Producer Sues Tea Shop Over Alleged Exclusion From 'Obsession' Profits

Key points

• Darby alleges Harris and Lane promised her equal producer status and one-third of net profits for films she lead-produced in 2024.
• The suit claims Darby intervened to restore the edit to director Curry Barker and advocated for reshoots, saving the film for its Toronto International Film Festival premiere.
• 'Obsession' sold to Focus Features for $16.2 million and grossed approximately $510 million worldwide on a budget under $800,000.
• Darby received a $300,000 payment but claims it was not a full settlement, and she was excluded from the film’s premiere and public recognition.
• The complaint seeks an equitable accounting of profits for 'Obsession' and other projects, plus unpaid wages and retaliation relief.

Background

This dispute follows earlier coverage in September 2026 detailing Darby’s claims of a seven-year pattern of unequal treatment at Tea Shop Productions. The lawsuit highlights the contrast between the film’s low budget and its massive commercial success, which intensified the conflict over profit participation. Previous reports noted that Focus Features and fellow executive producer Jason Blum were not named as defendants, focusing the legal action on the internal management of Tea Shop Productions.

How outlets are covering it

TheWrap and The Hollywood Reporter emphasize the gendered and hierarchical nature of the alleged mistreatment, describing a 'seven-year pattern' where Darby was treated as a subordinate despite her critical role. Deadline focuses on the financial disparity, highlighting the $510 million gross against the $300,000 payment Darby received. Dread Central, while not focusing on the legal dispute, corroborates the creative narrative by noting that the lawsuit details align with previous reports about the film’s turbulent post-production, including the removal and return of the edit from Barker. All outlets agree on the core facts of the 2024 agreement and the $16.2 million sale to Focus Features, but differ in emphasis: TheWrap and THR highlight the breach of equal status, while Deadline stresses the 'scam' aspect of the profit exclusion.

Why it matters

The case underscores the legal risks and power imbalances in independent film production, particularly regarding profit participation agreements. It highlights how a low-budget hit can lead to significant disputes over compensation and credit, especially when producers claim to have 'rescued' a project. The outcome may set precedents for how net profit participation is defined and enforced in the industry, affecting future contracts between producers and production companies.

What to watch

The lawsuit is pending in Los Angeles Superior Court, with Darby seeking a jury trial. Tea Shop Productions and Curry Barker have not yet responded to requests for comment. The next steps will likely involve discovery, where the financial records and communications regarding the 2024 agreement will be scrutinized. The case may also involve negotiations or mediation before trial, given the high stakes involved in the profit participation claims.