But in that case, lying didn't behoove Lindsey at all? It protected the band's legacy and arguably hurt LB/CM. If he had done interviews alongside Chris and said, "This was going to be a Fleetwood Mac album, can't you just imagine Stevie singing on these tracks?" it likely would have earned them more buzz, if not album sales and concert tickets.

I know we're stepping in to the realm of the hypothetical here, which is dangerous and often a huge waste of time, but it always struck me that LB was "taking one for the team" with all that duo album talk.

An oral contract is just as binding as a written one. Basic contract law.

Now, Sugar Mouse is going to be a legal expert.

Now we have to see if his interpretation of the oral contract matches the other members’ and their reps’ interpretation.

This is why Azoff called to say the tour was off. And it wasn’t until after he was let go that a “new” tour with some hired guns was established starting at a different time. We’ll see if that holds up in court though.

This is why they stopped doing interviews. The band themselves were characterizing it as carrying on with the tour they had planned, but which Lindsey had supposedly refused to do on their timeline. That does not fit the narrative of an entirely separate tour, especially with Christine letting it slip that she had gone to London with the impression Lindsey would be on the tour!

Very sneaky of Azoff and the band. Perhaps a bit too sneaky to pass the smell test ...

Agreed Azoff must’ve freaked

I think management, promoters, and legal had more to do with his firing than Stevie. I don’t doubt for a second that Stevie had a major outburst and gave an ultimatum. I also think that was a fire they (management and legal) could have put out, if they had been so inclined. They could have talked Stevie down. (BTW, I have no doubt that Mick and Christine heard about their dancing, too. But they have a very different relationship with Stevie.)

But, Lindsey’s comments before Classic West and what many perceived as a lackluster performance on his part, especially compared to his enthusiastic performances with LBCM, ultimately did him in. A concurrent tour? He’d already proven to management and promoters (which was pretty much one and the same with Classic West) that he couldn’t maintain his enthusiasm for Fleetwood Mac when he was also promoting a new project. It was one of the biggest things Azoff ever did, and Lindsey basically took a dump on it when they were still selling tickets. I think Lindsey made himself a liability in management’s eyes.

I could be wrong, but there’s enough between the lines..

That won't pass the smell test, especially when Lindsey points out that when John had cancer Mick and Stevie went looking for a new bass player and weren't going to cancel the tour. Plus, Fleetwood Mac has a history of NOT stopping a tour, when a members leaves. They can't just lie and get away with it. I think Lindsey is going to win a lot of money.

This is ridiculous. Blame the victim why don't you. #himtoo

He is not a victim.

The reports are that Lindsey didn't have a written contract for the tour. If that's true, he will have a very difficult time winning this case.

I'm reminded of herpes...

Once again, we get the claim that his performance at Classic West was "lackluster." It was not perceived that way by anyone but hypercritical fans, and therefore did not damage Fleetwood Mac at all. I have posted in the past gushing reviews from actual critics and have refuted this "lackluster" argument before but sadly, that doesn't keep it from getting repeated.

BTW, I wonder which sells more tickets: the Rumours 5 (even after Lindsey makes one comment about doing CW for the money), or a not-really-what-you-remember version of the band with two new guys (one of whom is almost unknown in America) which has alienated fans on an unprecedented level?

You can bet Azoff knew the answer to that question long before the band found it out the hard way.

No, I'm not pinning this on him.

I checked and Lindsey is suing for breach of oral contract; he apparently didn't have a written contract making this a very difficult case for him to win.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/11/a...m-lawsuit.html

You mean it's what you get if you don't keep your little demon from going after people?

I agree with a lot of this. I think this has even more to do with management than bad blood with Stevie. I believe that Mick is still hurting financially from his last divorce and they quietly whispered to him and the rest of the band, you will make more if you get rid of him. Lindsey as far as i know is the wealthiest of the group; he has made smart financial decisions. The way in which this has played out makes my skin crawl. I hope they all have trouble sleeping at night.

I wouldn't pay $1.00 to see Fleetwood Mac

The courts will ultimately decide if Lindsey was a victim here but he's got a very tough road to winning the case. He's suing for breach of fiduciary duty, breach of oral contract, and international interference with prospective economic advantage. He has a weak case for breach of contract as oral contracts don't often hold up these days. He has an even weaker case for international interference with prospective economic advantage. He would have to prove that the band interfered with his solo career. If anything, all the media attention is helping his solo career. His only decent case is for breach of fiduciary duty but that's not a strong case as he apparently doesn't have a written contract. I wish Lindsey the best in settling this case because the band is likely to win if it goes to court.

