BS: Guitars in custody battle!

Subject: Guitars in custody battle!
From: GUEST,Roger the skiffler
Date: 29 Aug 01 - 04:56 AM

Keep the kids, I want the axes!
From today's BBC Online:
Garcia guitar lawsuit not dismissed

An American court has refused to dismiss a lawsuit to determine the ownership of five guitars belonging to the late rock and roll star Jerry Garcia.

Grateful Dead Productions which represents the surviving band members had asked the Marin County Superior Court to dismiss Doug Irwin's claim for custody of the guitars.

Irwin, who built the guitars known as Wolf, Tiger, Rosebud, Headless and Wolf Jr, claims Garcia left them to him in his will.

But Grateful Dead Productions claims it had bought the instruments which were not Garcia's to give away.
(c)BBC Online

RtS (I think I'll leave my kazoo to the nation to avoid such unseemly squabbling when I go to the great Jug Band in the sky)

Subject: RE: BS: Guitars in custody battle!
From: Willie-O
Date: 29 Aug 01 - 08:37 AM

And beautiful instruments they are too. seen em up close...definitely lawsuit-quality inlay art.

I would have expected this to be part of the squabble between Garcia's widows. (or between his widow and his ex-wife...can you leave more than one widow if you're not a polygamist?)

I kinda think Grateful Dead Productions should back off or at least compromise here...Garcia's guitars weren't his to give away? Doesn't seem right...

W-O
three guitars, 100% owned, no holding company.

Subject: RE: BS: Guitars in custody battle!
From: GUEST,iamjohnne
Date: 29 Aug 01 - 11:20 AM

Put them in the rock and roll hall of fame and be done with it. If there is squabble between Jerry'a ex's it is prolly based on money anyway.

Johnne "goin where the weather suits by clothes"

Subject: RE: BS: Guitars in custody battle!
From: GUEST,Roger the skiffler
Date: 29 Aug 01 - 11:28 AM

An interview with Irwin and pictures of the guitars HERE
RtS

Subject: RE: BS: Guitars in custody battle!
From: The Walrus at work
Date: 29 Aug 01 - 01:28 PM

Is it me or does the concept of a musician selling the "tools of his trade" to his production company ring a little false? It may well be true, but short of being skint (or a tax/alimony fiddle) I don't see too many musicians doing it.

Walrus