Michael Crichton’s widow can move forward with her lawsuit over “The Pitt” after an appeals court ruled Wednesday that similarities between the Emmy-winning series and “ER” were sufficient to let the case proceed. The unanimous decision by a three-judge panel rejected Warner Bros. Television’s appeal.
The panel pointed to several features shared by the medical dramas, including their emergency room settings, rapid pacing, medical terminology and graphic portrayals of injuries. It also cited the presence of an inexperienced, incompetent doctor just out of medical school. Taken together, the court found, those details provided enough support for a prima facie case.
The ruling does not settle whether “The Pitt” is a derivative work of “ER.” That question could eventually go before a jury, unless the parties reach a settlement first. For now, the appellate decision permits the lawsuit to return to the trial court and continue.
The dispute centers on contractual rights held by Crichton, a creator of “ER.” The series grew out of a script he wrote in 1974 drawing on his experiences as a medical student. His agreement with Warner Bros. Television contained a provision described as “frozen rights,” which barred the studio from producing reboots or spinoffs without his approval.
Sherri Crichton filed the lawsuit in August 2024, several months before “The Pitt” premiered. She alleged that John Wells and Noah Wyle initially sought to revive “ER” and shifted their plans only after they were unable to obtain her permission for that project.
Warner Bros. has maintained that the two programs are unrelated and that “The Pitt” is an entirely different show. The studio sought dismissal under California’s anti-SLAPP law, intended to discourage frivolous litigation that obstructs free expression. Judge Wendy Chang rejected that request last year, concluding that Sherri Crichton had supplied sufficient evidence for the case to advance.
The appeals court did, however, dismiss a claim against Wyle, Wells and fellow creator R. Scott Gemmill. It found no evidence that they knew they might be violating Crichton’s contractual rights.
In a statement, Sherri Crichton welcomed the appellate decision and said she looked forward to discovery and presenting the case to a jury. She described the dispute as having implications for writers and creators, as well as their families and estates.
