Nicolas Cage Money Manager Suit

l_

,

3

4

t

6

7

I

I

[0

11

t2

13

l4

15

L6

L7

t8

L'

20

2t

o,

23

24

25

26

27

28

PIAI{TIN D. SINGER (Bar IYo. itLE6)

couFg-Sw*?"E9PYLoi Angeles SuPerior Court

CIcl I 6 2009BRIAN c. WOLF [Bar No. LSSZSTIpp_q S. EAGAN (Bar No. 207426')rrJuD u' "riAtiA"F{ (Ea{l{9'*a0flry'l - , ^Atrftnn ^ mrArr JohnA.ctarke,Execonve0ffieer/clerkLAIMLY & SINGER rRorEssIol$AL coRPoRATIoN I rrr/?? T T^ndq2049 Cenatry Park Easr, Suire 2400Los Angeles, Californi a 90A67 -2gA6Telephone: (310) 55G3501Facsimile: (310) 556-3615Email: rndsin o e r@Iave Iy sinp e r. com

bw qlftdlav elys in g e r. comte a g 4n(& lave ly s i n s er. c 0 nr

Attnrneys for Plainriff NICOLAS CAGE

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

FEB O T Z[]IO

sc105285

PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCEIBR"EACII Otr' F'IDUCIARY DLIIIYTCONSTRUCTIW FRATJD;CONCS,AI"KIENT;NEGLIGENTS{ISREPRESENTATION;BRHACH Of' COIffRACT; arrdACCOT]NTING

DEMANU FOR.TARY TEIaL

i

PlaiutiffNICOLAS CAGE ("Plaintiff' or nCage") alleges as follows:

sul{MA.RY OF CLAIM

1. Nicolas Caga is one of the most sought after afid lrighly paid actors in the worgl.

I'Ie is also the victin of an incomperent business maoager, Samuel J. Levin ("Levin"), who lined

his pockas with several million dollars in business management fees while sending Cage down

a path toward financial ruil. Like many successful artists who trusr financial professionals ro

(1)a,(3)(4'(s)(o(T

\

)

JomrLsEGfiL txs' o E3oo\SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR TI{E COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - WEST DISTRTCT

NICOLAS CAGE, an iudividuat,

Plainiff,

v.

SAMTIEL J. LEVIN, an individual;

Defendanrs.

SAMIJEL J. LEVIN, C.P.A.,INC., A )Califoroia corporariorr; LEVIN & )COMPANY MANT.CEMENT, INC., A ibusiaess entity, fiorm unknown; and DOES iI through 50, iaclusive, )

CASE NO.

COMPLAINT F'OR:

Kr\151 l-7d\PLE\COMPLAIN? l0l309,wFd

L

).

3

4

5

6

7

I

9

10

11

t2

13

t4

15

t6

t7

18

19

20

2l.,,

23

24

25

26

27

28

advise them, Cage relied on Levin to handle his financial affairs to ensure that he and his family

would have a financially secure future built on the foundation of the substantial monies Cage

earned through years of hard work. However, Cage discovered that he is now forced to sell major

assets and investments at a significant loss and is faced with huge tax liabilities because of Levin's

incompetence, misrepresentations and recklessness. Rather than attaining financial security, Cage

has been forced to dispose of significant assets in order to pay for Levin's gross misconduct.

2. Nicolas Cage is a worlcl renowned Academy Award winning actor, and is one of

the most highly respected and sought after actors in Hollywood, having appeared in excess of fifty

(50) motion pictures during the past two decades. In 2001, Cage retained Levin, a business

manager and certified public accountant, to oversee and manage his business interests, investments

and finances. For the next seven years, Levin profited off of the hard work and creative ability

of Cage, paying himself millions of dollars. Instead of protecting and preserving Cage's wealth

during one of the greatest economic periods in the country's history, Levin placed Cage in

numerous highly speculative and risky real estate investments, resulting in Cage suffering

catastrophic losses. In addition, Levin failed to timely pay taxes on behalf of Cage when due,

resulting in millions of dollars in back taxes, interest and penalties owed by Cage.

3. It was only recently, when Cage terminated Levin and retained new business

management and accountant services, that Cage learned the gravity of his financial condition.

