An IPT legal primer...FYI

D

Deadon

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
A Legal Primer...........................................

Alright, here’s some legal info for those whom are interested; Generally................

1. There are two classes of players in the IPT, card holders and qualifiers, and the case for each is different in some respects.

2. If you agree to accept payments, your debt then becomes based on that agreement and any recovery beyond that amount is impossible. That is, absent an agreement otherwise, but I’m sure his attorney told him about that.

3. Agreements for payment of money can be easily set aside or discharged in Ch. 11 or 13 bankruptcy. Debts based on intentional misconduct cannot.

4. Intentional misdeeds, torts as they are called, allow for the recovery of punitive damages on top of the economic loss. With his felony theft related conviction and his other extensive history, he’s a prime candidate for a big slap. This is probably one of his main concerns as his conduct is borderline criminal, and most certainly subjects him to punitive damages. Punitive damages also help soften the impact of legal costs on each person’s recovery. Can’t always count on getting them.

5. Attorneys ask for money up front in such cases for different reasons. It helps soften the amount of money he takes out of his pocket to handle your case. It also establishes a commitment by the client to continue and cooperate in the case. With players not being the reliable people, it can become difficult to contact and get them to show up for need appointments and court appearances. The out of pocket cash, is an incentive. Depositions and such are not as expensive as represented by some of the other posters. That is, unless extensive travel is required.

Think about it, the attorney invests thousands of dollars in cash and more in his time, then the player(s) becomes disinterested, perhaps is playing in Europe or Asia, and just writes the 5K or such off as a loss. This will happen with some players, guaranteed. This way some of the risk of litigation is put on the clients shoulders. Very typical. Which is why the fee agreement will probably also be higher than usual. Litigating and then collecting the debt are more than the average case. Debt collection agencies frequently charge between 40 and 50% fees just for collecting debts.

In the end.....

Here’s what I think he is doing.

If he doesn’t sell or get a great influx of cash, he will file bankruptcy. But only after changing the nature of the debts to the players/employees from a fraud/misrepresentation etc.. debt to a contractual debt, which will make the debts dischargable. He will make, maybe, one or two small payments to cement the deal, then file for bankruptcy. He walks clean.

He may file anyway, and force the players to go to bankruptcy court to get their case excluded from the bankruptcy. BTW, that’s another lawyer and cost.
 
Deadon said:
A Legal Primer...........................................

Alright, here’s some legal info for those whom are interested; Generally................

1. There are two classes of players in the IPT, card holders and qualifiers, and the case for each is different in some respects.

2. If you agree to accept payments, your debt then becomes based on that agreement and any recovery beyond that amount is impossible. That is, absent an agreement otherwise, but I’m sure his attorney told him about that.

3. Agreements for payment of money can be easily set aside or discharged in Ch. 11 or 13 bankruptcy. Debts based on intentional misconduct cannot.

4. Intentional misdeeds, torts as they are called, allow for the recovery of punitive damages on top of the economic loss. With his felony theft related conviction and his other extensive history, he’s a prime candidate for a big slap. This is probably one of his main concerns as his conduct is borderline criminal, and most certainly subjects him to punitive damages. Punitive damages also help soften the impact of legal costs on each person’s recovery. Can’t always count on getting them.

5. Attorneys ask for money up front in such cases for different reasons. It helps soften the amount of money he takes out of his pocket to handle your case. It also establishes a commitment by the client to continue and cooperate in the case. With players not being the reliable people, it can become difficult to contact and get them to show up for need appointments and court appearances. The out of pocket cash, is an incentive. Depositions and such are not as expensive as represented by some of the other posters. That is, unless extensive travel is required.

Think about it, the attorney invests thousands of dollars in cash and more in his time, then the player(s) becomes disinterested, perhaps is playing in Europe or Asia, and just writes the 5K or such off as a loss. This will happen with some players, guaranteed. This way some of the risk of litigation is put on the clients shoulders. Very typical. Which is why the fee agreement will probably also be higher than usual. Litigating and then collecting the debt are more than the average case. Debt collection agencies frequently charge between 40 and 50% fees just for collecting debts.

