Yuri Vanetik Orange County – Rip Off Scammer

Yuri Vanetik has a history of non-stop fundraising for investments and misappropriating funds. Time and time again he promises payback, but of course no money goes back to investors and partners. The money goes straight into his pockets. In the judgement below you can see where Yuri Vanetik was caught red handed and had to be tracked down for years to finally get served this document and he is still dodging payment. This deadbeat Yuri Vanetik runs around Orange County, CA presenting himself as a wealthy person. He has contributed and even help sponsor Republican candidates and events. In addition he can routinely be found at the Pacific Club iin Newport Beach and the Shady Canyon Golf Club. So interesting that he has all this money, but none to pay back the many investors he has scammed for so many years. Be ready to get ripped off doing business with Yuri Vanetik.

Below please see where Yuri Vanetik alone owes one investor over $2,537,413.29 with interest included. The amount he owes to everyone he has ripped off must be astronomical.

Judgement of the Superior Court Of California

JEFFREY D. FARROW, ESQ., SBN 180019

ERIC J. RANS, ESQ., SBN 195615

DAVID J. WILLIAMS, ESQ. SBN 236919

MICHELMAN & ROBINSON, LLP

17901 Von Karman Ave., 10th Floor

Irvine, CA 92614-6297

Telephone:      714-557-7990

Facsimile:       714-557-7991

Attorneys for Plaintiff FARMERS & MERCHANTS TRUST COMPANY, a California corporation, as administrator and trustee of the Elliott Broidy SEP IRA

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF ORANGE

CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER

FARMERS & MERCHANTS TRUST COMPANY, a California corporation, as administrator and trustee of the Elliott Broidy SEP, IRA,   Plaintiff,             v.   TERRA RESOURCES PLC; ENERGY TODAY INC., a Texas corporation; KLEL FUNDS, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company; WEED & CO. LLP, a California limited liability company; WEED & CO. L.C.; RICHARD WEED, an individual; APRIL FRISBY, an individual; YURI VANETIK, an individual; ANATOLY VANETIK   Defendants.CASE NO.: 30-2013-00688150-CU-BC-CJC Hon. Ronal Bauer Dept: CX103     PROPOSED JUDGMENT   Trial Date:       October 19, 2015 Time:              8:30 a.m. Dept:               CX103 Complaint:      11/15/2013
  And Related Cross-Action   

            This action came on regularly for jury trial on or about October 19, 2015, in Department CX-103 of the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Orange, the Honorable Ronald Bauer. Plaintiff FARMERS & MERCHANTS TRUST (“Plaintiff” or “FARMERS”) appeared at Trial by its counsel Jeffrey D. Farrow, Esq. and Eric Rans of Michelman & Robinson, LLP. Defendants ANATOLY VANETIK and YURI VANETIK (“VANETIK

DEFENDANTS”), appeared at Trial by their counsel John M. Hamilton, Esq. of the Hamilton Law Offices, and Defendants WEED & CO. LLP, WEED & CO, L.C. and RICHARD WEED (“WEED Defendants”) appeared at Trial by their counsel Michael R. White, Esq. of White & Reed, LLP.

            Witnesses were sworn and testified and documents were entered in evidence. After hearing the evidence and arguments of counsel, the case was submitted to the jury on November 10, 2015.

            On November 10, 2015, the jury reached its verdict on the relevant causes of action on Plaintiff’s Complaint, and found as follows.

TITLE OF COURT AND CAUSE

            WE THE JURY ANSWER THE QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO US AS FOLLOWS:

Breach of Contract

1.         Did Plaintiff and any of the following defendants enter into the written Securities Purchase Agreement?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 1, then answer question 2 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 1, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 2. If you answered no for all defendants in question 1, please proceed to Question 5.

2.         Did all the conditions that were required for Defendants performance occur?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 2, then answer question 3 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 2, make an “x” on the line for “Not

Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 3. If you answered no for all defendants in question 2, please proceed to Question 5.

