Originally Posted by
TheMotownManiac
marv, you need some correcting.
‘First, there is no contract law anywhere requiring legal representation. Period.
Second, no child labor laws were broken as there was no labor involved [[recording as an artist is not labor - also every kid under age 14-16, depending on the state, who had recorded would be in violation.) their parents/guardians were required for this reason. It is not Motown fault Johnnie Mae was illiterate - reading tests are not required to sign contracts how was Motown supposed to know she was illiterate and why would the onos not be on Mary to correct the situation with someone who could read? You can’t blame Motown for everything.
Third, how on earth would a Michigan contract signed in 1961 in Violate a s law in California? DMF signed new contracts, also in Michigan, as adults, in 1965.
‘’Fourth, as Motown owned The Supremes, and had total control of the group, how could they be violating anything replacing Mary in ‘68&69? What about the dozens of tracks before and after without Mary on them?
Mary did not gave a strong case, she didn’t have ANY case at all. Motown only settled with offering that joke solo contract to avoid legal fees. If Mary had a lick of sense, she would never, ever have trusted Motown to have her best interest at heart when she wasn’t even allowed to lead the group for a single night. They chose a neophyte Supreme with not one show under her belt to to the chore for ailing Jean. Maybe Pedro had already shopped Mary around and found no takers, so a deal with Motown was better than no deal at all.
Where do you get this stuff?
Bookmarks