) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Similar documents
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION. Case No. COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES, RESTITUTION AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

Case3:15-cv Document1 Filed07/10/15 Page1 of 12

Case 3:17-cv DMS-RBB Document 1 Filed 03/17/17 PageID.1 Page 1 of 20

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION : : : : : : : : : :

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CASE NO.: 1. BREACH OF IMPLIED CONTRACT 2. TRESPASS TO CHATTEL

Case 3:16-cv LB Document 1 Filed 06/11/16 Page 1 of 14

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 2:15-cv SVW-AS Document 1 Filed 02/12/15 Page 1 of 15 Page ID #:1

Case 5:16-cv Document 1 Filed 09/12/16 Page 1 of 16 Page ID #:1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CASE NO:

Case 1:16-cv LTS Document 5 Filed 08/08/16 Page 1 of 9. Plaintiff, Defendants.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Defendant.

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO. Case No.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 2:17-cv DMG-JEM Document 1 Filed 04/03/17 Page 1 of 23 Page ID #:1

Case 2:18-cv Document 1 Filed 10/12/18 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #:1

Case 5:14-cv Document 1 Filed 11/06/14 Page 1 of 12 Page ID #:1

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE, CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )_ ) ) ) ) )

Case 1:16-cv Document 1 Filed 09/22/16 Page 1 of 6

Case 1:11-cv JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/06/2011 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3 James A. McDaniel (Bar No ) 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

1. OVERTIME COMPENSATION AND

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION

Case3:15-cv Document1 Filed01/09/15 Page1 of 16

Attorneys for Plaintiffs LARRY KING ENTERPRISES, INC. and ORA MEDIA LLC

Attorneys for Plaintiff STEVE THOMA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA STEVE THOMA

Courthouse News Service

Case 2:18-cv DMG-SK Document 1-2 Filed 08/09/18 Page 2 of 17 Page ID #:11

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS GALVESTON DIVISION

Case 2:11-cv Document 1 Filed 11/23/11 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION. CASE NO: 1:15-cv RNS

Superior Court of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION

Case 3:17-cv JCS Document 1 Filed 06/15/17 Page 1 of 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1 COMPLAINT

1:15-cv JMC Date Filed 04/06/15 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 12/05/16 Page 1 of 23 Page ID #:1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 2:14-cv JFW-AGR Document 1 Filed 06/10/14 Page 1 of 18 Page ID #:1

Attorney for Plaintiff WORLD LOGISTICS SERVICES, INC. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT - 1 -

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JESSICA CESTA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Attorney for Plaintiff SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER. EDGARDO RODRIGUEZ, an individual,

Case 1:18-cv PGG Document 1 Filed 10/24/18 Page 1 of 6

Case 8:16-cv Document 1 Filed 03/18/16 Page 1 of 19 Page ID #:1

Case 1:15-cv Document 1 Filed 02/27/15 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS. COMPLAINT and Jury Demand

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 04/26/18 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO. BAYOU CITY BROADCASTING EVANSVILLE, INC., a Delaware Corporation,

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Attorney for Plaintiffs SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO SOUTH COUNTY REGIONAL CENTER

Attorneys for Plaintiff, Robin Sergi, and all others similarly situated IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SACRAMENTO DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) E.D. Case No.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION

thejasminebrand.com SO SO DEF PRODUCTIONS, INC., thejasminebrand.com

Case 2:17-cv Document 1 Filed 07/05/17 Page 1 of 11 Page ID #:1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, WESTERN DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES. Plaintiff, Defendants.

