BisnER arc AIP sna J SYNOLDS (SBN 223554) Wil isnerlaw.com ‘961 Wilshire Boulevard, 7h Floor ‘Beverly Hills, California 90210 Tals (310) 835-3200 Pax: (10 835901 Attorneys for Paintit GaePinaedins, Ines ert, Et eel om ‘By: dl Lace, Deputy APR 2:7 2018 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES GERE PRODUCTIONS, INC.; ‘Case No, BC7 04828 aii, COMPLAINT FOR REACH OF . COMERAEY AND DECLARATORY fae RANDOM ACTS ENTERTAINMENT, LLC; SCOTT ELIAS; ANNA ELIAS; and Does 1 ‘Through 10, Inclusive, Defendants, ConAEISNER APC Plaintiff Gere Productions, Ine. fr its Complaint against Defendants Random Acts Entertainment, LLC, Scott Elias and Anna Flas and Does 1 through 10, inclusive, alleges as follows JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. Jurisdiction is proper inthe Superior Court ofthe Sate of California forthe County of California pursuant o section 410.10 ofthe Code of Civil Procedure, 2 Venue is proper in Los Angeles County, California pursuant wo sections 392 et seg. ofthe California Code of Civil Procedure because Los Angeles County is where performance ofthe contracts was supposed te occur and where the parties contractually agreed to venue PARTIES 3. PlainifrGere Productions, In. i a Delaware corporation registered to do business in Calitoria 4. Defendant Random Acts Entertainment, LLC (“RAE”) is limited laity company. Pius informed and believes that RAE is owned by Defendants Scott Elias and Anna Eis 5. The true names and capacities of Does | through 10 are uaknown to Plaintiff who therefore sues sail Defendants by such fcttous names. Plainti wil as leave ofthis Court to amend this Complaint to show their re names and capacities when the same have been ascertained. Plaintiffs informed and believes, and based thereon allege, that Does trough 10 were responsible in some manner for the ats and transactions hereinafter alleged and ae lable to Pla therefor. GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 6 Plaintiffs a corporation that fishes the services ofthe ator, producer and humanitarian activist, Richard Gere. In or around December 2008, Me. Gere became interested in producing a motion picture based in whole oon parton the book, “Bones ofthe Master: A Buddhist Monk's Search forthe Lost Heart of Chins” the Book”) by George Crane. The rights to the Book ‘ha been optioned by the Defendants in this case. Plaintiff entered int discussions with Defendants shout potentially directing, eting in, and producing @ motion picture based on the Book (‘he Project" 7. Onorabout December 17,2009, Plant and Defendants entered into “Joint 1 COREAEISNER APC Producer Agreement” attached hereto as Exhibit A with respect othe Book andthe Project. As pat ofthe Agreement, twas agreed that Mr. Gere would reimburse RAE for approximately $56,000 it had expended developing the Projet and the panies further agreed to jointly develop a mutually acceptable sereenplay forthe motion picture, During the negotiation ofthe Agreement, Defendants be allowed to not only demanded reimbursement oftheir costs, they also demanded that Anna El ‘ite one or more drafts ofthe sereenplay. Ms, Elias is «neophyte writer without any produced sereen credits or recognition inthe motion picture industry. Wanting to bea god creative collaborator, Mr. Gere accommodated this demand although, his experience told him, it was highly unlikely that Ms. a's wring efforts would achieve the level required to seeure financing forthe Picture 8 The Agreement provided that ifthe Book Rights were purchased, the partes would each pay 50% of the purchase price, However, both pats reserved the right o refuse any right of contribution for ther costs to devel the Projet that were not mutually approved. On or around December 2015, Plaitff and Defendants agreed to exercise the Option which required the payment .0fS35,000, Asan accommodation tothe Defendants, Me. Gee advanced in reliance thatthe DDeferidants were bound to reimburse him, the sum of $35,000 to exercise the option and fully purchase the Book Rights. Accordingly, Defendants were required to reimburse Mr. Gee for $17,500, which was their portion of the payment forthe Book Rights. However, Defendants have smatrally breached the Agreement by refusing to honor ther financial obligation. PlaintfThas sever been reimbursed for ssid $17,500 and Defendants have therefor lost all rights in the Book, ‘Book Rights and the Project. 