Davis Et Al V Parkinson Et Al Cacdce-17-01959 0001.0

Case 2:17-cv-01959-FMO-AGR Document 1 Filed 03/12/17 Page 1 of 15 Page ID #:1
Marc Y. Lazo, SBN 215998

1 WILSON KEADJIAN BROWNDORF LLP
2 1900 Main Street, Suite 600
Irvine, CA 92614
3 Phone No.: (949) 407-5029
Fax No.: (949) 234-6254
4
5 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Michael Davis and Uptone Pictures, Inc.
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11 MICHAEL DAVIS, an individual; and COMPLAINT FOR:
UPTONE PICTURES, INC., a North
12 Carolina corporation 1. BREACH OF CONTRACT
13 Plaintiffs, 2. BREACH OF IMPLIED COVENANT
OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR
14 v. DEALING
15 ERIC PARKINSON, an individual; 3. BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTIES
HANNOVER HOUSE, INC., a
16 4. FALSE PROMISE
Wyoming corporation; TRUMAN
17 PRESS, INC. (d/b/a HANNOVER
HOUSE), an Arkansas corporation; and 5. UNJUST ENRICHMENT
18 MEDALLION RELEASING, INC., an 6. INTENTIONAL
19 Arkansas corporation MISREPRESENTATION
Defendants.
20 7. FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT
21 8. UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES

