USPPA Reno players, did they get paid?

[kybill9]

Which of these two is willing to take the job on contingincy ??? If neither of them are willing it proves the point that there is NO case.

So much for your understanding of the legal system. When you have a viable legal standard for your claim of NO basis, get back. As far as the Peppermill having no responsibility, show me the contracts. Actually, the reason our friend in Washington didnt take the case is because he is in Washington.
I love how those who have NO solutions are so quick to dispell any viable solution because they know so much about the law.
IF YOU BRAINIACS ARE SO SMART, INSTEAD OF ALL THE DRIVEL, COME UP WITH A SOLUTION.
56 pages of crying, whining, and drivel. It's a pool site alright.

 

[gsm1sw]

So much for your understanding of the legal system. When you have a viable legal standard for your claim of NO basis, get back. As far as the Peppermill having no responsibility, show me the contracts. Actually, the reason our friend in Washington didnt take the case is because he is in Washington.
I love how those who have NO solutions are so quick to dispell any viable solution because they know so much about the law.
IF YOU BRAINIACS ARE SO SMART, INSTEAD OF ALL THE DRIVEL, COME UP WITH A SOLUTION.
56 pages of crying, whining, and drivel. It's a pool site alright.

Why should anyone show YOU the contracts? Are you going to handle the case? As far as my understanding of the legal system, it's that if there is money to be made there are a lot of lawyers that will take the case on contingency. Obviously, if no one is willing then there is NO money to be made. And you answered for one of your lawyers (in Washington) what about the other? Seeing as he recommends suing the Peppermill, what is his reason for not taking the case?

if you think the Pepermill did something illegal then you should get the District Attorney involved.

 

[Rickw]

The legal animal is a complicated one.

A friend of mine accepted a job from a company. She had to hire a freelancer to help her get the job done. The freelancer did not meet the deadline of the job given to her. My friend had to hire another freelancer to finish the job due to a lack of communication by the first freelancer who didn't finish the job. The first freelancer did eventually turn the job in, but it was too late. My friend had always paid somebody else to do it, so she could meet her deadline. This was time-sensitive work.

The freelancer sued my friend in court for nonpayment and named the company she accepted the job from as a co-party. It was a circus in court in the peanut gallery.

The end result was my friend counter-sued the freelancer. The freelancer ended up not showing up for court, and the judge awarded my friend a judgment, which was never collected because the freelancer was a broke dog.

I don't know how the law works where you're at Jam but in CA, it is one thing to get a judgment and quite another to enforce a collection. Enforcement capabilities are not available to your average person and the court doesn't do anything more than render a judgment.

 

[Rickw]

So much for your understanding of the legal system. When you have a viable legal standard for your claim of NO basis, get back. As far as the Peppermill having no responsibility, show me the contracts. Actually, the reason our friend in Washington didnt take the case is because he is in Washington.
I love how those who have NO solutions are so quick to dispell any viable solution because they know so much about the law.
IF YOU BRAINIACS ARE SO SMART, INSTEAD OF ALL THE DRIVEL, COME UP WITH A SOLUTION.
56 pages of crying, whining, and drivel. It's a pool site alright.

Well I like the idea of going after the Peppermill because that's the only way Jeff is going to get any money. I know Tony and I'm sure if he could pay, he would. I seriously doubt he has any money to give. Last I heard he was living out of a small trailer in a parking lot somewhere. The guy just has no money. You can beat a dead horse all you want but if it's dead, he aint going to move no matter how long or hard you beat him!

 

[kybill9]

Why should anyone show YOU the contracts? Are you going to handle the case? As far as my understanding of the legal system, it's that if there is money to be made there are a lot of lawyers that will take the case on contingency. Obviously, if no one is willing then there is NO money to be made. And you answered for one of your lawyers (in Washington) what about the other? Seeing as he recommends suing the Peppermill, what is his reason for not taking the case?

if you think the Pepermill did something illegal then you should get the District Attorney involved.

If someone shows me the contracts, at least I won't be talking out my ass.
I know you think you are making a logical argument by equating a simple disagreement between two parties and contracts between a large corporation and others, but the real world is more complicated. Does your understanding of how attorneys face large corporations come out of watching TV or looking at comic books?
Because Jeff wouldn't pony up the money.
Do you or don't you have a solution?
Like I said, 56 pages of drivel.

