Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
hero_prop_suit [2018/10/11 17:13] – [Declaratory Judgment, Damages] Carlos Pedraza | hero_prop_suit [2019/07/27 14:30] (current) – Carlos Pedraza | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{:: | {{:: | ||
- | <wrap lo>The studio model of the Sovereign-class Enterprise-E from //Star Trek: First Contact// is at the center of a lawsuit over its sale, from which OWC Studios head Alec Peters claims he is owed $200,000. <wrap indent lo>// | + | <fs smaller>The studio model of the Sovereign-class Enterprise-E from //Star Trek: First Contact// is at the center of a lawsuit over its sale, from which OWC Studios head Alec Peters claims he is owed $200, |
- | ====== Company Sues Peters for Defamation in Disputed Prop Sale ====== | + | <fs x-small> |
- | **// | + | ====== Trial in Peters' |
+ | |||
+ | **//In Countersuit, | ||
{{TOC}} | {{TOC}} | ||
{{page> | {{page> | ||
- | OWC Studios head Alec Peters | + | A January 2020 trial awaits Axanar producer [[Alec Peters]] in a Nevada courtroom, where he' |
+ | |||
+ | <WRAP center 90%> <fs smaller> | ||
+ | |||
+ | Meanwhile, Peters himself filed an amended countersuit November 7, 2018, seeking $165,000 in damages, plus attorneys' | ||
+ | |||
+ | Armstrong' | ||
+ | |||
+ | {{page> | ||
- | The suit seeks at least $15,000 in damages after Peters | + | She also wants a judge to declare |
- | The lawsuit was first filed in Clark County District Court in Nevada on September 21, 2018, by [[http:// | + | Her lawsuit was first filed in Clark County District Court in Nevada on September 21, 2018, naming Peters as a defendant, along with his company, [[propworx-email|Propworx]]. |
[{{ :: | [{{ :: | ||
Line 23: | Line 33: | ||
===== Legal Complaint ===== | ===== Legal Complaint ===== | ||
- | The eight-page legal complaint details attempts by Hero Prop to broker the sale of the 10.5-foot long Enterprise-E model constructed for the TNG film, //Star Trek: First Contact//. The legal complaint was amended October 9 to address public defamatory statements Peters allegedly made about Armstrong after Peters was served in the lawsuit. | + | The eight-page legal complaint details attempts by Hero Prop to broker the sale of the 10.5-foot long Enterprise-E model constructed for the TNG film, //Star Trek: First Contact// |
- | <WRAP right round download | + | <WRAP right round download |
- | <wrap lo> | + | \\ |
- | </ | + | **COUNTERCLAIM** Read Alec Peters’ response to the legal complaint with his counterclaim against Armstrong. {{: |
+ | |||
+ | The legal complaint was amended October 9 to address public defamatory statements Peters allegedly made about Armstrong after Peters was served in the lawsuit. | ||
Line 34: | Line 46: | ||
According to the suit, Hero Prop began working with Peters in October 2017, when Armstrong told Peters she had a buyer interested in purchasing the Enterprise-E model from its owner. The model' | According to the suit, Hero Prop began working with Peters in October 2017, when Armstrong told Peters she had a buyer interested in purchasing the Enterprise-E model from its owner. The model' | ||
- | The suit alleges Armstrong asked Peters if he knew the owner. Peters reportedly replied, “Yes, very well.” Though the owner is not named in the suit, Peters was briefly associated with Schneider' | + | <WRAP right round important 320px> |
+ | <fs larger>< | ||
+ | <fs smaller>The Clark County, Nev., District Court set the following schedule for the case leading up to trial:</ | ||
+ | * <fs smaller> | ||
+ | * <fs smaller> | ||
+ | * <fs smaller> | ||
+ | * <fs smaller> | ||
+ | * <fs smaller> | ||
+ | * <fs smaller> | ||
+ | * <fs smaller> | ||
+ | </ | ||
- | [{{ :: | + | The suit alleges Armstrong asked Peters if he knew the Enterprise |
- | Armstrong stated she told Peters the buyer was willing to pay $500,000 for the Enterprise model, and that Hero Prop would split profits from the sale, with one-third going to Peters, if he could convince the owner to sell for less than $500, | + | Armstrong stated she told Peters the buyer was willing to pay $500,000 for the Enterprise model, and that Hero Prop would split profits from the sale, with one-third going to Peters, if he could convince the owner to sell for less than $500, |