22 9. ACCOUNTING
23 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
24
25 Plaintiffs MICHAEL DAVIS and UPTONE PICTURES, INC. (herein after collectively referred
26 to as Plaintiffs) allege against Defendants ERIC PARKINSON, HANNOVER HOUSE, INC.,
27 TRUMAN PRESS, INC., and MEDALLION RELEASING, INC.(herein after collectively referred to as
28 Defendants),as follows:
Wilson Keadjian
Browndorf LLP
Attorneys at Law
Irvine, CA
-1 -
COMPLAINT
1 PARTIES
2 1. Plaintiff MICHAEL DAVIS (Davis) is, and at all times mentioned in this complaint
3 was, an individual and president of Uptone Pictures, Inc.
4 2. Plaintiff UPTONE PICTURES, INC. (Uptone) is, and at all times mentioned in this
5 complaint was, a North Carolina corporation organized under the laws of North Carolina.
6 3. Plaintiffs are informed and believe that at all times mentioned herein, Defendant ERIC
7 PARKINSON (Parkinson) was and is an individual residing in the State of Arkansas. Plaintiffs are
8 further informed and believe that Parkinson was the principal and managing agent of defendants House
9 and Medallion, identified below.
10 4. Plaintiffs are informed and believe that at all times mentioned herein, Defendant
11 HANNOVER HOUSE, INC. (House) was and is a Wyoming corporation.
13 TRUMAN PRESS, INC. (Press) was and is an Arkansas corporation.
15 MEDALLION RELEASING, INC. (Medallion) was and is an Arkansas corporation.
16 Plaintiffs are informed and believe that at all times mentioned herein, there was such a
17 unity of interests between each of the individual and corporate Defendants named herein, that the
18 separate corporate entities should be disregarded, and the corporate entities of the Defendants should be
19 treated merely as the alter-ego of the respective individual Defendants. Adherence to the fiction of
20 separate existence of the corporate and entity Defendants as an entity distinct from the respective
21 individual Defendants would permit an abuse of the corporate provision, would sanction fraud and
22 injustice in that the individual Defendants could evade personal liability for their wrongdoing alleged in
23 this complaint and could and would continue in the corporate name to perpetuate the fraudulent plan,
24 scheme and device alleged in this complaint.
25 ///
26 ///
27 ///
28 ///
Wilson Keadjian
Browndorf LLP
Attorneys at Law
Irvine, CA
-2 -
COMPLAINT
1 JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2 7. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 USC 1332
3 because of a diversity of citizenship. Plaintiffs are residents of and doing business in North Carolina and
4 Defendants are residents of and doing business in Arkansas.
5 8. On information and belief, this Court also has personal jurisdiction over Defendants for
6 the reasons, among others, that (i) Defendants transact business in California by marketing to potential
7 business clients in California; and (ii) Defendants have entered into contracts within the state of
8 California with distributors and licensees. Moreover, each of the Defendants engaged in negotiations
9 and otherwise interacted with Plaintiff Davis while he was in California. As such, Defendants contacts
10 with this state have been systematic and continuous in the sundry dealings they have had with
11 filmmakers and producers similarly situated with Plaintiff.
12 9. Accordingly, venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C 1391 (b) and (c)
13 because a substantial part of the events giving rise to Plaintiffs claims occurred in this judicial district,
14 including the negotiations and contract into which Plaintiffs entered with Defendants, as well as the
15 contracts into which Defendants have entered into with other filmmakers and producers.
16 FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
17 10. Plaintiff Uptone is the authorized distribution agency and proprietor, as well as the
18 licensing source for the feature film, Union Bound (Picture). Plaintiff Davis as the principal of the
19 Picture had exclusive control and responsibility over the entirety of the creative process in developing,
20 producing and directing the Picture, and at all times alleged herein owned all rights to the Picture.
21 11. Defendants House and Medallion are in the business of marketing and distributing film
22 and television programs in all applicable formats and media for theatrical releases, home video and
23 video-on-demand markets in the territory of the United States of America and English-speaking
24 provinces of Canada.
25 12. In or around 2015, Defendant Parkinson and Plaintiff Davis began to discuss and
26 negotiate a potential agreement for Defendants to market and distribute the Picture leading up to the date
27 of its release.
28 ///
Wilson Keadjian
Browndorf LLP
Attorneys at Law
Irvine, CA
-3 -
COMPLAINT
1 13. On or around January 6, 2016, Defendant Parkinson emailed Plaintiff Davis to confirm