 

[gsm1sw]

If someone shows me the contracts, at least I won't be talking out my ass.

At least you admit your doing it until then.

 

[gsm1sw]

.
Does your understanding of how attorneys face large corporations come out of watching TV ....?.

I learned it watching Boston Legal.


IMO, there is no legal solution to this. Anything that has been paid is all that will be paid.

 

[kybill9]

At least you admit your doing it until then.

Im a pool player, right. It goes without saying.:smile:

 

[albertl]

I think the better question is why anyone thinks the Casino has liability. Liability here is either from a breach of contract or a tort, like fraud. As far as I can see, none of the players were there because they accepted a contractual offer from the peppermil, the deal was with USPPA, the entity that sponsored the event and offered the prizes to entice players to enter the event. USPPA breached when it didnt pay.
That the Peppermill has deep pockets is correct. It will use those deep pockets to punish anyone who tries to claim that Tony's bs is their responsibility. For all any of us know he still owes them money as well. Whether or not he does none of the players had a contract with the Peppermill and I don't think anyone who went there can say different. That leaves the argument that somehow the Peppermill in its first year as the venue should have realized that Tony was underfunded and would crap out even though he'd been running events across town for 20 years or so without a problem.
As far as a claim for fraud you need to show that you relied on a statement that was known to be false and that you were justified in doing so. What is the statement made by the Peppermill that was both false and that anyone relied on?
There's a reason that no attorney has stepped up to this, and it's simply that there's a great case against the guy with no money and a crappy case against the hotel that has money and no responsibility for what USPPA and Tony did.
The handwriting was on the wall for this one when then junior and wheelchair event was underway the week before. The international players were supposed to get a perform for meals and somehow it was always tomorrow, tomorrow. I think Tony finally got them buffet passes but it was a struggle.
Unfortunately, deep pockets don't always mean deep liability. This is one of those times. Mark's right.

IF many of the USPPA players were promised free entry into a Hold-em tournament running at the same time and the Peppermill supplied the tables, cards, chips & dealers and IF the winners of the Hold-em tournament were paid with entry fee funds for the pool tournament... maybe the Peppermill could somehow be connected?

I don't think Tony ran the tournaments successfully for 20 years; wasn't it Gene Stary?

Why doesn't one of the winners meet with the District Attorney in Reno? If somebody took $10K in entry fees and then did not pay out $25K as guaranteed - wouldn't that be a criminal offense? Maybe even interstate issues would be applicable if entry fees were paid/collected outside of Nevada.

 

[saddlebow]

poker tournament

I think that Tony promised the poker to anyone who entered the pool tournament.Go back and take a look at the posters and promo material. The whole scene there was a real mess; I was up there for the WPA events before hand, and it was barely organized and not together at all. They were still putting tables up the night before play was scheduled, and the tables were embarrassing when they were done. Understand, he 'hosted' as the promoter two different WPA world championships, for which he was paid. I suspect that money all went to the Peppermill to get him in the door and up and running, so it really is a good question to ask where the entry fees went, because the hall was rented and being used the week before the pro event went off.
Don't get me wrong, I would love to find a way to get everyone paid off even if Tony doesn't do it. It's just pretty clear that Tony had 'four walled' the event, meaning that all the Peppermill does is rent him the space inside the four walls, and everything else was his to deal with. It's no different to them than when you go to a sales event at their convention center: unless you can show that they knew the guy was selling whatever you bought, it's just not the Peppermill's problem. One of the ways you could tell it was going to be rocky was the per diem for the players who had traveled from out of the country. They were all promised rooms and meals, and there was a lot of "confusion" and hungry PO'ed players. Tony was walking around offering to sell "shares" of the pro event, and that was a great big red flag too.
You're right about the history, but as far as the Peppermill was concerned, it wasn't Tony or Gene, it was USPPA, and it did have a long history in Reno, and actually was a legitimate organization until this happened.
Meeting with the DA would have been a great idea a year ago. There's no doubt this could be charged as a crime, but you'd have to convince the DA to do it after a lot of time has passed, and the complaining witnesses would all have to go back and forth to Reno, probably at least twice, to make it stick. That seems like throwing good money after bad.
Best thing to do would be to file a small claims action against Tony and USPPA, it would go to court fast, down and dirty, and then you get a judgment that you can record. Of course no one should forget that this happened in Reno, and Tony lives in CA, which just makes it that much harder.
Obviously he doesn't give a crap about his rep, Can't believe he'd show his face anywhere that matters in the pool world,ever. Since pool has literally been his life, you can only conclude that he's really on the ropes. Trashing his future and destroying what reputation he had, and the USPPA to boot, for this amount of money tells me a lot about the guy and his present circumstances.
If any of the guys that didn't get paid want to pursue it through small claims in Reno, PM me and I'll help you fill out the forms and explain how to do it. [ ya, I'm an attorney, don't hate me for it] Doesn't make much sense for anyone who isn't a local, as you have to represent yourself [no attorneys are allowed in small claims] and show up in court, and it costs money to file and serve the papers. Add that to the two days or so that you'd wind up losing to get it done, and it takes the air out of the balloon.
As kybill9 and a lot of others conclude, 56 pages of beyatching hasn't gotten anything done, and nothing will change until someone steps up and actually does something.

