The last time I reported on the Robson case, Robson changed lawyers and wanted to amend his complaint. Judge Beckloff allowed Robson to amend his complaint for the 4th time. This restarted the whole process of initial reply, demurrer and so on. (Previous updates here and here).

On November 14th, 2016 Estate filed their initial reply to the newly amended Robson complaint. It can be found at this link :

The initial answer document is a short document that includes the preliminary statement and general denial of the claims. In 2015, Estate had filed a similar initial reply to the previous complaint (Link)

When you compare the 2015 Answer document (for 3rd complaint) to the 2016 Answer document (for 4th complaint), you will see several similarities. But the interesting thing is the Estate’s change in the words they are using and how stronger they get. It seems that just like the fans, the Estate is getting tired with this absurd never ending cycle of Robson’s case.

First, the Estate start their answer by calling Robson’s accusations “meritless sham” - both the old answer and the new answer mention Robson’s testimony in 2005 and how Robson recanted his testimony now for the sole purpose of getting money from the MJ Estate – which would mean taking money away from Michael’s kids. This time the Estate calls the 2005 trial as meritless as well.




In the 2016 initial answer document, the Estate adds a whole new paragraph and provide new information about Robson and his actions. Some of these seems like a reference to Estate’s findings at the discovery phase. Estate states:

  • After Michael’s death in 2009, Robson desperately tried to trade off his association with Michael Jackson
  • Tried to work for productions associated with Michael and his estate
  • Robson admitted mental breakdowns run in his family
  • Robson’s career is in shambles and Robson is in desperate need for money.



The Estate’s affirmative defenses range from failure to state a cause of action to statute of limitations to much more. In these affirmative defenses Estate once again points out to the absurdity of some of Robson’s claims. For example, Estate mentions how Robson’s own mother, Joy, defended Michael, and how Robson’s own mother did not take any steps to protect Wade from the alleged abuse. Therefore Robson cannot prove his absurd claim that MJ Companies should have protected him. Estate also points out that Robson can’t sue Michael or the Estate (as decided in the probate ruling) and that’s why he has disguised his complaint against MJ Companies.

Estate then also states that they will be filing a summary judgment in due to time to get this case dismissed for good.

Although this initial answer is routine and short, it gives us a good idea of what the Estate’s strategy is going to be and the weapons they plan to use in a more important and detailed upcoming summary judgment motion. As I wrote several times before, Robson’s mother Joy will definitely be an important topic. Robson’s actions and history does seem to haunt him and make everyone question his motives.

I would also like to share that while we were getting this document from the court, we were also able to get documents from the Safechuck case. I will do a separate update about Safechuck case in a few days.

The most interesting development happened while I was finalizing this post. On December 27, 2016 Estate filed a motion to compel Wade Robson to produce documents. Although discovery disputes are quite common in all of the cases I follow, I’m curious to see what information Robson is refusing to provide to the Estate. I have a feeling that whatever Robson is trying to hide, it will be quite interesting. We immediately started working on getting that document and I will try to do my best to report on it ASAP.