3.         Did any of the following Defendants fail to do something that the written Securities Purchase Agreement required him to do and/or do something that the contract prohibited him from doing?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 3, then answer question 4 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 3, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 4. If you answered no for all defendants in question 3, please proceed to Question 5.

4.         Was Plaintiff harmed by any of the Defendants’ breach of the written Securities Purchase Agreement?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            Please proceed to Question 5.

Breach of Oral Contract

5.         Did Plaintiff and any of the following defendants enter into the oral agreement to repay Plaintiff?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 5, then answer question 6 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 5, make an “x” on the line for “Not

Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 6. If you answered no for all defendants in question 1, please proceed to Question 9.

6.         Did all the conditions that were required for Defendants performance occur?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 6, then answer question 7 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 6, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 7. If you answered no for all defendants in question 6, please proceed to Question 9.

7.         Did any of the following Defendants fail to do something that the oral agreement for repayment to Plaintiff required him to do and/or do something the contract prohibited him from doing?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 7, then answer question 8 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 7, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 8. If you answered no for all defendants in question 7, please proceed to Question 9.

8.         Was Plaintiff harmed by any of the Defendants’ breach of the oral agreement to repay Plaintiff?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            Please proceed to Question 9.

Negligent Misrepresentation

9.         Did Defendants make a false representation to Plaintiff?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 9, then answer question 10 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 9, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 10. If you answered no for all defendants in question 9, please proceed to Question 15.

10.       Did defendants honestly believe that the representation was true when he/it made it?

                        Yuri Vanetik               ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 10, then answer question 11 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 10, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 11. If you answered no for all defendants in question 10, please proceed to Question 15.

11.       Did Defendants have reasonable grounds for believing the representation was true when he/it made it?

                        Yuri Vanetik               ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 11, then answer question 12 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 11, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 12. If you answered no for all defendants in question 11, please proceed to Question 15.

12.       Did Defendants intend that Plaintiff rely on the representation?

                        Yuri Vanetik               ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 12, then answer question 13 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 12, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 13. If you answered no for all defendants in question 12, please proceed to Question 15.

13.       Did Plaintiff reasonably rely on the representation?

                        Yuri Vanetik               ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       ___ Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 13, then answer question 14 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 13, make an “x” on the line for

“Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 14. If you answered no for all defendants in question 13, please proceed to Question 15.

14.       Was Plaintiff’s reliance on the following Defendants representation a substantial factor in causing harm to Plaintiff?

                        Yuri Vanetik               ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            Please proceed to Question 15.

Intentional Misrepresentation

15.       Did Defendants make a false representation to Plaintiff?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 15, then answer question 16 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 15, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 16. If you answered no for all defendants in question 15, please proceed to Question 20.

16.       Did the following Defendants know that the representation was false, or did he/it make the representation recklessly and without regard for its truth?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 16, then answer question 17 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 16, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 17. If you answered no for all defendants in question 16, please proceed to Question 20.

17.       Did the following Defendants intend that Plaintiff rely on the representation?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 17, then answer question 18 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 17, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 18. If you answered no for all defendants in question 17, please proceed to Question 20.

18.       Did Plaintiff reasonably rely on the representation?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 18, then answer question 19 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 18, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 19. If you answered no for all defendants in question 18, please proceed to Question 20.

19.       Was Plaintiff’s reliance on the following Defendants representation a substantial factor in causing harm to Plaintiff?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

Please proceed to Question 20.

Concealment

20.       Did any of the following Defendants intentionally fail to disclose a fact that Plaintiff did not know and could not reasonably have discovered?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 20, then answer question 21 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 20, make an “x” on the line for

“Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 21. If you answered no for all defendants in question 20, please proceed to Question 24.

21.       Did any of the following Defendants intend to deceive Plaintiff by concealing the fact?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 21, then answer question 22 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 21, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 22. If you answered no for all defendants in question 21, please proceed to Question 24.

