HDNet v. WILLIAM HAMBRECHT

Case 3:11-cv-00061-O Document 1 Filed 01/10/11 Page 1 of 5 PageID 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
HDNET, LLC,
Plaintiff,
v. CASE NO. 3:11-cv-61
WILLIAM HAMBRECHT AND THE

HAMBRECHT 1980 REVOCABLE
TRUST,
Defendants.
PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT
Plaintiff HDNet, LLC (“Plaintiff”), files its Complaint against William Hambrecht and
The Hambrecht 1980 Revocable Trust (collectively “Defendants”) and respectfully shows the
Court and Jury as follows:
I.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1332 because this action is between citizens of different States and the amount in controversy
exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs.
2. Because Defendants have purposefully availed themselves of the privilege of
conducting business in this state, which has been regular and systematic, and because Defendants
committed many of the wrongful acts alleged in this Complaint within this judicial district,
Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction in this Court.
3. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(a)(2) because a
substantial part of the events giving rise to these claims occurred in this judicial district, and the
injurious consequences of Defendants’ acts occurred in this judicial district.
PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT – Page 1

4. Venue is also proper in this Court because Defendants agreed to venue in Dallas
County pursuant to a written agreement between Plaintiff and Defendants.
II.
PARTIES
5. Plaintiff HDNet, LLC, is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of
business in Dallas County, Texas.
6. Defendant William Hambrecht is an individual residing in San Francisco,
California.
7. On information and belief, Defendant The Hambrecht 1980 Revocable Trust is a
trust organized under the laws of California.
III.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
8. On or about April 7, 2010, UFL Management, LLC executed and delivered to
Plaintiff a promissory note dated April 7, 2010 whereby UFL Management, LLC promised to
pay to the order of plaintiff the sum of $5,000,000.00 due and payable on October 6, 2010, with
interest at the rate of one percent (1%) per annum (the “UFL Note”). A true copy of the UFL
Note is attached as Exhibit “A” and incorporated by reference. Plaintiff is the legal owner and
holder of the note.
9. As part of the same transaction, on or about April 7, 2010 for consideration made
and delivered, Defendants executed an agreement by the terms of which Defendants absolutely
and unconditionally guaranteed prompt payment of the UFL Note, together with reasonable
attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses. A true copy of the agreement (with personal financial
information removed) is attached as Exhibit “B” and incorporated by reference.

10. Despite Plaintiff's demand for payment from UFL Management LLC after the
note became due and payable, no part of the note has been paid.
11. On or about October 19, 2010, Plaintiff, Defendants and UFL Management LLC
entered into a forbearance agreement, under which Plaintiff agreed to forbear its rights under the
UFL Note and guaranty until December 1, 2010. Under this forbearance agreement, the parties
agreed that interest accruing on the principal amount of the UFL Note after October 6, 2010,
would accrue at the rate of fifteen percent (15%) per annum.
12. On or about December 1, 2010, Plaintiff demanded that Defendants fulfill the
terms of Defendants’ guaranty, and pay the debt owed to Plaintiff in accordance with that
guaranty, but no part of the debt has been paid. Accordingly, there is now due, owing, and
unpaid from Defendants to Plaintiff on the note the sum of $5,000,000.00 principal, and interest
on this sum at the rate of one percent (1%) per annum calculated from April 7, 2010 to October
6, 2010, and at the rate of fifteen percent (15%) per annum calculated from October 7, 2010.
IV.
CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
A. Breach of Contract
13. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the facts contained in the preceding paragraphs and
incorporate them fully herein.
14. HDNet and Defendants have a valid, enforceable contract by which Defendants
guaranteed payment of principal and interest under the UFL Note.
15. HDNet has fully performed its obligations under the contract.
16. Defendants have breached the contract by failing to tender prompt payment of the
principal and interest due under the UFL Note.

