Judge Tosses Claims Against Winklevoss Twins Over $1.3M Adult Magazine Investment
Miami attorney Carlos F. Gonzalez came up on the losing side of the litigation over the public role of investors Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss.
March 04, 2019 at 02:27 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Delaware Business Court Insider
A judge dismissed counterclaims against online entrepreneurs Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss over allegations they failed to publicly promote their $1.3 million investment in an adult magazine venture.
Delaware Court of Chancery Vice Chancellor Joseph R. Slights III ruled Friday in Winklevoss Capital Fund's 2018 lawsuit accusing one-time partner Stephen Shaw of mismanaging Treats!, a Delaware limited liability company operating a print and digital magazine depicting nude and semi-nude photographs of models and celebrities.
Miami attorney Carlos F. Gonzalez of Alvarez | Gonzalez | Menezes responded for Shaw by filing counterclaims for fraud and promissory estoppel, claiming the twins refused to honor a 2012 agreement in 2012 to promote the magazine following their depiction in the film “The Social Network,” which portrayed the early days of Facebook.
Instead, Shaw said the Winklevosses strung Treats! along for months to gain access to his social circles for their own purposes and later demanded a buyout.
Shaw grew frustrated with the twins' involvement by December 2012 after he turned down Tyler's request to arrange a “special casting” with models so that he could “shag” them, according to court documents. Shaw said they also pressed him and his team to promote Hukkster, an online e-commerce company the twins had invested in.
Slights concluded Shaw's allegations were time-barred by Delaware's three-year statute of limitations on claims for fraud and promissory estoppel, and the case fit the rare conditions for applying the equitable doctrine of laches at the pleading stage.
Shaw privately accused the Winklevoss twins as early as June 2013 of breaking their promise to promote the Treats! brand but didn't pursue his claims for nearly five years, the opinion said.
“Defendants had every opportunity to do just that, but they inexplicably chose not to until after plaintiffs filed this lawsuit well beyond the expiration of the statute of limitations on the counterclaims,” Slights wrote in the 29-page memorandum opinion.
While Delaware case law allows late-filed claims to proceed under unusual or extraordinary circumstances, Slights said none of those factors applied.
“Defendants have not carried their burden under any of the tolling theories they have proffered for the simple reason that facts giving rise to their counterclaims were never hidden from them,” he said. ”Defendants were well aware of these potential claims; they simply failed to file them on time.”
Slights has yet to rule on Winklevoss Capital Fund's claims against Shaw and Treats!
Attorneys in the case had no comment by deadline.
The Winklevoss twins are represented by Charles J. Harder of Harder in Beverly Hills, California, and P. Clarkson Collins Jr. and Albert J. Carroll of Morris James in Wilmington, Delaware.
Richard G. Placey of Montgomery McCracken Walker & Rhoads in Wilmington is acting as local counsel for Shaw and Treats!
The case is captioned Winklevoss Capital Fund v. Shaw.
|This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllMiami Developer Drops Claims of Misappropriating Trade Secrets and Stealing Key Employees
5 minute read'Be Proactive With Clients': Florida's New Condo Regulations Will Require a Closer Look at Contracts
5 minute readReal Estate Transactions: Nelson Mullins Says Trust Is Key to Display Good Judgment
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 2Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 3NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 4A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 5Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250