Pitt Challenges Crichton Estate’s Claims That HBO Max Series Is a Copy of ER

Legal Dispute Continues Between the Estate of Michael Crichton and HBO Max’s ‘The Pitt’

No date has been set for oral arguments at the California Court of Appeals regarding the ongoing legal battle between the estate of ER creator Michael Crichton and the HBO Max series The Pitt, led by Noah Wyle. This clash centers on allegations that The Pitt is a derivative work of ER, raising significant questions about intellectual property rights in the television industry.

In a final submission to California’s Second Appellate District on Monday night, the legal team representing The Pitt is seeking to overturn a 2025 lower court ruling that favored Sherri Crichton, Michael Crichton’s widow. The appellate brief argues for the dismissal of the case, asserting that the broad interpretation of the term "derivative works" by the plaintiff could hinder the defendants’ ability to create original content unrelated to ER.

“Plaintiff’s expansive interpretation of the term ‘derivative works’ would extend the Freeze Provision so broadly as to impede Defendants’ ability to develop their own original ideas that have nothing to do with ER, simply because those ideas happened to be connected at one point in time with an abandoned ER reboot,” the brief states.

As The Pitt, which has earned both Emmy and Peabody awards, gears up for its Season 3 debut in January 2027, the two-year-old lawsuit brought by Sherri Crichton continues to cast a shadow over the series, with potential financial repercussions looming if the court sides with her.

Sherri Crichton claims that The Pitt is ultimately “derivative” of ER, asserting that the show’s development was sparked by a failed agreement to reboot the original NBC medical drama. The crux of her argument hinges on a contract from the Clinton administration, which she alleges grants her or her representatives final say over related productions.

In August 2024, Sherri Crichton filed a breach of contract lawsuit. Efforts by The Pitt to dismiss the case under California’s anti-SLAPP statutes were rejected early in 2025, leading to the current appeals court proceedings.

“The trial court’s improper dilution of the anti-SLAPP standard necessarily informed its denial of Defendants’ anti-SLAPP motion … all because the trial court concluded, in some general sense, that Plaintiff’s claims were ‘not totally meritless,’” noted attorneys Ilissa Samplin and Ted Boutrous Jr. regarding Judge Wendy Chang’s 2025 ruling.

For Warner Bros. TV, which is part of the Warner Bros. Discovery portfolio being sold to David Ellison’s Skydance for $111 billion, the stakes are high, especially with The Pitt positioned as a key asset within HBO. The recent brief presented by the defense includes pointed arguments aimed at convincing the court of the merits of their case.

“Even if the contract were ambiguous (it isn’t), and even if Plaintiff’s reading were not patently absurd (it is), Plaintiff’s claim would still fail because Plaintiff fails to carry its burden of presenting evidence that the Freeze Provision should be interpreted in the manner it proposes,” the attorneys further clarify regarding the contractual clause from 1994.

They emphasize that there is no evidence suggesting that the 1994 agreement intended to grant approval rights over all future original ideas unrelated to ER. Instead, the contract was focused solely on “publishing relating to ER,” not on entirely new projects.

As this complex legal saga unfolds, it highlights the ongoing challenges in the realm of television rights and the intricate balance between creative inspiration and legal ownership.