Exhibits to complaint, defendants - Insurance Coverage Blog

More documents

Recommendations

Info

47. Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 47. 48 Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 48. 49. Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 49. 50. Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 50. 51. Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 51. 52. Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 52. 53. Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 53. 54. Defendants are currently without information or knowledge suffcient to form a belief regarding the truth of allegations contained in Paragraph 54, and, therefore, deny the same. four of 55. Defendants admit that on March 2,2007, an agreement of the five members of the Joint Venture was reached after a vote regarding the distribution of fees pursuant to the Joint Venture Agreement. Defendants admit that an agreement was reached by four of the five members of the Joint Venture after a vote to remove plaintiff from the Joint Venture pursuant to the "removal" provision contained in the Joint Venture Agreement. Defendants deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 55. 56. Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 56. 57. Defendants admit that an agreement to remove plaintiff from the Joint Venture was reached by four of the five members of the Joint Venture pursuant to the Joint Venture Agreement after a vote. Defendants admit that the Joint Venture Agreement signed and agreed to by plaintiff provides that any member being removed pursuant to the "removal" provision wil forfeit further rights under the Joint Venture Agreement. Defendants deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 57. 6 ~:
58. Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 58. 59. Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 59. 60. Defendants admit that SKG tendered a check representing 3 % of the net fees, or $617,924.43, which four of the five members of the Joint Venture agreed upon as the share of fees to which plaintiff was entitled pursuant to the Joint Venture Agreement. Defendants admit that plaintiff rejected the check. Defendants deny the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 60. 61. Defendants deny the allegations contained in Paragraph 61. Defendant, Scruggs Law Firm, P.A., has asserted in its Supplemental Demand for Arbitration fied with the American Arbitration Association that plaintiff owes fiduciary duties to Scruggs Law Firm, P. A. arising has from plaintiff's representation of Scruggs Law Firm, P. A. in other litigation; and that plaintiff breached those duties by disclosing and/or threatening to disclose privileged and confidential information acquired during its representation of Scruggs Law Firm, P .A. for its own (il-gotten) gain, and by using and/or threatening to use a twisted and false version of such privileged and confidential information to harass, intimidate, threaten, and pressure Scruggs Law Firm, P. A. into which plaintiff paying monies under the Joint Venture Agreement to plaintiff has not earned and does not deserve. The proper remedy for plaintiff's breach of fiduciary duties is the disgorgement of all fees paid to plaintiff by Scruggs Law Firm, P .A. This claim is subject to arbitration, but Scruggs Law Firm, P. A. reserves the right to assert this claim as a counterclaim in this proceeding in the (unlikely) event it is determined that said claim is not subject to arbitration. Scruggs Law Firm, P.A. reserves the right to assert this claim as a counterclaim without waiver of its right to arbitrate this claim and all of plaintiff's claims and only as may be necessary to preserve its rights. 7
Page 1 and 2: In Re: Katrina Litigation Joint Ven
Page 3 and 4: the common account of the joint ven
Page 5 and 6: This Agreement may be executed in c
Page 7 and 8: v- IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF LAFAYETT
Page 9 and 10: among the plaintiff and the defenda
Page 11: 33. Defendants admit the allegation
Page 15 and 16: confidential information to harass,
Page 17 and 18: 90. Defendants deny the allegations
Page 19 and 20: equires a response, defendants deny
Page 21 and 22: FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Defendan
Page 23 and 24: V"' IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF LAFAYET
Page 25 and 26: 5. As a threshold issue, the partie
Page 27 and 28: , LARRY D. MOFFETT - BAR # 3401 WIL
Page 29 and 30: I. " Removal - A member of the join
Page 31 and 32: . . . ~ This Agreeent may be execut
Page 33 and 34: " ;:-.- -- . I . , ' , JONES, FUNER
Page 35 and 36: K-lb12ÌL~t ApRoinlinent by: a Pai.
Page 37 and 38: Standard Arbitration Clause The par
Page 39 and 40: Commercial Arbitration Rules .. --0
Page 41 and 42: Commercial Arbitration Kuies (a) by
Page 43 and 44: Commercial Arbitration Rules .L ""0
Page 45 and 46: ~VJ.ilJ.ii\"J.\"J.u..1 .i 1..1 U.L.
Page 47 and 48: Commercial Arbitration Rules fuher
Page 49 and 50: Commercial Arbitration Rules presen
Page 51 and 52: Commercial Arbitration Rules - --0-
Page 53 and 54: Commercial Arbitration Rules - ~o -
Page 55 and 56: Commercial Arbitration Rules may sc
Page 57 and 58: '-Vl.l.l.l.l.l.\.l.\.l.u.l. .il. Ui
Page 59 and 60: \"Vllllll~.lvl'U L-L l.LUaUVLL .L'-
Page 61 and 62: IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF LAFAYETTE C
Page 63 and 64:
7. The Joint Venture Agreement prov
Page 65 and 66:
'l~ Oìslmlr. Ruoff/liD . American
Page 67 and 68:
DANIEL COKER HORTON & BELL, PA ATTO
Page 69:
Lr~IEL COKER HORTON & BLi-L, P.A AT
show all

Exhibits to complaint, defendants - Insurance Coverage Blog

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?