interesting first post, btw...........

 

[JAM]

I learned it watching Boston Legal.

I'm Denny Crane!

 

[CocoboloCowboy]

What is your legal basis for saying there is No case? Are you an attorney? Both of the attorneys I spoke with, say the deep pockets are in one place, the Peppermill. One attorney is a well known pool player, the other is a well know litigator. The facts are; until someone takes legal action against the Peppermill, Tony, USPPA, or Two Pockets, NO ONE will get any money.
Mark, you dont want the Peppermill sued because of your fear that the back lash could hurt you and your promotions. I understand it. Just the same, these players deserve their money and I haven't seen one post that has an answer of how to get the money. 56 pages of drivel. :thumbup:

Well the world of Casino ownership is a small world, and I would be willing to bet if the Peppermill is named a a defendant in a Civil Case.

The news will spread like a WILD FIRE in the casino world, that because some Pool event promoter who help an event at the Peppermill Casino property, and did not pay the winner of their his event.

Now the Peppermill is named as a Co -defendant will not sit well with casino ownership, and management. So it could be the end of Pool events being held on casino properties like the DCC, BCAPL 8 Ball Championships, Bar Box National, etc.

The reason is be the Peppermill innocent or guilt, the Peppermill is name in civil litigation, and they will have to spend money on attorneys fees at a very minimum to answer the suit.

Casino's like making money, and don’t like having to give it away on unexpected business expenses like on spending money on attorneys to defend themselves against civil litigation.

Even if the Peppermill has some legal firm on retainer, the BEAN COUNTERS will remind ownership & management if you had not had that Pool Event, you would be having to defend the Peppermill in this action.

 

[gsm1sw]

I'm Denny Crane!

I picture you more of the Shirley Schmidt type.

I like to think of myself as the Alan Shore type but I am probably closer to Edwin Poole. :grin-square:

 

[abs]

....

Now the Peppermill is named as a Co -defendant will not sit well with casino ownership, and management. So it could be the end of Pool events being held on casino properties like the DCC, BCAPL 8 Ball Championships, Bar Box National, etc.

The reason is be the Peppermill innocent or guilt, the Peppermill is name in civil litigation, and they will have to spend money on attorneys fees at a very minimum to answer the suit.

Casino's like making money, and don’t like having to give it away on unexpected business expenses like on spending money on attorneys to defend themselves against civil litigation.

Even if the Peppermill has some legal firm on retainer, the BEAN COUNTERS will remind ownership & management if you had not had that Pool Event, you would be having to defend the Peppermill in this action.

I’m not a lawyer, but have worked with many in legal and contract matters from my previous life…. I picked-up a thing or two, and I can confidently say that I'm afraid it's wishful thinking to think trying to implicate the Peppermill as a defendant will product any results...

To the point of not wanting the publicity of a lawsuit, this type of lawsuit would not even be a blip on the radar. Corporations are sued all the time, and it’s very much the case with casinos; they don’t like it, but it’s a cost of doing business that no corporation is immune from.

Read the annual report of any of the “casino” corporations at least some of them will list lawsuits in any given year (they have to be disclosed in corporate reporting if they meet certain criteria). Over years of reporting you will see plenty of million-dollar-plus lawsuits in progress against the respective corporations with very little if any effect on their image, stock price, or flow of business; it doesn’t even amount to the equivalent of a pesky fly at a picnic. Heck, in the Fortune 500 realm, civil lawsuits are as common as topless dancers in strip clubs; it’s a way of life. It’s a funny fact that at any given time the all auto companies are involved in at least one major lawsuit… 99.9999% of the time nobody knows or cares.

