Shelby in the News

[ve4mm]

LAW OFFICES OF M. NEIL CUMMINGS & ASSOCIATES, PLC

M. NEIL CUMMINGS, ESQ. (SBN 76166)

11150 W. Olympic Boulevard, Suite 1050

Los Angeles, California 90064

(310) 914-1849; Fax (310) 914-1853

 

 

 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

CARROLL SHELBY, SHELBY COLLECTIBLES INC.,

SHELBY AUTOMOBILES INC. and

CARROLL SHELBY INTERNATIONAL INC.

 

 

 

SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

 

CENTRAL DIVISION

 

 

CARROLL SHELBY, SHELBY COLLECTIBLES, INC., SHELBY AUTOMOBILES, INC. and CARROLL SHELBY INTERNATIONAL, INC.

Plaintiffs,

vs.

R. BRENT FENIMORE,

 

Defendant. )

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

) CASE NO.:

 

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: (1) BREACH OF CONTRACT; (2) ACCOUNTING; (3) BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY, (4) CONVERSION/FRAUD AND DECEIT

 

 

 

 

COMES NOW, Plaintiffs Carroll Shelby (CS), Shelby Collectibles Inc. (SCI), Shelby Automobiles, Inc. (SAI) and Carroll Shelby International, Inc. (CSI) (sometimes collectively referred to herein as “Plaintiffs”), complain of defendant R. Brent Fenimore (“Defendant”) as follows:

1. Plaintiff CARROLL SHELBY is an individual with a residence in the County of Clark, State of Nevada.

2. Plaintiff SHELBY COLLECTIBLES INC. (“CSC”) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Nevada, with its principal place of business in the County of Clark, State of Nevada.

3. Plaintiff SHELBY AUTOMOBILES INC. (“SAI”) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Nevada, with its principal place of business in the County of Clark, State of Nevada.

4. Plaintiff CARROLL SHELBY INTERNATIONAL INC. (“CSI”) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Nevada, with its principal place of business in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. CSI is the shareholder of SAI.

5. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that Defendant R. BRENT FENIMORE (“Defendant”) is an individual who at all times relevant herein resided in the County of Clark, State of Nevada, and who now resides, on information and belief, in the State of Texas.

6. Any contracts and/or agreements set forth herein were entered into and/or made to be performed in the County of Clark, State of Nevada.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

BREACH OF WRITTEN CONTRACT

7. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege each and every allegation of paragraphs 1-6 as though fully set forth herein at this point.

8. On or about October 7, 2005, Plaintiffs CSI and SAI and Fenimore entered into a termination of employment agreement (“Agreement”) whereby Fenimore agreed to the termination of his employment as General Manager at SAI effective September 30, 2005, and whereby Fenimore further covenanted and agreed to (1) return all property of SAI then in his possession; (2) “hold SAI and its shareholders, officers, directors, agents or representatives harmless from any claims arising out of or relating to the termination of his employment”; and (3) “not make any negative or disparaging comments or take action intending to create negative or disparaging image or impression of…SAI, CSI, or any of their officers, directors or representatives, and/or any of their products (past or future).” A true and correct copy of the Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.

9. Further, pursuant to the Agreement, Defendant agreed to “cooperate and work together with SAI and its representatives to resolve any disputes or disagreements which may arise between SAI and any third parties concerning Item Nos. 2 and 3 on the second page of our previous letter to you dated September 22, 2005, or any other business questions or issues which arise in the future concerning transactions in which you were involved while serving as General Manager of SAI.” A true and correct copy of said letter dated September 22, 2005 is attached hereto as Exhibit 2.

10. Plaintiffs CSI and SAI are informed and believe, and based upon such information and belief allege that Defendant has breached the aforementioned covenants of the Agreement by engaging in conduct which includes, but is not necessarily limited to the following: (1) Defendant’s failure to return all property of SAI then in his possession; (2) Defendant’s filing and prosecution of a lawsuit in the State of Texas, in which he is alleging claims, and damages against CSI and SAI based upon claims which arise out of his employment, or relate to the termination of his employment as General Manager of SAI; (3) Defendant’s failure to cooperate and work together with SAI and its representatives to resolve the disputes and disagreements referenced in the letter to him dated September 22, 2005 (Exhibit 2); (4) Defendant has made, or caused to be made negative and disparaging comments, and has taken or caused others to take action intending to create a negative or disparaging image or impression of SAI, CSI and its officers, directors or representatives, including but not limited to Carroll Shelby, John Luft and Amy Boylan. Defendant has also made negative and disparaging comments, or taken action intending to create a negative and disparaging image or impression of the products of SAI.