In the end.....

Here’s what I think he is doing.

If he doesn’t sell or get a great influx of cash, he will file bankruptcy. But only after changing the nature of the debts to the players/employees from a fraud/misrepresentation etc.. debt to a contractual debt, which will make the debts dischargable. He will make, maybe, one or two small payments to cement the deal, then file for bankruptcy. He walks clean.

He may file anyway, and force the players to go to bankruptcy court to get their case excluded from the bankruptcy. BTW, that’s another lawyer and cost.
Click to expand...

Great information, especially your analysis of what you think he is trying to accomplish: trying to alter the nature of the debt by entering into contractual payment agreements with the players with the intention of having them ultimately discharged in bankruptsy. I believe that you are 100% correct here.

I also understand the situation of an attorney taking a case without a retainer, investing time and laying out expenses only to have the client disappear. This very often happens with low recovery personal injury cases. But in this situation, an attorney representing all, or most, of the players has quite a substantial case where exceptions and negotiated fees are more usual. Also, more often than not, these cases are settled before ever seeing the inside of a courthouse.

Excellent analysis and overview, thank you.

Jim
 
Deadon...

<<3. Agreements for payment of money can be easily set aside or discharged in Ch. 11 or 13 bankruptcy>>

Or Chapter 7 as well.

<<With his felony theft related conviction and his other extensive history, he’s a prime candidate for a big slap.>>

As you surely know, the admissibility of prior conduct (sometimes referred to as "impeachment evidence) is often VERY hard to establish in most states and under Federal Rules such as

404

(b) Other crimes, wrongs, or acts.

Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identify, or absence of mistake or accident,.

While KT's past history is certainly widely known, he is not UNIVERSALLY known and in the preemptory phase of jury selection, his lawyers would go to great pains to empanel jurors who have no idea who he is.

In addition, as his large-scale book/Video sales suggest, there are many who view him as a hero, fighting against the big bad government and drug companies. So whether such prior conduct is likely to get him slapped or make him the recipient of more hero worship is far from a foregone conclusion.

<<Depositions and such are not as expensive as represented by some of the other posters. That is, unless extensive travel is required. >>

Since I am one of those posters, I will chime in on that one. First, it depends on what your definition of "expensive" is so I'll just provide an example for others to decide upon. The following example is completely "typical"

1. Lawyer bills at $250.00 per hour. Lawyers highly experienced in the prosecution of federal cases...which any IPT-related case would certainly become...will charge AT LEAST that much. To depose any witness important enough to spend the time on, the lawyer will require AT LEAST 10 hours merely to prepare for the dep therefore:
1. $2,500.00

2. Time elapsed for the dep itself 6 hours 1,500.00

3. Court Reporter fee during dep @ $125.00 per hr. 750.00

4. Lawyer's analysis time to study dep answers 1,250.00
@ 5 hours
$6,000.00


The above are MINIMUM figures PER DEP...doesn't include transcript fees or Video Dep charges which are becoming increasingly popular...for good reason... and in a case like this there would be AT LEAST a half dozen people deposed by the plaintiff....if not 12 or more.

Now DOUBLE if not QUADRUPLE those lawyer fees because the defense is going to depose that plaintiff and an array of people related to the plaintiff and plaintiff's counsel must prepare for and attend and study the results of those as well.

So, $75,000.00-100,000.00 would be the MINIMUM the plaintiffs could expect in what would be a multi-million dollar lawsuit.

I think most people would consider that "expensive."

<<If he doesn’t sell or get a great influx of cash, he will file bankruptcy.>>

Yes, likely for the IPT but who knows whether A) KT is subject to suit personally or B) if he is, how much he is ACTUALLY worth. BIG wildcard.

<<But only after changing the nature of the debts to the players/employees from a fraud/misrepresentation etc.. debt to a contractual debt, which will make the debts dischargable.>>

KT has no power to change "fraud debt" to "contractual debt" or vice versa. If he is sued for actions including fraud, and he subsequently files bankruptcy that suit will be halted by the "Automatic Stay" associated with all bankruptcy filings. Then, if the bankruptcy court deems that fraud was likely to have occured, it can, upon Plaintiff's Motion, lift the Automatic Stay with respect to such charges and they would proceed in the Federal District court where they were filed.