Among other things, Levin recommended and facilitated numerous highly risky and speculative

real estate investments; failed to properly diversify Cage's investment portfolio; failed to obtain

proper and adequate insurance on behalf of Cage and his various investments leaving Cage subject

to uninsured claims; and misrepresented and concealed Cage's true financial status at the time that

plaintiff acquired assets and investments. As a result of Levin's gross mismanagement of the

financial aftairs of Cage, Cage has suffered significant monetary losses, and his reputation has

been irreparably tarnished.

tl I

K:\1531 -?6\PLE\COMPLAINT 101309.wpdCOMPLAINT

1

,,

3

4

3

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

t4

15

16

T7

18

19

20

2l

J'

23

z4

25

26

27

28

ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION

The Parties

4. Cage is, and at all times relevant hereto was, a part-time resident of the County of

Los Angeles, State of California.

5. Levin is, and at all times relevant hereto was, an individual residing in the County

of Los Angeles, State of California.

6. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that Defendant lJvin

& Co. Management, Inc. ("kvin Management") is a business entity, form unknown, with its

principal place of business located in the County of Los Angeles, State of California.

7 . Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that Defendant Samuel

J. Levin, CPA, Inc. ("Levin, Inc. ") is a California corporation, with its principal place of business

located in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. (Defendants Levin, Levin Management

and Levin, Inc. are sometimes referred to collectively as "Defendants.")

8. Plaintiff is informed and believes and based thereon alleges that Levin Management

and Levin, Inc. are mere shells only and have no existence separate and apart from their owner,

Levin. At all times mentioned herein there existed a unity of interest and ownership between

Levin and his companies Levin Management and Levin, Inc., such that any individuality and

separateness between Levin, on the one hand, and Levin Management and Levin, Inc., on the

other hand, has ceased, and both Levin Management and Levin, Inc. are the alter egos of Levin.

9. Plaintiff is informed and believes and based thereon alleges that the assets and

properties of Levin Management, [nc. and Levin, Inc. are commingled with the separate assets

of Levin, such that there is no distinction between the individual and the entity assets. Plaintiff

is further informed and believes and based thereon alleges that adherence to the fiction of the

separate existence of Levin Management and Levin, Inc. as entities distinct from Levin would

succeed in avoiding legally incurred liabilities while maintaining the benefits of the entities, an

unfair and unjust result.

10. The true names and capacities of the defendants DOES I through 50, inclusive,

whether individual plural" corporate, partnership, associate or otherwise are not known to

K:\l 53 l-76\PLE\COMPLAINT l0l309,wpdCOMPLAINT

I

)

3

4

6

7

8

9

10

11

t2

13

l4

15

16

L7

18

T9

20

2l

'rt

23

24

25

26

an

28

Plaintiff, who therefore sue these defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will seek leave

of court to amend this complaint to show the true names and capacities of DOES 1 through 50,

inclusive, when the same has been ascertained. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and

based thereon alleges that each of the defendants designated herein as a DOE is negligently,

wantonly, recklessly, tortiously and unlawfully responsible in some manner for the events and

happenings herein referred to and diligently, wantonly, recklessly, tortiously and unlawfully

proximately and legally caused injuries and damages to Plaintiff as herein alleged.

11. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that each of the

defendants designated herein as a DOE is indebted to Plaintiff as hereinafter alleged and that

Plaintiff's rights against such fictitiously named defendants arise from such indebtedness.

12. Plaintiff is informed and believe, and based thereon alleges, that at all times

mentioned, each of the defendants was the joint venturer, agent and/or employee of each of their

co-defendants and in doing the things herein mentioned, acted within their authority as such agents

and employees and with the permission and consent of their co-defendants.

RETENTION OF LEVIN

13. Levin represented himself to Plaintiff as an expert in business management,

accounting and investment advisory services. Based on this representation, in or around

September 2001 Plaintiff retained Defendants to render business management, accounting and

investment advisory services pursuant to an oral agreement (the "Agreement'o). Pursuant to the

Agreement, Defendants agreed to take all necessary and appropriate measures to properly and

professionally manage Plaintiff's business and financial affairs, and represented, among other

things, that Defendants could and would competently and properly:

(a) Maintain accurate books of account, including cash receipts, cash disbursements

and general ledgers andjournals;

(b) Compile statements of assets and liabilities and related statements of receipts and

disbursements quarterly on a cash basis;

(c) Timely and accurately prepare and file income tax returns;

K:\153 l '76\PLE\COMPLAINT 101309.wpdCOMPLAINT

1

,

3

4

S

6

7

8

9

10

11

T2

t3

r4

15

t6

17

18

t9

20

2l

t ,

23

24

25

26

27

?.8

(d) Prepare and file payroll tax, sales and other local tax returns;

(e) Review insurance coverage and consult with insurance advisors no less than semi-

annually to ensure adequate covefage;

(0 Provide investment advice and analyze potential investments, including the risks

involved;

(g) Provide financial planning advice and services and recommend and oversee all

investments:

(h) Provide overall tax planning services in connection with all personal and business

activities;

(i) Provide estate planning consultation; and

O Provide consultation regarding pension and retirement plans.

