reach the trial stage. But, when a settlement can't be reached, a case will go to trial. If I am convinced a jury is going to award me $3,000,000, I am not going to settle with you for $30,000, and we are definitely going to do battle in the courtroom.
Sorry, maybe I phrased that badly :)
I wasn't meaning "settlement" as an agreement between two parties as such (we call that out-of-court settlement to distinguish it from a trial result).
The term settlement would also include a judicial ruling after a trial by jury.
In the UK, the judge can award a sum for compensation but there's no real enforcement through the usual channels (ie you go to jail for not doing what the court ruled only for defying the ruling. If you want the money, you then have to take another civil case out to get the bailiffs in etc).
The courts can't actually get the money for you per se in a civil case, only say that you are entitled to it. This sort of thing can go on for years and years with the courts only able to get you for contempt of court. The usual result here is for the accused to plead bankruptcy as assets are often in the name of the spouse etc.
Here it's usually libel cases that go on for ages after the trial on the basis that you can't get millions if the person has only a few cents to their name.
they then start up the same businesses without their name being on the books - usuaaly through a spouse or other family member.
We have crooks here as well, you know.
 

Magic Music

Administrator
Playlist Author
Joint status report regarding the early settlement conference, filed on August 5, 2010:

Disney Enterprises, Inc. et al v. David Oneal et al

Status Report

Status_01.gif

Status_02.gif

Status_03.gif
 

Gurgitoy2

Active Member
You know, if this does go to court, I hope David tries to get some of the imagineers as witnesses. I'd be willing to bet they don't quite realize exactly what he sells. With his tactics, I'm sure he conveniently leaves things out when he tries to build relationships with them to get interviews and access to things. Didn't Alice Davis get upset with him because she found out he used things without her permission, or at least she was not aware he was going to use things she said on his documentaries? If he does call any of them, I hope it backfires on him...
 

Top