To the point of spending money... Attorneys are already on retainer for the Peppermill, that cost is fixed already (you noted that possibility). The cost would be in court filings; however, those fees would be low impact. Peppermill would within just a few simple steps, by legal standards, would request dismissal with prejudice either as a party (if they are listed as co-defendants) or of the entire “action” (if Peppermill is the sole defendant). And it’s almost a sure thing their request for dismissal would be accepted and result in dismissal. If somehow it went to trial, the judge could, again after just a few steps, provide a summary judgment at the request of the agent of the Peppermill.

The advice to try to put pressure on the Peppermill through bad publicity will completely backfire; it’s madness, as was the feedback by another elsewhere in this thread where it had been noted that an attorney was consulted and he recommended the best course of action would be to, again, sue the Peppermill because that is where the money is; again, pure madness.

Why is the above madness? Because a civil lawsuit against Peppermill will be ultimately dismissed one way or another, and quite quickly in legal terms. As a result, the plaintiffs (if they could find a lawyer to represent them) would owe tens of thousands in legal fees and court fees; more than the $20,000 prize money would have amounted to. So not only would the plaintiffs not get their prize money, they will out of pocket thousands each in legal bills; pretty counterproductive.

Any lawyer taking a proper five minutes looking at the events would simply recommend those who were defrauded to follow-up with the county DA where the Peppermill stands to report a fraudulent action by Tony A… But that won’t result in getting their prize money. Each plaintiff taking Tony A. to small claims court might be more conducive to getting their money, in the best case.

The only way the Peppermill would have a legal obligation here is if anybody can show some sort of complicity or negligence. The fact that it happened on their property isn’t sufficient to even hint at participation or negligence (hosting is not participation). It would need to be successfully demonstrated that the Peppermill had some explicit participation in the event to the point where they were involved with the payout obligation in some capacity… And that wasn’t the case to my knowledge.

Any lawyer who thinks it’s a good idea to sue Peppermill and thinks that is where the money will ultimately come from will be willing to take just a retainer fee and court fees from the plaintiffs and then gladly agree to only receive payment based on the lawsuit winnings… If one can find a lawyer who agrees to all that should go for it.

 

[MahnaMahna]

Nu-uh! Nope, nope, you are wrong! Stay out of here with your real life experience and factual statements, I talked to a guy who told me he was the best attorney in the world! That's right, the world! He said sue the peppermill, they have money, yay yay yay! My attorney is a pool player too, so he must be right!




Just kidding, nice post.

I’m not a lawyer, but have worked with many in legal and contract matters from my previous life…. I picked-up a thing or two, and I can confidently say that I'm afraid it's wishful thinking to think trying to implicate the Peppermill as a defendant will product any results...

To the point of not wanting the publicity of a lawsuit, this type of lawsuit would not even be a blip on the radar. Corporations are sued all the time, and it’s very much the case with casinos; they don’t like it, but it’s a cost of doing business that no corporation is immune from.

Read the annual report of any of the “casino” corporations at least some of them will list lawsuits in any given year (they have to be disclosed in corporate reporting if they meet certain criteria). Over years of reporting you will see plenty of million-dollar-plus lawsuits in progress against the respective corporations with very little if any effect on their image, stock price, or flow of business; it doesn’t even amount to the equivalent of a pesky fly at a picnic. Heck, in the Fortune 500 realm, civil lawsuits are as common as topless dancers in strip clubs; it’s a way of life. It’s a funny fact that at any given time the all auto companies are involved in at least one major lawsuit… 99.9999% of the time nobody knows or cares.

To the point of spending money... Attorneys are already on retainer for the Peppermill, that cost is fixed already (you noted that possibility). The cost would be in court filings; however, those fees would be low impact. Peppermill would within just a few simple steps, by legal standards, would request dismissal with prejudice either as a party (if they are listed as co-defendants) or of the entire “action” (if Peppermill is the sole defendant). And it’s almost a sure thing their request for dismissal would be accepted and result in dismissal. If somehow it went to trial, the judge could, again after just a few steps, provide a summary judgment at the request of the agent of the Peppermill.