Case: 1:17-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 07/09/17 Page 1 of 18 PageID #:1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 3:16-cv SK Document 1 Filed 08/17/16 Page 1 of 23

Case 2:16-cv SDW-LDW Document 5 Filed 09/01/16 Page 1 of 14 PageID: 22

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION

Case: 1:17-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 10/27/17 Page 1 of 14 PageID #:1 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Case 4:16-cv DMR Document 1 Filed 02/09/16 Page 1 of 21

Case 1:17-cv WHP Document 1 Filed 10/05/17 Page 1 of 21

Case 2:14-cv HRH Document 37 Filed 12/08/14 Page 1 of 8

Case 2:16-cv KOB Document 1 Filed 09/23/16 Page 1 of 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION

RELIEF FOR VIOLATIONS OF: SOLARCITY CORPORATION,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES. Plaintiff, Defendants. General of the State of California, hereby alleges as follows:

Case 3:15-cv EDL Document 1 Filed 12/09/15 Page 1 of 16

Case 9:18-cv RLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2018 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA CEDAR RAPIDS DIVISION. Plaintiff, COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Case 2:14-cv PMW Document 4 Filed 01/05/15 Page 1 of 20

Case 3:07-cv TEH Document 1 Filed 09/11/2007 Page 1 of 13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 8:18-cv JVS-DFM Document 1-5 Filed 06/22/18 Page 1 of 29 Page ID #:41

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Case No:

Attorneys for Plaintiffs MICHELLE RENEE MCGRATH and VERONICA O BOY, on behalf of themselves, and all others similarly situated

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 2:15-cv Document 1 Filed 09/24/15 Page 1 of 12 Page ID #:1

Case 2:15-cv Document 1 Filed 04/06/15 Page 1 of 14 Page ID #:1

Case 3:16-cv Document 1 Filed 11/11/16 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Case No. Plaintiff, Defendants

Case: 4:14-cv AGF Doc. #: 49 Filed: 04/03/15 Page: 1 of 49 PageID #: 637

Case 5:18-cv EJD Document 31 Filed 05/03/18 Page 1 of 14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 1:17-cv VEC Document 1 Filed 02/15/17 Page 1 of 6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case: 1:11-cv DAP Doc #: 1 Filed: 01/19/11 1 of 9. PageID #: 1

Case: 1:16-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 12/15/16 Page 1 of 15 PageID #:1

Case: 1:16-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 11/15/16 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:1

Transcription:

Case :-cv-0-dmg-e Document Filed // Page of Page ID #: 0 GERARD FOX LAW, P.C. GERARD P. FOX (SBN # gfox@gerardfoxlaw.com BELINDA M. VEGA (SBN # bvega@gerardfoxlaw.com 0 Century Park East, Suite 0 Los Angeles, CA 00 Telephone: (0-000 Facsimile: (0 - Attorneys for Plaintiff KM LPTV of Chicago-, L.L.C. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA KM LPTV OF CHICAGO-, L.L.C., an Illinois limited liability company, v. Plaintiff; MUNDOMAX BROADCASTING, LLC f/k/a MUNDOFOX BROADCASTING, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; RCN M.F. HOLDINGS, INC., a Delaware company, and DOES -, inclusive, Defendants. Case No. :-cv-0 FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR: ( BREACH OF CONTRACT ( BREACH OF COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING ( FALSE PROMISE ( VIOLATIONS OF CAL. BUS. & PROF. CODE 0 ET SEQ. ( QUANTUM MERUIT DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Case :-cv-0-dmg-e Document Filed // Page of Page ID #: 0 Plaintiff KM LPTV of Chicago-, L.L.C. ( Plaintiff or KM LPTV, by and through its undersigned counsel, brings this Complaint against Defendants MundoMax Broadcasting, LLC f/k/a MundoFox Broadcasting, LLC ( MundoMax, RCN M.F. Holdings, Inc. ( RCN, and DOES - (collectively, Defendants, and hereby alleges the following: NATURE OF THE CLAIM. KM LPTV is the licensee of a television station in Chicago, Illinois, WOCK-CD ( WOCK or the Station. In May, KM LPTV entered into a contract with MundoMax to affiliate the Station with the MundoMax network. Under that agreement, the Station agreed to broadcast Spanish-language programming delivered to it by MundoMax for a four-year term from August, until July,.. MundoMax agreed to be the Station s exclusive sales representative for national spot sales during the four-year term of the agreement and to pay the Station at least $00,000 per year for the national advertising sales revenue. MundoMax was required to pay $0,000 per quarter to KM LPTV. However, MundoMax breached its obligation and failed to make the final three required payments to the Station in the aggregate amount of $0,000, which payments were due on November,, May 0, and August 0,, respectively.. MundoMax also agreed to advance up to $0,000 per year for the second, third and fourth years of the term to KM LPTV for marketing expenditures. As required by the agreement, KM LPTV documented and requested $,00 for each of the third and fourth quarters of the fourth year of the term. Once again, MundoMax breached its obligation and failed to advance $,000 to KM LPTV.. KM LPTV brings this action seeking to hold Defendants liable for their breach of contract, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, false promises, violation of California Business and Professions Code Section - -