At the same time, any contractual debt can be discharged or reduced depending upon which Chapter has been filed.

Nothing is certain but death and taxes but it is HUGELY unlikely that the players will ever be considered "employees" of the IPT.

<<He will make, maybe, one or two small payments to cement the deal, then file for bankruptcy. He walks clean.>>

That is an extremely speculative position and would depend ENTIRELY upon the facts and circumstances, including any contractual provisions of the partial payments..without which, the players can take VERY strong steps to enable themselves to accept partial payment without any waiver of rights. This whole idea about waiving rights by accepting partial payments is VASTLY over-simplified as is simply not NECESSARILY correct. In fact, it might be correct and it might not be correct depending on the actions or inactions of the IPT and the players which CANNOT be know in advance.

<<He may file anyway, and force the players to go to bankruptcy court to get their case excluded from the bankruptcy. BTW, that’s another lawyer and cost.>>

First, since the player's case is largely founded in contract, that part of their claim will NOT be excluded from any bankruptcy. I have already commented on the fraud aspect of the matter. But you are quite correct that the costs of the player's functioning within the context of a bankruptcy filing would be entirely IN ADDITION to any litigation in the District courts.

Regards,
Jim
 
Ok Jim;

Here goes;

1. Thats only when the evidence is used for character, it can be used to show his intent to defraud or mislead, which is the case here when he said monies were put aside in escrow..Fed Ex screwed up delivery..etc, and almost all states have this exception to character evidence in their state codes too, if the case was filed in a state court, which is sometimes a better forum than Federal Court. Frankly though, he would get BBQ'd by a good lawyer, with any jury. No one likes felons, and one that lies to take advantage of people...wow

Punitive damages, yes as I said it cannot always be expected.

2. Relating to the expenses, an earlier poster had mentioned the out of pocket expenses the lawyer would incur to do a deposition. This was discussed in a thread that was commenting on Harry wanting some money up front. This is what I was referring to in my comment. I don't know if that was your post or not, but your figures above are not typical and wouldn't apply in this case.

Since fees are based on contingency, the lawyer may get nothing if nothing is recovered, and the other party (IPT) will be paying theirs and WGAF what they pay. Normal deposition costs are less than $2,000.00, and thats on the high end. Of course, they can vary some and that does not include attorney fees because of the nature of the case.

3. The nature of the debt is changed when you accept a lesser amount and payments. Especially if a waiver/release is signed. The money owed is then, waiver or not, a contractual obligation to pay a certain amount over a finite period of time. An action then based on the earlier conduct could not be successfully maintained. He would have to be sued for breach of his agreement to pay, which would be lost in a BK, 11, 13 or 7. There is actually even a way around some of the punitives in a well planned 11 and 13.

That is not to say that if he just started making payments to everyone that they would precluded from seeking legal action on the original fact. You are correct that eveyones conduct would have to be considered, my information is only general and not specific to any particular person or state.

4. The employees I referenced are the ones that have not been paid for working the tournaments. A couple are posters on this forum.

5. When giving info, especially on this forum, I try to avoid being too technical because its much easier for the lay person to understand. Forgive me if it sounds oversimplified. It certainly is not simple and is a complex case.

If he files w/o any agreement with the players he can list them as debtors and force them to get relief from the automatic stay. Big chance, unless the case is already close to trial, the Bankruptcy court could take jurisdiction over the debt and force the parties to resolve it in adversarial proceeding in BK court. Most players looking at this expensive, BK lawyers won't work on contingency usually, will just walk away. He may count on them doing that. A large multi-class action lawsuit might keep the BK out of the meat of the case.

