Dancehall producer Cleveland Constantine Browne, known as Clevie, and his co-plaintiffs are fighting back against a motion filed by Rodney Sebastian Clark Donalds and other defendants to disqualify their attorney, Garth A. Clarke, from representing them in their high-profile copyright infringement case. The plaintiffs allege unauthorized use of their works, including the Fish Market and Dem Bow riddims, in over 1,800 Reggaeton songs, implicating 162 defendants.
According to documents obtained by WMV, the defendants claim Clarke is a necessary witness due to his communications with the U.S. Copyright Office during the registration process for the disputed works, questioning the validity of those registrations. However, Browne and his legal team argue the motion is baseless and designed to derail their case. In their filing, they assert that Clarke has no unique knowledge that cannot be obtained from other sources and accuse the defense of attempting to undermine their strategy by targeting a key attorney.
Plaintiffs emphasize Clarke’s long-standing role as their trusted counsel, stating that disqualifying him would disrupt their legal efforts and unfairly prejudice their case. They have also called on the court to sanction the defendants for filing what they describe as a “bad faith” motion, arguing that it threatens the integrity of the judicial process.
Amid these developments, on December 31, 2024, when attorneys Mark B. Chassman and his firm, Chassman & Seelig, LLP, filed a motion to withdraw as local counsel for the defendants. The motion, set to be heard on February 7, 2025, before Judge André Birotte, requests the substitution of Edwin F. McPherson of McPherson LLP as new local counsel.
The defendants, a mix of high-profile music industry figures such as Yandel, Wisin, Maluma, Carlos Vives, and Prince Royce, along with corporations like WK Records, Inc. and Mr. 305 Inc., cited the need for specialized legal expertise as the case enters the discovery phase. Richard C. Wolfe of Wolfe Law Miami, P.A. will remain as lead counsel, ensuring continuity in representation.
The motion emphasizes that the substitution will not delay proceedings, harm the administration of justice, or prejudice any parties. It highlights McPherson’s extensive experience in entertainment law as an asset for the defendants’ defense.
Discovery Disputes Await Resolution
Earlier, on December 4, 2024, U.S. Magistrate Judge A. Joel Richlin presided over a discovery dispute concerning whether discovery requests served on Clarke fall within the case’s protectability and authorship phase or are barred by attorney-client privilege. Defense attorneys argued that resolving the dispute before the motion to disqualify Clarke is premature, a position plaintiffs opposed, calling for immediate clarity to avoid delays.
Judge Richlin deferred a decision until after the January 10, 2025, hearing on the motion to disqualify Clarke, staying compliance with the disputed discovery in the meantime. The court scheduled a follow-up conference for January 17, 2025, with both parties required to provide a joint update on developments, including the disqualification motion’s outcome.
Both sides boast prominent legal teams. The plaintiffs are represented by attorneys Benjamin Tookey and Stephen M. Doniger, while the defense includes Donald S. Zakarin and Frank P. Scibilia. With key hearings and rulings on the horizon, the case’s trajectory will likely be shaped in the coming weeks, potentially influencing its ultimate outcome.
