A judge found that Carey incurred “needless expenses responding to frivolous legal arguments” made by country artist Andy Stone, who sued for copyright infringement
Mariah Carey has received the gift of attorney’s fees awards this holiday season. According to court documents reviewed by Rolling Stone, the musician has been awarded $92,300 to be paid by legal counsel for country artist Vince Vance — whose real name is Andy Stone. Stone’s copyright infringement lawsuit against her was dismissed in March.
Stone claimed “All I Want For Christmas is You” ripped off a 1988 Christmas jingle of the same name from his band Vince Vance & the Valiants. Stone sought $20 million in the case filed in November 2023. Judge Mónica Ramírez Almadani ultimately ruled that Stone and his co-writer Troy Powers lacked sufficient evidence of infringement.
In the ruling, the judge criticized the “egregious” conduct displayed by Stone and his lawyers, Gerard Fox and co-counsel Douglas M. Schmidt. “Although each incident of sanctionable conduct, in isolation, may not warrant more than a stern reprimand,” the dismissal document reads, “it is the aggregate of misconduct reflected in Plaintiffs’ Motion that makes this an egregious situation warranting more severe sanctions.”
The court found that Carey, as well as co-defendants Sony Music, Kobalt Publishing, and producer Walter Afanasieff, incurred “needless expenses responding to frivolous legal arguments and unsupported factual contentions” made on behalf of Stone. The sanctions total to $109,983. This includes $92,300 to Carey and more than $14,000 to Sony. Kobalt Publishing and Afanasieff received portions, too.
Trending Stories
Almadani also noted in the latest filing that documents filed by Stone’s attorneys make no mention of co-plaintiff Powers, Stone’s co-writer, who attorney Fox says he “no longer had contact” with. “Until leave to withdraw is granted, Fox and Schmidt remain under a professional duty to represent Powers’ interests to the best of their ability,” the judge said. “It does not appear that Plaintiffs’ counsel have upheld their ethical obligation to Powers.”
Lawyers Fox and Schmidt have until Jan. 5 to submit their argument “why their failure to comply with the California Rules of Professional Conduct and the Local Rules regarding withdrawal should not be the subject of disciplinary action.” Failure to reply could result in additional sanctions.
