COME NOW, the defendants, JAMES NESFIELD, A. F. GALLOWAY, and DOUGLAS C. COGAN, by and through the undersigned counsel, and file this Motion for Summary Judgment, and in support thereof, state as follows:
shareholders and creditors of Stan Lee Media, Inc., as well as the courts of this district, since before June of 2001. Although concealed by the plaintiffs for years, the conspiracy and the frauds have recently come to light and will be uncovered in these proceedings, whether it be on this motion for summary judgment or in the counterclaim that will follow disposition of motions regarding the plaintiffs\u2019 first amended complaint. This pending case was not prompted by any wrongdoing on the part of the named defendants, as alleged, but is simply a last-ditch effort by the co-conspirators to eliminate their past and any evidence of their fraud.
The defendants contend that the evidence that is presented contemporaneous with the filing of this motion will clearly demonstrate that the plaintiffs, together with other third parties, have conspired with one another to defraud the SLMI bankruptcy court, SLMI\u2019s shareholders, SLMI\u2019s creditors, and the bankruptcy trustee. In conspiring to do so, the plaintiffs, Stan Lee and Gill Champion, breached their fiduciary obligations as officers and representatives of SLMI during the bankruptcy proceedings. The plaintiffs have all directly financially benefited from their acts of conspiracy and fraud in wrongfully and unlawfully taking and using the assets of SLMI. At all times material to this case, Stan Lee and Gill Champion have been insiders to all of the information that will be presented to this court. At all times material hereto, these insiders, together with other co-conspirators, raided the assets of SLMI and left it, and its shareholders and creditors behind. In furtherance of the conspiracy, Stan Lee and Gill Champion developed two new companies, POW! Entertainment, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as \u201cPOW!\u201d) and QED Productions, LLC (hereinafter referred to as \u201cQED\u201d). Thereafter, Stan Lee and Gill Champion proceeded to illegally move assets of SLMI into QED and POW!, all while SLMI was under bankruptcy protection. Even though they do not prefer to be labeled \u201cconspirators\u201d and will disagree with the term \u201cfraud\u201d being used, it appears that the plaintiffs\u2019 first amended complaint
admits all of the facts underlying these allegations. Regardless of how one characterizes or labels what has happened, SLMI was in bankruptcy, SLMI was managed by Stan Lee and Gill Champion, Stan Lee and Gill Champion did not like SLMI\u2019s future, Stan Lee and Gill Champion established new companies, and Stan Lee and Gill Champion simply transferred the assets from SLMI to their new companies without any authority to do so. The unauthorized taking is nothing short of theft.
In support of this motion or summary judgment, the defendants have prepared and are presenting to this court substantial evidence in support of these allegations. The facts, as they will be presented to this court, are completely supported by documentation, which is already of record (1) in other judicial proceedings in this Central District of California, (2) with the State of Delaware Division of Corporations, (3) with the State of Colorado Division of Corporations, (4) with the United States Copyright and Trademark Office, (5) with the Securities and Exchange Commission (hereinafter \u201cSEC\u201d), and (6) as otherwise supported by documents and affidavits which are filed with this Court in support of this motion. Furthermore, the pleadings will also be a source of information for this court to consider in making its determination on this motion. In fact, the plaintiffs, by their very own admissions, as contained within their initial complaint and first amended complaint, have eliminated much of the requirement that the defendants present any evidence for this court to grant summary judgment in this case.
The Plaintiffs have filed an eight (8) count complaint against the defendants, seeking relief based upon allegations of copyright infringement (Count I); violation of 15 U.S.C. \u00a7 1125, Lanham Act (Count II); violation of 15 U.S.C. \u00a7 1125(d) cyber squatting (Count III); violation of common law right of privacy (Count IV); interference with contractual relations (Count V);
Now bringing you back...
Please enter your email address below to reset your password. We will send you an email with instructions on how to continue.
Does that email address look wrong? Try again with a different email.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?