United States District Court, S.D. California
In Re: CHARLES ROLLINS, Debtor.
ELEPHANT PRODUCTIONS, INC., ET AL., Appellees CHARLES ROLLINS, Appellant,
Bankruptcy No. 13-11744-LA7.
In Re Charles Rollins, Debtor, Pro se, Encinitas, CA.
In Re Charles Rollins, Debtor: Daniel J Lickel, LEAD ATTORNEY, Rooney & Lickel, San Diego, CA.
For Charles Rollins Appellant: Daniel J Lickel, LEAD ATTORNEY, Rooney & Lickel, San Diego, CA.
For Elephant Productions, Inc, Quincy Lowman, Jeff Hastings, Esquire, Appellees: Ashley Naporlee, LEAD ATTORNEY, The Grant Law Firm, San Diego, CA.
WILLIAM Q. HAYES, United States District Judge.
The matter before the Court is the appeal of " the judgment granting Summary Judgment to Plaintiff," entered by the Bankruptcy Court on November 6, 2014. (ECF No. 1).
A. Prior Litigation
" In or about 2004, [Appellee Elephant Productions, Inc.] and [Appellant Charles Rollins] entered into a joint venture agreement for production of a golf video produced and paid for by [Elephant Productions, Inc.] with [Appellant] obligated to distribute the video and pay [Elephant Productions, Inc.] a percentage of the revenues." (Complaint to Determine Dischargeability of Debt ¶ 6, ECF No. 11-2 at 14). A dispute arose between the parties over the joint venture agreement. On November 24, 2010, Appellant filed a complaint in San Diego County Superior Court against Appellee, alleging nine claims for relief related to the joint venture. (ECF No. 11-2 at 37). The San Diego Superior Court dismissed the case with prejudice. (Bankruptcy Court's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law (" FFCL" ), ECF No. 11-6 at 22).
On September 22, 2011, Appellee filed a separate action in Texas state court against Appellant, alleging breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, and malicious prosecution (the " Texas Action" ). Id. ; see also ECF No. 11-5 at 14. " [Appellant], who was properly served with process, failed to respond." (FFCL, ECF No. 11-6 at 22); see also Final Default Judgment, ECF No. 11-5 at 33. " On November 2, 2011, in the Texas Action, [Appellees] moved for a default judgment against [Appellant] due to his failure to file an answer in the case." (FFCL, ECF No. 11-6 at 22).
Appellees Hastings and Lowman submitted affidavits in support of Appellees' motion for default judgment. (ECF No. 11-5 at 25-31). The Texas Court held a hearing " at which [Appellees] presented evidence of their damages." (Final Default Judgment, ECF No. 11-5 at 34). The Texas Court granted Appellees motion for default judgment and awarded Appellee Elephant Productions, Inc. $322,708.47 in damages for fraud, $107,569.49 in actual damages and $215,138.98 in exemplary damages (the " Texas Judgment" ). Id. The Texas Court further awarded Appellees Elephant Productions, Inc., Lowman, and Hastings $84,740.04 for malicious prosecution, $28,246.68 in actual damages and $56,493.36 in exemplary damages. Id.
The Texas Judgment states that the Texas court considered " the pleadings, the papers on file in this case, and the evidence Plaintiff presented on liability and damages...." Id. at 33. " Plaintiffs Elephant Productions, Inc. proved actual damages of $107,569.49 and exemplary damages of $215,138.98. Plaintiffs Elephant Productions, Inc., Quincy Lowman, and Jeff Hastings proved actual damages ...