22.       Had the omitted information been disclosed, would Plaintiff reasonably have behaved differently?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 22, then answer question 23 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 22, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 23. If you answered no for all defendants in question 22, please proceed to Question 24.

23.       Was Defendants’ concealment a substantial factor in causing harm to Plaintiff?

                        Yuri Vanetik               ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       ___ Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            Please proceed to Question 24.

False Promise

24.       Did Defendants make a promise to Plaintiff?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 24, then answer question 25 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 24, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 25. If you answered no for all defendants in question 24, please proceed to Question 30.

25.       Did Defendants intend to perform this promise when he/it made it?

                        Yuri Vanetik               ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered no for any defendant in question 25, then answer question 26 for that defendant. If you answered yes for any defendant in question 25, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 26. If you answered no for all defendants in question 25, please proceed to Question 30.

26.       Did Defendants intend that Plaintiff rely on this promise?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 26, then answer question 27 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 26, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 27. If you answered no for all defendants in question 26, please proceed to Question 30.

27.       Did Plaintiff reasonably rely on this promise?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 27, then answer question 28 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 27, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 28. If you answered no for all defendants in question 27, please proceed to Question 30.

28.       Did Defendants perform the promised act?

                        Yuri Vanetik               ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered no for any defendant in question 28, then answer question 29 for that defendant. If you answered yes for any defendant in question 28, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 29. If you answered no for all defendants in question 28, please proceed to Question 30.

29.       Was Plaintiff’s reliance on Defendants promise a substantial factor in causing harm to Plaintiff?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

Please proceed to Question 30.

Violation of Business and Professions Code § 17200

30.       Did any of the following Defendants:

                        a.         Commit an unlawful business activity?

                        b.         Commit an Unfair practice?

                        c.         Act fraudulently when conducting their business?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No

            Please proceed to Question 31.

Damages on Multiple Legal Theories

31.       What are Plaintiffs damages? Enter the amount below if you find that the Defendants are liable to Plaintiff under any or all of the causes of action.

TOTAL $ _____________    

            Please proceed to question 32.

Intentional and Willful Misconduct

32.       Did any of the following Defendants engage in the conduct with malice, oppression, or fraud?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No

Stop here, answer no further questions, and have the presiding juror sign and date this form.

Dated:  Signed by: 
     
    Presiding Juror

After this verdict form has been signed, notify the bailiff that you are ready to present your verdict in the courtroom.

            Attached as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of the Verdict Form.

            A summary of the Jury Verdict is as follows:

  1. Against Defendants ANATOLY VANETIK and YURI VANETIK and in favor of Plaintiff FARMERS & MERCHANTS TRUST on the cause of action for Breach of Contract;
  2. Against Defendants ANATOLY VANETIK and YURI VANETIK and in favor of Plaintiff FARMERS & MERCHANTS TRUST on the cause of action for Breach of Oral Contract;
  • Against Defendants ANATOLY VANETIK, YURI VANETIK, WEED & CO. LLP, WEED & CO. L.C., and RICHARD WEED and in favor of Plaintiff FARMERS & MERCHANTS TRUST on the cause of action for Concealment;
  • Against Defendants ANATOLY VANETIK, YURI VANETIK, WEED & CO. LLP, WEED & CO. L.C., and RICHARD WEED and in favor of Plaintiff FARMERS & MERCHANTS TRUST on the cause of action for False Promise; and
  • In favor of Defendants ANATOLY VANETIK, YURI VANETIK, WEED & CO. LLP, WEED & CO. L.C., and RICHARD WEED on the cause of action for Negligent Misrepresentation.
  • On the causes of action on which the jury found in favor of Plaintiff FARMERS & MERCHANTS TRUST, the jury awarded damages, joint and severally, against each of the Defendants ANATOLY VANETIK, YURI VANETIK, WEED & CO. LLP, WEED & CO. L.C., and RICHARD WEED in the amount of $750,000.00.
  • The jury also found that each of the Defendants ANATOLY VANETIK, YURI VANETIK, WEED & CO. LLP, WEED & CO. L.C., and RICHARD WEED had acted with malice, oppression or fraud and on November 13, 2015 ordered punitive damages in favor of Plaintiff FARMERS & MERCHANTS TRUST, in the following amounts:
    • ANATOLY VANETIK – $1,250,000.00;
    • YURI VANETIK – $2,000,000.00;
    • WEED & CO. LLP – $1.00;
    • WEED & CO. L.C. – $1.00; and
    • RICHARD WEED – $110,000.00.

