Kevin Costner Exonerated of Cheating Stephen Baldwin

Big Hollywood ^ | June 15, 2012 | William Bigelow

[Bratch]

Stephen Baldwin, the youngest of the four acting Baldwin brothers, lost his lawsuit against Kevin Costner in which he alleged Costner had cheated him out of millions by encouraging him to prematurely sell his shares in a company that made a fortune selling oil cleanup equipment after the BP oil spill.

The jury only deliberated for 2 hours before they cleared Costner.

[Bratch]

They better be careful.

The last time Kevin won a court decision, it started a 30-year feud.

[pops88]

In September 2006, Baldwin released his book titled The Unusual Suspect, which details highlights from his personal life, career, days of drug abuse, and ultimately, his turn to becoming a born-again Christian after the 9/11 attacks.

I'm so not surprised he lost this skirmish of good against evil.

[BipolarBob]

You lie down with dogs, you get fleas.

[spetznaz]

I am trying hard to understand the merits of this case. Baldwin sold his shares to Costner, which was probably triggered by the fact that some months before Baldwin had gone through some financial difficulties that led to a default on his mortgage and bankruptcy court. Costner bought the shares from Baldwin for half a million, and everything is signed and sealed and Baldwin walks away. A while later Costner sells the centrifuge equipment to BP for $52 million. Where is the crime? In my industry - Private Equity - one of the most important stages is due diligence and terms negotiations. You need to, independently, do your due diligence to ensure that you ascertain the real truth, and then after that you have your internal and external counsel make sure yu aren't getting the shaft in terms. It is in your docket to ensure you check.

Now, it could be said that Costner was being very 'unethical' (especially IF he was friends with Baldwin) since, knowing the financial troubles Baldwin was going through he SHOULD have told him to wait a while before selling. However, he did not HAVE to, Baldwin definitely didn't do his due dil, and Baldwin was not forced to sign nor was he lied to. He simply was not told the possible future valuation of the shares, and the sale went ahead based on current valuation.

As much as I prefer Baldwin over Costner, the jury made the right decision here. I somehow doubt that, had the deal with BP not materialized (which was very possible) and the shares went down even further leading to Costner asking Baldwin for a claw-back of part of the $500,000 ...had that happened I strongly doubt Baldwin would have given back some of that money. Anyways, in business as long as there is no outright misinformation (lying by commission and false information in particular) then due diligence is up to you. If you don't do your due dil then you shouldn't be too annoyed if the stakes flip. Especially considering that the suing Baldwin wouldn't have given part of their $500,000 back if the company had made a loss of $52m after he got the money.

[bramps]

I don’t get your point. Who are you calling ‘good’ and who ‘evil’, and based on what?

[Hebrews 11:6]

He still can’t act.

[time4good]

I think there’s more to the story. Somewhere around that time I thought I read that the issue was that there were some closed door meetings that Baldwin and his associate weren’t invited to - between Costner and BP before Costner bought the shares back from Baldwin.

[skeeter]

*snort* Good one.

[pops88]

Spiritual warfare. If you don’t get it, I’m not going to explain it, nor am I obliged to.

[Uncle Slayton]

All court cases should be decided based on which party to the lawsuit is deemed to be the better Christian.

[kenavi]

Good post, but Costner did the ethical and legal thing by not divulging confidential discussions between his company n a public company.

[bramps]

I’m well aware of spiritual warfare. Just trying to figure out which side you’re calling ‘good’ and which side ‘evil’. It sounds like you were calling a man who put his faith in Christ and had his life transformed, Stephen Baldwin, evil. (I shouldn’t say you mean Baldwin is per se ‘evil’, but it sounds like you meant by being ‘born again’ he’s playing for the ‘evil’ side in a battle of spiritual warfare). I would certainly want that clarified if I was you.

[pops88]

Quite the jump. Steven Baldwin (admitted born-again Christian) in court with (can’t act) Kevin Costner. I thought it was rather obvious. My husband grew up just outside Hollywood. I have more than a few anecdotes.

[bramps]

Baldwin’s story is a good one. I thought you might have been calling him a phony. Sorry.

You know, Kevin Costner doesn’t really exist. He’s actually a cardboard cutout and if you look closely when he’s on screen you can see the wires above moving the necessary body parts.

[pops88]

“You know, Kevin Costner doesn’t really exist. He’s actually a cardboard cutout and if you look closely when he’s on screen you can see the wires above moving the necessary body parts.”

I just knew it! Thanks for the confirmation. Shades of “Mulholland Dr.”