L4. In exchange for rendering business management, accounting and investment

advisory services, the parties agreed that Defendants would receive five percent (5 %) of all gross

income received by Plaintiff, with an agreed upon annual cap.

THE WRONGFUL CONDUCT

15. In or around September 2008, Plaintiff retained a new business management and

accountancy firm. Shortly thereafter it was discovered that Defendants' had engaged in numerous

grossly negligent acts and omissions and otherwise failed to competently and professionally render

services on behalf of Plaintiff. Among other things, Defendants engaged in the following grossly

negligent conduct:

(a) Failed to timely pay taxes on behalf of Plaintiff for several years, and concealed

these facts from Plaintiff, resulting in Plaintiff owing back taxes, interest and

penalties of million of dollars;

(b) Concealing Plaintiff's true financial condition prior to investments and assets being

acquired by Plaintiff;

(c) Recommending and facilitating Plaintiff's investment in exceedingly risky and

speculative real estate transactions without disclosing the risks;

K:\ I 531-76\PLE\COMPLAINT 10t309.wodCOMPLAINT

I

,

J

4

5

6

7

I

I

10

11

t2

13

t4

15

t6

L7

18

t9

20

2l

,)

23

24

,<

26

27

28

(d) Recommending that Plaintiff execute personal guarantees on bank loans without

advising Plaintiff of the associated risk;

(e) Failing to diversify Plaintiff's investment holdings;

(0 Failing to obtain adequate insurance coverage for real estate and other holdings;

(g) Over-extending Plaintiff's lines of credit with banks and financial institutions as a

result of failing to disclose to Plaintiff his true financial condition;

(h) Failing to keep Plaintiff and his representatives informed of material information

regarding Plaintiff's finances and business affairs;

(i) Continuing to misrepresent and conceal Cage's financial condition so that Levin

could make millions of dollars in fees;

O Actively concealing from Plaintiff and his representatives material facts regarding

Plaintiff s finances and business affairs;

(k) Grossly overcharging Plaintiff fees for services rendered by Defendants;

0) Failing to manage, control and administer Plaintiff's accounting, tax and other

financial affairs with requisite professional competence and skill, all of which

resulted in substantial financial losses to Plaintiff; and

(m) Failing to place Plaintiff's interests before Defendants' own economic interests, in

managing, directing and/or controlling transactions made on behalf of Plaintiff.

16. Defendants' actions demonstrate that they lacked competence and expertise in the

area of business management, accounting and investment advisory services, and that their

represeffation of Plaintiff was grossly negligent. Defendants' actions also evidence their

purposeful disregard for Plaintiff's business and financial well being.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE

(Against All Defendants and DOES 1 through 50)

l7. Plaintiffrepeats, realleges and incorporates by reference Paragraphs I through 16,

inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.

K:\l 53 1 -7(r\PLE\COMPLAINT l0l309.wpdCOMPLAINT

1

,.

3

4

6

7

8

9

1,0

11

t2

13

L4

15

L6

L7

18

t9

20

2l

t ,

23

24

25

26

27

28

18. Defendants agreed to, and did, act as Plaintiff's business managers, accountants and

investment advisors during the period September 2001 to September 2008, and continued to render

services through July, 2009.

19. As Plaintiff's business managers, accountants and investment advisors, Defendants

owed Plaintiff duties of professional care to use such skill, care and diligence as other business

managers, accountants investment advisors commonly possess and exercise on behalf of high net

worth individuals under similar circumstances in similar communities.