9, As producers, the parties agreed to joint creative approval of the Project, However, Me. Gere ad independent ereative approval to determine whether he would perform services asthe star and director. In onder for Me. Gere to commit othe Projet asthe star and director, Mr. Gere required tha the sereenplay be competed and approved. ‘This approval right has been consistently applied to virtually all films in which Mr, Gere has starred. Unfortunately Ms. Elias’ sereenplay was woefblly inadequate and succeeding screenplays were not materially acceptable either. ‘Consequently, Mr. Gere could not commit o starting inthe Picture and the partes reached creative 2 aimpasse and were unable to agree ona resolution, Rather than work through the creative Aitferences, Defendants aggressively threatened to file a legal action against Mr, Gere with claims that are insuling defamatory, inaceurat and a gross distortion ofthe actual facts. 10. Plain and Mi. Gere are the now the unfortunate viens ofa specious and corupt for by the Defendants to extort payment of $500,000 (or ater sums under threat ofa lawsuit) ‘which i further breach ofthe Agreement that protested both partes from inuirng ny expense to ‘which they had not agreed. Defendant have concocted false and malicious claim that Pini and Me. Gere have somehow breached the Agreement. Nothing coud be further from the trth, Plaintiff and Mr. Gere have ulilled al obligations owed under the Agreement, Indeed, Mr, Gere has gone shove and beyond his obligations inthe Agreement by atively developing and supporting the Project for years by providing his creative supervision and writing services, hs immense goodwill and contacts inthe entertainment industry, an substantial investments inthe Project by engaging Iighly recognized sereenwaitrs to wnite the screenplay. Mr. Gere engaged such writes without any ‘expectation that RAE would reimburse him. He proceeded withthe sole intention of furthering the Projet and producing sreenplay that would secure financing. 11, Despite Me. Gete's efforts to ake the Project a sucess, Defendants, who are videnly desperate fr money, have recently atempted to extort Mr. Gee into paying them the sum $500,000 to “buyout” thei interest inthe Project, despite their breaches and lack of investment ‘Under hese circumstances, Plant has no altematve but to vigorously combat the false and slicios allegations of he Defendants and thvart thet il-concived extortion efor. HIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (Gy Paint gatas Defends and Does 1-10) 12, Phin inconorats herein by reference, as though set forth full, the allegatios in paragraphs 1 through 11, inlusve 13. PlaintifTand Defendants are partes toa written agreement entitled “Joint Producer “Agreement” attached hereto as Exhibit A, 14, Plain has performed all obligations required under the Agreement excep those ‘obligations that have been excused or Plaintiff was prevented from performing. 3 CORMANEISNER aPC i i u ul 10 2 B 4 15 6 7 » 20 a 2 2 4 28 26 n 28 15. Defendants have breached the Agreement by among other things, ling to pay the amounts due under the Agreement, including the sm of $17,500 owed to Paintin connection withthe purchase ofthe underlying rights to the Project. 16, —PlaintitThas suffered damages as of result of Defendants’ breach in an amount o be proven at trial SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 17. PlaintifYincorporates herein by reference, as though set forth in ull, the allegations in paragraphs 1 through 16, inclusive. 18. A present and actual controversy exists between Plaintiff and Defendants as to their rights under the Agreement, Plaintiff seeks a declaration that Defendants have no rights inthe Book or the Project because they have failed to pay thei share of the purchase price forthe Book Rights Plaintiff further secks a declaration that it has not breached the Agreement and does not owe any sums to Defendants, PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for Judgment against Defendants, and each of them, as, follows: 1. Forcompensatory damages in an amount to be proven a tral; 2. Fora declaration that Defendants have no rights inthe Book or the Project because they have failed to pay their share ofthe purchase price for the Book Rights, 3. Plain further seks a declaration tha thas not breached the Agreement and does ot owe any sums to Defendants 4. Foran assessment of prejudgment and postjudgment interes tthe maximum rate allowed by law; 5. Forall such other relief as the Court dems just and proper. Dated: April 27, 2018 EISNER APC By: leremiah T. Reynolds “or Plaintft Gere Productions, In.