Case 3:11-cv-02044-G Document 1

Filed 08/16/11

Page 1 of 9 PageID 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION ARIEL VIGO, Plaintiff, v. GABE REED d/b/a GABE REED PRODUCTIONS, Defendant. COMPLAINT TO THE HONORABLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE: COMES NOW, Ariel Vigo (Plaintiff or Vigo) and complains of Gabe Reed d/b/a Gabe Reed Productions (Defendant or Reed), and for cause of action would respectfully show the Court as follows: PARTIES 1. Plaintiff, Ariel Vigo is an individual residing in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Plaintiff

CIVIL ACTION NO. ___________

does not maintain a place of business or residence in Texas. 2. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Defendant, Gabe Reed

d/b/a Gabe Reed Productions is an individual resident and citizen of Dallas, Dallas County, Texas. On information and belief, Defendant, Gabe Reed d/b/a Gabe Reed Productions may be served at his usual and customary place of business, Gabe Reed Productions, The Crescent, 7th Floor, 100 Crescent Court, Dallas, Texas 75201. JURISDICTION/VENUE 3. The Court has jurisdiction pursuant to U.S. Const., Art. 3, 2 and 28 U.S.C.

1332(a)(2). Under the U.S. Constitution, judicial powers extend to controversies between citizens of a state and citizens of a foreign country. U.S. Const., Art. 3, 2. By statute, district courts have
COM PLAINT Page 1

Case 3:11-cv-02044-G Document 1

Filed 08/16/11

Page 2 of 9 PageID 2

original jurisdiction over all civil actions when the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, excluding interest and costs, and the dispute is between, inter alia, citizens of a state and citizens of a foreign country. 28 U.S.C. 1332(a)(2). 4. There is a complete diversity of citizenship in this case because no plaintiff is a

citizen of the same state as any defendant. See 28 U.S.C. 1332. The Plaintiff is a citizen of the country of Argentina and the Defendant is a citizen of the State of Texas. 5. As more specifically described below, the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000,

excluding interest and costs. 28 U.S.C. 1332(a). 6. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(a). FACTUAL BACKGROUND 7. Vigo is a concert promoter in Buenos Aires, Argentina. As a concert promoter, Vigo

hires musical acts to perform live musical concerts in Buenos Aires. In turn, Vigo produces and sells tickets to the concert. 8. Vigo is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Reed is a concert promoter

in Dallas, Texas. Vigo is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Reed works with the musical group professionally known as Motley Crue, and/or individual members of Motley Crue. 9. In or about October 2010, Vigo contacted Reed to discuss entering into a contract

whereby Vigo would pay Reed for a live musical performance of Motley Crue, and another musical group professionally known as Papa Roach, in Buenos Aires, Argentina. 10. In e-mail discussions throughout December 2010 and January 2011 between Vigo in

Buenos Aires and Reed in Dallas, as well as in person in Buenos Aires on or about December 12, 2010, Vigo and Reed entered into an oral contract whereby, inter alia, Vigo would pay Reed for a live musical performance of Motley Crue to take place in Buenos Aires, Argentina on a date between March and May, 2011. As payment for this performance, the parties agreed that Reed would be paid
COM PLAINT Page 2

Case 3:11-cv-02044-G Document 1

Filed 08/16/11

Page 3 of 9 PageID 3

a $300,000 flat fee, as well as a percentage of certain net revenues, and that Vigo would advance a $150,000 deposit to Reed towards this fee. 11. The contracted for live musical performance of Motley Crue was a material condition

of the contract. At the time the parties entered into this agreement, Reed represented that Motley Crue could and would perform this live musical performance for Vigo in Buenos Aires. However, this representation was false and Motley Crue did not perform the concert for Vigo. At the time Reed made this representation, he either knew that it was false or made it recklessly without any regard for its truth and as positive assertion. The representation was made with the intent that Vigo rely on it, enter into the contract, and, inter alia, send Reed the $150,000 deposit. 12. In reasonable reliance upon Reeds representations that Motley Crue would perform

the live musical performance, and without knowledge of the falsity of this representation, Vigo forwarded the deposit to Reed. On or about January 25, 2011, Vigo wired $100,000 of the deposit directly into Reeds bank account. On or about January 26, 2011, Vigo wired the remaining $50,000 of the deposit directly into Reeds bank account. Reeds bank account information was provided by Reed to Vigo via e-mail. 13. On or about January 27, 2011, Reed breached the contract with Vigo and indicated

the he was still considering offers from other promoters for Motely Crue to play in Buenos Aires. 14. On or about May 19 and 20, 2011, Motley Crue played two shows in Buenos Aires,

