A bitter legal battle has erupted between Daryl Hall and John Oates, the iconic music duo known as Hall & Oates, over Oates' plan to sell his share of their joint venture without Hall's permission. The lawsuit, which was filed by Hall, alleges that Oates committed the "ultimate partnership betrayal" by secretly seeking to sell his portion of Whole Oats Enterprises LLP to Primary Wave IP Investment Management LLC. The joint venture encompasses the duo's trademarks, personal name and likeness rights, record royalty income, and website and social media assets.

The case was brought before Chancellor Russell Perkins in Nashville, who was tasked with determining whether to extend the pause on the sale while the arbitration process unfolds. Hall's attorney, Christine Lepera, argued that Oates cannot sell his share to a third party without Hall's consent, calling it "intuitively correct."

In response, Oates' attorney, Tim Warnock, contended that Hall's claims of betrayal are unfounded and that Oates acted within his rights as outlined in their joint business agreement. Warnock pointed out that Hall could have pursued the same course of action himself. He also suggested that Hall's motivations may be driven by a desire for publicity or to interfere with Oates' business relationships.

The hearing shed light on the deteriorating relationship between the musical partners, with Hall's declaration detailing his sense of blindsiding and betrayal. He accused Oates of timing the sale to cause maximum harm while Hall was about to embark on a tour. However, Warnock dismissed Hall's claims as “salacious” and unrelated to the matter at hand.

The dispute centers around Oates' decision to sell his share of the joint venture, potentially fetching a considerable sum due to the duo's numerous hits in the 1970s and 80s, including "Maneater," "Rich Girl," "Kiss on My List," and "I Can't Go for That (No Can Do)."

The judge initially issued a temporary restraining order on November 16, preventing the sale until an arbitrator could review the case. The parties have since agreed on an arbitrator, and the arbitration process will determine the fate of the deal. Hall opened the arbitration process on November 9, seeking to block the sale.

Hall's declaration also alleges that Oates' team violated a confidentiality provision by disclosing their business agreement to Primary Wave Music in a letter of intent. Furthermore, Hall expressed his disagreement with Primary Wave's business model, stating that he would not approve of the sale.

Both Hall and Oates were absent from the court hearing, leaving their attorneys to present arguments. Lepera emphasized the need for the temporary blocking of the deal, citing the need for an affidavit supporting Hall's position. She denied any intention of seeking publicity through the lawsuit.

The legal dispute between the long-time musical partners has attracted significant attention, given their enduring popularity and extensive catalog of hits. Hall's declaration reflects his sense of betrayal and deteriorating trust, while Oates' filing portrays Hall as seeking to distance himself from the duo in recent years.

The court's ruling on extending the temporary restraining order will determine whether the sale of Oates' share remains paused until the arbitration process concludes. The case highlights the complex dynamics and financial stakes involved in musical partnerships and the potential consequences for breaches of trust.