2 the terms of their agreement regarding the marketing and advertising of the Picture. A true and correct
3 copy of Parkinsons January 6, 2016 email to Davis outlining the terms of their engagement is attached
4 hereto as Exhibit A.
5 14. On or around January 12, 2016, Plaintiffs and Defendants entered into a written sales
6 distribution agreement (the Agreement) in which Defendants received the exclusive right to advertise,
7 market, license, and distribute the Picture in specified territories. In return, Plaintiffs were entitled to a
8 fee from the gross revenue of the Picture. A true and correct copy of the Agreement is attached hereto as
9 Exhibit B.
10 15. The initial release date of the Picture through media channels was on February 12, 2016,
11 with its theatrical release scheduled for April 22, 2016. The Picture received high praise from its viewers
12 with a rating of 6.7/10 on IMDB and 76% on Rotten Tomatoes. Plaintiffs are informed, believe and
13 thereon allege that because Defendants did not fully perform as agreed upon, the Picture did not raise as
14 much revenue as projected (goal was to be substantially over $550,000.00).
15 16. Defendants were under an obligation per the Agreement to have the Picture qualify for
16 the Netflix Output Subscription Video-On-Demand agreement with FreeStyle Digital Media, Inc. and
17 have failed to do so. Plaintiffs are informed and believe that the goal was not met because Defendants
18 performed no substantial acts in furtherance of their contractual duties, and the representations of
19 performance that they made to Plaintiffs during the negotiations leading up to the Agreement and
20 thereafter.
21 17. Defendants were to have the Picture on One-Hundred-Sixty-Five (165) theatres
22 simultaneously in all of the top 35 largest Designated Market Areas in the United States and have failed
23 to do so.
24 18. Plaintiffs are informed, believe and thereon allege that Defendants have not spent a
25 minimum of Seven-Hundred-Thousand-Dollars ($700,000.00) per the Agreement on advertising and
26 marketing.
27 19. To date, Plaintiffs have not received any fees per the Agreement. Defendants have not
28 remitted any payment to Plaintiffs and have not communicated with Plaintiffs regarding such payment.
Wilson Keadjian
Browndorf LLP
Attorneys at Law
Irvine, CA
-4 -
COMPLAINT
1 20. Plaintiffs are informed, believe and thereon allege that Defendants have distributed, and
2 continue to distribute the Picture in various formations, including but not limited to home video or
3 video-on-demand, and have retained the entirety of the profits there from, and have failed to provide any
4 accounting or otherwise communicate with Plaintiffs as to the nature and extent of the Pictures gross
5 proceeds despite Plaintiffs repeated demands.
6 21. Plaintiffs are informed, believe and thereon allege that Defendants have profited from the
7 distribution of the Picture. Thus, Defendants are in breach of the Agreement for failure to pay any
8 monies to Plaintiffs pursuant to the Agreement and their representations to Plaintiffs.
9 22. Plaintiffs are informed, believe and thereon allege that Defendants have failed to take any
10 measures to distribute the Picture or otherwise satisfy their contractual obligations. Thus, Defendants
11 are in breach of the Agreement for failure to perform pursuant to the Agreement.
12 23. As a result of Defendants failure to, among other things, market, advertise, and distribute
13 the Picture, Plaintiffs have been damaged and continue to suffer damages from Defendants failures to
14 perform and breaches of the Agreement. Plaintiffs are informed and believe that the extent of such
15 damages is within the jurisdictional limits of this Court.
16 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
17 BREACH OF CONTRACT
18 (By Plaintiff Uptone Against HOUSE and MEDALLION)
19 24. Plaintiffs refer to each of the foregoing paragraphs in their entirety, and hereby
20 incorporate them by reference as though fully set forth herein.
21 25. On or around January 12, 2016, Plaintiff Uptone and Defendants House and Medallion
22 entered into a written Agreement whereby Defendants agreed to market and distribute the Picture in
23 consideration for exclusive licensing rights and a 25% distribution fee with the remaining 75% to be
24 distributed to Plaintiff before deduction of costs and expenses. A true and correct copy of the
25 Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
26 26. Defendants have not distributed, advertised or marketed the Picture pursuant to the
27 Agreement and have failed to otherwise perform their duties in the Agreement in any reasonable
28 manner. Defendants continue to breach the Agreement for their failure to perform.
Wilson Keadjian
Browndorf LLP
Attorneys at Law
Irvine, CA
-5 -
COMPLAINT
1 27. As a result of Defendants failure to comply with their contractual obligations or to