17. As a result of Defendants’ breaches of contract, Plaintiff has sustained financial
harm within the jurisdiction of this court.
B. Attorney’s Fees
18. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the facts contained in the preceding paragraphs and
incorporates them fully herein.
19. Due to the breaches of contract described above, it has been necessary for
Plaintiff to obtain legal counsel to prosecute this suit. As a result, Plaintiff is entitled to recover
its reasonable and necessary fees and costs for prosecuting this action.
V.
JURY DEMAND
20. HDNet demands a jury trial of all claims in this Complaint on which a jury trial is
available.
VI.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff requests that Defendants be cited
to appear and answer herein, and that on final hearing, Plaintiff have judgment as follows:
A. All actual damages caused by Defendants’ actions;
B. Reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees for prosecuting this action;
C. Pre- and post-judgment interest at the highest lawful rate;
D. Costs of suit; and
E. Such other and further relief to which Plaintiff may be justly entitled.

Dated: January 10, 2011 Respectfully submitted,
FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
By: /s/ M. Brett Johnson

Thomas M. Melsheimer
Attorney-in-Charge
melsheimer@fr.com
State Bar No. 13922550
M. Brett Johnson
bjohnson@fr.com
Texas Bar No. 00790975
Scott C. Thomas
sthomas@fr.com
John C.C. Sanders, Jr.
jsanders@fr.com
1717 Main Street, Suite 5000
Dallas, Texas 75201
Telephone (214) 747-5070
Telecopy (214) 747-2091
Attorneys for Plaintiff

HDNET, LLC

Case 3:11-cv-00061-O Document 1-1 Filed 01/10/11 Page 1 of 4 PageID 6
“EXHIBIT A”
“EXHIBIT B”
2-67;1'5HY &,9,/&29(56+((7
7KH-6FLYLOFRYHUVKHHWDQGWKHLQIRUPDWLRQFRQWDLQHGKHUHLQQHLWKHUUHSODFHQRUVXSSOHPHQWWKHILOLQJDQGVHUYLFHRISOHDGLQJVRURWKHUSDSHUVDVUHTXLUHGE\ODZH[FHSWDV
SURYLGHGE\ORFDOUXOHVRIFRXUW7KLVIRUPDSSURYHGE\WKH-XGLFLDO&RQIHUHQFHRIWKH8QLWHG6WDWHVLQ6HSWHPEHULVUHTXLUHGIRUWKHXVHRIWKH&OHUNRI&RXUWIRUWKHSXUSRVHRI
LQLWLDWLQJWKHFLYLOGRFNHWVKHHW6((,16758&7,216217+(5(9(56(2)7+()250
, D 3/$,17,))6 '()(1'$176
William Hambrecht and The Hambrecht 1980 Revocable Trust
HDNet, LLC
E&RXQW\RI5HVLGHQFHRI)LUVW/LVWHG3ODLQWLII Dallas County, TX &RXQW\RI5HVLGHQFHRI)LUVW/LVWHG'HIHQGDQW San Francisco County, CA

(;&(37,1863/$,17,))&$6(6 ,1863/$,17,))&$6(621/<
127(,1/$1'&21'(01$7,21&$6(686(7+(/2&$7,212)7+(
/$1',192/9('
F$WWRUQH\¶V)LUP1DPH$GGUHVVDQG7HOHSKRQH1XPEHU $WWRUQH\V,I.QRZQ

M. Brett Johnson; Fish & Richardson P.C.; 1717 Main Street
Suite 5000; Dallas, TX 75201; (Ph:) 214-747-5070
,,%$6,62)-85,6',&7,213ODFHDQ³;´LQ2QH%R[2QO\ ,,,&,7,=(16+,32)35,1&,3$/3$57,(63ODFHDQ³;´LQ2QH%R[IRU3ODLQWLII