Case :-cv-0-dmg-e Document Filed // Page of Page ID #:0 0 0, and alternatively, quantum meruit. PARTIES. Plaintiff KM LPTV is an Illinois limited liability company with its principal place of business in Chicago, Illinois.. Upon information and belief, Defendant MundoMax is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business in Miami, Florida and offices in Los Angeles, California.. Upon information and belief, Defendant RCN is a Delaware company and a subsidiary of RCN Television S.A., a leading Colombian broadcaster.. The names, residences, and capacities of the Defendants named as DOES through are unknown to Plaintiff at this time. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and therefore alleges, that each of the fictitiously named Defendants is in some way liable, jointly and severally, to Plaintiff for the damages alleged in this Complaint, either together with or independently of each other Defendant. At such time as the fictitiously named Defendants are identified, Plaintiff will amend this Complaint to state each of their true names, capacities, and residences.. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and on that basis, alleges that, at all relevant times, each of the Defendants named in this Complaint was the agent, employee, servant, partner, or joint venturer of or with each of the remaining Defendants and was at all times acting within the purpose and scope of such agency, employment, service, partnership, or joint venture. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 0. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction with respect to this action pursuant to U.S.C. as there exists complete diversity of citizenship between Plaintiff and Defendants and the amount in controversy exceeds $,000, exclusive of interest and costs.. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to U.S.C. (b(. - -

Case :-cv-0-dmg-e Document Filed // Page of Page ID #: 0 MundoMax contractually agreed in the Station Affiliation Agreement dated May, that all actions, proceedings or litigation brought against it shall be instituted and prosecuted solely within the County of Los Angeles, California.. Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction in this Court because they transact business and purposefully avail themselves in this District. FACTS General Allegations. KM LPTV owns and operates WOCK-CD, digital Channel in Chicago, Illinois.. MundoMax is a Spanish-language broadcast television network that was, at all relevant times, owned and operated by RCN.. MundoMax was formerly known as MundoFox Broadcasting, LLC. On or about July,, MundoFox changed its name to MundoMax following the purchase by RCN of the 0% interest in the company held by Fox International Channels (US, Inc. MundoMax is liable for the contracts signed by MundoFox because MundoMax is simply a new name for the same limited liability corporation.. At all relevant times to this dispute, RCN had control over MundoMax, shared in the profits and losses of MundoMax, and had the sole ownership interest in MundoMax.. On May,, KM LPTV and MundoMax entered into a Station Affiliation Agreement. The contract set forth the terms and conditions for the carriage of MundoMax programming on the Station. A copy of the Station Affiliation Agreement is annexed as Exhibit. National Advertising Sales Revenue. On May,, KM LPTV and MundoMax entered into two side letter agreements.. A letter agreement dated May, was executed by Jon - -