11. Plaintiffs CSI and SAI have fully performed each and every term, condition and covenant of said Agreement.

12. As a proximate and foreseeable result of the above breaches of the Agreement by Defendant, as alleged herein above, Plaintiffs SAI, CSI and CS have sustained damages in an amount not yet fully ascertained, but which Plaintiffs are informed and believe that based upon such information and belief alleges is in excess of $500,000, subject to proof at trial.

 

 

 

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

ACCOUNTING

13. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege each and every allegation of paragraphs 1-12, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein at this point.

14. As the General Manager of SAI with complete and unfettered access to the books, records, inventory, finances, bank accounts, bank checks and statements, Defendant owed a fiduciary duty to Plaintiff SAI, and its shareholder CSI, to provide full, complete and accurate accountings of all business transactions relating to SAI, including but not limited to all sales of inventory and the receipt and disposition of all business funds, but Fenimore failed and refused to do so during the time he was employed as General Manager up until the date of his termination of employment in October 2005. Plaintiff is entitled to and requires an accounting from Defendant, which Defendant has thus far failed to provide.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY

15. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege each and every allegation of paragraphs 1-14, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein at this point.

16. Defendant, for the reasons and based upon the allegations as contained herein above, has breached the fiduciary duty owed by him to Plaintiffs SAI, CSI and Carroll Shelby (as the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of CSI and SAI), and as a proximate result thereof said plaintiffs have sustained damages in an amount not yet fully ascertained, subject to proof at trial.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

CONVERSION/ FRAUD & DECEIT

17. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege each and every allegation of paragraphs 1-16, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein at this point.

18. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant was placed in a position of trust and confidence by Plaintiffs SAI and CS, who, respectively, relied upon Defendant to conduct the business of SAI, and to carry out the requests made of him by CS, personally, in such a way as to be truthful, honest and not cause damage to SAI, CS and/or their personal property. Defendant, however, violated said position of trust and confidence, and made false representations to SAI and CS on a number of occasions, at various times, which resulted in Defendant converting valuable items of personal property owned by CS to Defendant’s own use, or to a use violative of SAI’s and/or CS’s ownership rights in said property, so as to cause SAI and CS damages as a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s conduct. Defendant’s fraudulent conduct in this regard includes, but is not limited to Defendant’s willful and deliberate forging of CS’s signature on Manufacturer’s Statements of Origin fraudulently issued in the name of SAI, contracts and other legal documents so as to cause damages to SAI an CS, and to deprive CS of his ownership interest in valuable personal property and to deprive CS of his ownership interest in said personal property, including but not limited to Shelby Series One vehicles and one or more GT-40 component vehicles.

19. As a direct and proximate result of the conduct of Defendant, as set forth herein, Plaintiffs SAI and CS have been damaged in an amount which is presently unknown, but is at least the sum of $500,000, according to proof at trial.

20. The conduct of Defendant was willful, wanton, malicious and oppressive, thereby justifying the award of exemplary and punitive damages in an amount to be determined at time of trial.

21. Furthermore, during calendar year 2005 (and before) CS, personally, entrusted Defendant with, and made him a signatory to the bank accounts, bank checks and business records of a company wholly owned by CS, to wit: Plaintiff Shelby Collectibles Inc. (SCI). In this capacity, Defendant had access to and used credit cards taken out by Defendant in the name of SCI and/or his own name. During said time, Defendant received and had the obligation and duty to use and reconcile all bank accounts, bank statements and credit cards for which CS and/or SCI were liable in such a way as to assure that no money was being spent on Defendant’s personal expenses, or on business expenses that had not been pre-approved by the sole owner of the company, CS. Further, during said time, Defendant expressly represented to CS, on numerous occasions, that he had carried out his fiduciary duties and obligations owed to CS in a manner consistent with his fiduciary obligations owed to, and promises made by Defendantto CS.