Hopefully the folks at Loeb and Loeb know how to contact you for legal advice.

The show got a terrible review in the L.A. Times, which is probably the most important review as far as they were concerned.

I'm sure the lawyers at Loeb and Loeb know they have a very weak case. That's why they released the legal documents to the press rather than sending them to the band. US Weekly received the legal papers before the band did. The goal of the lawyers is to drive up media support for Lindsey with the hope that the band settles quickly. Without a written contract, they know that they are likely to lose if this goes to court.

Yes, and that review criticizes the entire band's performance, not just Lindsey's. Lindsey shouldn't have made that comment, but that review implies that the whole band had the same tacit attitude toward Classic West, hence their uninspired performance.

And why would management wait until Stevie issued an ultimatum to fire Lindsey? The 2018 tour plans with Lindsey were on until something happened between him and Stevie at MusiCares.

Oral contracts count too to an extent.

How are you so sure of this? It amazes me how all this supposition is allowed with Lindsey, but never with Stevie. There's never an ulterior motive where she's concerned.

My guess is this will never go to court, as it's in no one's interests to drag this out. Lindsey might not get the amount he's seeking, but he will probably get a settlement of several million. I'd be surprised if the band fights this lawsuit, as it is bad publicity.

It wasn’t sent to the media first. That may be how the band first heard of it, but it’s a matter of public record once it’s filed. Anyone can access it for a fee, hence RS, US weekly and radar on line. I think it’s pretty apparent, all relevant parties are none too shocked he filed. Totally agree with you it won’t go to court. I am sure there is a lot more dirty laundry that needs to be protected

He is a total victim.

:] :thumbsup: :xoxo: :]

Are you kidding? Most of the posts for years — way before this latest drama happened — has been supposition about Stevie, from every facet of her life!

I don't know about "most of the posts" being supposition about Stevie. In this specific case of Lindsey's firing, any supposition about Stevie tends to get slammed, yet the same people indulge in wild conspiracies about Lindsey's motives. You seem to require hard evidence for anything that might reflect poorly on Stevie, but no such requirement exists for Lindsey. Just an observation. :wavey:

Like some posters, it won't go away.

$he's a ma$ter of all thing$.

Hmm...yes indeed... ;)

yes, it's public, but you'd have to know to go look for it. the accusation is that lindsey's people would have alerted certain people in the media that it was filed or being filed so they would know to go pull it up.

they do in california.

“Two new guys...” LOL!

It’s not like they got virtual unknowns, like Billy Burnette and Rick Vito.

Mike Campbell is a rock icon and already had some measure of relevance in the Fleetwood Mac universe before joining. As for Neil, he’s had two top-ten hits in the US, and more abroad. For the record, DDIO charted higer in the US than any of Lindsey’s or Christine’s singles. Not bad for someone who’s a virtual unknown in America.

Totally get that and understand that perspective. And could very well be the case. The cynic that I am also thinks there are poor interns that want jobs with Radar Online, TMZ, US weekly so badly that they troll the courts websites just for this sort of thing. I am sure they have someone on their payroll for this sort of thing alone.

hahahaha, :lol::lol::lol:, that’s perfect.

Fleetwood Mac responds
 

https://twitter.com/thr/status/1050865460898615296?s=12

Fleetwood Mac's statement to @THR in response to Lindsey Buckingham's complaint: "Fleetwood Mac strongly disputes the allegations presented in Mr. Buckingham’s complaint and looks forward to their day in court"

They retained Dan Petrocelli, the same lawyer who represented the Eagles against Don Felder’s suit. I sort of figured that would be the case. This will be interesting to watch to say the least. Doesn’t look like FM is going down without a fight. By the looks of their statement, they have their own side of the story and are eager to tell it.

Also, for those who don’t know Petrocelli, let’s just say FM is in very good hands. He is a pretty big name when it comes to lawyers. He’s like the human personification of the blood sucking entertainment attorney stereotype. Even represents Trump and Weinstein.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_M._Petrocelli