Case :-cv-0-dmg-e Document Filed // Page of Page ID #: 0 Hookstratten on behalf of MundoMax and Donald Bae on behalf of KM LPTV (the May First Letter Agreement. The letter provided, Subject to obtaining the requisite waiver from the FCC, and in accordance with FCC rules and regulations, and the terms and conditions of the Affiliation Agreement, Licensee will appoint MundoFox, and MundoFox agrees that it or an entity affiliated with Fox Networks Group will serve, as Station s exclusive sales representative for national spot sales during the Term, at a commission rate of % and in accordance with the other terms and conditions of an Advertising Sales Services Agreement to be mutually agreed by the parties as promptly as practicable upon receipt of the FCC waiver. A copy of the May First Letter Agreement is annexed as Exhibit.. KM LPTV obtained the requisite waiver from the FCC required by the May First Letter Agreement.. MundoMax failed to make the payments required to KM LPTV under the May First Letter Agreement for the final three quarters of the fourth year of the term.. A second letter agreement dated May, was also executed by Jon Hookstratten on behalf of MundoMax and Donald Bae on behalf of KM LPTV (the May Second Letter Agreement. A copy of the May Second Letter Agreement is annexed as Exhibit.. Section of the May Second Letter Agreement further amends and supplements the May First Letter Agreement and the Station Affiliation Agreement. Section provides that in the second, third and fourth years of the Station Affiliation Agreement, KM LPTV shall retain the first $00,000 (net of any commission in national advertising sales revenue, and any additional national advertising sales revenue shall be subject to the standard commission rate of %. Further, MundoMax guaranteed that if the amount of national advertising sales revenue in years two, three or four of the term was less than $00,000, then - -

Case :-cv-0-dmg-e Document Filed // Page of Page ID #: 0 MundoMax would pay KM LPTV the difference between the actual national advertising sales revenue and $00,000.. On February,, MundoMax and KM LPTV agreed to a written amendment to the May Second Letter Agreement (the Amendment. The amendment was executed by Ibra Morales on behalf of MundoMax and Donald Bae on behalf of KM LPTV. A copy of the Amendment is annexed as Exhibit.. Section B of the Amendment amended Paragraph of the May Second Letter Agreement to require that MundoMax make payments to KM LPTV on a quarterly basis. In the Amendment, MundoMax guaranteed that if the amount of national advertising sales revenue is less than $0,000 in a quarter, then MundoMax would pay KM LPTV the difference between the actual national advertising sales revenue booked for such quarter and $0,000.. MundoMax booked $0 in national advertising sales revenue for the second, third and fourth quarters of the fourth year of the term. Accordingly, MundoMax is obligated under the Amendment to the May Second Letter Agreement to pay KM LPTV $0,000.. MundoMax has failed to pay KM LPTV the $0,000 for which it guaranteed payment.. The Station Affiliation Agreement, the May First Letter Agreement and the May Second Letter Agreement are governed by the law of the State of California. See Exhibit at.. On August,, KM LPTV and MundoMax entered into a National Advertising Sales Representation Agreement (the NASR Agreement. The NASR Agreement set forth additional terms under which MundoMax agreed to serve as the Station s exclusive national representative for the sale of national television spot advertising time. A copy of the NASR Agreement is annexed as Exhibit. - -

Case :-cv-0-dmg-e Document Filed // Page of Page ID #: 0 0. On August,, MundoMax sent KM LPTV a purported Termination Notice that purported to terminate the NASR Agreement effective as of October,. A copy of the purported Termination Notice is annexed as Exhibit.. Following its service of the purported Termination Notice, on August,, MundoMax ceased providing national spot sales representation to the Station. However, MundoMax did not terminate its obligations under the Station Affiliation Agreement, the May First Letter Agreement and the May Second Letter Agreement as amended by the Amendment to provide national spot sales representation to the Station. MundoMax s failure to provide national spot sales representation to the Station and to pay the $0,000 that it guaranteed to pay KM LPTV were material breaches of the Station Affiliation Agreement, the May First Letter Agreement and the May Second Letter Agreement as amended by the Amendment. Marketing Contributions. Under Section of the May Second Letter Agreement, MundoMax agreed to advance up to $0,000 during Contract Years two, three and four for marketing expenditures to be documented and provided to MundoMax upon request to support Station s marketing of the MundoMax programming. For purposes of the May Second Letter Agreement, MundoMax agreed to advance the marketing contribution for Contract Years, and on each successive -day period after May, (the date of execution of the letter.. In Section A of the Amendment, MundoMax agreed to make quarterly payments of any amounts due under Section of the May Second Letter Agreement.. KM LPTV has documented and provided to MundoMax its marketing expenditures in support of the Station s marketing of MundoMax - -

