The History of Queensr˙che's Original Lineup!
The Queensr˙che Lawsuit
The members of Queensryche were involved in a very public and intense two-year legal dispute over the firing of vocalist Geoff Tate in 2012 and the ownership rights to the band name. This site's old discussion forum (now closed and deleted) helped the public gain a better understanding of the issues being disputed by being the first outlet to purchase and release all of the publicly-available documents from King County Superior Court, and explaining the complex legal jargon.
While this site only focuses on the original lineup of the band, because the legal drama referenced key events in Queensryche's history -- particularly events and situations during the original lineup's tenure together -- I've chosen to include the vast collection of court filings here on AnybodyListening.net for reference purposes. The lawsuit was settled in 2014, leaving Eddie Jackson, Scott Rockenfield and Michael Wilton with the Queensryche name, with Geoff Tate getting an undisclosed sum and rights to perform Operation: Mindcrime in its entirety (although Queensryche may perform songs from it, just not in sequential order).
Please note that I won't be further adding to this collection. The lawsuit is settled and additional terms of that settlement (other than the name going to the band and Tate getting some performance rights and an undisclosed monetary amount) are private. Admittedly, there are some filings that I once had stored in the cloud that I now can't find and as a result, haven't posted. Any documents or files that are not posted here can be retrieved at the King County Superior Court in Washington state.
IMPORTANT NOTE: For all documents, right-click on the link, and choose the "save link as" or an appropriate similar command. Some of these docs are quite large, and as a result, if you try to just click and view them online, they might appear to be blank at times due to lag. So I advise you to download them before reading. Thank you.
Declaration of Geoff Tate
Declaration of Michael Wilton
Additional Statements & Filings
Declaration of Brian Fleming
Posted on July 16, 2012:
Posted on July 22, 2012:
Posted on July 26, 2012:
Posted on Aug. 2, 2012:
Posted on Aug. 15, 2012:
Posted on Aug. 28, 2012:
Audio of the Preliminary Injunction Hearing Pt. 1 (right-click, save as)
Audio of the Preliminary Injunction Hearing Pt. 2 (right-click, save as)
Posted on Sept. 25, 2012:
Posted on Oct. 9, 2012:
Plaintiff's Response to Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
Posted on Oct. 18, 2012
Posted on Oct. 23, 2012
Posted on Aug. 20, 2013:
Plaintiff's Motion for Continuance
What this is: Tate is requesting a delay of 180 days for the trial. The band is opposed and says it is ready to move forward with the trial immediately. The attorneys go back and forth, and a hearing was held today, Aug. 20, for the judge to review. A decision on the continuance will likely be made shortly.
Posted on Aug. 24, 2013:
What this is: Tate was granted a continuance until Jan. 27, 2014, delaying the trial by approximately 70 days (he had requested 180).
Posted on Oct. 22, 2013:
What this is: This document was filed with the court and the parties to notify them that they have filed a Motion for Summary Judgment to end the case. In speaking with a friend, this is a doomsday motion by Tate. Unless a lot has changed with discovery since the continuance of trial, the MSJ will fail. In order to prevail Tate must demonstrate there is no triable issue of fact AND that as a matter of law he is entitled to judgment. Both are a pretty big reach given the available information.
Posted on Nov. 1, 2013:
What this is: Tate is taking one last try to get pieces of the suit thrown out for a violation of contract.
Posted on Nov. 8, 2013:
Posted Nov. 22, 2013
Posted on Dec. 5, 2013:
Posted on Dec. 14, 2013
Geoff Tate Declaration in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment
Note: I tried to put these in somewhat of an order so that it makes sense to read one after the other.
Posted on Jan. 21, 2014:
Note: This is a listing of all the documentation that will be used as evidence by the plaintiffs (the Tates) at trial.
Editor's Note: I didn't re-post all the notices that indicated how many times the trial was pushed back. Suffice it to say, the trial was continued at least three times while the parties tried to hammer out a settlement deal. As you likely know, the parties reached a settlement agreement in June/July 2014.