<<Yes, likely for the IPT but who knows whether A) KT is subject to suit personally or B) if he is, how much he is ACTUALLY worth. BIG wildcard.>>

This is one of the reasons I think he will try to convert the debts and BK the business. Its not clear who actually owns the IPT. Does KT own it or is it wholly owned by NC? If KT underfunded the IPT, and then represented that it was funded for 2 years (think he did), someone will be looking to knock on his door and the knock will be very loud. Does he have the money? Allegations for punitive damages allow for the financial evaluation of the person against which the damages are sought. So his cards would all be on the table. Sounds like great fun to me, and maybe some money for our friends.

Like I said, I try to be clear but not too technical, appreciate the mental gymnastics. Beats watching more election analysis. Sorry if anything sounds misleading. Any specific ?s, PM me.
 
Legal Question

Actually two. I want to know the answer to two questions:

1. When somebody stands up and says "I personally promise to fund the IPT for two years ..." and "I personally guarantee you will get paid" isn't that person personally responsible for that personal guarantee? He didn't say "I'm providing the IPT with seed funding as long as we have a viable business plan and your payments are guaranteed by the IPT." Any action I join will sue both the IPT and all the individuals who made false representations, personally.

2. Whether or not accepting a partial payment converts the original obligation into a new form of contract, isn't it fraud if you promise you are not going to file bankruptcy, then induce people to give up their initial breach of contract claims, then file bankruptcy to discharge the new debt? How can a clever (but kinda transparent) final fraudulent action nullify all earlier fraudulent actions?
 
Deadon...<<Thats only when the evidence is used for character, it can be used to show his intent to defraud or mislead, which is the case here when he said monies were put aside in escrow..>>

Yes, that is exactly what I posted. I didn't say that prior conduct evidence CANNOT be admitted...just that it is often difficult...and it is.

<<if the case was filed in a state court, which is sometimes a better forum than Federal Court>>

Even if it is filed in a state court there would be about a 100% chance that it would be removed to Federal court.

<<Frankly though, he would get BBQ'd by a good lawyer, with any jury. No one likes felons, and one that lies to take advantage of people.>>

Review the results of the O.J criminal trial. (-:

<<but your figures above are not typical and wouldn't apply in this case.>>

Well, with all due respect...they ARE typical of my experience...which is considerable. And your later remarks presume that this case will be handled on a contingency basis. That remains to be seen. But in any event, since I specifically cited legal fees, I was clearly not referring to a contingent fee circumstance.

<<The nature of the debt is changed when you accept a lesser amount and payments. Especially if a waiver/release is signed.>>

Actually ONLY if a waiver/release is signed assuming that the payee takes adequate safeguards. If you are aware of any cases not involving landlord tenant relationships that stand for the proposition that the acceptance of partail payment IN AND OF IT SELF constitutes a waiver of additional liabilith I would greatly appreciate your citing them.

I too enjoy the mental gymnastics and hope we are not the only two people who are interested in this stuff! (-:

Regards,
Jim
 
oneballeddie...

<<1. When somebody stands up and says "I personally promise to fund the IPT for two years ..." and "I personally guarantee you will get paid" isn't that person personally responsible for that personal guarantee? He didn't say "I'm providing the IPT with seed funding as long as we have a viable business plan and your payments are guaranteed by the IPT." Any action I join will sue both the IPT and all the individuals who made false representations, personally.>>

That would certainly be alleged. But PROVING allegations is a slippery slope.

<<2. Whether or not accepting a partial payment converts the original obligation into a new form of contract, isn't it fraud if you promise you are not going to file bankruptcy, then induce people to give up their initial breach of contract claims, then file bankruptcy to discharge the new debt? How can a clever (but kinda transparent) final fraudulent action nullify all earlier fraudulent actions?>>

Good question but the "promise" not to file bankruptcy (did he do that? I don't recall) is arguably an oral contract and ALL contracts are subject to being voided in bankruptcy...so there is a big time Catch 22 there.

Regards,
Jim
 
I too enjoy the mental gymnastics and hope we are not the only two people who are interested in this stuff! (-:
Regards,
Jim


No, I'm interested, so that's 2 1/2
Doug
 
Eddie;

Remember that these are general issues, and each persons particular circumstances can effect the reasoning.

