Page 89 - RICHERT VS. SORKIN THEFT OF THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT AND THE WEST WING

/
L
2
3
4 q
6 'l
B
9 10 11 L2 13 T4 15 L6 L7
18 19 2A 2I 22 23 2t 25
A There was a credit arbitration.
0 Not a participaling writer investigati-on; right? A Right.
MR. SEGAIL: I want to make a statement in connection with the next letter. The right thing would be for you to disclose that the videographer, Mr. Reichert, f'm not sure how t^o pronounce the name/ was a party to "The Presidenl Elopes" cred.it arbitration. was a party to litigation involving the Writers Guild of America, sued the Writers Guild of America and others in connection with that. and has sent a good many pretty aggressively worded lebters to
Ms. BurmesLer personally, and I think itts unconscionable that you wouldn't ment.ion that and point that out and didn't yesterday, and we would also offer that. as another reason that we are absolutely not going to give you a home address of Ms- Burmester
I,IR.,IOHNSON: That was entirely uncalled for.
I4R. SEGAIL: Tough.
MR. JOHNSON: And a violation of your duties as a
lawyer and if you have any authority
--
MR. SEGAII,: It was factually incorrect?
MR. JOHNSON: Yes, J-t was factually incorrect.
lG.. SEGAIL: What part of it?
MR. JOHNSON: Do you want me to go over it? I don't
!
know whether or not he s'ent a good many pretty (
19t
Although we first discover in 2004 that no "Participating writer investigation" occured, we did not know what that meant until the declaration by WGA Credit expert Eric Hughes -- it meant that Sorkin was awarded sole credit without any other writers reading and comparing the scripts -- the ONLY method that should have been legally used to determine credit