On December 7, 2015, this action came on regularly for closing arguments in Department CX-103 of the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Orange, the Honorable Ronald Bauer, on the remaining issues to be decided by Court trial. The matter was taken under submission by the Court on December 7, 2015.

On March 4, 2016, the Court came back with its verdict on the causes of action that were relevant to a bench trial and found as follows:

  • In favor of Defendants WEED & CO. LLP, WEED & CO. L.C., and RICHARD WEED on the cause of action for Breach of Contract;
  • In favor of Defendants WEED & CO. LLP, WEED & CO. L.C., and RICHARD WEED on the cause of action for Breach of Fiduciary Duty;
  • In favor of Defendants WEED & CO. LLP, WEED & CO. L.C., and RICHARD WEED on the cause of action for Constructive Fraud; and
  • The Court dismissed the cause of action for breach of Business and Professions Code § 17200.

Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of the Court’s Minute Order.

Based on the foregoing jury verdict and Court Minute Order, the Court now orders, adjudges, decreases, and enters judgment as follows:

  1. Judgment against each of the Defendants ANATOLY VANETIK, YURI VANETIK and in favor of Plaintiff FARMERS & MERCHANTGS TRUST on the cause of action for Breach of Contract;
  2. Judgment against each of the Defendants ANATOLY VANETIK, YURI VANETIK and in favor of Plaintiff FARMERS & MERCHANTS TRUST on the cause of action for Breach of Oral Contract;
  3. Judgment against each of the Defendants ANATOLY VANETIK, YURI VANETIK, WEED & CO. LLP, WEED & CO. L.C., and RICHARD WEED and in favor of Plaintiff FARMERS & MERCHANTS TRUST on the cause of action for Intentional Misrepresentation;
  4. Judgment in favor of the Defendants ANATOLY VANETIK, YURI VANETIK, WEED & CO. LLP, WEED & CO. L.C., and RICHARD WEED on the cause of action for Negligent Misrepresentation;
  5. Judgment against each of the Defendants ANATOLY VANETIK, YURI VANETIK, WEED & CO. LLP, WEED & CO. L.C., and RICHARD WEED and in favor of Plaintiff FARMERS & MERCHANTS TRUST on the cause of action for Concealment;
  • Judgment against each of the Defendants ANATOLY VANETIK, YURI VANETIK, WEED & CO. LLP, WEED & CO. L.C., and RICHARD WEED and in favor of Plaintiff FARMERS & MERCHANTS TRUST on the cause of action for False Promise;
  • Judgment in favor of Defendants WEED & CO. LLP, WEED & CO. L.C., and RICHARD WEED on the cause of action for Breach of Contract;
  • Judgment in favor of Defendants WEED & CO. LLP, WEED & CO. L.C., and RICHARD WEED on the cause of action for Breach of Fiduciary Duty;
  • Judgment in favor of Defendants WEED & CO. LLP, WEED & CO. L.C., and RICHARD WEED on the cause of action for Constructive Fraud;
  • Judgment and damages in favor of Plaintiff FARMERS & MERCHANTS TRUST, joint and severally, against each of the Defendants ANATOLY VANETIK, YURI VANETIK, WEED & CO. LLP, WEED & CO. L.C., and RICHARD WEED in the amount of $750,000.00; and
  • Judgment ordering punitive damages against the Defendants ANATOLY VANETIK, YURI VANETIK, WEED & CO. LLP, WEED & CO. L.C., and RICHARD WEED in favor of Plaintiff FARMERS & MERCHANTS TRUST, in the following amounts:
    • ANATOLY VANETIK – $1,250,000.00;
    • YURI VANETIK – $2,000,000.00;
    • WEED & CO. LLP – $1.00;
    • WEED & CO. L.C. – $1.00; and
    • RICHARD WEED – $110,000.00.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 15, 2016 
 Hon. Ronald Bauer Judge of the Superior Court of California, County of Orange

