Sound Of Surprise: Fx Upset Sound Of Surprise: Fx Upset / Judge Overturns Mediator's Accord In...

A lawsuit over the ownership of one of Hollywood's top special effects sound libraries could be heading to trial after the California Court of Appeal took the unusual step of overturning a mediator's ruling that would have settled the case.

The case is expected to send shock waves through the entertainment industry's Alternate Dispute Resolution system, which uses retired judges acting as mediators to settle legal disputes outside the normal court process. Indeed, the appellate court singled out the mediator in the case for special criticism, although not by name.

"The primary issue on this appeal involves an entertainment Alternate Dispute Resolution procedure gone seriously awry," the appellate court ruled in overturning the mediator's order.

The mediator was not named in the appellate court ruling, but he is known to be retired Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Keith Wisot, now a prominent private judge who has been called upon to mediate numerous legal disputes.

The dispute began in 1995 when Oscar-winning sound effects editor Stephen Flick decided to end his relationship with Mark Mangini and Richard Anderson, with whom he had been partnered since 1987 in Weddington Prods., a sound effects editing company.

When he left the company, Flick, who had won sound effects editing Oscars for "Speed" and "RoboCop," formed a new company called Creative Cafe, and took a copy of the Weddington library with him and continued to use it. According to the appellate court ruling, the library had been "jointly assembled" by all three partners.

After Flick left, Weddington obtained a preliminary injunction prohibiting him from using the library, and in May of 1996, the Superior Court issued an order to show cause why Flick should not be held in contempt for violating the injunction by using the library to create sound effects for the movie "Twister."

A month later, evidence was presented at a contempt trial, but before a ruling made, Flick and his old partners at Weddington agreed to mediate their dispute.

At the end of the mediation, both sides agreed to sign a one-page settlement agreement, which had been prepared by Wisot, the private judge, and which had been approved by both parties.

Unfortunately, the language in the settlement agreement was somewhat vague, although it stated that the library would continue to be owned by Weddington, and appears to provide that Flick would continue to have access to the library through an undefined "licensing agreement" to be executed by the parties.

More disagreements arose over the terms of the settlement, and Weddington filed a motion with the private judge to enforce the terms of the settlement.

Flick agreed to take part in those talks, but never conceded that the private judge had any power to determine or impose the terms of the licensing agreement.

Flick eventually pulled out of those talks, and the private judge, finding that Flick was "not acting in good faith," continued the discussions in his absence. In the end, a settlement and licensing agreement were approved by the private judge. These agreements were later affirmed by Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Alan Buckner, although the appellate court later concluded that there had been no "meeting of the minds" on the terms of the agreements.

The original one-page settlement agreement, the appellate court wrote, "thus became a 35-page judgment including a licensing agreement containing numerous material provisions never agreed to by ... Flick. It is this judgment which must be reversed."

"A settlement agreement is a contract," the appellate court wrote. "An essential element of any contract is consent."

Thus, since there was no consent on behalf of Flick to the settlement agreement, there was no settlement.

Attorneys for Weddington say they are considering filing an appeal in the California Supreme Court. Barring that, the case will be resolved in Los Angeles Superior Court.