Electronically FILED by Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles on 07/21/2020 11:31 AM Sherri R.

Carter, Executive Officer/Clerk of Court, by M. Mariscal,Deputy Clerk

1 ANDREW B. BRETTLER (BAR NO. 262928)

[email protected]
2 PAUL N. SORRELL (BAR NO. 126346)
[email protected]
3 LAVELY & SINGER
PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
4 2049 Century Park East, Suite 2400
Los Angeles, California 90067-2906
5 Telephone: (310) 556-3501
Facsimile: (310) 556-3615
6
Attorneys for Defendant and Cross-Complainant
7 NYLA PRODUCTIONS. LLC, erroneously sued
and served as NYLA MEDIA GROUP; and
8 Defendants LOUIS ARRIOLA; TARYN
ARRIOLA; and CAMERON MITCHELL
9
10 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

11 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

12 JEFF WALD, d.b.a. SOMMERS CASE NO. 20SMCV00832

ENTERPRISES, INC.,
13 [Hon. Elaine W. Mandel – Dept. P]
Plaintiff,
14 CROSS COMPLAINT OF NYLA
v. PRODUCTIONS, LLC FOR FRAUDULENT
15 INDUCEMENT OF CONTRACT AND
LOUIS ARRIOLA; TARYN ARRIOLA; BREACH OF CONTRACT AGAINST
16 NYLA MEDIA GRP; CAMERON PLAINTIFF AND CROSS-DEFENDANT
MITCHELL; DOES 1 to 15, inclusive, JEFF WALD
17
Defendants.
18

19 NYLA PRODUCTIONS. LLC, a Delaware Complaint Filed: June 22, 2020

limited liability company,
20
Cross-Complainant,
21
v.
22
JEFF WALD, an individual; and ROES 1 to
23 10, inclusive,
24 Cross-Defendants.
25

26

27

28

CROSS-COMPLAINT
 1 Defendant and Cross-Complainant NYLA Productions, LLC, erroneously sued and served

2 as NYLA Media Group (“NYLA”), for its Cross-Complaint against Plaintiff and Cross-

3 Defendant Jeff Wald (“Wald”), hereby alleges as follows:

4 NATURE OF THIS ACTION

5 1. These claims arise from an unscrupulous film producer’s attempt to fraudulently

6 capitalize on preliminary, non-binding discussions concerning his potential involvement with a

7 film in order to extract unwarranted and unjustified payments. Wald has already fraudulently

8 obtained $25,000 from NYLA, and now seeks additional unjustified compensation despite the

9 fact that he expressly committed to provide his services for a flat fee of $25,000. The simple fact
10 is that Wald never intended to comply with any of his promises to NYLA concerning the film. In

11 addition to fraudulently obtaining NYLA’s agreement to his involvement -- which he uses to

12 claim additional sums that no one agreed to pay -- Wald harassed employees, vendors and others

13 associated with the film and thereby undermined and impeded production. Furthermore, Wald

14 failed to perform the basic tasks he was hired to perform, such that he failed to provide material

15 consideration to support any agreement pursuant to which he claims payment. Wald’s tortious

16 conduct and breaches of contract are unconscionable and expose him to substantial compensatory

17 and punitive damages.

18 THE PARTIES

19 2. Cross-Complainant NYLA Productions, LLC (“NYLA”) is, and at all times

20 relevant to the matters alleged herein has been, a Delaware limited liability company authorized

21 to conduct and conducting business in the State of California and, in particular, the County of Los

22 Angeles. NYLA has from time to time during the events giving rise to these claims conducted

23 business as NYLA Media Group and/or NYLA Fishbowl.

24 3. NYLA is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Cross-Defendant Wald,

25 and at all times relevant to the matters alleged herein has been, an individual residing and

26 conducting business in the State of California and, in particular, the County of Los Angeles.

27 NYLA is further informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Cross-Defendant Wald at times

28 relevant to the matters alleged herein has conducted business as Sommers Enterprises, Inc.

1
CROSS-COMPLAINT
 1 4. The true names and capacities of the Cross-Defendants sued herein as Roes 1

2 through 10, inclusive, are currently unknown to NYLA, which therefore sues such Cross-

3 Defendants by fictitious names. NYLA will amend this Cross-Complaint to allege the true

4 identities of such Roe Cross-Defendants when their identities are discovered. NYLA is informed

5 and believes, and thereon alleges, that each such fictitiously named Roe Cross-Defendant is

6 responsible in some manner for the events alleged in this Cross-Complaint and that NYLA’s

7 damages as alleged herein were proximately caused by the conduct of such Roe Cross-

8 Defendants, and each of them, and that Cross-Defendants in committing the acts and omissions

9 alleged herein acted as agents and servants of one another, acted within the scope of their
10 authority as agents and servants of each other, and/or approved and ratified the acts and/or

11 omissions of each other.

