Another look at the air tight release agreement
In going over the Payment and Release Agreement again, the only item that Raymone Bain could even remotely try and fall back on would be a clause cited from California Civil Code Section 1542. However, even though a default right does exist "not to release existing claims of which you are not now aware of and do not suspect to exist" she legally can't pursue that either, as she also agreed to voluntarily waive that right by signing the agreement! See below:
-------
Raymone Bain & Michael Jackson Payment and Release Agreement Excerpt
5. Waiver of Rights Under California Civil Code Section 1542. You understand and agree that the release set forth above shall extend to any and all claims related to the matters described above, of every nature and kind whatsoever, whether such claims are known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, and any and all rights under Section 1542 of the California Civil Code ("Section 1542") within the scope of this release set forth above are expressly waived. You acknowledge that you have read Section 1542, which provides as follows:
A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS WHICH THE CREDITOR DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS OR HER FAVOR AT THE TIME OF THE EXECUTING THE RELEASE, WHICH IF KNOWN BY HIM OR HER MUST HAVE MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR.
You also understand that Section 1542 gives you the right not to release existing claims of which you are not now aware of and do not suspect to exist, unless you voluntarily choose to waive this right. Even though you are aware of this right, you nevertheless hereby voluntarily waive the right described in Section 1542, and elect to assume all risks for claims that now exist in your favor, known or unknown, arising from the subject matter of the release set forth above, and expressly waive any rights under any other statutes or common law principles of similar effect.
-------
So, the agreement is truly AIR TIGHT and I can't see any legal way for her to get around it short of claiming that Michael never satisfied the payment described or to claim under oath that her signature is forged. Neither of these will carry any water, and she didn't even mention the $500,000 nor the release form in her original complaint which is hugely suspect.
...
On a related note, of the few media outlets that even picked up on this story, only a single one bothered to mention even a small blurb about this compelling agreement that Michael Jackson's defense presented to the court. TMZ and Perez Hilton only mentioned that Michael responded to avoid default, and TMZ was even erroneous at reporting that!
4 comments:
stop sueing michael jackson, no one will ever break his records, the
music business is not and will not be the same in this life time. mj your the best.
... if there really is a release agreement in the first place.
For a guy who is so wildly out of control to be this careful with havign a release in place just doesn't add up to me...
... maybe she didn't mention the release because it doesn't exist?
The Payment and Release Agreement most certainly exists, I have a copy of it. The agreement itself is three pages long and was signed by both Michael Jackson and Raymone Bain in December 2007. It was faxed to Londell McMillan in February 2008 and is now legally filed in court as part of Michael's defense. I guess if Raymone wishes to claim it was forged, she is free to do so. But as it stands, the release agreement is as authentic as the original agreement Raymone referenced from 2006.
Yes, there was a release agreement even down to the penny. Raymone was seeking money regarding the upcoming concert in which she claimed she and help draw up the contract for the London O2 tour. And that she was to receive a 10% fee. We'll find ot if any of that was ever true as well. He's gone now. So I think everyone needs to leave Michael and his family alone.
Post a Comment