San Francisco Mayor's Wife Says She Was Swindled
National News
Moviemakers swindled the mayor of San Francisco's wife out of $75,000 by promising she would act in and produce a film in China, then making another movie, without hiring her for anything and without repaying her "one cent," Jennifer Siebel claims in Superior Court. Siebel demands punitive damages from Jay Rothstein and China Venture Films.
"This is a simple case of dishonesty," the complaint states. "Plaintiff Jennifer Siebel was swindled out of $75,000 by defendants Jay Rothstein and his company, China Venture Films, LLC based on false promises that they were producing and financing an independent film in China in which plaintiff would act and produce. Based on those false promises, plaintiff entered into an agreement with the defendants in which she invested $75,000. When soliciting her investment, defendants never had any intention of fulfilling the agreement, including repaying plaintiff the $75,000 that she invested and that defendant Rothstein, pursuant to the contract, agreed to be personally liable for."
Siebel claims Rothstein's flick, "Milk and Fashion," shot in China, "is essentially the same film as the film in which plaintiff invested. Plaintiff was not invited to appear in this film, was not offered the chance to take part in the production of the film, and has not been offered any rights to this film."
And, she says, Rothstein has blown off her requests to be repaid the $75,000. Siebel says he also owes her 6.5 percent of U.S. net income from the film.
Siebel, a Stanford graduate and actress, married Mayor Gavin Newsom on July 26.
She demands damages and punitive damages for fraud, conversion, breach of contract, unjust enrichment and negligent misrepresentation. She is represented by Steven Williams with Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy.
Related listings
-
Prosecutors trying to get obese defendant to court
National News 08/22/2008Prosecutors are trying to decide how to jail and bring to court a nearly half-ton, bedridden woman accused of killing her 2-year-old nephew.A grand jury on Thursday indicted Mayra Lizbeth Rosales, 27, on one count of first-degree murder and on one co...
-
Ninth Circuit upholds school policy on special education children
National News 08/20/2008The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on Tuesday upheld a California public school district's policy that parents may only observe their disabled children in the classroom for twenty minutes in order to evaluate the school's proposed educatio...
-
Businessman Says Joe Arpaio Ruined Him
National News 08/18/2008Joe Arpaio, the publicity-hungry sheriff of Maricopa County, staged a media event by bursting into a man's home and accusing him of running an illegal chop shop, though Arpaio was simply serving a warrant for an unpaid traffic ticket, a man cla...
Workers’ Compensation Subrogation of Administrative Fees and Costs
When a worker covered by workers’ compensation makes a claim against a third party, the workers’ compensation insurance retains the right to subrogate against any recovery from that third party for all benefits paid to or on behalf of a claimant injured at work. When subrogating for more than basic medical and indemnity benefits, the Texas workers’ compensation subrogation statute provides that “the net amount recovered by a claimant in a third‑party action shall be used to reimburse the carrier for benefits, including medical benefits that have been paid for the compensable injury.” TX Labor Code § 417.002.
In fact, all 50 states provide for similar subrogation. However, none of them precisely outlines which payments or costs paid by a compensation carrier constitute “compensation” and can be recovered. The result is industry-wide confusion and an ongoing debate and argument with claimants’ attorneys over what can and can’t be included in a carrier’s lien for recovery purposes.
In addition to medical expenses, death benefits, funeral costs and/or indemnity benefits for lost wages and loss of earning capacity resulting from a compensable injury, workers’ compensation insurance carriers also expend considerable dollars for case management costs, medical bill audit fees, rehabilitation benefits, nurse case worker fees, and other similar fees. They also incur other expenses in conjunction with the handling and adjusting of workers’ compensation claims. Workers’ compensation carriers typically assert, of course, that, they are entitled to reimbursement for such expenditures when it recovers its workers’ compensation lien. Injured workers and their attorneys disagree.