20. Despite the duties of professional care owed to Plaintiff, Plaintiff is informed and

believes and based thereon alleges that Defendants, and each of them, failed to use such degree

of professional care, competence and skill commonly possessed and exercised by business

managers, accountants and investment advisors under similar circumstances in similar

communities. Defendants negligently, carelessly and recklessly rendered the services for which

they were retained by, among other things: recommending and facilitating Plaintiff's investment

in risky and highly speculative real estate investments; concealing Plaintiff's true financial

condition; failing to advise Plaintiff of the risks of investing in real estate; failing to diversify

Plaintiff's investment portfolio; failing to timely pay all taxes on behalf of Plaintiff; failing to

obtain proper and adequate insurance on behalf of Plaintiff and in connection with the real estate

investments made by Defendants; failing to advise Plaintiff of the existence of personal guarantees

which Defendants recommended and facilitated Plaintiff entering into; misrepresenting and

concealing the financial status of Plaintiff; and failing to professionally and competently evaluate

and manage Plaintiff's investments.

21. [n that Defendants were solely and exclusively in possession of Plaintiff's financial

books and records, Plaintiffdid not discover, and could not have reasonably discovered the facts

underlying Defendants' mismanagement and gross negligence until 2009, after Plaintiff retained

a new business management firm.

22. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid gross negligence, mismanagement,

and professional negligence, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount that has not yet been fully

ascertainedbutwhichisbelievedtobeinexcessofTwentyMillionDollars($20,000,000). When

K:\153 l -76\PLE\CoMPLAINT l0l309.wpdCOMPLAINT

I

t

3

4

6

7

8

9

10

11

L2

13

14

15

16

r7

I.8

L9

20

21.

, ,

23

ut<

26

)n

28

Plaintiff has ascertained the full amount of the damases suffered. he will seek leave of the Court

to amend this Complaint accordingly.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY


23. Plaintiffrepeats, realleges and incorporates by reference Paragraphs lthrough 16,

and 18 through 21, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.

24. At all relevant times herein, by virtue of the professional relationships that existed

between Plaintiff and Defendants, wherein Defendants acted as Plaintiff's business managers,

accountants and investment advisors from 2001 until 2008, where Plaintiff placed trust and

confidence in the fidelity and integrity of Defendants and entrusted Defendants with Plaintiff's

financial well being, and where Defendants assumed control over Plaintiff's business and financial

affairs and property, a fiduciary duty existed at all times herein mentioned between Plaintiff and

Defendants.

25. This fiduciary duty required Defendants to treat Plaintiff with complete fairness

and the highest duty of loyalty, and to disclose to Plaintiff all material facts concerning Plaintiff's

business and financial affairs, the services rendered by Defendants in connection therewith, and

the fees charged by Defendants for such services. This fiduciary duty further required Defendants

to truthfuUy and completely disclose all relevant information to Plaintiff and not misrepresent or

conceal any facts in connection with any of the aforementioned services that Defendants provided

to Plaintiff. Furthermore, Defendants each owed Plaintiffs a duty to refrain from conducting

themselyes in any manner that was in conflict with the best interests of the Plaintiff. Defendants,

and each of them, further owed Plaintiff a fiduciary duty of due diligence that required Defendants

to veriff the legitimacy and soundness of the business, accounting, tax and/or financial and

investment advice which they offered to Plaintiff.

26. In violation of the relationship of trust, confidence and loyalty between Plaintiff and

Defendants, Defendants breached their fiduciary duties to Plaintiff by, among other things,

K :\153 l -76\PLE\COMPLAINT l0l 309.wpdCOMPLAINT

I

)

3

4

6

7

8

9

10

11

t2

13

t4

L5

t6

t7

18

t9

20

2L

, t

23

24

25

26

27

28

misrepresenting facts in connection with Plaintiff's finances and business affairs, concealing

material facts concerning the true financial condition of Plaintiff, and failing to disclose the tax

liabilities and true financial conclition to Plaintiff when he acquired assets and investments, and

continuing to misrepresent and conceal Cage's financial condition so that Levin could make

millions of dollars in fees.

27 . As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid gross negligence, mismanagemenr,

and breach of fiduciary duty, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount that has not yet been fully

ascertained but which is believed to be in excess of Twenty Million Dollars ($20,000,000). when

Plaintiff has ascertained the full amount of the damages suffered, he will seek leave of the Court


28 ' In doing the things herein alleged, Defendants acted with malice, oppression and/or

fraud pursuant to california code of civil Procedure section 3294(c),and acted willfully and with

the intent to cause injury to Plaintiff. As such, Defendants, and each of them, are therefore guilty

of malice, oppression and/or fraud and Plaintiff is entitled to recover an award of exemplarv

and/or punitive damages.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD


29. Plaintiffrepeats, realleges and incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1 through 16,

18 through 21, and 24 through 26, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.