=== Misrepresentation? | === Misrepresentation? | ||
- | The complaint states that Peters represented that he'd communicated with the owner, though Armstrong said she learned later Peters had never contacted the owner, instead asking his former Propworx business partner, Jarrod Hunt, to reach out. Hunt had parted ways with Peters in 2017, starting his own company, Propblock. | + | The complaint states that Peters represented that he'd communicated with the owner, though Armstrong said she learned later Peters had never contacted the owner, instead asking his former Propworx business partner, Jarrod Hunt, to reach out. Hunt had parted ways with Peters in 2017, starting his own company, |
- | In the course of those conversations, | + | In the course of those conversations, |
Armstrong stated she was unaware of the bad relationship between Peters and the owner: | Armstrong stated she was unaware of the bad relationship between Peters and the owner: | ||
- | > At no point prior to October 29, 2017 did Peters inform Armstrong that Peters had a very poor relationship with Owner and was in no position to arrange a sale with the Owner. Had Peters truthfully represented he had a poor relationship with the Owner, Plaintiffs would have never sought Peters’ assistance in acquiring | + | [{{ :: |
- | [{{ : | + | > At no point prior to October 29, 2017 did Peters inform Armstrong that Peters had a very poor relationship with Owner and was in no position to arrange a sale with the Owner. Had Peters truthfully represented he had a poor relationship with the Owner, Plaintiffs would have never sought Peters’ assistance in acquiring the Enterprise-E.((Hero Prop LLP v. Alec Peters/Propworx, Amended Complaint, Clark County District Court, Las Vegas, p. 2 ¶9, 10/9/18.)) |
=== 'An Asshole' | === 'An Asshole' | ||
- | By November 15, 2017, after telling Armstrong the owner was "being an asshole," | + | By November 15, 2017, after telling Armstrong the owner was "being an asshole," |
- | "Hunt believed the effort to acquire the Enterprise E from Owner was dead." | + | "Hunt believed the effort to acquire the Enterprise-E from Owner was dead." |
=== The Sale === | === The Sale === | ||
- | After learning from Armstrong a couple weeks later that the buyer was willing to pay more for the model, Hunt, of his own accord contacted the Enterprise' | + | After learning from Armstrong a couple weeks later that the buyer was willing to pay more for the model, Hunt, of his own accord, contacted the Enterprise' |
+ | |||
+ | [{{ : | ||
==== 'The Seller' | ==== 'The Seller' | ||
Line 66: | Line 90: | ||
According to the suit, Peters learned of the sale in June 2018 and claimed Armstrong owed him his commission: | According to the suit, Peters learned of the sale in June 2018 and claimed Armstrong owed him his commission: | ||
- | > When [Peters] reported in November 2017 that the Owner did not want to sell his collection, that was in fact “merely the first step in the negotiation.” Peters claimed he had done his job and was entitled to be compensated on the completed deal. Peters also argued he was “the seller’s agent” despite the fact Peters had no contractual agreement with the Owner, no communications with the Owner, and Peters claimed that Owner was not even supposed to know about Peters’ involvement in the proposed transaction.((Hero Prop LLP v. Alec Peters/ | + | > When [Peters] reported in November 2017 that the Owner did not want to sell his collection, that was in fact “merely the first step in the negotiation.” Peters claimed he had done his job and was entitled to be compensated on the completed deal. Peters also argued he was “the seller’s agent” despite the fact Peters had no contractual agreement with the Owner, no communications with the Owner, and Peters claimed that Owner was not even supposed to know about Peters’ involvement in the proposed transaction.((Hero Prop LLP v. Alec Peters/ |
