Slipknot's Chris Fehn

Chris Fehn’s Lawsuit Against His Ex-Slipknot Bandmates Seems Headed For A Potential Settlement


It would appear that the legalities between former Slipknot percussionist Chris Fehn and Slipknot frontman Corey Taylor and percussionist M. Shawn “Clown” Crahan may reach a resolution in the not too distant future. MetalSucks have obtained some legal documents that were dated this past June that indicated the case is headed to mediation, presumably with the intent of reaching a settlement.

In March of 2019, Fehn filed suit against his then bandmates, their music business manager Rob Shore and several Slipknot-related business entities. He claimed that Taylor and Crahan, with the assistance of Shore, had setup several businesses related to the Slipknot trademarks without his knowledge.

- Advertisement -

He alleged that through these ventures, which included Slipknot Incorporated, Knot Merch LLC, SK Productions, LLC, SK Touring, Inc. and Knot Touring LLC, Taylor and Crahan had been unjustly enriching themselves themselves.

He argued that these ventures violated an alleged general partnership established between the band’s ‘original’ nine members early on in their career to equally distribute the band’s revenues.

Fehn claimed to have been unaware of the above-mentioned business ventures until being advised of them while negotiating the terms for the recording and planned touring on the band’s then forthcoming album “We Are Not Your Kind“. Fehn was fired from the band shortly after filing suit.

While Fehn‘s individual claim against Shore was dismissed in November of last year, his claim against Shore‘s Rob Shore & Associates companies was allowed to proceed. Per his suit, Fehn was seeking an accounting of the band’s inner finances and workings to establish alleged lost wages owed to him and potential damages. There was also mention of a trust being established to distribute any future profits for recordings, merchandise, etc. he was legally entitled to going forward.

The legal documents newly obtained by MetalSucks reveal that Fehn‘s claims of a general partnership contract existing between the band members didn’t pan out in his favor and thus the premise of it and his unjust enrichment claims, were dismissed. According to the courts:

“The court dismisses the claim for breach of implied in fact contract. To plead a claim for implied in fact contract, a plaintiff must plead the essential terms of a contract: offer, acceptance and consideration (see Lapine v Seinfeld, 31 Misc3d 736, 741 [Sup. Ct. New York County 2011]). Here, the allegations supporting implied in fact contract are wholly conclusory. Plaintiff fails to plead any essential term of the contract, any specific provisions breached or any rate of compensation.

In addition, the court dismisses the unjust enrichment claim, because plaintiff fails to plead how the New York defendants were enriched at plaintiff’s expense. Moreover, all plaintiff claims is that “Crahan, as an agent of the corporate Defendants, requested Fehn perform a variety of services for the partnership and for each of the respective corporate entities.” This begs the question what those services were. Certainly, the services plaintiff provided are within plaintiff’s purview. Accordingly, the court dismisses counts II and III of the complaint without prejudice to re-pleading.”

A teleconference between lawyers for both parties and the presiding judge Justice Melissa Anne Crane is currently scheduled for October 29th. You can dig deeper into these recent findings over at MetalSucks.

- Advertisement - Purchase Merch