12 ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION

13 5. In approximately the spring of 2019, Wald and NYLA engaged in preliminary oral

14 discussions regarding the possibility that Wald would provide producer services in connection

15 with NYLA’s production of a motion picture known as Fishbowl aka American Cherry (“the

16 Picture”). During these initial discussions, which assumed a particular budget and other

17 parameters for the proposed Picture, NYLA prepared and circulated to Wald for discussion

18 purposes a preliminary working document entitled “NYLA MEDIA GROUP MEMORANDUM

19 OF UNDERSTANDING,” a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A to the Complaint in this

20 action (“the MOU”). The purpose of the MOU was to gauge Wald’s willingness to provide

21 producer services be based on the parameters for the Picture being discussed at that time. The

22 intent of the parties was that, if Wald indicated his agreement sufficient to continue the

23 discussions, legally binding documents would then be negotiated, prepared and signed by Wald

24 and the relevant production entity.

25 6. The MOU was never meant to be legally binding, and in fact did not contemplate

26 or provide a place for signature of any party other than Wald. The proposed terms set forth in the

27 MOU were subsequently changed in material respects, based on further discussions between the

28

2
CROSS-COMPLAINT
 1 parties and a substantial modification of the proposed budget. Wald was well aware that the

2 MOU was not intended to be legally binding on NYLA or anyone else.

3 7. Ultimately, by the summer of 2019, the proposed budget for the Picture had been

4 substantially reduced and the parties orally agreed that Wald would provide producer services on

5 the Picture for a flat fee of $25,000. In that regard, a revised proposal was prepared and sent to

6 Wald on or about April 1, 2019 referencing that Wald would receive a flat fee of $25,000 for his

7 services (in addition to potential contingent compensation based upon occurrence of certain

8 events that never materialized). Wald agreed that his primary task would be to handle casting of

9 the Picture; in that regard, he promised and agreed to attract and retain “Tier 1” talent to act in the
10 Picture. Wald agreed that he would diligently represent the interests of the Picture and discharge

11 his producer duties in a customary and reasonably commercial manner and according to

12 instructions from NYLA. Pursuant to this oral agreement, Wald traveled to the Arkansas location

13 where principal photography for the Picture took place.

14 8. Wald failed to render producer services on the Picture as promised and agreed.

15 Among other things, he failed to follow reasonable instructions from NYLA concerning his work,

16 and was verbally abusive to other producers, staff members and management associated with the

17 production, including representatives of NYLA. In addition, Wald was verbally abusive to other

18 vendors and others who provided services to the Picture, including members of the staff of the

19 hotel on location where Wald and other staff stayed. Wald slept on set during production and
20 failed to render customary producer services as agreed. He failed to handle casting of the Picture

21 as agreed. Indeed, the only “actor” he brought to the Picture was his unexperienced daughter; he

22 secured no “Tier 1” talent as agreed. Wald’s conduct caused significant delays in the production

23 and became a major impediment to morale. Wald’s non-performance and obstreperous conduct

24 undermined the entire production. Nevertheless, NYLA paid Wald $25,000 for his involvement.

25 9. Following conclusion of principal photography, Wald insisted on receiving

26 additional payments, despite the fact that he was not entitled to additional compensation from

27 NYLA or anyone else associated with the Picture. Wald insisted that he was owed the amount of

28 $75,000 for his services, although he was well aware that he is not entitled to this amount. Wald

3
CROSS-COMPLAINT
 1 contended that the MOU provided a basis for him to be paid $75,000, although he knew that the

2 MOU was not a legally binding agreement, the terms it referenced had been substantially

3 modified through later developments and discussions, and no one had ever agreed to pay Wald

4 this amount.

5 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

6 (For Fraudulent Inducement of Contract)

7 10. NYLA repeats, realleges and incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1 through 9,

8 inclusive, of this Cross-Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

9 11. The oral representations made by Wald to the effect that he would provide
10 producer services on the Picture for a flat fee of $25,000 and that he had the ability to and would

11 in fact attract and retain “Tier 1” talent to the Picture were false at the time they were made. At

12 the time such representations were made, Wald never intended to perform his services for the

13 total sum of $25,000, and never intended to and did not in any event have the ability to attract

14 Tier 1 talent to the Picture as represented. Instead, he intended to use his false promises and his

15 preliminary discussions with NYLA concerning the Picture, including the language in the

16 preliminary, nonbinding MOU worksheet, to seek additional unwarranted sums from NYLA

17 following his provision of services and receipt of $25,000 from NYLA based on his fraudulent

18 promise.