Case :-cv-0-dmg-e Document Filed // Page of Page ID #: 0 programming, in excess of $,00 for each of the Third Quarter and Fourth Quarter of Contract Year.. KM LPTV relied on MundoMax s representations that it would advance these marketing costs. For example, in April, KM LPTV informed MundoMax that it would be purchasing advertising and MundoMax responded by providing artwork for the purchase. At no time did MundoMax ever suggest to KM LPTV that it had decided or planned on not advancing marketing costs for the Third and Fourth Quarter of Contract Year.. In addition, in February, and May,, KM LPTV sent two marketing invoices to MundoMax and in an email dated May, re-sent the invoices and reminded MundoMax of the agreement to advance the marketing costs due pursuant to Section A of the Amendment. In that same email, KM LPTV sent MundoMax the contract for advertising proposed for May through July and agreed to by MundoMax. At no time did MundoMax ever suggest to KM LPTV that it had decided or planned on not advancing marketing costs for the Third and Fourth Quarter of Contract Year.. KM LPTV has requested that MundoMax pay it the $,000 that it has spent in marketing expenditures.. MundoMax has breached the agreement by refusing to pay KM LPTV $,000 for amounts that it incurred in marketing expenditures.. On March, and August,, KM LPTV sent MundoMax notices of breach of the Station Affiliation Agreement, the May First Letter Agreement and the May Second Letter Agreement, as amended by the Amendment. Copies of the notices are attached as Exhibit and Exhibit. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (Breach of Contract Against All Defendants 0. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing - -

Case :-cv-0-dmg-e Document Filed // Page of Page ID #: 0 paragraphs.. On May,, KM LPTV entered into the Station Affiliation Agreement, the May First Letter Agreement and the May Second Letter Agreement. The Amendment validly amended the May Second Letter Agreement. The Station Affiliation Agreement and the Letter Agreements are valid and enforceable contracts.. KM LPTV has at all times performed all, or substantially all, conditions, covenants, and promises required by it under the Station Affiliation Agreement, the May First Letter Agreement and the May Second Letter Agreement, as amended by the Amendment.. MundoMax has committed three material breaches of the Station Affiliation Agreement, the May First Letter Agreement and the May Second Letter Agreement, as amended by the Amendment.. First, under Section of the May Second Letter Agreement, as amended by the Amendment, MundoMax guaranteed that it would pay KM LPTV the difference between the actual national advertising sales revenue booked for each quarter and $0,000.. MundoMax did not book any actual national advertising sales revenue for the second, third or fourth quarters of the fourth year of the term.. Accordingly, in breach of the May Second Letter Agreement, as amended by the Amendment, MundoMax has failed to pay KM LPTV the sum of $0,000 for which it guaranteed payment.. Second, under Section of the May Second Letter Agreement, as amended by the Amendment, MundoMax agreed to pay $,00 per quarter to KM LPTV for its marketing expenditures that were documented and provided to MundoMax.. KM LPTV documented and provided to MundoMax $,00 in marketing expenditures for each of the third and fourth quarters of the fourth year - -

Case :-cv-0-dmg-e Document Filed // Page 0 of Page ID #: 0 of the contract.. In breach of its agreement, MundoMax has failed to pay $,000 to KM LPTV to compensate it for marketing expenditures. 0. Third, under Section of the May Second Letter Agreement, MundoMax (or an affiliated entity was contractually obligated to serve as the Station s exclusive sales representative for national spot sales during the entire four-year term of the agreement.. MundoMax breached this agreement by failing to serve or have an affiliated entity serve as the Station s exclusive sales representative from August, through July,.. MundoMax was obligated to agree to an Advertising Sales Services Agreement to formalize certain terms of its service as the Station s exclusive national sales representative. However, MundoMax breached this provision by unilaterally noticing the termination of the initial NASR Agreement on August,, and not entering into or having an affiliated entity enter into a new Advertising Sales Service Agreement.. KM LPTV has been damaged by MundoMax s failure to serve as the Station s exclusive sales representative for national spot sales. Under the May Second Letter Agreement, MundoMax guaranteed it would sell and KM LPTV would receive at least $00,000 per year in national ad sales revenue, and with KM LPTV to receive percent of annual national sales revenue above $00,000 (with MundoMax retaining % of the annual national sales revenue above the $00,000 minimum as its commission. Because MundoMax breached the agreement and did not sell any national spot sales for WOCK, and neither KM LPTV nor any other party could sell national spots on WOCK due to MundoMax s exclusive sales representation, KM LPTV did not receive any national ad sales revenue once MundoMax had breached its agreement.. As a direct and proximate result of MundoMax s breaches of the - 0 -