The suit claims Peters threatened Armstrong in a June 20 email, saying, "you don’t want to be dragged through the mud and have your business ruined.” | The suit claims Peters threatened Armstrong in a June 20 email, saying, "you don’t want to be dragged through the mud and have your business ruined.” | ||
Line 72: | Line 96: | ||
[{{ :: | [{{ :: | ||
- | By September 12, Peters had a lawyer send a letter demanding payment, stating that “Peters/ | + | By September 12, Peters had a lawyer send a letter demanding payment, stating that “Peters/ |
- | The owner characterized his relationship with Peters somewhat differently, | + | The owner characterized his relationship with Peters somewhat differently, |
- | ==== $200,000 in Damages ==== | + | ==== Peters' |
- | According to the lawsuit, the letter from Peters' | + | Peters' |
+ | |||
+ | ==== Stolen Objects ==== | ||
+ | |||
+ | In his counterclaim, Peters stated his discovery Armstrong had trafficked in stolen objects led her to retaliate: | ||
+ | |||
+ | > Upon information and belief, Mr. Peters discovered that Ms. Armstrong had sold multiple stolen objects and obtained commissions therefrom, including but not limited to objects from Marvel Studios and Warner Brothers. Once Ms. Armstrong became aware of Mr. Peters’ knowledge of her previous sales, she attempted to exclude him from all pending transactions.((Defendants' | ||
=== Propworx Bankruptcy === | === Propworx Bankruptcy === | ||
- | This is not the first time Peters' | + | This is not the first time Peters' |
==== Defamation Claims ==== | ==== Defamation Claims ==== | ||
Line 89: | Line 119: | ||
<WRAP center box 90%> | <WRAP center box 90%> | ||
- | <wrap lo> | + | <wrap lo> |
</ | </ | ||
Line 95: | Line 125: | ||
<WRAP box center 90%> | <WRAP box center 90%> | ||
- | <wrap lo> | + | <wrap lo> |
</ | </ | ||
=== 'False and Damaging' | === 'False and Damaging' | ||
- | The suit called Peters' | + | The suit called Peters' |
- | have your business ruined,” as malicious intent to injure Armstrong’s reputation.((Hero Prop LLP v. Alec Peters/ | + | have your business ruined," |
[{{ :: | [{{ :: | ||
Line 115: | Line 145: | ||
In its lawsuit against Peters, Hero Prop asked a judge to declare: | In its lawsuit against Peters, Hero Prop asked a judge to declare: | ||
<WRAP center 95%> | <WRAP center 95%> | ||
- | * Peters owes $15,000 in damages from his libelous Facebook posts. | + | * Peters owes in excess of $15,000 in damages from his libelous Facebook posts. |
* Peters was entitled to a portion of profits from the sale of the Enterprise-E only if he could persuade the owner to sell; he failed at that, so he was not due any commission. | * Peters was entitled to a portion of profits from the sale of the Enterprise-E only if he could persuade the owner to sell; he failed at that, so he was not due any commission. | ||
* Hero Prop was not legally bound to arrange sale of the model only through Peters. | * Hero Prop was not legally bound to arrange sale of the model only through Peters. | ||
* The plaintiffs are not liable for damages from claims alleged by Peters. | * The plaintiffs are not liable for damages from claims alleged by Peters. | ||
- | * Plaintiffs are due attorneys' | + | * Plaintiffs are due attorneys' |
</ | </ | ||
- | Armstrong and Hero Prop are represented by attorney Michael D. Rawlins of the Smith & Shapiro law firm. Peters' attorney has not yet been entered into court records. {{: | + | In his counterclaim, |
+ | <WRAP 95%> | ||
+ | * Actual and compensatory damages in excess of $165,000, plus pre- and post- judgment interest. | ||
+ | * Attorney’s fees and costs of the suit. | ||
+ | * Exemplary and punitive damages in excess of $15, | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===== Attorneys ===== | ||
+ | |||
+ | Armstrong and Hero Prop are represented by attorney Michael D. Rawlins of the Smith & Shapiro law firm. Peters | ||
<WRAP tip 75%> | <WRAP tip 75%> | ||
<wrap em> | <wrap em> | ||
- | Discuss this article in [[face> | + | Discuss this article in [[face> |
</ | </ | ||
---- | ---- | ||
- | **Keywords**{{tag> | + | **Keywords**{{tag> |