2 perform their duties as promised, Plaintiff has been harmed and will continue to be damaged by: (1)
3 being deprived of additional lost sales and revenues that could have been earned from the Picture; (2)
4 being deprived of the opportunity costs incurred in having been unable to market and distribute the
5 Picture through other sources; and (3) being deprived of its agreed to profits pursuant to the terms of the
6 Agreement.
7 28. Defendants have not paid any monies to Plaintiff, who has been harmed and continues to
8 be damaged by Defendants breaches and failures to pay Plaintiffs share of the proceeds.
9 29. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants breach, Plaintiff suffered, general,
10 special, and consequential damages in an amount according to proof at trial. The Agreement provides
11 for an award of attorneys fees and costs to the prevailing party. As such, Plaintiff also requests recovery
12 of reasonable attorneys fees and costs of suit.
13 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
14 BREACH OF IMPLIED COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING
15 (By Plaintiff Uptone Against HOUSE, and MEDALLION)
18 31. Every contract imposes the duty of good faith and fair dealing upon the parties in
19 performance and enforcement of the contract.
20 32. Defendants have acted in bad faith by not performing their obligations under the
21 Agreement, and by making oral and written misrepresentations to Plaintiff about their ability to perform
22 and actual performance, all in an effort to hinder and delay Plaintiffs discovery of their true actions, to
23 wit, their failure to fully market and distribute the Picture pursuant to their contractual obligations, and
24 their concealment of the actual profits realized from the Picture.
25 33. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants breach of good faith and fair dealing,
26 Plaintiff suffered general, special, and consequential damages in an amount according to proof at trial.
27 ///
28 ///
Wilson Keadjian
Browndorf LLP
Attorneys at Law
Irvine, CA
-6 -
COMPLAINT
1 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

