see any profit from the series; as an example, the suit references statements in 2012, following the second season, that AMC claimed the series was running at a $49 million deficit, despite being one of the most popular series in broadcast. Darabont's suit contends he was fired just at the start of the second season so that AMC would avoid having to pay him. Initial discovery phase hearings were held in 2014. Darabont's lawyers sought to gain information from AMC on their other series, specifically Breaking Bad and Mad Men, to obtain a "fair market value" for The Walking Dead. AMC asserted it had done no wrongdoing, had already paid Darabont $3 million upfront for two seasons, and was able to properly set the imputed license fee that worked into the profit formula for Darabont. The network resisted the request to provide otherwise confidential information on the other series. The court granted Darabont's lawyers access to the requested information as part of the discovery phase. Darabont described "crisis-level problems" during the series's production while under deposition, claiming that AMC had cut the per-episode budget from $3.4 million to $3 million while keeping the tax credit offered by the state of Georgia for filming there, effectively reducing the production budget by 25%. In August 2015, Darabont requested to amend his original complaint that AMC further reduced his profits from the second season as his firing mid-season meant he was not fully vested in the season, allowing AMC to reduce the profits paid him. Darabont's amended request points out that he had written and produced all the episodes in that season already and was entitled to the proper profit share. The judge granted this amendment in February 2016, partially influenced by concerns raised in Darabont's deposition. At the end of the discovery phase in September 2016, Darabont's lawyers stated they were seeking damages of over $280 million; AMC stated they would "vigorously" defend against the lawsuit. Summary judgement statements were completed in July 2017. While waiting for summary judgement, Darabont and the CAA filed a second lawsuit against AMC, based on further evaluation of material from the discovery phase. The second suit contended that AMC purposely manipulated some of its licensing fees that should go to Darabont, such as revenue from digital sales and from overseas markets, and sought an addition in damages. Though AMC had initially refused to provide necessary documents