Michael Jackson Estate Eyes Arbitration in Cascio Family Case

Photo Credit: Gabrielle Henderson

In the entertainment world, the newly released Michael might be poised to break box office records. But in the courtroom, the Michael Jackson estate has moved to compel arbitration in the ugly sexual abuse complaint filed by multiple Cascio family members.

The King of Pop’s estate just recently made its arbitration push official, about two months after the lawsuit set sail. As we reported then, the Cascio sibling plaintiffs accused Jackson of being “a serial child predator who…drugged, raped, and sexually assaulted each of” them.

The shocking claims marked a major shift for the filing parties, who’d stood by Jackson – including by expressly refuting different allegations against him – for decades. Various interviews described them as the “Thriller” artist’s “second family,” and Jackson even appeared in Cascio home videos.

It probably doesn’t need saying given the “second family” billing as well as the new lawsuit, but the situation involves a number of moving parts.

Published in tandem with the premiere of Michael, a fresh New York Times deep dive explores what brought about the “second family” arrangement, the nature of the alleged abuse, and more – besides reiterating plaintiff Eddie Cascio’s sale of the rights to three (purportedly) Jackson-recorded tracks.

Additionally, the plaintiffs acknowledged receiving $3.45 million apiece as part of a 2020 agreement with the Jackson estate – albeit while alleging that they’d been misled into putting pen to paper.

“Had Plaintiffs understood the full meaning of the Document, they would not have signed it,” according to the suit.

On the other end of the dispute, the Jackson estate vehemently denied the claims, downplaying the 2020 settlement as a “reluctant” step taken to prevent other “false allegations” from making a post-Leaving Neverland media splash.

In any event, there’s no debate about the presence of an arbitration clause in the agreement – an “unequivocal” clause, per the Jackson estate. The way the defendants see things, there’s “no serious dispute that Plaintiffs’ claims fall within the scope of the arbitration provision.”

That’s where the estate’s new motion to compel arbitration (and stay the case) comes in; a related hearing is currently scheduled to take place in early June. Closer to the present, we aren’t without possible indications of how the arbitration clash might unfold.

Though not a party to the federal suit, Frank Cascio has echoed the abuse claims. However, following his alleged litigation “threats” in pursuit of a massive additional payment, the Los Angeles County Superior Court recently granted a request from the Jackson estate to enforce the arbitration provision against him.

A few takeaways that could factor into Frank’s siblings’ suit: Per the LA court, Frank’s account of signing the 2020 contract “does not support his characterization that he was forced to” do so or that he’d been compelled to agree “on a take-it-or-leave-it basis.”

Rather, nine members of his family – not just the federal case plaintiffs – had already signed at this point and needed his signature to “get closure.” Thus, the alleged pressure to consent “came from his own family” as opposed to the Jackson estate, according to the text.

(Also mentioned in light of the criticism of the agreement as “unconscionable”: That the arrangement resulted in “subsequently increased” payments to the family via further negotiations.)

What about rescinding the overarching agreement – a request also present in the complaint – between the Cascio family and the Jackson estate?

“But having determined the parties entered into an Agreement to Arbitrate, whether and to what extent the Agreement is revocable or the parties breached the Agreement are questions for the arbitrator to decide,” the court wrote.