)RU'LYHUVLW\&DVHV2QO\ DQG2QH%R[IRU'HIHQGDQW
u 86*RYHUQPHQW u )HGHUDO4XHVWLRQ 37) '() 37) '()
3ODLQWLII 86*RYHUQPHQW1RWD3DUW\ &LWL]HQRI7KLV6WDWH u u ,QFRUSRUDWHGor3ULQFLSDO3ODFH u u
RI%XVLQHVV,Q7KLV6WDWH
u 86*RYHUQPHQW u 'LYHUVLW\ &LWL]HQRI$QRWKHU6WDWH u u ,QFRUSRUDWHGand3ULQFLSDO3ODFH u u

'HIHQGDQW RI%XVLQHVV,Q$QRWKHU6WDWH
,QGLFDWH&LWL]HQVKLSRI3DUWLHVLQ,WHP,,,
&LWL]HQRU6XEMHFWRID u u )RUHLJQ1DWLRQ u u
)RUHLJQ&RXQWU\
,91$785(2)68,73ODFHDQ³;´LQ2QH%R[2QO\
&2175$&7 72576 )25)(,785(3(1$/7< %$1.5837&< 27+(567$787(6
u ,QVXUDQFH 3(5621$/,1-85< 3(5621$/,1-85< u $JULFXOWXUH u $SSHDO86& u 6WDWH5HDSSRUWLRQPHQW
u 0DULQH u $LUSODQH u 3HUVRQDO,QMXU\ u 2WKHU)RRG 'UXJ u :LWKGUDZDO u $QWLWUXVW
u 0LOOHU$FW u $LUSODQH3URGXFW 0HG0DOSUDFWLFH u 'UXJ5HODWHG6HL]XUH 86& u %DQNVDQG%DQNLQJ
u 1HJRWLDEOH,QVWUXPHQW /LDELOLW\ u 3HUVRQDO,QMXU\ RI3URSHUW\86& u &RPPHUFH
u 5HFRYHU\RI2YHUSD\PHQW u $VVDXOW/LEHO 3URGXFW/LDELOLW\ u /LTXRU/DZV 3523(57<5,*+76 u 'HSRUWDWLRQ
(QIRUFHPHQWRI-XGJPHQW 6ODQGHU u $VEHVWRV3HUVRQDO u 55 7UXFN u &RS\ULJKWV u 5DFNHWHHU,QIOXHQFHGDQG
u 0HGLFDUH$FW u )HGHUDO(PSOR\HUV¶ ,QMXU\3URGXFW u $LUOLQH5HJV u 3DWHQW &RUUXSW2UJDQL]DWLRQV
u 5HFRYHU\RI'HIDXOWHG /LDELOLW\ /LDELOLW\ u 2FFXSDWLRQDO u 7UDGHPDUN u &RQVXPHU&UHGLW
6WXGHQW/RDQV u 0DULQH 3(5621$/3523(57< 6DIHW\+HDOWK u &DEOH6DW79
([FO9HWHUDQV u 0DULQH3URGXFW u 2WKHU)UDXG u 2WKHU u 6HOHFWLYH6HUYLFH
u 5HFRYHU\RI2YHUSD\PHQW /LDELOLW\ u 7UXWKLQ/HQGLQJ /$%25 62&,$/6(&85,7< u 6HFXULWLHV&RPPRGLWLHV
RI9HWHUDQ¶V%HQHILWV u 0RWRU9HKLFOH u 2WKHU3HUVRQDO u )DLU/DERU6WDQGDUGV u +,$II ([FKDQJH
u 6WRFNKROGHUV¶6XLWV u 0RWRU9HKLFOH 3URSHUW\'DPDJH $FW u %ODFN/XQJ u &XVWRPHU&KDOOHQJH
u 2WKHU&RQWUDFW 3URGXFW/LDELOLW\ u 3URSHUW\'DPDJH u /DERU0JPW5HODWLRQV u ',:&',::J 86&
u &RQWUDFW3URGXFW/LDELOLW\ u 2WKHU3HUVRQDO 3URGXFW/LDELOLW\ u /DERU0JPW5HSRUWLQJ u 66,'7LWOH;9, u 2WKHU6WDWXWRU\$FWLRQV
u )UDQFKLVH ,QMXU\ 'LVFORVXUH$FW u 56,J u $JULFXOWXUDO$FWV
5($/3523(57< &,9,/5,*+76 35,621(53(7,7,216 u 5DLOZD\/DERU$FW )('(5$/7$;68,76 u (FRQRPLF6WDELOL]DWLRQ$FW
u /DQG&RQGHPQDWLRQ u 9RWLQJ u 0RWLRQVWR9DFDWH u 2WKHU/DERU/LWLJDWLRQ u 7D[HV863ODLQWLII u (QYLURQPHQWDO0DWWHUV
u )RUHFORVXUH u (PSOR\PHQW 6HQWHQFH u (PSO5HW,QF RU'HIHQGDQW u (QHUJ\$OORFDWLRQ$FW
u 5HQW/HDVH (MHFWPHQW u +RXVLQJ +DEHDV&RUSXV 6HFXULW\$FW u ,56²7KLUG3DUW\ u )UHHGRPRI,QIRUPDWLRQ
u 7RUWVWR/DQG $FFRPPRGDWLRQV u *HQHUDO 86& $FW
u 7RUW3URGXFW/LDELOLW\ u :HOIDUH u 'HDWK3HQDOW\ ,00,*5$7,21 u $SSHDORI)HH'HWHUPLQDWLRQ
u $OO2WKHU5HDO3URSHUW\ u $PHUZ'LVDELOLWLHV u 0DQGDPXV 2WKHU u 1DWXUDOL]DWLRQ$SSOLFDWLRQ 8QGHU(TXDO$FFHVV
(PSOR\PHQW u &LYLO5LJKWV u +DEHDV&RUSXV WR-XVWLFH
u $PHUZ'LVDELOLWLHV u 3ULVRQ&RQGLWLRQ $OLHQ'HWDLQHH u &RQVWLWXWLRQDOLW\RI
2WKHU u 2WKHU,PPLJUDWLRQ 6WDWH6WDWXWHV
u 2WKHU&LYLO5LJKWV $FWLRQV
925,*,1 3ODFHDQ³;´LQ2QH%R[2QO\ $SSHDOWR'LVWULFW

