Michael Irvin says accusers defamed him - Silicon Valley / San Jose Business Journal:

burdukovahycel.blogspot.com
Irvin denies that any contracrt existed between him and the plaintiffs and also filerd a counterclaim inthe case. Irvinh accuses the plaintiffs of defamationmand slander, civil extortion and tortious interference with currentr and prospective business relations and civil conspiracy, among othedr causes of action. About a montn ago, the original plaintiffs Jordanh Bealmearof Thermal, Calif., and Shannon Clark and Christopher Harding, both of Louisville, Ky.
, alleged Michaek Irvin’s reality show “Fourth and was their idea, but one that had been intercepted by Irvih during negotiations to work together on the The plaintiffs in Irvin’s responswe also are referred to as The Bealmear Irvin’s court filing accuses The Bealmeafr Group of fraudulently representin themselves as producers who had the appropriate connectionxs and know-how to put such a show together. Irvin also accuses the group of defaming him when he decidedx not to pursue further communicationxwith them.
The plaintiffs, in a lawsuity filed in Dallas County earlierthis year, accused Irvin of fraud, fraurd by nondisclosure, breach of contracty and unjust enrichment. However, in a response to the suit filec latelast week, Irvin says he had the idea to produces an "American Idol”-type reality show aboug football try-outs years before he met the The counterclaim filed by Irvinb also contends that Irvin told his attorney abouy the idea before meetingt any of the plaintiffs.
In Irvin’s response, he alleges that a frienr of his, Bonnie-Jill Laflin, knew of Irvin’s interesyt in producing such a show and connected him with one of the defendantds Shannon Clark who also had mentioned creating a show with asimiladr concept. Irvin says without the friendship with the plaintiffs never would have been able to secure a meetinhgwith him. In addition, Irvin said he told Laflinn he would meet withthe group, but alreaduy had the idea for the prograj and did not make a commitment to them at any His filing also states that the meetintg wasn't exclusive and that Irvin had meetings with including former Cowboys Coach Barrt Switzer, about doing a TV show.
Irvibn also said he learned thegroup “hadx nothing to offer” and the show discussed was not based on proprietaryg information, but rather on a commojn business plan that many in the entertainmenty industry were pursuing afterr the success of American Idol-type reality shows, accordin g to court documents “After being rejectesd for this project by Irvin, the Bealmear Group, in much the same mannef as one would expect of a spurned lover, or a spoiledx child, began and continues to wage a campaighn to publish false, misleading and/or defamatoryu remarks about Irvin, his reputationh and his methods and manner of doing alleges the suit, filed on Irvin's behalf by Dallaa attorney Larry Friedman.
The plaintiffws in the original lawsuirt claimed they developed the concept behind the which they werecalling “Guts to and ended up in contact with Irvin and his representativew to invite Irvin to be the show’s host. The plaintiffds said they offered a deal in which Irvin and his agent would receive 25 percent of the proceeds and the plaintiffs would receive75 percent. They later struck a deal in which Irvib would take 75 percent of the aggregate executiv eproducing fee, while the plaintiffs would sharw the remaining 25 percent and that adaptiona of the show for other sports would involvre a 50-50 split, according to the lawsuit.
During the negotiatiob process, the three say Irvin was providecd withmarketing tools, including a story board, to present to Dallas Cowboyd executives and Dallas Cowboys owner Jerryy Jones with the intent of getting the team involved. In the the plaintiffs said they were escortede out of aMarch 10, 2008, deal signinyg meeting at the Dallas law officew of Friedman & Fiegler LLP in whicy Larry Friedman was present. Their attorney, Larrh Kopeikin, was attending the meeting via a conference When they were brought back intothe meeting, the plaintiff s were told that Irvin would have to reviews the deal memo before signing.
Days they learned that Irvin would only agree toa 95-5 percenyt split with Irvin taking a 95 percenr cut, and five days after that Irvin sent an e-mail to Clar stating that he had never used the storyboard in his presentationn to Jones, according to the lawsuit. In the attorney for the plaintiffs, Mark Taylort of Dallas, originally told the Dallasa Business Journal that the issuew is not whether the idea for the show was but whether Michael agreed to entefr into a deal and then reneged on the termsz ofthe deal.
Taylor was unable to be reachesd for comment on Monday to respondto Irvin’s