19 12. At the time Wald made the oral representations referenced above, NYLA did not
20 know that such representations were false but believed them to be true. In reasonable and

21 justifiable reliance on Wald’s representations, NYLA entered into an oral agreement for Wald to

22 provide producer services on the Picture and paid Wald the sum of $25,000. Had NYLA known

23 that Wald’s representations were false, it would not have entered into any agreement with Wald

24 and would not have paid him $25,000 or any amount.

25 13. As a direct and proximate result of Wald’s intentional misrepresentations as

26 alleged hereinabove, NYLA was fraudulently induced to enter into an agreement with Wald and

27 has been damaged in an amount subject to proof at the time of trial. Such damages include the

28

4
CROSS-COMPLAINT
 1 $25,000 which NYLA paid Wald based on his fraudulent inducement as well as additional

2 damages resulting from Wald’s involvement with the Picture.

3 14. Wald’s conduct as alleged herein was willful, malicious, oppressive and

4 despicable, performed with full knowledge of the adverse effects of his representations on NYLA

5 and with willful, deliberate and conscious disregard of the consequences to NYLA. As a result of

6 Wald’s conduct, NYLA is entitled to exemplary and punitive damages in an amount sufficient to

7 punish and deter Wald from engaging in such conduct in the future, the exact amount of which is

8 subject to proof at the time of trial.

9 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

10 (For Breach of Oral Contract)

11 15. NYLA repeats, realleges and incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1 through 9, 11

12 and 12, inclusive, of this Cross-Complaint as if fully set forth herein.

13 16. By his actions as alleged above, Wald breached the oral contract with NYLA with

14 respect to his services on the Picture. Among other things, Wald failed to follow instruction from

15 NYLA with respect to his services on the Picture, failed and refused to conduct himself in a

16 commercially reasonable manner and in fact harassed staff and vendors of the Picture thus

17 substantially undermining the production, and refused to perform his services for the agreed flat

18 fee of $25,000.

19 17. NYLA has performed each and all of its obligations in connection with the oral
20 agreement with Wald with respect to the Picture, except to the extent that such obligations were

21 waived or excused by Wald.

22 18. As a proximate result of Wald’s breach of his oral agreement with NYLA, NYLA

23 has been damaged in an amount according to proof at trial. This amount includes the $25,000

24 paid to Wald in connection with his promises concerning his involvement with the Picture, as

25 well as other damages according to proof at trial.

26

27

28

5
CROSS-COMPLAINT
 1 PRAYER FOR RELIEF

2 WHEREFORE, NYLA prays for the following relief:

3 As to the First Cause of Action:

4 1. For compensatory damages according to proof at trial;

5 2. For punitive or exemplary damages according to proof at trial;

6 As to the Second Cause of Action:

7 3. For compensatory damages according to proof at trial;

8 As to All Causes of Action:

9 4. For costs of suit herein; and

10 5. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and appropriate.

11

12 DATE: July 21, 2020 LAVELY & SINGER

PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
13 ANDREW B. BRETTLER
PAUL N. SORRELL
14

15 By: /s/ Paul N. Sorrell

PAUL N. SORRELL
16 Attorneys for Defendant and Cross-Complainant
NYLA PRODUCTIONS. LLC, erroneously sued
17 and served as NYLA MEDIA GROUP, and
Defendants LOUIS ARRIOLA, TARYN ARRIOLA
18 and CAMERON MITCHELL
19
20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

6
CROSS-COMPLAINT
 1 PROOF OF SERVICE
2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
3
I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the age of 18
4 and not a party to the within action. My business address is 2049 Century Park East, Suite 2400,
Los Angeles, California 90067-2906.
5
On the date indicated below, I served the foregoing document described as:
6
CROSS COMPLAINT OF NYLA PRODUCTIONS, LLC FOR FRAUDULENT
7 INDUCEMENT OF CONTRACT AND BREACH OF CONTRACT AGAINST
PLAINTIFF AND CROSS-DEFENDANT JEFF WALD
8
on the interested parties in this action by placing [ ] the original document OR [X] a true and
9 correct copy thereof enclosed in sealed envelopes addressed as follows:
10 Barry L. Morris, Esq.
11 1407 Oakland Blvd., #200
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
12 Tel: (925) 934-1100
Email: [email protected]
13
Attorneys for Plaintiff Jeff Wald
14

15
[X] By electronically filing with the Court and electronically serving true and correct copies of
16 the document on counsel of record listed above through ASAP Legal.

17 [X] BY ELECTRONIC SERVICE: I transmitted the foregoing document by electronic mail

to the e-mail address(s) stated above.
18

19 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above
is true and correct.
20

21 Executed July 21, 2020, at Los Angeles, California.

22
____________________________________________
23 Lisa Carpenter
24

25

26

27

28

1
PROOF OF SERVICE