Case :-cv-0-dmg-e Document Filed // Page of Page ID #: 0 Affiliation Agreement, the May First Letter Agreement and the May Second Letter Agreement, as amended by the Amendment, KM LPTV has suffered, and continues to suffer, direct and consequential damages, in an amount to be proven at trial, not less than $,000. KM LPTV is entitled to damages and penalties, including but not limited to, damages stemming from breach of the agreements and incidental and consequential damages, and other costs and expenses, in an amount to be proven at trial.. As the sole shareholder of MundoMax, RCN is jointly and severally liable for the liabilities and obligations of MundoMax. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION (Breach of Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Against All Defendants. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs.. On May,, KM LPTV entered into the Station Affiliation Agreement, the May First Letter Agreement and the May Second Letter Agreement. The Amendment validly amended the May Second Letter Agreement. The Station Affiliation Agreement and the Letter Agreements are valid and enforceable contracts.. A promise of good faith and fair dealing is implied in both the Affiliation Agreement and the Letter Agreements, which prevents MundoMax from frustrating or interfering with KM LPTV s right to receive the full benefit of those Agreements, or vice versa. This duty is imputed into every contract entered into under the laws of the State of California.. KM LPTV has at all times performed all, or substantially all, conditions, covenants, and promises required by it under the Affiliation Agreement and Letter Agreements. 0. Instead of acting in good faith in accordance with the National Sales - -

Case :-cv-0-dmg-e Document Filed // Page of Page ID #: 0 Representation and Marketing Contribution provisions of the Agreements, MundoMax has delayed and obfuscated by not only failing to pay KM LPTV as required under the provisions, but also subjecting KM LPTV to unnecessary and time-consuming requests for documentation.. Instead of acting in good faith in accordance with the National Sales Representation and Marketing Contribution provisions of the Agreements, MundoMax led KM LPTV to believe it would honor its promises to make payments under the Agreements while knowing all along it did not intend to honor its commitments.. Thus, MundoMax has breached its duty of good faith and fair dealing to KM LPTV.. As a direct and proximate result of MundoMax s breach of its covenant of good faith and fair dealing, KM LPTV has suffered, and continues to suffer, direct and consequential damages, in an amount to be proven at trial, not less than $,000.. As the sole shareholder of MundoMax, RCN is jointly and severally liable for the liabilities and obligations of MundoMax. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION (False Promise Against All Defendants. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs.. On February,, by executing the Amendment, MundoMax made promises to KM LPTV that it would compensate KM LPTV on a quarterly basis for its marketing expenditures and that it would guarantee payment to KM LPTV of at least $0,000 per quarter for national advertising sales revenue. - -

Case :-cv-0-dmg-e Document Filed // Page of Page ID #:00 0. In April, MundoMax provided art to KM LPTV to be used in marketing materials. KM LPTV informed MundoMax that the art would be used for marketing expenditures for which MundoMax would be obligated to repay KM LPTV. MundoMax did not object.. On February,, May, and May,, KM LPTV sent invoices to MundoMax for marketing expenses and an approved plan for marketing for May through July. MundoMax did not object to the marketing expenses and did not object to the marketing plan which had already been approved by it.. On information and belief, at the time MundoMax made these promises to advance payment for marketing expenses, it did not intend to perform its promises. 0. KM LPTV reasonably relied on MundoMax s false promises by foregoing its right to terminate the Station Affiliation Agreement and by continuing to broadcast MundoMax programming. Had KM LPTV known that MundoMax did not intend to make good and fulfill its promises, KM LPTV would have terminated the Station Affiliation Agreement and looked for other broadcast opportunities.. KM LPTV was harmed by MundoMax s actions and KM LPTV s reliance on MundoMax s false promises was a substantial factor in causing that harm. Specifically, without limitation, KM LPTV continued to perform its obligations under the Station Affiliation Agreement and incurred substantial losses, in an amount to be determined at trial. In addition, KM LPTV lost other broadcast opportunities, which it could have entered into, had it known MundoMax did not intend to fulfill its promises.. Defendants conduct was malicious, intentional, and outrageous and constituted willful and wanton disregard for the rights of Plaintiff in that, as described above, MundoMax maliciously intended to lull KM LPTV into - -