30' By virtue of the breaches of the fiduciary duries and obligations owed by

Defendants to Plaintiffs as alleged hereinabove, Defendants have engaged in constructive fraud

pursuant to California Civil Code Section L573 and other applicable California law.

31. Plaintiff is informed and believes and on that basis alleges that Defendants

concealed' among other acts and information, the following wrongful acts and information:

misrepresenting facts in connection with Plaintiff's finances and business affairs, concealing

material facts concerning the true financial condition of Plaintiff, and failing to disclose rhe tax

K:\ I 53 l-76\PLE\COMPLAINT l0l309.wod

COMPLAINT

I

1

3

4

5

6

7

8

I

10

t1

t2

13

t4

15

t6

t7

18

19

20

2l

1t

23

24

25

26

27

28

liabilities and true financial condition to Plaintiff when he acquired assets and investments and

continuing to misrepresent and conceal Cage's financial condition so that Levin could make

millions of dollars in fees; their lack of expertise in the area of business management, accounting

and investment advisory services; mismanagement of Plaintiff's finances and investments; the risks

involved in the investments recommended and facilitated by Defendants, inclucling the risks

associated with Cage's personal guaranty of loans; over-extension of Plaintiff's lines of credit;

failure to obtain adequate insurance coverage; and the failure to timely pay all taxes when due, as

set forth in detail above.

32. Defendants concealed the truth behind these matters with the intent to deceive and

defraud Plaintiff, and to prevent Plaintiff from learning the true facts.

33 ' Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants

concealed the truth about their lack of cornpetence, skill and oversight of Plaintiff's investments

and assets, in order to conceal years of mismanagement, fraud, negligence, waste and

malfeasance, and to prevent Plaintiff from learning the true facts. On information and belief,

Defendants conspired to conceal the truth about Plaintiff's finances in an effort to continue to sain

financial benefits by way of their ongoing work.


and constructive fraud, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount that has not yet been fully

ascertainedbutwhichisbelievedtobeinexcessofrwentyMillionDollars($20,000,000). when

Plaintiff has ascertained the full amount of the damages suffered, he will seek leave of the Court


35. In doing the things herein alleged, Defendants acted with malice, oppression and/or

fraud pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 3294(c), and acted willfully and with


of malice, oppression and/or fraud and Plaintiff is entitled ro recover an award of exemplary

and/ or punitive damages.

K:\ I 53 l '76\PLE\COMPLAINT l0 I 309.wod 10COMPLAINT

1

,

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1l

t2

13

L4

15

t6

l7

18

t9

20

2L

t t

23

24

25

26

27

28

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

CONCEALMENT



18 through 2t , 24 through 26, and 30 through 33 , inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.

37 , Plaintiff is informed and believes and there on alleges that Defendants intentionally

concealed from Plaintiff the highly risky and speculative nature of the real estate investments

which Defendants made on behalf of Plaintiff, and further concealed that, with respect to several

of the real estate investments, Plaintiff had personally guaranteed the loans supporting the

investments. In addition, as stated above, Defendants concealed material facts concerning

Plaintiff's true financial condition including Plaintiff's tax liabilities when he acquired assets and

investments so that Levin could make millions of dollars in fees. Had Plaintiff been informed of

the risk inherent in several of the real. estate investments made by Defendants on behalf of

Plaintiff, or that Plaintiff was personally guaranteeing the payment of the loans in connection with

those real estate investments, or of Plaintiffs true financial condition when the investments were

made, Plaintiff would not have agreed to or approved the investments made by Defendants.

Defendants further intentionally concealed from Plaintiff the true financial conclition to Plaintiff

prior to Plaintiff acquiring investments and assets. Had Plaintiff been informed of his true

financial condition, he would have not have acquired significant assets and investments.

38. Throughout their many years of representing Plaintiff, Defendants intentionally

failed to keep Plaintiff and his representatives informed of Plaintiff's financial and business matters

and intentionally concealed such information in order to prevent Plaintiff from discovering their

gross negligence and mismanagement of Plaintiff's financial affairs.

