Holland v. Lions Gate Entertainment and Films

Background

Cory Darnell Holland Sr., representing himself, sued Lions Gate Entertainment Corp., Curtis Jackson, Starz Entertainment LLC, and Courtney A. Kemp. He alleged that Power, Power Confidential, and Power Book II were based on his life and his written materials and compact disc. He claimed that the character Jamie “Ghost” St. Patrick was based on him and that the character Tariq was based on his life as a teenager and young adult. Holland alleged that the shows falsely portrayed him as a psychopathic murderer, causing defamation and emotional distress. He also asserted invasion-of-privacy and “theft of life story” claims.

The defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint under Rule 12(b)(6), which asks whether the complaint alleges enough facts to support a legally plausible claim. Holland later moved to amend again and requested an emergency hearing. The court determined that it had jurisdiction based on diversity of citizenship and the amount in controversy. It applied New York law because the case was in federal court based on diversity jurisdiction, the defendants applied New York law, and Holland stated that New York law applied.

Defamation

The court held that New York’s one-year deadline for defamation claims barred claims concerning episodes that first aired before February 14, 2017. It also held that a New York executive order paused the limitations period from March 20, 2020, through November 3, 2020. The court concluded that claims concerning episodes first aired on or after August 22, 2019, were timely. It did not decide the equitable-tolling and timeliness issues for the remaining episodes because it found other pleading defects.

The court concluded that Holland sufficiently alleged that the “Ghost” character referred to him. He alleged that he was known as “Ghost” and that people who knew him asked whether he had committed killings depicted in Power. Those allegations were enough at the dismissal stage to connect him to the fictional character. The court rejected the argument that Holland could not be harmed by accusations of murder because of his alleged reputation for other violent conduct and drug dealing; it treated murder as a distinct subject.

The court found that Holland did not allege that people who knew him believed he was the Tariq character, so the defamation claim based on Tariq could not proceed. It also found that he did not allege defamatory statements involving Ghost in seasons four through six of Power and Power Confidential, except for the finale, and made no defamation allegations concerning Ghost in Power Book II. Holland did allege defamation based on statements by Ghost in the Power finale and about Ghost in the Power Confidential episode following the finale.

Accordingly, the court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the defamation claim except as to the finale episodes of Power and Power Confidential. The claims concerning seasons one through three of both shows were dismissed with prejudice because they were time-barred. The claims concerning Power Book II were dismissed without prejudice. The court also granted dismissal as to the Tariq character and the non-finale episodes identified in the order, while allowing Holland to seek amendment concerning additional facts about later episodes.

Other claims

The court granted dismissal of Holland’s intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress claim because it relied on the same facts as the defamation claim and was duplicative under New York law. That claim was dismissed with prejudice.

The court treated the “theft of life story” claim as similar to the invasion-of-privacy claim and analyzed them together. It explained that New York provides a statutory remedy only for unauthorized commercial use of a living person’s name, portrait, picture, or voice in advertising or trade. Even assuming that use of “Ghost” was use of Holland’s name, the court held that fictional works do not qualify as advertising or trade under the statute. It therefore granted dismissal of the invasion-of-privacy and “theft of life story” claims and dismissed them with prejudice.

Holland’s motions and disposition

The court granted Holland’s motion to amend so he could include relevant facts concerning the finales of Power and Power Confidential. It also permitted him to move to amend to add facts about seasons four through six of Power and Power Confidential and all of Power Book II. The court stated that he could not amend the claims dismissed with prejudice, including the seasons-one-through-three defamation claims, the emotional-distress claim, and the invasion-of-privacy and “theft of life story” claims. Holland was ordered to file an amended complaint by November 1, 2022.

Judge Analisa Torres granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss in part and denied it in part, granted Holland’s motion to amend, and denied his motion for an emergency hearing. The court directed the clerk to end the stay, mail Holland a copy of the order, and terminate the pending motions.