            APPROVED AS TO FORM.

  MICHAELMAN & ROBINSON, LLP
   
Dated: March __, 2016By: 
  Jeffrey D. Farrow, Esq. Eric J. Rans, Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiff FARMERS & MERCHANTS TRUST COMPANY
   
  WHITE & REED LLP
   
Dated: March __, 2016By: 
  Michael R. White, Esq. Attorneys for Defendants WEED & CO. LLP, WEED & CO. L.C., and RICHARD WEED
   
  HAMILTON LAW OFFICES
   
Dated: March __, 2016By: 
  John M. Hamilton, Esq. Attorneys for Defendants YURI VANETIK and ANATOLY VANETIK
   


EXHIBIT A

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF ORANGE, CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER

FARMERS & MERCHANTS TRUST COMPANY, a California corporation, as administration and trustee of the Elliott Broidy SEP IRA,                           Plaintiff,             v.   WEED & CO. LLP; WEED & CO. L.C.; RICHARD WEED; YURI VANETIK; ANATOLY VANETIK.                           Defendants.CASE NO.: 30-2013-00688150-CU-BC-CJC       VERDICT FORM    

            WE THE JURY ANSWER THE QUESTIONS SUBMITTED TO US AS FOLLOWS:

///

///

///

///

///

///

Breach of Contract

1.         Did Plaintiff and any of the following defendants enter into the written Securities Purchase Agreement?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 1, then answer question 2 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 1, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 2. If you answered no for all defendants in question 1, please proceed to Question 5.

2.         Did all the conditions that were required for Defendants performance occur?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 2, then answer question 3 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 2, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 3. If you answered no for all defendants in question 2, please proceed to Question 5.

///

///

///

///

///

///

///

3.         Did any of the following Defendants fail to do something that the written Securities Purchase Agreement required him to do and/or do something that the contract prohibited him from doing?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 3, then answer question 4 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 3, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 4. If you answered no for all defendants in question 3, please proceed to Question 5.

4.         Was Plaintiff harmed by any of the Defendants’ breach of the written Securities Purchase Agreement?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            Please proceed to Question 5.

Breach of Oral Contract

5.         Did Plaintiff and any of the following defendants enter into the oral agreement to repay Plaintiff?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 5, then answer question 6 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 5, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 6. If you answered no for all defendants in question 1, please proceed to Question 9.

6.         Did all the conditions that were required for Defendants performance occur?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 6, then answer question 7 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 7, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 7. If you answered no for all defendants in question 6, please proceed to Question 5.

7.         Did any of the following Defendants fail to do something that the oral agreement for repayment to Plaintiff required him to do and/or do something that this contract prohibited him from doing?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 7, then answer question 8 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 7, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 8. If you answered no for all defendants in question 7, please proceed to Question 9.

8.         Was Plaintiff harmed by any of the Defendants’ breach of the oral agreement to repay Plaintiff?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            Please proceed to Question 9.

///

Negligent Misrepresentation

9.         Did Defendants make a false representation to Plaintiff?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 9, then answer question 10 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 9, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 10. If you answered no for all defendants in question 9, please proceed to Question 15.

10.       Did Defendants honestly believe that the representation was true when he/it made it?

                        Yuri Vanetik               ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 10, then answer question 11 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 10, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 11. If you answered no for all defendants in question 10, please proceed to Question 15.

