This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2013/apr/23/james-franco-wins-legal-case

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
James Franco wins legal case after opposition fails to find him James Franco wins legal case after opposition fails to find him
(5 months later)
A professor who claims he was fired from his job at New York University for giving James Franco a "D" has lost a defamation case after a judge ruled his legal representatives failed to successfully serve the actor with legal papers, according to the Hollywood Reporter.A professor who claims he was fired from his job at New York University for giving James Franco a "D" has lost a defamation case after a judge ruled his legal representatives failed to successfully serve the actor with legal papers, according to the Hollywood Reporter.
José Angel Santana had filed a civil action in the Manhattan supreme court over comments Franco made, labelling his classes "awful". In an interview with the New York Post he accused his former student of using "the bully pulpit of his celebrity to punish anyone who doesn't do his bidding".José Angel Santana had filed a civil action in the Manhattan supreme court over comments Franco made, labelling his classes "awful". In an interview with the New York Post he accused his former student of using "the bully pulpit of his celebrity to punish anyone who doesn't do his bidding".
Franco had described Santana as "awful" during interviews to promote his film The Broken Tower in April last year, as part of attempts to explain his lack of attendance at classes. "I didn't feel like I needed to waste my time with a bad teacher," he said, adding: "No teacher will ever be fired from NYU for giving a student a D. He wasn't fired, he was asked not to come back after three years because they didn't think he was a good teacher. He is not going to be hired at another institution."Franco had described Santana as "awful" during interviews to promote his film The Broken Tower in April last year, as part of attempts to explain his lack of attendance at classes. "I didn't feel like I needed to waste my time with a bad teacher," he said, adding: "No teacher will ever be fired from NYU for giving a student a D. He wasn't fired, he was asked not to come back after three years because they didn't think he was a good teacher. He is not going to be hired at another institution."
Santana promptly sued, but the case judge recently ruled that the professor's representatives had failed to successfully serve court papers on Franco and ordered the suit to be dismissed. The problem appears to be that despite the actor's notoriety – some might say ubiquity – they were unable to find him.Santana promptly sued, but the case judge recently ruled that the professor's representatives had failed to successfully serve court papers on Franco and ordered the suit to be dismissed. The problem appears to be that despite the actor's notoriety – some might say ubiquity – they were unable to find him.
Santana's people tried to serve papers on Franco at New York University itself, but the institution refused to accept them on his behalf. They then travelled to an LA property where a number of Hollywood websites had suggested the actor lived and – according to Franco's lawyers – "threw some court papers on the ground". But their target did not, in fact, live there.Santana's people tried to serve papers on Franco at New York University itself, but the institution refused to accept them on his behalf. They then travelled to an LA property where a number of Hollywood websites had suggested the actor lived and – according to Franco's lawyers – "threw some court papers on the ground". But their target did not, in fact, live there.
Franco's lawyers subsequently ridiculed their opponents for gleaning their information on Franco's whereabouts from "gossip blogs", and asked the judge to dismiss the defamation lawsuit on the grounds that the court didn't have personal jurisdiction over him, and that he was prejudiced by the plaintiff's attorneys' failure to serve him properly and timely.Franco's lawyers subsequently ridiculed their opponents for gleaning their information on Franco's whereabouts from "gossip blogs", and asked the judge to dismiss the defamation lawsuit on the grounds that the court didn't have personal jurisdiction over him, and that he was prejudiced by the plaintiff's attorneys' failure to serve him properly and timely.
Franco's lawyer Jura Zibas said in a legal paper: "It is astounding that plaintiff's attorneys claim that they were unable to find Mr Franco, a celebrated actor, as well as filmmaker, lecturer and author. The court is requested to take judicial notice that Mr Franco has certainly been active in promoting his recent movie, Oz the Great and Powerful, and has made a number of promotional public appearances. Even if the plaintiff may have had difficulty locating where Mr Franco resides, there has always been an option to deliver the summons and complaint to Mr Franco's actual place of business."Franco's lawyer Jura Zibas said in a legal paper: "It is astounding that plaintiff's attorneys claim that they were unable to find Mr Franco, a celebrated actor, as well as filmmaker, lecturer and author. The court is requested to take judicial notice that Mr Franco has certainly been active in promoting his recent movie, Oz the Great and Powerful, and has made a number of promotional public appearances. Even if the plaintiff may have had difficulty locating where Mr Franco resides, there has always been an option to deliver the summons and complaint to Mr Franco's actual place of business."
Last week the judge ruled in favour of Franco and agreed to dismiss the case on grounds of lack of jurisdiction. Neither the actor or his former professor has yet made any comment.Last week the judge ruled in favour of Franco and agreed to dismiss the case on grounds of lack of jurisdiction. Neither the actor or his former professor has yet made any comment.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.