u 2ULJLQDO u 5HPRYHGIURP u 5HPDQGHGIURP u 5HLQVWDWHGRU u 7UDQVIHUUHGIURP
DQRWKHUGLVWULFW u 0XOWLGLVWULFW u -XGJHIURP
0DJLVWUDWH
3URFHHGLQJ 6WDWH&RXUW $SSHOODWH&RXUW 5HRSHQHG /LWLJDWLRQ
VSHFLI\ -XGJPHQW
&LWHWKH86&LYLO6WDWXWHXQGHUZKLFK\RXDUHILOLQJ'RQRWFLWHMXULVGLFWLRQDOVWDWXWHVXQOHVVGLYHUVLW\
28 U.S.C. § 1332
9,&$86(2)$&7,21 %ULHIGHVFULSWLRQRIFDXVH
Suit by creditor against guarantor
9,,5(48(67(',1 u &+(&.,)7+,6,6$&/$66$&7,21 '(0$1' &+(&.<(6RQO\LIGHPDQGHGLQFRPSODLQW
&203/$,17 81'(5)5&3 -85<'(0$1' ✔
u <HV u 1R
9,,,5(/$7('&$6(66HHLQVWUXFWLRQV
3(1',1*25&/26('
-8'*( '2&.(7180%(5
'$7( 6,*1$785(2)$77251(<2)5(&25'
01/10/2011 /s/ M. Brett Johnson
)252)),&(86(21/<
5(&(,37 $02817 $33/<,1*,)3 -8'*( 0$*-8'*(

HDNet v. WILLIAM HAMBRECHT

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

HDNet v. WILLIAM HAMBRECHT

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 3:11-cv-00061-O Document 1 Filed 01/10/11 Page 1 of 5 PageID 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

v. CASE NO. 3:11-cv-61

WILLIAM HAMBRECHT AND THE

Court and Jury as follows:

exceeds the sum or value of $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs.