///

///

///

11.       Did Defendants have reasonable grounds for believing the representation was true when he/it made it?

                        Yuri Vanetik               ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       ___Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       ___ Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered no for any defendant in question 11, then answer question 12 for that defendant. If you answered yes for any defendant in question 11, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 12. If you answered no for all defendants in question 11, please proceed to Question 15.

12.       Did Defendants intend that Plaintiff rely on the representation?

                        Yuri Vanetik               ___ Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         ___ Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             ___ Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       ___ Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       ___ Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 12, then answer question 13 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 12, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 13. If you answered no for all defendants in question 12, please proceed to Question 15.

///

///

///

///

13.       Did Plaintiff reasonably rely on the representation?

                        Yuri Vanetik               ___ Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         ___ Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             ___ Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       ___ Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       ___ Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 13, then answer question 14 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 13, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 14. If you answered no for all defendants in question 13, please proceed to Question 15.

14.       Was Plaintiff’s reliance on the following Defendants representation a substantial factor in causing harm to Plaintiff?

                        Yuri Vanetik               ___ Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         ___ Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             ___ Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       ___ Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       ___ Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            Please proceed to Question 15.

///

///

///

///

///

///

Intentional Misrepresentation

15.       Did Defendants make a false representation to Plaintiff?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 15, then answer question 16 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 15, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 16. If you answered no for all defendants in question 15, please proceed to Question 20.

16.       Did the following Defendants know that the representation was false, or did he/it make the representation recklessly and without regard for its truth?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 16, then answer question 17 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 16, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 17. If you answered no for all defendants in question 16, please proceed to Question 20.

///

///

17.       Did the following Defendants intend that Plaintiff rely on the representation?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 17, then answer question 18 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 17, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 18. If you answered no for all defendants in question 17, please proceed to Question 20.

18.       Did Plaintiff reasonably rely on the representation?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 18, then answer question 19 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 18, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 19. If you answered no for all defendants in question 18, please proceed to Question 20.

///

///

///

///

///

19.       Was Plaintiff’s reliance on the following Defendants representation a substantial factor in causing harm to Plaintiff?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

Please proceed to Question 20.

Concealment

20.       Did any of the following Defendants intentionally fail to disclose a fact that Plaintiff did not know and could not reasonably have discovered?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 20, then answer question 21 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 20, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 21. If you answered no for all defendants in question 20, please proceed to Question 24.

///

///

///

///

21.       Did any of the following Defendants intend to deceive Plaintiff by concealing the fact?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 21, then answer question 22 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 21, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 22. If you answered no for all defendants in question 21, please proceed to Question 24.

22.       Had the omitted information been disclosed, would Plaintiff reasonably have behaved differently?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 22, then answer question 23 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 22, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 23. If you answered no for all defendants in question 22, please proceed to Question 24.

///

///

///

///

///

23.       Was Defendants’ concealment a substantial factor in causing harm to Plaintiff?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            Please proceed to Question 24.

False Promise

24.       Did Defendants make a promise to Plaintiff?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 24, then answer question 25 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 24, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 25. If you answered no for all defendants in question 24, please proceed to Question 30.

///

///

///

///

///

25.       Did Defendants intend to perform this promise when he/it made it?

                        Yuri Vanetik               ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered no for any defendant in question 25, then answer question 26 for that defendant. If you answered yes for any defendant in question 25, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 26. If you answered no for all defendants in question 25, please proceed to Question 30.

26.       Did Defendants intend that Plaintiff rely on this promise?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 26, then answer question 27 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 26, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 27. If you answered no for all defendants in question 26, please proceed to Question 30.

///

///

///

///

///

27.       Did Plaintiff reasonably rely on this promise?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered yes for any defendant in question 27, then answer question 28 for that defendant. If you answered no for any defendant in question 27, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 28. If you answered no for all defendants in question 27, please proceed to Question 30.

