Why didn't FM sue Lindsey when he left them in 1987? - Page 3

cbBen · #31 11-11-2018, 09:12 AM

I could be wrong, but I believe I recently read that the California law making oral contracts enforceable took effect in the nineties. That would explain why Lindsey might now have a case against the band based on oral promises, but the reverse would not be true in 1987.

cbBen · #32 11-11-2018, 11:19 PM

FM filled big venues even without Lindsey, so what did the damages really amount to?

jcalzaretta · #33 11-18-2018, 10:13 PM

Oral contracts can be binding. Interesting question to ask. He really screwed them over back then from what I can remember.

David · #34 11-18-2018, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jcalzaretta

Oral contracts can be binding. Interesting question to ask. He really screwed them over back then from what I can remember.

On the other hand, Tango in the Night sold 6 or 7 million (or something like that) worldwide. There would have been no album had it not been for his handiwork. That's a lot of money.