22. CS is informed and believes, and based upon such information and belief alleges, however, that Defendant breached and violated his fiduciary duties owed and promises made to CS (individually and in his capacity as Chief Executive Officer of SCI) by spending many thousands of dollars on Defendant’s personal, non-business related expenses without the prior knowledge of CS, and/or for reasons entirely unrelated to the business of SCI, including but not limited to stereo and other electronic equipment, alcohol and entertainment.

23. As a direct and proximate result of the fraudulent conduct of Defendant, as set forth herein, Plaintiffs CS and SCI have been damaged in an amount which is presently unknown, but which Plaintiffs will seek to prove at time of trial.

24. The conduct of Defendant, as alleged herein above, was willful, wanton, malicious and oppressive, thereby justifying the award of exemplary and punitive damages in an amount to be determined at time of trial.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendant as follows:

1. General and consequential damages of at least $2,000,000, or according to proof at trial;

2. For punitive damages in the sum of at least $5,000,000; and

3. For costs of suit incurred herein; and

4. For other such relief as this court deems just and proper.

 

DATED: May 2, 2008 LAW OFFICES OF M. NEIL CUMMINGS

& ASSOCIATES, PLC

 

 

 

By:__________________________________

M. Neil Cummings, Esq.

Attorneys for Defendants

CARROLL SHELBY; CARROLL SHELBY

INTERNATIONAL, INC; and

SHELBY AUTOMOBILES INC.

[ShelbyEra08]

So.......what is going on?

 

I get confused reading Law stuff, haha.

[old guy]

So.......what is going on?

 

I get confused reading Law stuff, haha.

 

 

Shelby is suing somebody

[Alexandros]

LAW OFFICES OF M. NEIL CUMMINGS & ASSOCIATES, PLC

M. NEIL CUMMINGS, ESQ. (SBN 76166)

11150 W. Olympic Boulevard, Suite 1050

Los Angeles, California 90064

(310) 914-1849; Fax (310) 914-1853

 

 

 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

CARROLL SHELBY, SHELBY COLLECTIBLES INC.,

SHELBY AUTOMOBILES INC. and

CARROLL SHELBY INTERNATIONAL INC.

 

 

 

SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

 

CENTRAL DIVISION

 

 

CARROLL SHELBY, SHELBY COLLECTIBLES, INC., SHELBY AUTOMOBILES, INC. and CARROLL SHELBY INTERNATIONAL, INC.

Plaintiffs,

vs.

R. BRENT FENIMORE,

 

Defendant. )

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

) CASE NO.:

 

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: (1) BREACH OF CONTRACT; (2) ACCOUNTING; (3) BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY, (4) CONVERSION/FRAUD AND DECEIT

 

 

 

 

COMES NOW, Plaintiffs Carroll Shelby (CS), Shelby Collectibles Inc. (SCI), Shelby Automobiles, Inc. (SAI) and Carroll Shelby International, Inc. (CSI) (sometimes collectively referred to herein as “Plaintiffs”), complain of defendant R. Brent Fenimore (“Defendant”) as follows:

1. Plaintiff CARROLL SHELBY is an individual with a residence in the County of Clark, State of Nevada.

2. Plaintiff SHELBY COLLECTIBLES INC. (“CSC”) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Nevada, with its principal place of business in the County of Clark, State of Nevada.

3. Plaintiff SHELBY AUTOMOBILES INC. (“SAI”) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Nevada, with its principal place of business in the County of Clark, State of Nevada.

4. Plaintiff CARROLL SHELBY INTERNATIONAL INC. (“CSI”) is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Nevada, with its principal place of business in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. CSI is the shareholder of SAI.

5. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that Defendant R. BRENT FENIMORE (“Defendant”) is an individual who at all times relevant herein resided in the County of Clark, State of Nevada, and who now resides, on information and belief, in the State of Texas.