Case :-cv-0-dmg-e Document Filed // Page of Page ID #:0 0 continuing to broadcast content, thus obtaining the benefits of the affiliation while refusing to appropriately compensate KM LPTV.. As the sole shareholder of MundoMax, RCN is jointly and severally liable for the liabilities and obligations of MundoMax. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Violations of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 0 et seq. Against All Defendants. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference each of the foregoing paragraphs.. The relationship between KM LPTV and MundoMax is governed by California law.. MundoMax s actions as described in this Complaint constitute unfair business practices as proscribed by California Business and Professions Code Sections 0 et seq.. MundoMax s unfair business practices include, but are not limited to, failing to compensate KM LPTV under the National Sales Representation and Marketing Contribution provisions. The actions described in this Complaint are unfair, unlawful, or fraudulent for purposes of California Business and Professions Code Sections 0 et seq.. As a result of MundoMax s acts in violation of California Business Code Sections 0 et seq., KM LPTV is entitled to a disgorgement of MundoMax s profits, restitution, and/or such other equitable remedies as permitted under the statute and that the Court may order.. As the sole shareholder of MundoMax, RCN is jointly and severally liable for the liabilities and obligations of MundoMax. - -

Case :-cv-0-dmg-e Document Filed // Page of Page ID #:0 0 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Quantum Meruit Against All Defendants 0. Plaintiff restates and incorporates by reference the foregoing paragraphs numbered through.. KM LPTV performed services for MundoMax by promoting MundoMax s programming, and broadcasting MundoMax s programming and MundoMax s commercial advertisements, at MundoMax s request, on the Station from August, through July,.. MundoMax benefitted from the promotion of its programming provided by KM LPTV and by the airing of its programming on the Station in Chicago.. The Station incurred significant promotional expenditures and obligations with third parties, and forewent opportunities to generate Station revenues by broadcasting other programming, during this time period.. MundoMax did not compensate KM LPTV for its airing of MundoMax programming for the last three quarters of the Station Affiliation Agreement, nor compensate KM LPTV for its promotional efforts for the last two quarters of the Station Affiliation Agreement. The reasonable value of broadcasting MundoMax programming on the Station and the promotional work for these time periods is at least $,000. That amount remains unpaid.. MundoMax is liable to KM LPTV for quantum meruit in an amount to be proven at trial, not less than $,000.. As the sole shareholder of MundoMax, RCN is jointly and severally liable for the liabilities and obligations of MundoMax. PRAYER FOR RELIF WHEREFORE, KM LPTV prays for relief as follows: a. That the Court enter judgment for KM LPTV and against all - -

Case :-cv-0-dmg-e Document Filed // Page of Page ID #:0 0 Defendants on the above claims for relief; b. For damages in the amount to be proven at trial; c. For restitution, disgorgement of profits, or other equitable relief; d. For punitive damages; e. For attorneys fees and costs, in an amount according to proof; f. For prejudgment interest according to law; and g. For any such other and further relief, including equitable relief, as the Court may deem just and proper. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiffs respectfully demands a trial by jury in this action. DATE: November, GERARD FOX LAW, P.C. BY: _/s/ GERARD P. FOX GERARD P. FOX BELINDA M. VEGA Attorneys for Plaintiff KM LPTV of Chicago-, L.L.C. - -