1. I believe his initial promises are meant to mislead the players, as was the first KOTH. This would be part, and only part, of the underlying rational for suing and would not necessarily establish personal liability. Personal liability would require an analysis of the business and the accounting. I expect the IPT is in some way tied to Natural Cures, and they (NC) would also be named.

If the player enters into an agreement with him to accept payments for a lesser amount that is a separate agreement and that acceptance can, and usually is, be interpreted as definitive of the real amount owed and is based on the contract. Usually if there is a writing, and lawyers involved, there are statements put in it that protect their respective clients. Players should have a paragraph(s) that reinstates their ability to sue for the original amount under the original facts should he fail to pay as agreed.

He would want one that contains a release of all claims, regardless of nature, considering he agreement to make these payments. In that situation, when he doesn’t pay, the claim is then based on the “settlement” that was made.


Example;

If I owed you some money, say $200.00 and you said you would settle if I would pay $100.00 in two $50.00 payments. Now I pay the first one, but then I don’t have the money for the second payment. Your mad and take me to court. I only owe you last $50.00 as those are the damages from our agreement, which modified the terms of what was originally owed. Without certain clauses, that is the result because your only out the last payment. The old stuff is resolved by the agreement.

2. Unfortunately, transparency is difficult to prove in court when you (KT) don’t have the money to pay outright. I’m sure he would say he had expectations of TV deals, healthy qualifiers, DVD sales..etc. But alas, it all fell through, and who could prove he is wrong. Its easy to see as even the qualifiers are getting little attention and now being rescheduled. True, but extremely difficult to prove. Its called fraudulent inducement, and the intent is extremely hard to prove.

Jim;

Good response;

OJ, don’t see the comparison. OJ did not testify, in fact, if you recall the prosecutors were chomping at the bits to cross-examine him and with good reason. He would have had a difficult time explaining his behavior. A friend of mine was on his team, but thats another story. He was icon, a celeb. KT is a questionable businessman with a scarred reputation and a felon with numerous legal, administrative and judicial, judgments against him and they all include deception of some sort. Roll him over and baste him before he burns. I like well done, if he testifies, as I initially said, and in a civil case, OJ was criminal, he can be forced to testify.

I know little to nothing about landlord tenant stuff, but the same contractual standards should apply. But, other liability, I’m not sure what you mean. Certainly if there was other money owed outside of what the payments were intended to replace, it would still exist absent a general release.

Removal to Federal Court, maybe, but not unless someone really wanted it, and unlikely it would be forced. IMHO, and every state, district, has different policies.

I have a little experience also, over 25 years private, 100 or so jury trials, including multimillion dollar civil cases in both Federal and State court. But I am wrong....................sometimes.:D
 
Last edited:
Smorgass Bored said:
I too enjoy the mental gymnastics and hope we are not the only two people who are interested in this stuff! (-:
Regards,
Jim


No, I'm interested,
Click to expand...

You are a very sick man to be interested in a couple of bantering lawyers !

Dave, also rather sick ;)
 
I Am NOT A Fruitcake, I Am A Human Being.... imo

I too enjoy the mental gymnastics and hope we are not the only two people who are interested in this stuff! (-:
Regards,
Jim


No, I'm interested,
Doug


DaveK said:
You are a very sick man to be interested in a couple of bantering lawyers !

Dave, also rather sick ;)
Click to expand...


I've never professed to be sane, but I'm not completely nuts, either.
Doug
 
Smorgass Bored said:
I too enjoy the mental gymnastics and hope we are not the only two people who are interested in this stuff! (-:
Regards,
Jim


No, I'm interested, so that's 2 1/2
Doug
Click to expand...
Can't you go one single without saying something seriously?
 
Deadon...<<OJ, don’t see the comparison.>> I was just commenting on your statement...

<<Frankly though, he would get BBQ'd by a good lawyer, with any jury. No one likes felons>>

That particular jury didn't seem to mind much! (-:

<<I know little to nothing about landlord tenant stuff, but the same contractual standards should apply.>>

I do. most states have statutes that control those relationships and therefore, they are not subject to common law standards.

