As previously reported, members of the band Ratt, have been in an ongoing dispute over ownership of the name.

In an exclusive Eddie Trunk news report, dated November 29th, 2016, Ratt members Stephen Pearcy (singer), Warren DiMartini (guitarist) and Juan Croucier (bassist) had won a judgment to the rights to the moniker and expelled drummer Bobby Blotzer from the partnership.

Blotzer, who also claimed ownership of the band name, and toured using it, while being the only original member of Ratt, filed a counter lawsuit against his former bandmates. Well, on February 3rd, the judge presiding over Blozter’s case has denied the drummer’s request for rights to the band’s name.

U.S. District Judge Dean D. Pregerson issued an order denying Blotzer’s request, writing in part:

“Although WBS relied upon a letter purportedly expelling Croucier from the Partnership in early 1997, prior to the assignment, that letter was signed by, and referred to the unanimous vote and consent of, only Blotzer and Pearcy. The Partnership Agreement, however, required the unanimous consent of all partners, other than the partner being expelled. By [Blotzer’s] own admission, DeMartini remained a member of the Partnership at all times. Blotzer and Pearcy could not, therefore, have expelled Croucier without DeMartini’s consent, of which there was no evidence.

In addition, Pearcy submitted a declaration stating that he never discussed Croucier’s expulsion from the RATT Partnership with Blotzer, never understood Croucier to have been expelled, and had no recollection of seeing the 1997 expulsion letter prior to this litigation. Pearcy’s declaration stated that the letter ‘is not the product of any agreement I reached with Robert Blotzer or anyone else.’

[Blotzer] did not file any written objection to the Pearcy declaration. Although [Blotzer’s] counsel did, at oral argument, suggest that Pearcy lacked credibility, [Blotzer] submitted no evidence that conflicted with or contradicted Pearcy’s statement. Indeed, as the court also noted, Blotzer himself took a position different than that advanced by WBS, stating in a deposition that Croucier voluntarily withdrew from the Partnership, not that the other members of the Partnership unanimously expelled Croucier. Now, on this motion for reconsideration, WBS argues that Croucier submitted evidence in bad faith and committed a fraud on this Court by intentionally ignoring proceedings in an earlier, 2002 state court action between Pearcy and WBS. WBS contends that this Court should have considered documents submitted in those proceedings, which, [Blotzer] asserts, establish that Croucier is collaterally estopped from challenging the validity of the assignment of the RATT marks to WBS.

[Blotzer’s] theory of fraud is not clear to the court. The 2002 judgment [Blotzer] submitted to the court does not discuss the composition of the RATT partnership and makes no mention of the 1997 assignment of the marks to WBS. [Blotzer] nevertheless argues that ‘[e]ven if the 2002 judgment did not specifically express that the transfer in 1997 was valid, the 2002 Judgment did reference and incorporated (sic) in the state court’s ruling. As part of their Rule 11 obligations, Croucier’s counsel had a duty . . . to investigate what the ruling and (sic) not present bad law to this Court.’ It is not apparent, however, what ‘bad law’ [Croucier] is alleged to have presented.”

The last time Blozter played a live show using the Ratt name was on December 29th, 2016 at Soaring Eagle Casino and Resort in Michigan. The show was was cancelled after the Michigan entertainment venue received a cease-and-desist letter from Blozter’s former bandmates.

In the interim, the official version of Ratt, now featuring Pearcy, DeMartini, Croucier and guitarist Carlos Cavazo (ex-Quiet Riot) is scheduled to make its first official return to the stage on February 11th at the Treasure Island Resort Casino in Welch, Minnesota.

additional source: blabbermouth.net

Share : facebooktwittergoogle plus

6 Responses

Leave us a comment

  • Rattlehead on

    Karma…Blotz gets what he deserves, in my opinion. This guy is a dirt bag for trying to sell himself and his tribute group as the brand RATT. Blotz was a forgettable support member of RATT, had no songwriting credits on any of the classic songs/hits, yet still tries to brand himself as RATT??? That’s sad and pathetic of him, and misleading to the people attending the shows.

    • Mr. Rock And Roll on

      Rattlehead: While I agree on most points in your post, the one thing I feel I must say is that, even though Blotzer didn’t contribute much to the writing, and even though I am a casual Ratt fan of the first few records, his drumming style is very particular to him. I always argued that he was one of the better drummers of the 80’s. Very tasty and punchy.

  • RandyK on

    A new bar just opened in the town next to me called “Ratts.” Should I tell Blotzer? Maybe he can sue them to get some grocery money.

  • elliot goldberg on

    that’s a good juan!

  • T on

    I’m sure Bobby feels that he put as much work into the band as anyone else, and he did beg them all to reunite for the last decade or so. However, he overestimated his importance to the fans and probably overstepped his boundaries by attempting to go out as “RATT”, on his own. Unfortunately the lawsuits probably burned any bridges moving forward.

  • storminnorman on

    Pearcy/Demartini/Croucier should have the name RATT. Pearcy started the whole thing. But with that said, Blotz always wanted to work and keep the Ratt music alive for the fans. So I can’t really blame him for that. But with that said, I’m so excited about some new Ratt music as Pearcy’s solo album just realized is his best in years.

Leave a Reply