Request Media Kit

Evan Rachel Wood Being Sued For Breach Of Contract

The producers of 10 Things I Hate About Life are claiming that they paid Evan Rachel Wood $300,000 in advance to play the lead role. They are suing the actress for $30 million, which includes equity i...
Evan Rachel Wood Being Sued For Breach Of Contract
Written by
  • The producers of 10 Things I Hate About Life are claiming that they paid Evan Rachel Wood $300,000 in advance to play the lead role. They are suing the actress for $30 million, which includes equity investments, financing costs, damages and lost profits, plus attorney fees.

    A representative for Wood claims that this is not true and that the producers are only trying to get money because they are in financial trouble. The rep said,

    “The lawsuit is preposterous and simply a bullying tactic from financially troubled producers. The production shut down in February 2013, when the producers ran out of money. Even after that, Evan agreed to resume production in Nov. 2013, by which time the producers said they would have cleared up their issues. However, the producers still could not get their act together, nor did they pay Evan money that was owed,” the statement goes on to claim. Repeated subsequent promises by the producers to resume production and pay Evan also turned out to be false. Enough is enough. The producers, not Evan, have breached contract.”

    The producers however, say that after they temporarily suspended production and then tried to start up again, Wood claimed that she would not be available at the time they requested and then decided not to continue with filming at all. The producers recommenced principal photography in February, but Wood said she was unable to continue until November. The producers agreed to wait, but Wood eventually refused to return at all.

    The lawsuit states that Wood claimed that she fulfilled her contractual obligations and refused to finish filming without receiving more money. The producers claim that they pleaded with Wood to return and that she only completed 11 days of principle photography. They claim that she would not return for the requested seven weeks of work that she had originally agreed to complete.

    Who do you think is telling the truth?

    Image via Wikimedia Commons

    Get the WebProNews newsletter delivered to your inbox

    Get the free daily newsletter read by decision makers

    Subscribe
    Advertise with Us

    Ready to get started?

    Get our media kit