Argentina for another concert promoter. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that these performances were contracted for by Reed. The live musical performance that Vigo contracted for was never performed. 15. As a proximate result of Vigos reliance on Reeds false representation, Vigo has

suffered damages. In particular, Reed refuses, and continues to refuse, to return the $150,000 deposit to Vigo. This is despite Reeds numerous promises in various e-mails to return the $150,000
COM PLAINT Page 3

Case 3:11-cv-02044-G Document 1

Filed 08/16/11

Page 4 of 9 PageID 4

deposit. In addition, Vigo lost of the benefit of the bargain of the Motley Crue performance. As a result of the lost ticket sales and other revenue from the show, Vigo has been damaged in the amount of $2,000,000 in lost profits. Further, Vigo has incurred consequential damages, including mental anguish, in an amount to be determined at trial. COUNT ONE (Breach of Oral Contract) 16. forth herein. 17. On or about December 12, 2010, Plaintiff and Defendant entered into a valid and Plaintiff incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs the same as if fully set

enforceable oral agreement wherein Plaintiff would pay Motley Crue $300,000 to perform a live musical concert for Vigo in Buenos Aires, Argentina. 18. As part of Vigos performance of this contract, Vigo paid a deposit of $150,000 to

Reed on January 25 and 26, 2011. Plaintiff has performed all of his contractual obligations. 19. On or about January 27, 2011, Defendant breached the oral agreement. Defendant

further breached the oral agreement by failing and refusing, and continuing to fail and refuse, to return the $150,000 deposit to Plaintiff. 20. As a result of Defendants breach of the oral agreement, Plaintiff has been damaged,

including but not limited to the loss of his $150,000 deposit. COUNT TWO (Fraud) 21. forth herein. 22. In e-mail discussions throughout December 2010 and January 2011 between Plaintiff Plaintiff incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs the same as if fully set

in Buenos Aires and Defendant in Dallas, as well as in person in Buenos Aires on or about December 12, 2010, Defendant represented to Plaintiff that Motley Crue would perform a live musical performance for Plaintiff in Buenos Aires, Argentina between March and May 2011. This
COM PLAINT Page 4

Case 3:11-cv-02044-G Document 1

Filed 08/16/11

Page 5 of 9 PageID 5

representation was material in that it induced the Plaintiff to agree to pay to Defendant a fee of $300,000 for this performance, and further induced Plaintiff to pay the Defendant a deposit against this fee of $150,000. 23. The representation made by Defendant as described above was false. In fact, the

Defendant made a deal with another concert promoter in Buenos Aires, Argentina for Motley Crue to perform on or about May 19 and 20, 2011. Motley Crue did, in fact, perform these live musical performances for the other concert promoter. Motley Crue did not perform the live musical performance for Plaintiff. 24. At the time this representation was made, the Defendant either knew this

representation was false or asserted it recklessly without any regard for its truth, with intent that the Plaintiff rely on the representation. 25. Plaintiff reasonably believed and relied upon this representation and, as a result, was

induced to forward the $150,000 deposit to Defendant. 26. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants actions, Plaintiff has been injured as

follows: (a) Defendant has refused to return the $150,000 deposit ; (b) Plaintiff lost the benefit of the bargain $2,000,000 in profits he would have made from the live Motley Crue performance; and (c) Plaintiff has been caused mental distress and anguish; all to Plaintiffs damage in an amount within the jurisdictional limits of this Court. 27. The acts of Defendant as described above constitute actual fraud, in that Defendant

made a false, material misrepresentation, that Defendant either knew to be false or asserted recklessly without knowledge of its truth, with the intent that Plaintiff act on the misrepresentation. Plaintiff did indeed act in reliance on Defendant's misrepresentation, and has been injured as a result. Accordingly, Plaintiff seeks exemplary damages under Sections 41.001 et seq. of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code.
COM PLAINT Page 5