2 BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTIES
3 (Against All Defendants)
5 incorporates them by reference as though fully set forth herein.
6 35. By virtue of Plaintiffs entrustment and reliance in giving full and exclusive control and
7 licensing rights to Defendants, Defendants owed fiduciary duties of care, loyalty and good faith to
8 Plaintiffs. Defendants fiduciary duties included obligations to exercise good business judgment, to act
9 prudently in performing the Agreement, to discharge their actions in good faith, and to act in the best
10 interests of the Plaintiffs.
11 36. Defendants breached their fiduciary duty of care by, among other things, failing to
12 execute their obligations under the Agreement and failing in nature as fiduciaries to exercise their
13 exclusive rights given by and for the benefit of the Plaintiffs.
14 37. Defendants breached their duties of loyalty and good faith by, among other things,
15 intentionally breaching the Agreement in an attempt to reap benefits from the sale of the Picture while
16 unlawfully withholding Plaintiffs share and by refusing to provide any sort of accounting.
17 38. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants breach of fiduciary duties, Plaintiffs have
18 suffered damages including, but not limited to, harm to their rights and interests as licensor, in an
19 amount to be determined at trial.
20 39. Defendants conduct was malicious, fraudulent, and/or oppressive, and was committed
21 with a conscious disregard of the rights of Plaintiffs. Defendants were entrusted by the Plaintiffs to
22 market and distribute the Picture and transfer 75% of all revenue to the Plaintiffs. Defendants
23 intentionally and knowingly withheld Plaintiffs share of the revenue for their own benefit, disregarding
24 Plaintiffs rights to their share, and then misrepresented the nature and extent of the sales with the
25 purpose of deceiving Plaintiffs into believing that they were not owed anything. Accordingly, Plaintiffs
26 are entitled to an award of punitive or exemplary damages in an amount to be determined at trial.
27 ///
28 ///
Wilson Keadjian
Browndorf LLP
Attorneys at Law
Irvine, CA
-7 -
COMPLAINT
1 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