39. Because of Defendants' intentional concealment of such matters, Plaintiff did not

know of Defendants' acts of intentional concealment until in or after September 2008, or have a

reasonable opportunity to discover such acts of concealment by nature of Defendants' control over

Plaintiff's financial records and information, and concealment of same from Plaintiff.

l lK:\1531-76\PLE\COMPLAINT l0l309.wodCOMPLAINT

I

)

3

4

5

6

7

8

I

10

l1

t2

L3

L4

15

1.6

17

18

r9

20

2l

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

44. Plaintiff trusted Defendants through the many years of Defendants' representation

as Plaintiff's business managers, accountants and investment advisors. Based on that relationship

of trust and confidence, Plaintiff reasonably relied on Defendants' deception. Namely, Plaintiff

permitted Defendants to continue to serve as Plaintiff's business managers, accountants and

investment advisors from approximately September 2001 to September 2008. Had Plaintiff known

of Defendants' acts of concealment and wrongful conduct, which Defendants concealed from him,

Plaintiff would not have continued to retain Defendants as Plaintiff's business managers,

accountants and investment advisors, but would have terminated Defendants immediately.


and concealment, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount that has not yet been fully ascertained

but which is believed to be in excess of Twenty Million Dollars ($20,000,000). When Plaintiff

has ascertained the full amount of the damages suffered, he will seek leave of the Court to amend

this Complaint accordingly.

42. In doing the things herein alleged, Defendants acted with malice, oppression and/or

fraud pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 3294(c';, and acted willfully and with


of malice, oppression andior fraud and Plaintiff is entitled to recover an award of exemplary

and/or punitive damages.

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION

(Against Ail Defendants and DOES 1 through 50)


18 through 21, 24 through 26, 3A through 33, and 37 through 40, inclusive, as though fully set

forth herein.

44. At the time Defendants made the false representations described above (including

those with respect to Defendants' competence and skill, Defendants' agreement to professionally

manage Plaintiff's finances and investments and timely pay taxes on behalf of Cage when due),

K:\153 l-76\PI.E\COMPLAINT 101309.wpd L2COMPI.{iNT

I

7

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

t2

13

l4

15

16

L7

18

t9

2A

2L

).r.

23

24

25

26

27

28

Defendants had no reasonable basis for believing them to be true, and intended that Plaintiff rely

on their misrepresentations.

45. Plaintiff trusted Defendants through the many years of Defendants' representation

as Plaintiff's business managers, accountants and investment advisors. Based on that relationship

of trust and confidence, Plaintiff justifiably relied on Defendants'misrepresentations, and as a

result, among other things, Plaintiff entrusted Defendants to control, manage, monitor and

safeguard Plaintiff's finances and assets, and financially compensated Defendants for their

services, all to the financial detriment of Plaintiff.

46. Had Plaintiff known the truth, Plaintiff would not have so acted.

47 . As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid gross negligence, mismanagement,

and negligent misrepresentation, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount that has not yet been

fully ascertained but which is believed to be in excess of Twenty Million Dollars ($20,000,000).

When Plaintiff has ascertained the full amount of the damages suffered, he will seek leave of the

Court to amend this Complaint accordingly.

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

BREACH OF CONTRACT


48. Plaintiffrepeats, realleges and incorporates by reference Paragraphs I through 16,

18 through 21,24 through 26,30 through 33, and 37 through 40, inclusive, as though fully set

forth herein.

49. Defendants materially breached their duties and obligations to Plaintiff pursuant to

the Agreement, in one or more of the following respects alleged above: misrepresenting facts in

connection with Plaintiff's finances and business affairs; concealing material facts concerning the

true financial condition of Plaintiff and failing to disclose the tax liabilities and true financial

condition to Plaintiff when he acquired assets and investments and continuing to misrepresent and

conceal Cage's financial condition so that Levin could make millions of dollars in fees; failing to

advise Plaintiff of the risk of investing in real estate; recommending and facilitating Plaintiff's

K:\l 53 1-76\PLE\COMPLAINT I 0l 309.wpd t3COMPLAINT

I

t

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

t6

t7

18

t9

20

2l

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

investment in risky and highly speculative real estate investments; failing to diversify Plaintiff's

investment portfolio; failing to timely pay taxes on behalf of Plaintiff; failing to obtain proper and

adequate insurance on behalf of Plaintiff and in connection with the real estate investments made

by Defendants; failing to advise Plaintiff of the existence and the fact of personal guarantees which

Defendants recommended and facilitated Plaintiff entering into; misrepresenting the financial status

of Plaintiff; and failing to professionally and competently valuate and manage Plaintiff's

investments.