28.       Did Defendants perform the promised act?

                        Yuri Vanetik               ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       ___Yes [or] X No [or] ___ Not Applicable

            If you answered no for any defendant in question 28, then answer question 29 for that defendant. If you answered yes for any defendant in question 28, make an “x” on the line for “Not Applicable” next to that defendant’s name in question 29. If you answered no for all defendants in question 28, please proceed to Question 30.

29.       Was Plaintiff’s reliance on Defendants promise a substantial factor in causing harm to Plaintiff?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No [or] ___ Not Applicable

Please proceed to Question 30.

Violation of Business and Professions Code § 17200

30.       Did any of the following Defendants:

                        a.         Commit an unlawful business activity?

                        b.         Commit an Unfair practice?

                        c.         Act fraudulently when conducting their business?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No

            Please proceed to Question 31.

///

///

Damages on Multiple Legal Theories

31.       What are Plaintiffs damages? Enter the amount below if you find that the Defendants are liable to Plaintiff under any or all of the causes of action.

TOTAL $ 750,000     

            Please proceed to question 32.

Intentional and Willful Misconduct

32.       If Plaintiff has proven any of its claims for Intentional Misrepresentation, Concealment or False Promise, do you find by clear and convincing evidence that any of the following Defendants engaged in such conduct with malice, oppression, or fraud?

                        Yuri Vanetik               X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Anatoly Vanetik         X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Richard Weed             X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., LLP       X Yes [or] ___ No

                        Weed & Co., L.C.       X Yes [or] ___ No

Stop here, answer no further questions, and have the presiding juror sign and date this form.

Dated:11/10/15 Signed by: 
     
    Presiding Juror

After his verdict form has been signed, notify the bailiff that you are ready to present your verdict in the courtroom.

EXHIBIT B

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

COUNTY OF ORANGE

CIVIL COMPLEX CENTER

MINUTE ORDER

DATE: 03/04/2016                                 TIME: 01:43:00 PM                   DEPT: CX103

JUDICIAL OFFICER PRESIDING: Ronald L. Bauer

CLERK: Janet E Frausto

REPORTER/ERM: None

BAILIFF/COURT ATTENDANT: Cecilia Pedraza

CASE NO: 30-2013-00688150-CU-BC-CJC       CASE INIT.DATE: 11/15/2013

CASE TITLE: Farmers & Merchants Trust Company, a California corporation, as administrator and trustee of the Elliott Broidy SEP IRA vs. Terra Resources PLC

CASE CATEGORY: Civil – Unlimited                  CASE TYPE: Breach of Contract/Warranty

EVENT ID/DOCUMENT ID: 72332806

EVENT TYPE: Chambers Work

APPEARANCES

30 2013 00688150 FARMERS & MERCHANTS VS TERRA RESOURCES

No appearances

The court having taken this matter under submission on 12-7-2015 now rules as follows:

Issues not involved at an earlier jury trial in this case are now presented for decision by the court. Plaintiff Farmers & Merchants Trust Company (“plaintiff”) presents claims against defendants Weed & Co. LLP, Weed & Co L.C., and Richard Weed (collectively “the Weed defendants”) for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, constructive fraud, and violation of Business & Professions Code section 17200.

The heart of these claims is an Escrow established for the handling and transfer of $750,000 which plaintiff invested in a plan for the re-drilling of dormant oil wells in Russia. The escrow agent named in that Agreement (Exhibit 401) is Weed & Co. LLP. The money was lost, with no return on these oil wells. The recipients of this money testified about spending it in world-wide travels that were apparently designed to hook other investors or perhaps just to entertain the other defendants in this case who were promoting the drilling scheme (as well as to buy, in St. Petersburg, a very expensive and never-seen set of maps for the drilling site thousands of miles away).

