Michael Moore Sued Over Disturbing Allegations
The suit claims Moore has walked away from an arbitration agreement needed to "flesh out the terms of an important provision in their property settlement," according to the New York Post. Moore, it argues, wants all of the benefits of their 2014 settlement in which Glynn "signed over essentially all of her interest in the fruits of the parties’ joint efforts as film-makers … in exchange for a promise of future revenue-sharing by" her husband.
"She was the driving force in the making of many of [his] films and other ventures in which Mr. Moore was the featured personality, dating back to their first big success, ‘Roger and Me’ (1989)," Glynn’s attorney writes.
According to the suit, Moore was supposed to pay Glynn 4 percent of total revenue from his films, but he paid her less than $600 in 2014. That would mean he earned under $14,000 during a seven-month period.
Moore reported negative income to the IRS in 2014 and 2016 – negative $350,862 in 2014 and $221,025 in 2016 – but Glynn believes the figures are false.
Moore's latest film, Fahrenheit 11/9, premiered at the world-famous Toronto Film Festival earlier this week. The title pays homage to his anti-Bush documentary, Fahrenheit 9/11 and references the date the 2016 election results became official.
Moore has claimed his movie will take down the president. We say fat chance.