50. Plaintiff did not discover, and could not in the exercise of reasonable diligence have

discovered, the facts underlying Defendants' breaches of contract until in and during September

2008, and thereafter.

51. Plaintiff has performed all duties and obligations on his part required to be

performed under the Agreement with Defendants, except to the extent that such performance was

waived, excused or prevented by reason of the acts and omissions of Defendants.

52. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid material breach of contract,

Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount that has not yet been fully ascertained but which is

believed to be in excess of Twenty Million Dollars ($20,000,000). When Plaintiff has ascertained

the full amount of the damages suffered, he will seek leave of the Court to amend this Complaint

accordingly.

SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

ACCOI.INTING



18 through 21,24 through 26,30 through 33,37 through 40, 44 through 46, and 49 through 51,

inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.

54. As alleged hereinabove, Defendants, and each of them, as Plaintiff's accountants,

business managers and investment advisors, had and continue to have a fiduciary duty to and

relationship with Plaintiff, requiring Defendants to act only in the best interest of Plaintiff, and

K:\1531-76\PLE\COMPLAINT l0l 309.wnd L4COMPLAINT

L

J

3

4

5

6

7

I

9

10

11

t2

l3

t4

15

16

17

18

t9

20

2L

))

23

24

,.4

26

27

28

to not engage in any acts or omissions which would cause Plaintiff to suffer any harm or damages.

55. As further alleged above, during the period of time that Defendants rendered

accounting and business management services to Plaintiffs, Defendants solely controlled and

maintained Plaintiff's financial books and records. Plaintiffs are unaware of the full amounts

Defendants paid themselves or otherwise misappropriated from Plaintiffs' accounts.

56. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to a full and complete accounting to all amounts

Defendants paid to themselves, misappropriated from Plaintiffs' accounts, secreted, misplaced,

or otherwise used or paid without Plaintiff's informed consent. Wherefore, the fulI amount owed

and becoming due to Plaintiff can only be determined pursuant to a full and accurate accounting

of all books and records of Defendants.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendants, and each of them, as

follows:

A$ TO THE TIRST CAUSE OF ACTIOI\T

t. For general and special damages in an amount not less than Twenty Million Dollars

($20,000,000), in accordance with proof at trial, together with interest thereon at the legal rate;

AS TO THE SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION:

2. For general and special damages in an amount not less than Twenty Million Dollars


3. For punitive or exemplary damages pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure

Section 3294(c);

AS TO THE THIRD CAUSE OF ACTIOII

4. For general and special darnages in an amount not less than Twenty Million Dollars


5. For punitive or exemplary damages pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure

Section 3294(c);

Kr\1531-76\PLE\COMPLAINT l0l 309.wod 15COMPLAINT

1

n

3

4

3

6

7

I

I

10

1l

t2

l3

14

1.5

L6

l7

18

19

2A

2l

,r.

23

24

25

26

27

28

AS TO THE FOII-RTH CAUSE Qr ACTIOI\I



7 . For punitive or exemplary damages pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure

Section 3294(c);

AS TO THE FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION



AS TO THE SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

L For general and special damages in an amount not less than Twenty Million Dollars


AS TO THE SEVEI.flTH CAUSE OF ACTIOI{

10. For an order that each of the Defendants provide to Plaintiff an accounting of all

amounts Defendants paid to themselves, misappropriated, secreted, misplaced or otherwise used

or paid without Plaintiff's informed consent;

AS TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION:

11. For all costs of suit;

12. For pre-judgment interest at the maximum legal rate;

13. For post-judgment interest at the maximum legal rate;

14. For such other and further relief as deemed just and proper.

' /DATE: oetober 12, z0og LAVELY & SINGERPROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONMARTIN D, SINGERBRIAN G. WOLF

Attorneys for Pla

K:\153 l -76\PLE\COMPLAINT l0l 309.wpd t6COMPLAINT

I

)

3

4

3

6

7

8

9

L0

11

12

13

t4

15

16

t7

18

t9

20

2l.r^,

?3

?"4

25

26

n28

REOUEST FOR JI]RY TRIAL

Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury.

, r /t t -

DATE: October l') ,2009r-LAVELY & SINGERPROFESSIONAL CORPORAMARTIN D. SINGERBRIAN G.TODD S

Attornevs for Plaintiff

K:\l 53 I -76\PLE\COMPLAINT l0l309.wDd L7COMPLAINT

Documents

Nicolas Cage Money Manager Suit