Exhibit 401 is not a particularly unusual Escrow Agreement. As escrowee, Weed had the task of holding money and following instructions. Plaintiff has no provision of that contract that was breached by

CASE TITLE: Farmers & Merchants Trust Company, a California corporation, as administrator and trustee ofCASE NO: 30-2013-00688150-CU-BC-CJC

Weed. To argue that Weed was “intimately involved” in the scam of the Vanetik defendants is not the equivalent of showing a breach of the Escrow Agreement. Nor can the court take the leap suggested by the plaintiff in order to find that Weed violated the Securities Purchase Agreement (Exhibit 400), to which it was not a party. At page 2, lines 8-11 of the plaintiff’s Brief, it is written that Weed was required to “release Funds and securities in accordance with the terms and conditions of [the Securities Purchase Agreement].” The court can find no such obligation in either of these documents. The closest might be the requirement on page 1 of the Escrow Agreement that the escrowee “release funds and securities in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement.” (Emphasis added.) Slipping a reference to the Securities Purchase Agreement into that sentence is not a fair reading of these contracts. This sleight of hand is repeated when plaintiff writes that Weed must act “subject to the terms and conditions of [the Securities Purchase Agreement]. Once again the Escrow Agreement requires that Weed perform “subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement.” (Emphasis added.) The argument in the Weed Brief – based upon the actual terms of the Escrow Agreement – is more compelling than the plaintiff construct.

Other claims arising from the Escrow Agreement also fail. Within the terms of that contact are explicit limitations on the duties of the escrow agent. The claims now being presented for decision by the court are here because Exhibit 401 states in Article I: “Each of the parties executing this Agreement agree to submit to the jurisdiction of such courts and waive trial by jury.” Other causes of action have been tried to a jury, which has rendered its verdict. To be sure, the evidence received in that trial could be pertinent to the claims under the Escrow Agreement, but no evidence can erase the terms of this contract. Rather than needlessly repeating it, the court now adopts and incorporates the analysis set forth from page 5, line 1 through page 6, line 10 of Weed’s Brief for this hearing.

The Weed defendant and the Vanetik defendants all urge that the court reject the plaintiff’s claim under Business & Professions Code section 17200. They argue that statute “does not apply to securities transactions,” citing Bowen v. Ziasun Technologies, Inc. (2004) 116 Cal. App. 4th 777, 786-90. A review of the plaintiff’s Twelfth Cause of Action, which is based upon section 17200 leads to the conclusion that it alleges misdeeds in a “securities transaction.” That pleading references the parties’ Securities Purchase Agreement and alleges a series of fraudulent acts in the sale of the stock that was exchanged for the plaintiff’s $750,000 purchase price. The court must therefore dismiss that claim. This makes no difference in the jury’s award of $750,000 damages, since that sum was universally understood to be the damages incurred by the plaintiff in each of several other causes of action.

Counsel for the plaintiff is directed to prepare and submit a judgment reflecting the jury’s verdict and the court’s rulings set forth above.

Clerk to give notice.

CLERK’S CERTIFICATE OF MAILING: I certify I am not a party to this cause, over age 18, and a copy of this document was mailed first class postage, prepaid in a sealed envelope addressed as shown, on, at Santa Ana, California.

ALAN CARLSON/Executive Officer & Clerk Of The Superior Court, by: Janet Frausto deputy.

MICHELMAN ROBINSON LLP

17901 Von Karman Avenue Suite 1000

CASE TITLE: Farmers & Merchants Trust Company, a California corporation, as administrator and trustee ofCASE NO: 30-2013-00688150-CU-BC-CJC

Irvine, CA 92614

REBACK MCANDREWS KJAR WARFORD & STOPCKALPER LLP

1230 Rosecrans Avenue

Manhattan Beach, CA 90264

HAMILTON LAW OFFICES

5757 West Century Blvd Suite 700

Los Angeles, CA 90045

WEED & COMPANY

5757 West Century Blvd Suite 700

Los Angeles, CA 90045

WHITE & REED

5757 West Century Blvd Suite 700

Los Angeles, CA 90045

Court Document

We will be happy to hear your thoughts

Leave a reply

Gripeo
Logo
Register New Account
Reset Password