6. Any contracts and/or agreements set forth herein were entered into and/or made to be performed in the County of Clark, State of Nevada.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

BREACH OF WRITTEN CONTRACT

7. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege each and every allegation of paragraphs 1-6 as though fully set forth herein at this point.

8. On or about October 7, 2005, Plaintiffs CSI and SAI and Fenimore entered into a termination of employment agreement (“Agreement”) whereby Fenimore agreed to the termination of his employment as General Manager at SAI effective September 30, 2005, and whereby Fenimore further covenanted and agreed to (1) return all property of SAI then in his possession; (2) “hold SAI and its shareholders, officers, directors, agents or representatives harmless from any claims arising out of or relating to the termination of his employment”; and (3) “not make any negative or disparaging comments or take action intending to create negative or disparaging image or impression of…SAI, CSI, or any of their officers, directors or representatives, and/or any of their products (past or future).” A true and correct copy of the Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.

9. Further, pursuant to the Agreement, Defendant agreed to “cooperate and work together with SAI and its representatives to resolve any disputes or disagreements which may arise between SAI and any third parties concerning Item Nos. 2 and 3 on the second page of our previous letter to you dated September 22, 2005, or any other business questions or issues which arise in the future concerning transactions in which you were involved while serving as General Manager of SAI.” A true and correct copy of said letter dated September 22, 2005 is attached hereto as Exhibit 2.

10. Plaintiffs CSI and SAI are informed and believe, and based upon such information and belief allege that Defendant has breached the aforementioned covenants of the Agreement by engaging in conduct which includes, but is not necessarily limited to the following: (1) Defendant’s failure to return all property of SAI then in his possession; (2) Defendant’s filing and prosecution of a lawsuit in the State of Texas, in which he is alleging claims, and damages against CSI and SAI based upon claims which arise out of his employment, or relate to the termination of his employment as General Manager of SAI; (3) Defendant’s failure to cooperate and work together with SAI and its representatives to resolve the disputes and disagreements referenced in the letter to him dated September 22, 2005 (Exhibit 2); (4) Defendant has made, or caused to be made negative and disparaging comments, and has taken or caused others to take action intending to create a negative or disparaging image or impression of SAI, CSI and its officers, directors or representatives, including but not limited to Carroll Shelby, John Luft and Amy Boylan. Defendant has also made negative and disparaging comments, or taken action intending to create a negative and disparaging image or impression of the products of SAI.

11. Plaintiffs CSI and SAI have fully performed each and every term, condition and covenant of said Agreement.

12. As a proximate and foreseeable result of the above breaches of the Agreement by Defendant, as alleged herein above, Plaintiffs SAI, CSI and CS have sustained damages in an amount not yet fully ascertained, but which Plaintiffs are informed and believe that based upon such information and belief alleges is in excess of $500,000, subject to proof at trial.

 

 

 

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

ACCOUNTING

13. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege each and every allegation of paragraphs 1-12, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein at this point.

14. As the General Manager of SAI with complete and unfettered access to the books, records, inventory, finances, bank accounts, bank checks and statements, Defendant owed a fiduciary duty to Plaintiff SAI, and its shareholder CSI, to provide full, complete and accurate accountings of all business transactions relating to SAI, including but not limited to all sales of inventory and the receipt and disposition of all business funds, but Fenimore failed and refused to do so during the time he was employed as General Manager up until the date of his termination of employment in October 2005. Plaintiff is entitled to and requires an accounting from Defendant, which Defendant has thus far failed to provide.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY

15. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege each and every allegation of paragraphs 1-14, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein at this point.

16. Defendant, for the reasons and based upon the allegations as contained herein above, has breached the fiduciary duty owed by him to Plaintiffs SAI, CSI and Carroll Shelby (as the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of CSI and SAI), and as a proximate result thereof said plaintiffs have sustained damages in an amount not yet fully ascertained, subject to proof at trial.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

CONVERSION/ FRAUD & DECEIT

17. Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege each and every allegation of paragraphs 1-16, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein at this point.