2 FALSE PROMISE (FRAUD)
3 (Against PARKINSON, HOUSE, and MEDALLION)
6 41. Leading up to the entry into the Agreement and thereafter, Defendants made several
7 promises to Plaintiffs that they would market, advertise, license, and distribute the Picture pursuant to
8 the terms of the Agreement, in order to induce Plaintiffs into retaining their services under the false
9 pretenses that Defendants would perform and utilize their industry expertise, rather than abscond with
10 Plaintiffs bargained-for profits.
11 42. Plaintiffs are informed, believe, and thereon allege that Defendants did not intend to
12 perform these promises to market, advertise, license, and distribute the Picture when they made them.
13 43. Defendants intended that Plaintiffs rely on these promises and induced Plaintiffs into
14 believing that Defendants would market, advertise, license, and distribute the Picture.
15 44. Plaintiffs reasonably relied on Defendants promises, and went forth without looking for
16 other marketing agents and distributors for the Picture in reliance of Defendants promises.
17 45. Defendants did not perform the promised acts of marketing, advertising, licensing, and
18 distributing the Picture.
19 46. Plaintiffs are informed, believe, and thereon allege that Defendants were aware that
20 Plaintiffs were not able to enter into licensing agreements with other distributors, causing Plaintiffs to
21 solely rely on Defendants performance to market, advertise, license, and distribute the Picture.
22 47. Had Plaintiffs known the actual facts concerning Defendants true intentions and false
23 promises, Plaintiffs would not have entered into the contract with Defendants and would have looked for
24 other distributors to market, advertise, license, and distribute the Picture.
25 48. Plaintiffs reliance on Defendants promises was a substantial factor in causing their
26 harm. Plaintiffs were unable to market, advertise, license, and distribute the Picture in time before the
27 scheduled release date of the Picture, and thereafter were bound to Defendants as their exclusive agents,
28 who did nothing to satisfy their obligations.
Wilson Keadjian
Browndorf LLP
Attorneys at Law
Irvine, CA
-8 -
COMPLAINT
1 49. As a direct, legal and proximate result of the aforementioned conduct, Plaintiffs have
2 suffered, and will continue to suffer, substantial general and special damages, including but not limited
3 to: loss of goodwill and revenue, as well as by: (1) being deprived of additional lost sales and revenues
4 that could have been earned from the Picture; (2) being deprived of the opportunity costs incurred in
5 having been unable to market and distribute the Picture through other sources; and (3) being deprived of
6 its agreed to profits pursuant to the terms of the Agreement. Accordingly, Plaintiffs have been damaged
7 in an amount to be proven at trial.
8 50. Plaintiffs are informed and believe that the aforementioned conduct of Defendants was
9 carried out as part of a deliberate scheme to preclude Plaintiffs from the benefits of the Agreement.
10 Such conduct was oppressive and fraudulent, and subjected Plaintiff to cruel and unjust hardship in a
11 willful and conscious disregard of their rights, warranting exemplary and punitive damages pursuant to
12 Civil Code section 3294, for the reasons set forth herein and for at least the following reasons:
13 a. It was done with the purposeful and intentional design of putting Defendants own interests
14 ahead of Plaintiffs rights and interests, in order to deprive Plaintiffs of their share of the
15 revenue from the Picture.
16 b. It was done with malice and with the intent to injure Plaintiffs with willful and conscious
17 disregard of Plaintiffs rights, financial wellbeing and the foreseeable damages and losses
18 caused thereby.
19 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
20 UNJUST ENRICHMENT
21 (Against all Defendants)
24 52. As a result of Defendants pervasive wrongful conduct described above, Defendants have
25 been unjustly enriched at the expense of Plaintiffs in the form of sales and royalties paid by distributors
26 and licensees with whom Defendants have transacted business.
27 ///
28 ///
Wilson Keadjian
Browndorf LLP
Attorneys at Law
Irvine, CA
-9 -
COMPLAINT
1 53. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon alleges that as a result of
2 Defendantsongoing oppressive conduct and exclusion of Plaintiffs, Defendants have unjustly been
3 enriched through the exclusive right to sell and distribute the Picture afforded by Plaintiffs.
4 54. Defendants should be ordered to disgorge the gains which they have unjustly obtained
5 and/or a constructive trust should be imposed for the benefit of the Plaintiffs in such amount as will
6 preserve the rights and interests of the Plaintiffs per the Agreement.
7 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
8 INTENTIONAL MISREPRESENTATION
12 56. Defendants made clear and unambiguous representations, orally and in writing, through
13 phone conversations and email correspondences, committing to distribute, advertise, and market the
14 Picture. A true and correct copy of Parkinsons January 6, 2016 email to Davis outlining the terms of
15 such discussions is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
16 57. Defendants representations were not true.
17 58. When Defendants made the aforementioned representations, Defendants knew the
18 representations were in fact false and made without any reasonable basis for believing them to be true.
19 59. Defendants intended that Plaintiffs rely on these representations, and further deceived and
20 induced Plaintiffs to dismiss other potential distributors and licensees.
21 60. Plaintiffs reasonably relied on the Defendants representations and therefore dismissed
22 other potential distributors.
23 61. Plaintiffs were harmed and their reliance on Defendants representations were a
24 substantial factor in causing their harm. Plaintiffs would not have dismissed other distributors and
25 licensees, and/or entered into any agreement with Defendants had Plaintiffs known that Defendants
26 would not fulfill his duties and promises to distribute, advertise, and market the picture.
27 62. Defendants misrepresentation was a substantial factor in causing Plaintiffs harm.
28 ///
Wilson Keadjian
Browndorf LLP
Attorneys at Law
Irvine, CA
-10 -
COMPLAINT
11 caused thereby.
12 SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
13 FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT
15 64. Plaintiffs repeat and incorporate by reference all other paragraphs of this complaint as
16 though fully set forth under this cause of action.
17 65. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants knowingly and
18 willfully conspired between themselves to defraud Plaintiffs by cooperatively engaging in the fraudulent
19 withholding of Plaintiffs share of profits, and the extent of revenue generated from the Picture.
20 66. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that all of the Defendants acting in
21 concert, intended to hide the receipt of the sales and therefore improperly withheld Plaintiffs shares
22 between the Defendants.
23 67. Specifically, HOUSE and MEDALLION misappropriated, misdirected, and otherwise
24 converted Plaintiffs share of revenue from the Picture.
25 68. Defendants intended to deceive Plaintiffs by concealing the sales figures and their
26 misappropriation of Plaintiffs share of the revenue derived from the Picture, including concealing their
27 failure to transfer 75% of the revenue as promised. Defendants, and each of them, concealed the funds
28
Wilson Keadjian
Browndorf LLP
Attorneys at Law
Irvine, CA
-11 -
COMPLAINT
1 from Plaintiffs for the purpose of hindering, delaying and otherwise lulling Plaintiffs into not pursuing
2 the recovery of their share.
3 69. Plaintiffs reasonably relied on Defendants deception because Defendants were Plaintiffs
4 fiduciaries and were, in fact, the ones to hold and disperse Plaintiffs share of the revenue derived from
5 the Picture. Defendants had exclusive licensing rights of the Picture and were therefore in complete
6 control of all revenue derived from such. Defendants improperly withheld the funds and were involved
7 in making direct misrepresentations to Plaintiffs regarding the disposition of Plaintiffs share of the
8 revenue, which Defendants knew were false and were made deliberately to mislead, obfuscate and
9 otherwise deter Plaintiffs from discovering the fraudulent concealments and transfers made with
10 Plaintiffs share of the revenue.
11 70. As a result, Plaintiffs were harmed in an amount according to proof, plus interest at the
12 legal rate from and after January 12, 2016.
13 71. Defendants concealment was a substantial factor in causing Plaintiffs harm.
24 caused thereby.
25 ///
26 ///
27 ///
28 ///
Wilson Keadjian
Browndorf LLP
Attorneys at Law
Irvine, CA
-12 -
COMPLAINT
1 EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION

2 UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES
6 74. Plaintiffs are informed, believe, and thereon allege that Defendants wrongful conduct
7 constituted unlawful, unfair or fraudulent business acts or practices proscribed by Californias Unfair
8 Business Practices Act, or Business and Professions Code 17-200, et seq., including but not limited to
9 the deprivation of money and property.
10 75. Defendants unlawful, unfair, and fraudulent business acts or practices include, but are
11 not limited to, failure to market, advertise, license, and distribute the Picture, as agreed, directing
12 Plaintiffs to cease business relations with other parties; purposefully and knowingly, or at minimum
13 recklessly preventing Plaintiffs from having access to other distributors and business opportunities; and
14 purposefully and knowingly misusing and abusing the professional and legal duties and obligations
15 owed to Plaintiffs during the course of their professional relationship, or at a minimum, recklessly or
16 negligently breaching those duties and obligations, by making the aforementioned material
17 misrepresentations to Plaintiffs.
18 76. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants wrongful acts, Plaintiffs have suffered
19 and will continue to suffer substantial pecuniary losses and irreparable injury.
20 77. Defendants willful and conscious disregard for Plaintiffs rights and the harm caused to
21 Plaintiffs based on Defendants egregious misrepresentations, concealment, and breaches of contract
22 created an unjust hardship for Plaintiffs.
23 78. As a result of Defendants wrongful, unlawful and/or unfair conduct, Plaintiffs are
24 entitled to compensation of all the monies lost in reliance upon Defendants failure to market, advertise,
25 license, and distribute the Picture.
26 79. It has been necessary for Plaintiffs to retain the services of legal counsel to pursue this
27 matter and Plaintiffs are entitled, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 1021.5, to an award of attorneys
28 fees, interest and costs incurred pursuing the action.
Wilson Keadjian
Browndorf LLP
Attorneys at Law
Irvine, CA
-13 -
COMPLAINT
1 80. Defendants acts have impaired Plaintiffs goodwill and have otherwise adversely
2 affected Plaintiffs business and reputation by use of unfair and fraudulent business practices. Also,
3 Defendants conduct violates federal and state statutory law, as set forth herein.
4 81. These acts constitute unfair competition and unfair business practices under California
5 Business and Professions Code 17200 et seq., the analogous statutes of other states, and California
6 common law.
7 82. Plaintiffs are also entitled to recover any of Defendants profits derived from the
8 distribution and licensing of the Picture.
9 83. By performing the conduct described herein, Defendants have acted and continue to act
10 with oppression, fraud, or malice, and intend to injure Plaintiffs and gain an advantage at Plaintiffs
11 expense.
12 NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION
13 ACCOUNTING
17 85. Pursuant to the written Agreement entered into between Plaintiffs and Defendants,
18 Defendants agreed to pay to Plaintiffs a fee, consisting of a percentage of the gross revenue from
19 distribution of the Picture.
20 86. As a result of Defendants numerous fraudulent acts described herein, Plaintiffs have
21 suffered damages and Defendants have received money, a portion of which is due to Plaintiffs from
22 Defendants per the Agreement.
23 87. Plaintiffs have demanded an accounting of the aforementioned transactions from
24 Defendants and payments but Defendants have failed and refused, and continues to fail and refuse, to
25 render such an accounting and to pay such sum.
26 88. The amount of money due from Defendants to Plaintiffs is unknown to Plaintiffs and
27 cannot be ascertained without an accounting of the receipts and disbursements of the aforementioned
28 transactions.
Wilson Keadjian
Browndorf LLP
Attorneys at Law
Irvine, CA
-14 -
COMPLAINT
1 89. Accordingly, Plaintiffs demand an accounting from Defendants in order to determine the
2 amount of money due per the Agreement.
3 PRAYER FOR RELIEF
4 WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants as follows:
5 ON THE FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
6 1. For attorneys fees and costs incurred herein.
7 ON THE FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
8 1. Disgorgement of gains unjustly obtained and/or a constructive trust imposed for the benefit
9 of Plaintiffs.
10 ON THE THIRD, FOURTH, SIXTH, AND SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
11 1. For exemplary and punitive damages in amounts that are yet to be ascertained.
12 ON THE NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION:
13 1. For an accounting from Defendants to Plaintiffs; and
14 2. For the amount found to be due from Defendants to Plaintiffs as a result of the accounting.
15 ON ALL CAUSES OF ACTION:
16 1. For general and special damages according to proof; including but not limited to all out of
17 pocket losses incurred by Plaintiffs;
18 2. For recovery of costs and expenses of suit as allowed by law; and
19 3. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
20 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
21 Plaintiffs hereby demand a jury trial on all of the claims herein.
22
23 Dated: March 6, 2017 WILSON KEADJIAN BROWNDORF, LLP
24
25 By:_______________________________
26 MARC Y. LAZO
27 Attorney for Plaintiffs
28
Wilson Keadjian
Browndorf LLP
Attorneys at Law
Irvine, CA
-15 -
COMPLAINT

Davis Et Al V Parkinson Et Al Cacdce-17-01959 0001.0

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Davis Et Al V Parkinson Et Al Cacdce-17-01959 0001.0

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Case 2:17-cv-01959-FMO-AGR Document 1 Filed 03/12/17 Page 1 of 15 Page ID #:1

Marc Y. Lazo, SBN 215998

9 FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

21 8. UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES

26 to as Plaintiffs) allege against Defendants ERIC PARKINSON, HANNOVER HOUSE, INC.,

1 JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1 27. As a result of Defendants failure to comply with their contractual obligations or to

1 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

1 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

1 EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION

S-ar putea să vă placă și