African-American media has always played an important role in both informing and educating our community. Recently, when a settlement was reached between Mathew Knowles and two former members of Destiny’s Child, Wise-Up, a Black-owned and operated television show, got an exclusive interview with one of the lawyers on the case. During an interview that aired on August 7, 2002 attorney Warren Fitzgerald, Jr. sat down to discuss the case with the host of the Wise-Up television show. Below is a transcript of that interview:

Earlier this week a settlement was reached in the lawsuit filed by the two former members of the multi-platinum singing group Destiny’s Child, against the group’s manager Mathew Knowles, father of lead singer Beyonce Knowles. Here to give us some insight into this case is prominent entertainment attorney, partner in the prestigious Law Firm Fitzgerald & Ray, and attorney for the Destiny’s Child former members, Warren M. Fitzgerald, Jr.

Q. Which of the former members are involved and what are the specifics of the suit?

A. I represent LaToya Luckett and Latavia Roberson who were two of the original members of the group who came to be known as Destiny’s Child. Destiny’s Child started at a very early age and at that time they where all minors. They signed a series of management agreements with, at that time, Mathew Knowles and his erstwhile partner Ann Tillman, and then later with Mathew Knowles. That was the origination of what came to be the central issue of the lawsuit. In December of 1999, LaToya and Latavia disaffirmed their management agreement and then subsequently found themselves no longer in the group.

Q. For our viewers, can you go over a little about the disaffirming process? What exactly does that entail on their part?

A. In almost every State (including Texas) the law is such that a minor can disaffirm or invalidate or void any contract that they sign while they are minors, or upon reaching the legal age or shortly thereafter. This is set up as a protection for minors who may enter into contracts that are not in their best interest, and the law allows them, upon getting better advice or upon reach adulthood, to be able to undo those contracts. And this is precisely what happened in the case of LaToya Luckett and Latavia Roberson. After turning 18 they sent notice to Mr. Knowles, Mathew Knowles, that they where disaffirming their management agreements which under the law they had every right to do.

Q. What was the nature of the settlement was there some admission of guilt on the part of Mr. Knowles or the group?

A. No, there was no admission of guilt by Mr. Knowles or any of his management entities or companies. Nor should any inference of an admission be drawn from a settlement. That is the nature of settlements. That parties agree to whatever terms are relevant to the settlement and then no admission is to be made, either pro or con, as a result of the settlement. The terms of the settlement agreement are confidential, so we cannot discuss money or amount of money or if there is money. What is important is the lawsuit involves substantial rights that we feel where at issue. There are fiduciary duties when an adult enters into a business relationship with a minor and that relationship involves trust and reliance and confidence, what’s called fiduciary duties are created. Which means the highest level of trust and accountability and responsibility. It was our position that, as a result of the way certain things where handled through this relationship, and as a result of how they found themselves no longer in the group, we felt that certain fiduciary duties were violated and that there was actual interference by Mr. Knowles in their contractual relationships. The case has been settled. It has been resolved amicably. We believe that all parties are pleased with the outcome.  With that being said, this is not a comment on who won or lost, but that the parties were able to sit down and resolve the issue and put it to rest.

Q. Even with the amicable settlement I’m sure you know that there are those out there who will say that this was a case of ‘sour grapes’ on the part of the girls, and that they where just looking for a payday out of this whole thing. What do you have to say to those people?

A. First of all on behalf of my clients, and personally, I take my hat off to Mr. Knowles and Beyonce and the group. They have been phenomenally successfully and they have benefited Houston at large, and really put us on the map. So, we really take our hats off to them. We did, however, feel that there were contractual rights that were at issue, and that there were fiduciary duties that were not met. Society must protect its minors.  In the criminal arena society protects the persons of minors who are abused. In the business arena we must use the civil remedies to protect minors in the business, and as you well know, in the entertainment industry minors are very productive and very popular so there must be some type of vehicle to protect minors as they are engaged in business, and we have to protect their affairs. So, it was not sour grapes. It was a process that had to take place to seek redress and protection of their interests as minors in the entertainment business.

Q. So looking forward is there any music in the background of this story? What’s next in the careers of your clients?

A. I’m not their entertainment attorney for the other aspects of there career, but I do know that they both are very talented and they have indicated that they will continue to be involved in the entertainment industry. So, I think you are going to hear some very good things from them in the very near future.

Wise-Up airs each Wednesday night at 11:00p.m. on Houston Media Source (Ch. 17) on Time-Warner Cable. More information is available online at www.wiseup.com