The advice to try to put pressure on the Peppermill through bad publicity will completely backfire; it’s madness, as was the feedback by another elsewhere in this thread where it had been noted that an attorney was consulted and he recommended the best course of action would be to, again, sue the Peppermill because that is where the money is; again, pure madness.

Why is the above madness? Because a civil lawsuit against Peppermill will be ultimately dismissed one way or another, and quite quickly in legal terms. As a result, the plaintiffs (if they could find a lawyer to represent them) would owe tens of thousands in legal fees and court fees; more than the $20,000 prize money would have amounted to. So not only would the plaintiffs not get their prize money, they will out of pocket thousands each in legal bills; pretty counterproductive.

Any lawyer taking a proper five minutes looking at the events would simply recommend those who were defrauded to follow-up with the county DA where the Peppermill stands to report a fraudulent action by Tony A… But that won’t result in getting their prize money. Each plaintiff taking Tony A. to small claims court might be more conducive to getting their money, in the best case.

The only way the Peppermill would have a legal obligation here is if anybody can show some sort of complicity or negligence. The fact that it happened on their property isn’t sufficient to even hint at participation or negligence (hosting is not participation). It would need to be successfully demonstrated that the Peppermill had some explicit participation in the event to the point where they were involved with the payout obligation in some capacity… And that wasn’t the case to my knowledge.

Any lawyer who thinks it’s a good idea to sue Peppermill and thinks that is where the money will ultimately come from will be willing to take just a retainer fee and court fees from the plaintiffs and then gladly agree to only receive payment based on the lawsuit winnings… If one can find a lawyer who agrees to all that should go for it.

 

[abs]

Thanks MahnaMahna. I definitely don't want to overstate my "experience". I'm no Raymond Burr. It's all swiss-cheese and second hand info that probably doesn't amount to much more than being an oberver in the court room of a few civil lawsuit cases... I was just a banker working for lawyers, lol.

I did ask a buddy of mine today who is in contracts and mergers/acquisiions law to do a sanity check on what I wrote yesterday. He already pointed out that I made a bad assumption, but not horrible. He never worked a trial case, but understands the process well. Keep in mind he's not giving any legal advice, he can't, but this is just his personal opinion based on what I told him has gone on so far.

He said what I wrote was generally right, but pointed out that my assumption about a lack of evidence setting the course for a quick dismissal is not necessarily so. He said, using this case for example, if the promotional materials can be even be weakly misinterpereted to associate the Peppermill with prize money, it would be possible for a trial to proceed further than expected.

So it could be dismissed without a full born trial, but if the evidence is not conclusive one way or the other, then a trial could proceed allowing the presentation of each sides analysis of the evidence.

He said in the end, assuming the facts here are taken at face value, that based on the information provided that the suit would be dismissed even if gone to trial; but going to trial stretches things out and causes numerous court filings and visits.

He said just going to trial, going through the process of stepping through court filings, examination of evidence, and the assured dismissal request by the plaintiff would get stretched out over a year or more. It's not a year or more of trial of course, but it's like dozens of trips to court to file papers, sit in court for procedural matters, present evidence, etc... All stretched over the span of a year or more (depends on how busy the court is, but most likely "more").

He also commented that contacting the DA in Reno with a fraud complaint wouldn't likely result in any action. He said criminal fraud is difficult to quantify and prove, and requires intent and other qualifications. He says, in his personal opinion, this whole issue sounds more like a financial solvency issue and not any type of legal fraud. Again, that's just his personal opinion, not a legal analysis; he's not a criminal laywer, and just like everybody else here, he only has limited insight into what went on.

My buddy definitely confirmed that from an economics and effectiveness standpoint, each player filing in small claims against Tony A is probably a sound course... But could be more bother than it's worth, and may still result in non-payment.

Lastly he pointed out my posts are way too long, poorly written, and are painful to read, so sorry about that folks :grin:

 

[levartze]

The USPPA changed it's entity type to a corporation just before the tournament. If that were the case, wouldn't the officials of the corporation (i.e., President, Secretary, Treasurer, etc..) be protected from Small Claim stuff of Suits?

