CAA added a barrage of new allegations to a lawsuit against a rival firm on Monday, alleging that former employees illegally accessed CAA databases and stole trade secrets when they left to form Range Media Partners in 2020.
CAA first sued Range last fall, claiming the firm was built on deceit and betrayal. In an amended complaint filed Monday, the agency says it has since uncovered “documents, photographs, and video footage” through discovery that “reveal the depth of Range’s dishonesty.”
Mick Sullivan, who left CAA to help form Range, is accused in the suit of emailing himself client “rundowns,” which detailed every meeting the clients had taken and projects they were tracking. At least one of those clients immediately left CAA when Range formed.
Sullivan is also accused of emailing himself hundreds of pages of meeting notes, which detailed information on hundreds of projects and potential projects that had been gathered for CAA clients. Sullivan also allegedly pressured a CAA assistant to send him additional information about clients, including lists totaling nearly 200 scripts that had been sent to them.
The suit alleges that other Range employees also stole confidential information, including by pressuring CAA employees who remained at the company. Paige Wandling, an assistant at CAA who left to become a manager at Range, is accused of using a CAA “mole” to obtain hundreds of confidential documents.
“Over a course of weeks, Wandling requested, and Empoyee-1 provided, CAA’s confidential information dozens of times,” the suit alleges. “The stolen information included, by way of example, internal CAA emails, extensive information about film and TV opportunities for talent, scripts, industry contacts, CAA memos, CAA grids, and information on CAA meetings and business initiatives.”
According to the complaint, Wandling offered to pay the CAA mole for this information, and in fact did so.
The complaint argues that CAA’s trade secrets are essential to making the company — and the industry — run. Agents gather information from studios, producers, directors and writers, and put it into a database so it can be sorted and shared internally. Agents also collect sensitive information from clients, including their financial information, career goals and so on.
“This client confidential information is immeasurably valuable to competitors who could use it to understand the particular nuanced needs, motivations, and negotiating tactics of CAA’s clients,” the complaint states.
CAA’s initial lawsuit, filed last fall, accused Range of “unfair competition,” arguing that it had devised a scheme to get around California’s talent agency law by claiming to be a management firm.
Range has moved to throw out that suit, arguing it was legally defective. The amended lawsuit retains the initial claims while adding accusations of theft of trade secrets and unauthorized computer access.
Orin Snyder, who represents Range in the litigation, denied the allegations in a statement.
“CAA leadership is at it again — using baseless litigation to go after former colleagues out of bruised egos and petty vengeance,” he said. “Range didn’t steal trade secrets or anything else belonging to CAA. This case isn’t grounded in facts or law; it’s fueled by resentment. Range was built on integrity and earned client trust. While CAA wastes time on spiteful lawsuits, Range is focused on what matters: working collaboratively with CAA at large to service the 150+ clients they share. We’re confident we’ll prevail — because the truth, the law, and the industry are on our side.”