<<Removal to Federal Court, maybe, but not unless someone really wanted it, and unlikely it would be forced. IMHO, and every state, district, has different policies.>>

First, if the case is a Class Action, as I assume it would be, then it could be removed to Fed court by the IPT/KT on grounds (as you know) such as diversity and IF MEMORY SERVES a limited threshold of the amount PER CLASS MEMBER sought in the action. (Is there a limit??? Isn't it like $75k per Class Member in order to exert state vs. Fed jurisdiction??)

Regards,
Jim
 
My Humor Is Serious Business

ironman said:
Can't you go one single (day?, post?) without saying something seriously?
Click to expand...


I learned long ago that Milton Berle, George Burns, Bob Hope, etc. lived very long lives, due to their sense of humor and good mood (and Millions of dollars )...
I'm trying to laugh my way to 100.
Doug
( unfortunately, my diet is trying to take me out before retirement age )
( btw, if you've been unemployed your whole life, can you still retire (and from WHAT ? )
 
DaveK said:
You are a very sick man to be interested in a couple of bantering lawyers !

Dave, also rather sick ;)
Click to expand...

There is a certain humor in sparring mentally. An exchange of ideas also brings new ideas. As long as its done in good humor, that is.

As for who is interested, read the previous posts in the IPT forum. Many people have legal questions that need to be answered. I've had several IPT members go over this problem, in person, because they wanted to know what they can do. Yes we sometimes get carried away, pool is not our only passion.
 
Deadon said:
There is a certain humor in sparring mentally. An exchange of ideas also brings new ideas. As long as its done in good humor, that is.

As for who is interested, read the previous posts in the IPT forum. Many people have legal questions that need to be answered. I've had several IPT members go over this problem, in person, because they wanted to know what they can do. Yes we sometimes get carried away, pool is not our only passion.
Click to expand...

Not to worry. Although I'm a lowly engineer, I spent a lot of time with a house full of recent law grads studying for their Bar Admission exams. In discussions I always took the position of "the reasonable man" ... although sometimes they did not agree .... lawyers ! Some of those fellows remain good friends. Please carry on, I believe that this is very helpful to those concerned and just interested.

Dave
 
Huh #1

av84fun said:
oneballeddie...
<<1. When somebody stands up and says "I personally promise to fund the IPT for two years ..." and "I personally guarantee you will get paid" isn't that person personally responsible for that personal guarantee? He didn't say "I'm providing the IPT with seed funding as long as we have a viable business plan and your payments are guaranteed by the IPT." Any action I join will sue both the IPT and all the individuals who made false representations, personally.>>

That would certainly be alleged. But PROVING allegations is a slippery slope.
Click to expand...

I think I'm learning why I would have been a bad lawyer. Things seem simpler to me than they do to real lawyers. Proving it would be a "slippery slope"? Why wouldn't 150 people testifying they heard him say it, followed by playing the CD he handed out with him saying it, be proof enough?

av84fun said:
Good question but the "promise" not to file bankruptcy (did he do that? I don't recall) is arguably an oral contract and ALL contracts are subject to being voided in bankruptcy...so there is a big time Catch 22 there.

Regards,
Jim
Click to expand...

No I don't think he used the words "I promise not to file bankruptcy" in his last letter. I think he did say the IPT is going forward, the 2006 tournaments will be rescheduled, there will be a 2007 season, he will pay everyone 100% of what he owes, and he thinks he can make up any revenue shortfall with an IPO.

My question was this: A lot of people think somewhere along the line KT decided to back away from his promises and treat everybody less than fairly. Now he owes $3M outright to the players and many others have lost money following his dream. There are a lot of places where fraud could have entered into this story and I don't know whether or not it can be proven. My question is whether or not he can pull any legal tricks to get out of the $3M, like promising 100% in a series of installments (and he did promise to pay in full before the next tournament and he did promise there would be tournaments in 2007, so everybody is going to get paid in the next year, not over an indefinite period) paying once and filing bankruptcy? I just don't see how cashing that first check makes any difference at all whether or not he files bankruptcy and whether or not he files it before or after that first payment. I do see that if the payment comes with a release of all future claims that it should not be cashed, but even my dog could figure that out. I do see how a bankruptcy would notify us once and for all that there will be no more payments coming from the IPT, but my dog already thinks that anyway. So that's why I asked question #1: if the IPT doesn't have any money (which he keeps telling us over and over) does the guy have to pay us from his personal checking account because he personally guaranteed the payouts?
 
