1/20/2017 New Claims in Audra McDonald Case
Marc Hershberg Contributor I write about the business of Broadway.
Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.
MEDIA & ENTERTAINMENT 12/24/2016 @ 9:00AM 5,275 views New Claims in Audra McDonald Case
Audra McDonald poses after receiving the Tony Award for Best Performance by a Leading Actress in a Play at the 68th annual Tony Awards on Sunday, June 8, 2014. (Photo by Charles Sykes/Invision/AP)
Audra McDonald has been caught in the crossfire as the contentious litigants exchange volleys in the Shuffle Along lawsuit.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/marchershberg/2016/12/24/newclaimsinaudramcdonaldcase/print/ 1/3 1/20/2017 New Claims in Audra McDonald Case Previously, the producers of the musical sued insurer Lloyd’s of London for refusing to reimburse their losses after its star actress became pregnant. The show insisted that her pregnancy was an accident covered under its insurance policy, which pledged to return the full capitalization of the musical in the event that it had to be abandoned due to an accident, illness, or death of McDonald.
The insurer responded that the pregnancy was not an accident, and the contested insurance policy should be voided. According to its lawyers, McDonald had failed to disclose that she was pregnant before the coverage began, invalidating the entire contract.
When completing the application for coverage, McDonald claimed that she was not “suffering from physical, psychological, or any other condition.” She verified that all of the information that she provided was correct in March 2016, and that she had no other health news to share.
But, Lloyd’s of London argues that its own investigation uncovered that McDonald knew that she was pregnant back in February. “McDonald’s prior medical history was a material fact that must have been known by McDonald,” claim the lawyers, and all of her inaccurate answers on the application were material misrepresentations.
The insurer states that it was “induced to enter into the [insurance policy] by way of the material nondisclosures and/or material misrepresentations,” and it would not have otherwise entered into the insurance policy as it was written. It urges the court to rescind the contract as though it had never happened.
Lloyd’s of London made a similar argument in 1996 after it denied claims from the producers of Victor/Victoria for $1.6 million in losses stemming from the illness of its star actress, Julie Andrews. The insurer claimed that she concealed her chronic asthma and arthritis on insurance forms.
“She would never lie,” producer John Schrer told the New York Daily News at the time. “In fact, I think Julie believes that if she ever told a lie her nose would grow,” he said.
The Victor/Victoria litigation was settled out of court in 1997. But, with no quick end in sight, the Audra McDonald dispute seems certain to shuffle along.
RECOMMENDED BY FORBES
Audra McDonald Stars in New Lawsuit
Lawsuit Threatens Anastasia's Broadway Debut
Creators Of 'Jersey Boys' Found Guilty Of Copyright Infringement
Low Sales Force Early Closing Of Broadway's 'Motown', 'Shuffle Along'
The Richest Person In Every State
http://www.forbes.com/sites/marchershberg/2016/12/24/newclaimsinaudramcdonaldcase/print/ 2/3