Thanks MahnaMahna. I definitely don't want to overstate my "experience". I'm no Raymond Burr. It's all swiss-cheese and second hand info that probably doesn't amount to much more than being an oberver in the court room of a few civil lawsuit cases... I was just a banker working for lawyers, lol.

I did ask a buddy of mine today who is in contracts and mergers/acquisiions law to do a sanity check on what I wrote yesterday. He already pointed out that I made a bad assumption, but not horrible. He never worked a trial case, but understands the process well. Keep in mind he's not giving any legal advice, he can't, but this is just his personal opinion based on what I told him has gone on so far.

He said what I wrote was generally right, but pointed out that my assumption about a lack of evidence setting the course for a quick dismissal is not necessarily so. He said, using this case for example, if the promotional materials can be even be weakly misinterpereted to associate the Peppermill with prize money, it would be possible for a trial to proceed further than expected.

So it could be dismissed without a full born trial, but if the evidence is not conclusive one way or the other, then a trial could proceed allowing the presentation of each sides analysis of the evidence.

He said in the end, assuming the facts here are taken at face value, that based on the information provided that the suit would be dismissed even if gone to trial; but going to trial stretches things out and causes numerous court filings and visits.

He said just going to trial, going through the process of stepping through court filings, examination of evidence, and the assured dismissal request by the plaintiff would get stretched out over a year or more. It's not a year or more of trial of course, but it's like dozens of trips to court to file papers, sit in court for procedural matters, present evidence, etc... All stretched over the span of a year or more (depends on how busy the court is, but most likely "more").

He also commented that contacting the DA in Reno with a fraud complaint wouldn't likely result in any action. He said criminal fraud is difficult to quantify and prove, and requires intent and other qualifications. He says, in his personal opinion, this whole issue sounds more like a financial solvency issue and not any type of legal fraud. Again, that's just his personal opinion, not a legal analysis; he's not a criminal laywer, and just like everybody else here, he only has limited insight into what went on.

My buddy definitely confirmed that from an economics and effectiveness standpoint, each player filing in small claims against Tony A is probably a sound course... But could be more bother than it's worth, and may still result in non-payment.

Lastly he pointed out my posts are way too long, poorly written, and are painful to read, so sorry about that folks :grin:

 

[abs]

Ah, I didn't realize that was the case (USPPA incorperating); if it was previously mentioned in this thread, my apologies. I shouldn't be using Tony A. in my hypthetical comments then; bad form on my part.

You are correct that employees of corporation are highly limited in terms of personal liability in civil matters. Full disclosure, I only had one Business Law class, so I'm only one level above Clliff Klaven (the idiot/wannabe smart guy from the old TV show Cheers for you young folk). But employees are not always immune in civil matters when under the umbrella of a corporation, it just depends on the nitty gritty.

I honestly don't have a clue what sort/level of personal negligence an employee must be involved in to become subject to civil litigation, but I suspect it's along the lines of whenever an employee acts outside of corporate policy, corporate directive, or when knowingly violating the law regardless of policy or directive.

A prime example is sexual harrassment. It's possible that both a corporation and an employee directly could both be legally exposed, not just the corporation. It's also possible for just the employee to be negligent and subject to civil litigation under specific circumstances.

I wonder if timing matters from a legal perspective, for example... If the event and payout details were promoted by an individul first, and then at some point the incorporation happened, and so then it was the corporation perpetuating the event/payout promotion further. I wonder if that automatically exposes both the individual and the corporation. I'm way out of my realm here, so just thinking out loud.

The USPPA changed it's entity type to a corporation just before the tournament. If that were the case, wouldn't the officials of the corporation (i.e., President, Secretary, Treasurer, etc..) be protected from Small Claim stuff of Suits?

 

[Rickw]

Just my humble opinion, but what I've heard my own attorneys say on numerous occasions is, most attorneys don't like to go to court in a civil action because a trial is a liquid process, i.e., anything can happen. I'm sure the Peppermill would feel that way as well. If one could just show a possibility of liability on their part, I'm sure that they would much rather pay the amount owed to players rather than take a chance on a court hearing.

How much are we talking here? Less than $20k I would assume. That's chump change for them.

 

[kybill9]

The USPPA changed it's entity type to a corporation just before the tournament. If that were the case, wouldn't the officials of the corporation (i.e., President, Secretary, Treasurer, etc..) be protected from Small Claim stuff of Suits?

NO. It is just a different type of filing.