Home https://server7.kproxy.com/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/smyrwpoii/p2/ Entertainment https://server7.kproxy.com/servlet/redirect.srv/sruj/smyrwpoii/p2/ Cascade loses bid to prevent financial lawsuit in KAOS Nightclub Lawsuit

Cascade loses bid to prevent financial lawsuit in KAOS Nightclub Lawsuit



A U.S. judge has reprimanded an effort by Cascade to withhold information about concerts that the DJ played in the wake of the closure of the nightclub KAOS is Las Vegas and ordered the performer to pay the hotel’s attorney’s fee for the costs of enforcing a lawsuit.

Ryan Raddon, acting as Cascade, is suing FP Holdings, a limited partnership affiliated with Palms Casino Resort, for breach of his residence permit at the nightclub KAOS, which closed in November after six months of operation. KAOS was to anchor a $ 690 million renovation of the Palms and host a stay of global superstar Marshmello, but the club lost nearly $ 50 million according to a quarterly earnings call on Nov. 6, 201

9, and closed permanently.

Raddon earned $ 214,000 a night playing for the club and had 37 shows left on his contract when it was closed, a total of $ 7.95 million – the amount his lawyers say he owns of FP Holdings. But attorneys for FP Holdings say all injuries the DJ expects must be offset against the money he earned to play makeup shows at competing clubs and festivals. When FP Holdings recruited his financial records for the period he had been contracted to play KAOS, Raddon’s lawyer Alex L. Fugazzi called the claim “broad and unreasonably cumbersome” and argued that the request was not relevant to the lawsuit against the hotel.

American judge Nancy J. Koppe disagreed and ruled against Raddon on Monday, arguing that DJ’s lawyer should comply with subpoenas even though he disagrees with their significance to the case.

“[A] the party has the right to seek discovery of its theory of facts and law and is not limited to the discovery of the opponent’s theory, “Koppe wrote, referring to the legal text governing evidentiary decisions.” Cascade has not provided the necessary factual basis or meaningful argument. necessary to give priority to such objections, the Court rejects his contention of excess and unnecessary burden. “

What the judge tells Raddon’s lawyers, the lawyer explains Michael Sevilla with San Francisco firm Seville Briggs, unrelated to the case, is that “the defense gets considerable leeway when defending against a claim, and Cascade cannot limit the scope of what can and cannot be used in their defense. “He says, ‘Here the judge says to Cascade,’ You can not decide what is evidence and what cannot be found. It is my job. ‘”

As part of his decision, Koppe also demands that Raddon pay the hotel’s lawyer’s fees in connection with the hearing, saying that his attempt to avoid giving details of how much money he earned after the closure of KAOS, “is not a close call. “

“Whether Kaskade disputes the content of the defense defense in substance is not relevant to whether he could appropriately withhold the discovery,” said Koppe.

Sevilla, which often deals with civilian discovery issues, notes that the decision to award legal fees to FP Holdings is a sign that Koppe wants both parties to settle arguments alone without asking the court to intervene. He says disputes over discovery in civil cases are quite common and part of the push and pull from lawyers seeking to use leverage to their advantage.

Koppe made another decision on Monday, ordering Raddon’s lawyer to deal with outstanding confidentiality issues surrounding the case. On April 1, 2020, Koppe signed a request to edit details of Raddon’s compensation from the complaint he had filed, but months later, after talks with FP Holdings, Kaskade indicated that he no longer claimed “that such information should be protected against the public “and did not object to his fee of $ 214,000 per. night was announced. The judge’s official says she wants an explanation for his change of heart and decided that his lawyer has until September 25 to explain, “why the Court should not deprive the unedited version of the complaint”, which was filed at the end of last year. It is unclear what, if any, new information will be made available at such a step.




Source link