2. Because Defendants have purposefully availed themselves of the privilege of

Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction in this Court.

3. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(a)(2) because a

injurious consequences of Defendants’ acts occurred in this judicial district.

PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT – Page 1

County pursuant to a written agreement between Plaintiff and Defendants.

5. Plaintiff HDNet, LLC, is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of

business in Dallas County, Texas.

6. Defendant William Hambrecht is an individual residing in San Francisco,

7. On information and belief, Defendant The Hambrecht 1980 Revocable Trust is a

trust organized under the laws of California.

8. On or about April 7, 2010, UFL Management, LLC executed and delivered to

holder of the note.

information removed) is attached as Exhibit “B” and incorporated by reference.

PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT – Page 2

would accrue at the rate of fifteen percent (15%) per annum.

incorporate them fully herein.

guaranteed payment of principal and interest under the UFL Note.

principal and interest due under the UFL Note.

PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT – Page 3

17. As a result of Defendants’ breaches of contract, Plaintiff has sustained financial

harm within the jurisdiction of this court.

incorporates them fully herein.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff requests that Defendants be cited

A. All actual damages caused by Defendants’ actions;

B. Reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees for prosecuting this action;

C. Pre- and post-judgment interest at the highest lawful rate;

D. Costs of suit; and

PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT – Page 4

Dated: January 10, 2011 Respectfully submitted,

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.

By: /s/ M. Brett Johnson

Attorneys for Plaintiff

PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT – Page 5

E &RXQW\RI5HVLGHQFHRI)LUVW/LVWHG3ODLQWLII Dallas County, TX &RXQW\RI5HVLGHQFHRI)LUVW/LVWHG'HIHQGDQW San Francisco County, CA

F $WWRUQH\¶V )LUP1DPH$GGUHVVDQG7HOHSKRQH1XPEHU $WWRUQH\V ,I.QRZQ

,,%$6,62)-85,6',&7,21 3ODFHDQ³;´LQ2QH%R[2QO\ ,,,&,7,=(16+,32)35,1&,3$/3$57,(6 3ODFHDQ³;´LQ2QH%R[IRU3ODLQWLII

u  86*RYHUQPHQW u  'LYHUVLW\ &LWL]HQRI$QRWKHU6WDWH u  u  ,QFRUSRUDWHGand3ULQFLSDO3ODFH u  u 

925,*,1 3ODFHDQ³;´LQ2QH%R[2QO\ $SSHDOWR'LVWULFW

5(&(,37 $02817 $33/<,1*,)3 -8'*( 0$*-8'*(

You might also like

E&RXQW\RI5HVLGHQFHRI)LUVW/LVWHG3ODLQWLII Dallas County, TX &RXQW\RI5HVLGHQFHRI)LUVW/LVWHG'HIHQGDQW San Francisco County, CA

F$WWRUQH\¶V)LUP1DPH$GGUHVVDQG7HOHSKRQH1XPEHU $WWRUQH\V,I.QRZQ

,,%$6,62)-85,6',&7,213ODFHDQ³;´LQ2QH%R[2QO\ ,,,&,7,=(16+,32)35,1&,3$/3$57,(63ODFHDQ³;´LQ2QH%R[IRU3ODLQWLII

u 86*RYHUQPHQW u 'LYHUVLW\ &LWL]HQRI$QRWKHU6WDWH u u ,QFRUSRUDWHGand3ULQFLSDO3ODFH u u

925,*,1 3ODFHDQ³;´LQ2QH%R[2QO\ $SSHDOWR'LVWULFW

5(&(,37 $02817 $33/<,1,)3 -8'( 0$-8'(