The actor and his co-defendants filed an appeal arguing that the breach of contract lawsuit filed by Michael Crichton’s widow is ‘baseless’ and should not proceed to the evidentiary stage.
The blockbuster hospital drama from Noah Wyle, The Pitt“is not derived” from his old series, Medical Duty. Therefore, a judge’s decision in February 2025, which allowed a breach of contract lawsuit against the Warner Bros. TV, Wyle and its co-producers, sets a “terrible precedent” and should be overturned, argues a new appeal.
Wyle and his co-defendants filed their lengthy brief in California’s Second District Court of Appeal minutes before Monday’s 11:59 p.m. deadline. Over the course of 71 pages, they reiterate their position that The Pitt is an “original and innovative” drama that is “intentionally different” from Medical Duty in all aspects related to protected intellectual property. They claim that Sherri Crichtonwidow of the creator of ER, Michael Crichtonhas no viable evidence to support its claims that the series HBO Max violates a 1994 contract between Crichton and the WBTV. Therefore, they claim, the trial judge “erred” in rejecting their previous motion to dismiss, known as the anti-SLAPP lawsuit. In turn, Crichton claims that the 1994 contract stipulates that any sequels, remakes, spin-offs or other “derivative works” linked to Medical Duty would require “mutual agreement” from all parties, including the estate of Crichtonbefore being shown to the public.
“Plaintiff’s attempt to use a strict contract clause to take control of any emergency medical drama that Defendants may work on is a direct attack on free speech and a terrible precedent for the California film and television industry,” says the new appeal obtained by Rolling Stone. “If this lawsuit is not dismissed in accordance with Defendants’ anti-SLAPP motion, the creative team at The Pitt will be forced to work under the threat of legal liability and with the constant distraction and expense of litigation and the procedural discovery phase.”
In his lawsuit filed on August 28, 2024, Crichton accused the WBTV of violating the 1994 contract. She also accused Wyle and its contractual interference production team. The defendants defended themselves, claiming that, after unsuccessful attempts to reach an agreement with Crichton over the terms of a spin-off project, they decided to break the tie and create something completely new. With their anti-SLAPP motion, they asked the court to dismiss the lawsuit at its initial stage on the grounds that it undermined their right to freedom of expression with frivolous accusations. When the judge ruled in favor of Crichtonstating that the action had demonstrated enough “minimum merit” to at least proceed to the evidence production phase, the defendants filed an appeal, suspending the original process.
The new document filed Monday offers the first detailed glimpse of the defendants’ appeal arguments. They claim that if it were up to Crichton“the highly impactful and award-winning cultural phenomenon that is The Pitt would not exist.” They allege that the widow “demanded many millions of dollars in connection with the new series ER – far above industry standard amounts and more than WBTV was willing or able to pay for a series in its first year,” so they “were unable to reach an agreement.” Once negotiations failed, according to the document, the executive producer R. Scott Gemmillwho previously worked on Medical Dutywrote a new script that “did not use or have any connection with the intellectual property of Medical Duty”.
The document notes that The Pitt takes place in the emergency room of a hospital in Pittsburgh, while Medical Duty It was set in Chicago. The Pitt is also based on a completely new cast of characters, and each of its hour-long episodes corresponds to one hour of a 15-hour emergency room shift, “a concept never before used in a medical drama,” the feature states. While Medical Duty it was more “soap opera”, with stories that followed the characters outside the hospital, The Pitt is “more focused on serious issues plaguing the modern medical field, and the characters almost never leave the emergency room,” the document argues. “While Medical Duty it was a series with a musical soundtrack, The Pitt there’s no soundtrack”, he adds.
“The simple fact that some defendants considered producing a series that would be based on Medical Dutyhad it been made, does not prove that the different series they actually produced is also based on Medical Duty“, argues the document. “The only evidence in the file is that the defendants wrote The Pitt intentionally to be different from Medical Duty and other medical dramas.”
And while it was true that the defendants shared an argument for a possible reboot of Medical Duty which proposed episodes taking place in real time and plots addressing the consequences of COVID, “these concepts did not come from Medical Duty – were new ideas proposed by the defendant R. Scott Gemmill in a pitch for a reboot he created more than a decade after the last airing of Medical Duty“, the resource states. “There is no legal reason why he would not have the freedom to incorporate these same original ideas into a different project, The Pittafter the proposed reboot failed. The right to prevent the production of ‘derivative works’ of Medical Duty does not give the author ownership of the original ideas of Gemmill.”
The appeal classifies the process as “unfounded” and accuses Crichton of “misusing the judicial system to try to silence important speech because [ela] was unable to reach an agreement he liked, although The Pitt do not use a single element protected from Medical Duty“.
In asking the appeals court to overturn the trial court’s decision, lawyers for the defendants wrote that the previous judge failed to apply the “well-established meaning” of “derivative works” under copyright law. They argue that the legal definition protects elements such as a “sequence of events” and “the relationships between main characters” but does not exclude entire genres or basic plot concepts from copyright.
“This lawsuit aims to prevent established artists – the screenwriters, producers and the actor named as defendants – from showing an innovative, award-winning TV series Emmywhich directly addresses some of today’s most pressing issues,” states the appeal filed by Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., main lawyer at WBTV, Wyle and the other defendants. “The decision of the trial court must be overturned.”
Robert N. Kliegerlawyer representing Sherri and the estate of Crichtonmade a brief comment on Wednesday in response to the appeal. “There is nothing new from the Warner Bros. in this resource. Instead, it is merely a repetition of arguments that the trial court already flatly rejected,” he said in an email to Rolling Stone.
“Sherri Crichton was excited about the idea of the original Medical Duty to do a reboot and was shocked when the Warner Bros.. abruptly halted negotiations and announced The Pitt – a faithful copy of the reboot of Medical Duty presented to him,” a Crichton spokesperson said in a statement last February. “The heirs of Crichton They eagerly await the opportunity to present their case to a jury and are confident they will emerge victorious.”
The estate will have the opportunity to contest the new appeal before a possible hearing and decision by a panel of judges, which could take many months. Meanwhile, the second season of The Pitt is scheduled to debut in January 2026.
-
hbo max
-
Michael Crichton
-
noah wyle
-
medical duty
-
The Pitt
Source: Rollingstone
Earl Johnson is a music writer at Gossipify, known for his in-depth analysis and unique perspective on the industry. A graduate of USC with a degree in Music, he brings years of experience and passion to his writing. He covers the latest releases and trends, always on the lookout for the next big thing in music.