Case 3:11-cv-02044-G Document 1

Filed 08/16/11

Page 6 of 9 PageID 6

COUNT THREE (Negligent Misrepresentation) 28. forth herein. 29. In e-mail discussions throughout December 2010 and January 2011 between Plaintiff Plaintiff incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs the same as if fully set

in Buenos Aires and Defendant in Dallas, as well as in person in Buenos Aires on or about December 12, 2010, Defendant represented to Plaintiff that Motley Crue would perform a live musical performance for Plaintiff in Buenos Aires, Argentina between March and May 2011. This representation was material in that it induced the Plaintiff to agree to pay to Defendant a fee of $300,000 for this performance, and further induced Plaintiff to pay the Defendant a deposit against this fee of $150,000. 30. The representation made by Defendant as described above was false. Motley Crue

did not perform the live musical performance for Plaintiff. 31. At the time this representation was made, the Defendant did not exercise reasonable

care or competence in obtaining or communicating the information. 32. Plaintiff reasonably believed and relied upon this representation and, as a result, was

induced to forward the $150,000 deposit to Defendant. 33. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants actions, Plaintiff has been injured as

follows: (a) Defendant has refused to return the $150,000 deposit ; (b) Plaintiff lost the benefit of the bargain $2,000,000 in profits he would have made from the live Motley Crue performance; and (c) Plaintiff has been caused mental distress and anguish; all to Plaintiffs damage in an amount within the jurisdictional limits of this Court. /// ///

COM PLAINT

Page 6

Case 3:11-cv-02044-G Document 1

Filed 08/16/11

Page 7 of 9 PageID 7

COUNT FOUR (Unjust Enrichment/Restitution) 34. forth herein. 35. Pleading further, and in the alternative, Defendant gained an unjust benefit from Plaintiff incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs the same as if fully set

Plaintiff in that he has kept and had the use of the $150,000 deposit made for a live musical concert that Defendant cancelled. 36. This benefit was gained by fraud and the taking of an undue advantage of Plaintiff. EXEMPLARY DAMAGES 37. forth herein. 38. The actions of Defendant are the kind of conduct for which the law allows the Plaintiff incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs the same as if fully set

imposition of exemplary damages in that Defendant acted with malice, as that term is defined by Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code 41.001(7). REQUEST FOR ATTORNEYS FEES 39. forth herein. 40. Plaintiff has presented demand for payment of its claim to the Defendant more than Plaintiff incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs the same as if fully set

thirty (30) days prior to the filing of this Complaint. As of the date of filing, the claim has not been paid or satisfied. Plaintiff has been required to retain the undersigned attorneys to represent his legal interests in this matter and to prosecute the claims set forth herein. Plaintiff, therefore, requests recovery of a reasonably attorneys fees from the Defendant in this cause through trial, as well as any appeals. 41. Plaintiff bases his entitlement of attorneys fees on the authority of 38.001 et seq.

of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code as this is a suit based on breach of contract.
COM PLAINT Page 7

Case 3:11-cv-02044-G Document 1

Filed 08/16/11

Page 8 of 9 PageID 8

JURY DEMAND 42. A trial by jury is requested. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that Defendant be cited to appear and answer, and that on final trial, this Court: a. b. c. d. Award Plaintiff compensatory damages as allowed by law; That this Court decree a constructive trust on the funds as requested; Award Plaintiff exemplary damages as allowed by law; Award Plaintiff his reasonable and necessary attorneys fees and costs pursuant to Sections 38.001 et seq. of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code; Award Plaintiff pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as allowed by law; Such other and further relief to which Plaintiff may be justly entitled; and Any other relief, at law or in equity, that the Court deems proper. Respectfully Submitted, By: /s/ Patrick W. Powers Patrick W. Powers State Bar No. 24013351 patrick@powerstaylor.com Peyton J. Healey State Bar No. 24035918 peyton@powerstaylor.com POWERS TAYLOR LLP Campbell Centre II 8150 North Central Expressway Suite 1575 Dallas, Texas 75206 Telephone: (214) 239-8900 Facsimile: (214) 239-8901

e. f. g.

COMPLAINT

Page 8

Case 3:11-cv-02044-G Document 1

Filed 08/16/11

Page 9 of 9 PageID 9

Michael D. Kuznetsky California Sate Bar No. 241045 (application for admission pro hac vice forthcoming) KUZNETSKY LAW GROUP, P.C. 10 Universal City Plaza, Suite 2000 Universal City, CA 91608-1074 Tel: (818) 753-2450 Fax: (818) 736-9099 mike@kuzlaw.com ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

COMPLAINT

Page 9