Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more ➡
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Add note
Save to My Library
Sync to mobile
Look up keyword
Like this
3Activity
×
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Vince Young Lawsuit v. Pro Player Funding

Vince Young Lawsuit v. Pro Player Funding

Ratings: (0)|Views: 1,641|Likes:
Published by Darren Adam Heitner

More info:

Published by: Darren Adam Heitner on Sep 09, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See More
See less

07/10/2013

pdf

text

original

 
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKCOUNTY OF NEW YORKVINCENT YOUNG,Plaintiff,-against-PRO PLAYER FUNDING LLC,Defendant.Index No. _____________Date Purchased: September 5, 2012
SUMMONS
Basis of Venue: CPLR §§ 501 and503(c).
TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT:
 You are hereby summoned to answer the Verified Complaint in this action and to serve acopy of your answer or, if the Verified Complaint is not served with summons, to serve a noticeof appearance, on the Plaintiff’s Attorneys within 20 days after the service of this summons,exclusive of the day of service (or within 30 days after the service is complete if this summons isnot personally delivered to you within the State of New York); and in case of your failure toappear or answer, judgment will be taken against you by default for the relief demanded in theVerified Complaint.Dated: New York, New York September 5, 2012DEWEY PEGNO & KRAMARSKY LLPBy /s/ Thomas E. L. DeweyThomas E. L. DeweyDavid S. PegnoDavid C. Marden777 Third Avenue, 37th FloorNew York, New York 10017(212) 943-9000OF COUNSEL:Trey L. DolezalKASLING, HEMPHILL, DOLEZAL &ATWELL, L.L.P.301 Congress Avenue, Suite 300Austin, Texas 78701(512) 472-6800
 Attorneys for Plaintiff Vincent P. Young
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/05/2012
INDEX NO. 156111/2012NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/05/2012
 
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKCOUNTY OF NEW YORKVINCENT YOUNG,Plaintiff,-against-PRO PLAYER FUNDING LLC,Defendant.Index No. _____________
VERIFIED COMPLAINT
Plaintiff Vincent Young (“Young”), by his undersigned attorneys, as and for hiscomplaint in this action, alleges as follows with knowledge as to his own actions, and otherwiseupon information and belief:
SUMMARY OF THE ACTION
1.
 
Young is a professional quarterback who has been defrauded by his formerbusiness representatives through a brazen scheme to secure loans using Young’s identity tosatisfy their own personal debts and otherwise line their own pockets.2.
 
One such loan that was secured as part of that fraudulent conduct was a nearly$1.9 million loan from defendant Pro Player Funding LLC (“Pro Player”)—a predatory lenderwith a history of loaning funds to football players on extraordinarily onerous terms. Under theonerous terms of the alleged loan to Young, Pro Player retained prepaid interest at the rate of 20% per annum in the amount of $619,112.26, and after other disbursements Young allegedlywas to receive a total of $1,104,902.54—or a mere 59% of the total loan proceeds (the “ProPlayer Loan”).
 
 23.
 
On June 6, 2012, an event of default on the loan was declared by Pro Player,which Pro Player claimed entitled it to commence charging Young interest at the default rate of 30%. Pro Player also filed a Judgment by Confession on July 2, 2012, seeking from Young anoutstanding principal amount of $1,695,070.54, together with post-judgment interest at 9% perannum until the judgment is paid in full.4.
 
Young has never received a penny from the purported Pro Player “loan” proceeds,nor has he ever communicated with anyone from Pro Player or knowingly executed any loanagreements with Pro Player. Tellingly, the signature pages to the various loan agreementspurportedly signed by Young were executed on May 4, 2011, even though the agreementsthemselves were not finalized until two weeks later—on May 17, 2011. Pro Player entered intothis purported loan without taking any reasonable steps to ensure that Young was aware of thetransaction, that he authorized it, or that he would benefit from it. Indeed, the circumstances of this loan should have given rise to grave suspicions on the part of Pro Player as to whether thetransaction was legitimate. Pro Player, however, turned a blind eye to those circumstances,motivated by its rapacious desire to earn the exorbitant profits on the loan.5.
 
Despite Young’s stated belief that the Pro Player Loan was fraudulently obtainedwithout his knowledge, Pro Player has subjected Young—and his former football team, theBuffalo Bills—to a barrage of threats and excessive and needless discovery requests in an effortto enforce its judgment.6.
 
Accordingly, Young brings this action to vacate the Judgment by Confessionbecause the underlying loan was obtained by fraudulent means, with Pro Players’ (at minimum)negligent and reckless assistance.

Activity (3)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
1 thousand reads
1 thousand reads

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->