Disney World

Billionaire investor Ronald W. Burkle’s lawsuit alleging that former Walt Disney Co. president Michael Ovitz broke a business agreement was dismissed Thursday by a judge who found that the men never had a formal partnership. Superior Court Judge Soussan Bruguera granted Ovitz’s motion to dismiss Burkle’s suit after finding that the men had more of a friendship than a business relationship, and that terms of their oral agreement were too vague to enforce.”Clearly this friendship soured,” Bruguera said.Burkle’s attorney, Russell F. Sauer, said he will appeal.Burkle, the founder of private equity firm Yucaipa Cos., sued Ovitz in February 2005, claiming the two made a verbal agreement in the 1990s to combine “their skill, money and knowledge” on investments.Each would be allowed to acquire 50 percent of any Internet-related or online technology projects that Ovitz or Burkle considered, the suit contends. Each also would have a chance to acquire 10 percent of any other business ventures being contemplated.According to the lawsuit, Ovitz and his company, CKE, never put “even one cent” into two Internet companies in which Burkle invested in 1998 and 1999.Ovitz, co-founder of the powerful Creative Artists Agency, once was considered among the most powerful men in Hollywood. He left CAA in 1995 to become president of Disney, but was fired after 14 months.Ovitz later began Artists Management Group, brokeringfilm and television deals with its own roster of stars.Burkle’s lawsuit claims Ovitz never gave the billionaire a chance to invest in Artists Management Group. The suit further claims that Ovitz had deprived him of an opportunity to invest in Google.Bruguera found that Burkle made his claims past the California statute of limitations for prosecution.”Her ruling just confirmed what we’ve known for several years, the claims are groundless and always were,” Ovitz’s attorney James Ellis said.Ellis said trial in Ovitz’s counterlawsuit against Burkle will begin April 28.In his suit, Ovitz denied he had a verbal agreement with Burkle. But it states that if a jury finds that there was such a pact, then it could also conclude that Ovitz was excluded from “numerous deals or opportunities” which Burkle was heading or was taking part in. The lawsuit seeks millions of dollars in damages, much of it in attorney’s fees.

---