18. At all times herein mentioned, Defendant was placed in a position of trust and confidence by Plaintiffs SAI and CS, who, respectively, relied upon Defendant to conduct the business of SAI, and to carry out the requests made of him by CS, personally, in such a way as to be truthful, honest and not cause damage to SAI, CS and/or their personal property. Defendant, however, violated said position of trust and confidence, and made false representations to SAI and CS on a number of occasions, at various times, which resulted in Defendant converting valuable items of personal property owned by CS to Defendant’s own use, or to a use violative of SAI’s and/or CS’s ownership rights in said property, so as to cause SAI and CS damages as a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s conduct. Defendant’s fraudulent conduct in this regard includes, but is not limited to Defendant’s willful and deliberate forging of CS’s signature on Manufacturer’s Statements of Origin fraudulently issued in the name of SAI, contracts and other legal documents so as to cause damages to SAI an CS, and to deprive CS of his ownership interest in valuable personal property and to deprive CS of his ownership interest in said personal property, including but not limited to Shelby Series One vehicles and one or more GT-40 component vehicles.

19. As a direct and proximate result of the conduct of Defendant, as set forth herein, Plaintiffs SAI and CS have been damaged in an amount which is presently unknown, but is at least the sum of $500,000, according to proof at trial.

20. The conduct of Defendant was willful, wanton, malicious and oppressive, thereby justifying the award of exemplary and punitive damages in an amount to be determined at time of trial.

21. Furthermore, during calendar year 2005 (and before) CS, personally, entrusted Defendant with, and made him a signatory to the bank accounts, bank checks and business records of a company wholly owned by CS, to wit: Plaintiff Shelby Collectibles Inc. (SCI). In this capacity, Defendant had access to and used credit cards taken out by Defendant in the name of SCI and/or his own name. During said time, Defendant received and had the obligation and duty to use and reconcile all bank accounts, bank statements and credit cards for which CS and/or SCI were liable in such a way as to assure that no money was being spent on Defendant’s personal expenses, or on business expenses that had not been pre-approved by the sole owner of the company, CS. Further, during said time, Defendant expressly represented to CS, on numerous occasions, that he had carried out his fiduciary duties and obligations owed to CS in a manner consistent with his fiduciary obligations owed to, and promises made by Defendantto CS.

22. CS is informed and believes, and based upon such information and belief alleges, however, that Defendant breached and violated his fiduciary duties owed and promises made to CS (individually and in his capacity as Chief Executive Officer of SCI) by spending many thousands of dollars on Defendant’s personal, non-business related expenses without the prior knowledge of CS, and/or for reasons entirely unrelated to the business of SCI, including but not limited to stereo and other electronic equipment, alcohol and entertainment.

23. As a direct and proximate result of the fraudulent conduct of Defendant, as set forth herein, Plaintiffs CS and SCI have been damaged in an amount which is presently unknown, but which Plaintiffs will seek to prove at time of trial.

24. The conduct of Defendant, as alleged herein above, was willful, wanton, malicious and oppressive, thereby justifying the award of exemplary and punitive damages in an amount to be determined at time of trial.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendant as follows:

1. General and consequential damages of at least $2,000,000, or according to proof at trial;

2. For punitive damages in the sum of at least $5,000,000; and

3. For costs of suit incurred herein; and

4. For other such relief as this court deems just and proper.

 

DATED: May 2, 2008 LAW OFFICES OF M. NEIL CUMMINGS

& ASSOCIATES, PLC

 

 

 

By:__________________________________

M. Neil Cummings, Esq.

Attorneys for Defendants

CARROLL SHELBY; CARROLL SHELBY

INTERNATIONAL, INC; and

SHELBY AUTOMOBILES INC.

[excaliber]

Shelby is suing somebody? Hardly big news there. We need a 'registry of law suits' to keep track of them of all. It's a fairly long list...

 

In Brent F.'s case the suit may be have been prompted by a couple of recent developements.

1. Unique and the whole mess with the Eleanor project, Brent was heavily involved in that.

2. AC cars is 'once again' talking about a 'factory' in the US to build cars, Brent is involved with that project as well.

 

Of course, AC cars has BEEN 'talking' about building cars for a long time and it's been one nightmare after another actually doing anything. They seem to open and close and may or may not have even built any cars when and if a 'factory' ever did exist in the recent past. 'AC Malta' was the latest 'factory' to close it's doors.