Huh #2

Deadon said:
Eddie;

Remember that these are general issues, and each persons particular circumstances can effect the reasoning.

1. I believe his initial promises are meant to mislead the players, as was the first KOTH. This would be part, and only part, of the underlying rational for suing and would not necessarily establish personal liability. Personal liability would require an analysis of the business and the accounting. I expect the IPT is in some way tied to Natural Cures, and they (NC) would also be named.

If the player enters into an agreement with him to accept payments for a lesser amount that is a separate agreement and that acceptance can, and usually is, be interpreted as definitive of the real amount owed and is based on the contract. Usually if there is a writing, and lawyers involved, there are statements put in it that protect their respective clients. Players should have a paragraph(s) that reinstates their ability to sue for the original amount under the original facts should he fail to pay as agreed.

He would want one that contains a release of all claims, regardless of nature, considering he agreement to make these payments. In that situation, when he doesn’t pay, the claim is then based on the “settlement” that was made.


Example;

If I owed you some money, say $200.00 and you said you would settle if I would pay $100.00 in two $50.00 payments. Now I pay the first one, but then I don’t have the money for the second payment. Your mad and take me to court. I only owe you last $50.00 as those are the damages from our agreement, which modified the terms of what was originally owed. Without certain clauses, that is the result because your only out the last payment. The old stuff is resolved by the agreement.

2. Unfortunately, transparency is difficult to prove in court when you (KT) don’t have the money to pay outright. I’m sure he would say he had expectations of TV deals, healthy qualifiers, DVD sales..etc. But alas, it all fell through, and who could prove he is wrong. Its easy to see as even the qualifiers are getting little attention and now being rescheduled. True, but extremely difficult to prove. Its called fraudulent inducement, and the intent is extremely hard to prove.
Click to expand...

Deadon,

Thanks for the elucidation but I wasn't really asking about his intentions when he made the promise or whether this is connected to Natural Cures. I want to know if somebody stands up and says "I personally guarantee you will make $113,000 if you play on my tour and make the top 100 on my money list" - if that is binding on that person, not his companies or other instruments of implementation. And if not (I'm on a roll here)... why not?
 
oneballeddie said:
Deadon,

Thanks for the elucidation but I wasn't really asking about his intentions when he made the promise or whether this is connected to Natural Cures. I want to know if somebody stands up and says "I personally guarantee you will make $113,000 if you play on my tour and make the top 100 on my money list" - if that is binding on that person, not his companies or other instruments of implementation. And if not (I'm on a roll here)... why not?
Click to expand...

That is exactly my point and question. There has been some attempt to answer it, but I guess I just don't comprhend.

If I follow you and your question, he stood up and said that you are garunteed $100,000 in 2007, if you fail, I will issue a personal check for the balance.

The other, I am investing personally 56-28-13 million for the first three years.
Kt and the IPT to me, are two seperate investors.
 
oneballeddie...You are asking the CORE questions and you have expressed them well. The problem is that due to the nature of litigation, your questions can't be answered with any conviction until the FACTS are established by entering documents and testimony into evidence and THAT is where the slope gets slippery.

That is especially so when fruad is alleged. There is no fraud if the person actually believed what he was saying was correct...or would come true...unless it can be PROVEN that he KNEW or should have known that his statements were false.

But PROVING that someone should have known that their BELIEFS...HOPES...WISHES...DREAMS...etc. were KNOWN by the person to be false when they were expressed is FAR from impossible to prove but it is also FAR from easy.

That is why we have courts, judges and juries.

I'm not sure I answered your questions....in fact, I am sure I have not but that is because none of us have ALL the facts.

Regards,
Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top