Counterclaim, Ubetcha vs IRS et al.

Ivy Resorts & Showbiz, Inc. & Collective Blitz Teams et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

Chet Ubetcha, et al.,

Defendants.

—————————————————————-

Chet Ubetcha,

Counterclaim Plaintiff,

v.

Ivy Resorts & Showbiz, Inc. & Collective Blitz Teams et al.,

Counterclaim Defendants.

—————————————————————

ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, AND COUNTERCLAIM OF
DEFENDANT CHET UBETCHA

    Defendant Chet Upbetcha by and through his undersigned attorneys, hereby answers the Complaint (“Complaint”) filed by Plaintiffs The Ivy Resorts & Showbiz Inc., Bikini Bottom Surfers, Blackforest Unicorns, Itza Leaping Lizards, Badlands Rejects, Granite City Guardians, Dunsford Do Lilly Taps, and Drumphtopia Winners (collectively, “Plaintiffs”).

   Except as expressly stated otherwise below, Mr. Ubetcha answers and responds only to those allegations in the Compliant that are directed towards him, and is without sufficient knowledge of information to form a belief concerning the truth of the allegations in the Complaint that are direct toward other Defendants, and therefore denies those allegations.

   Mr. Ubetcha responds to the Plaintiffs’ allegations in like numbered paragraphs as follows:

I. INTRODUCTION

  1. Paragraph 1 of the Compliant states conclusions of the law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Mr. Ubetcha denies the allegations in Paragraph 1 of the Complaint.
  2. Paragraph 2 of the Complaint states conclusions of the law to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required, Mr. Ubetcha denies the allegations in Paragraph 2 of the Complaint.
  3. Paragraph 3 of the Complaint states conclusions of the law to which no response is required. Mr. Ubetcha admits, however, that his company Hot Potato did contract to sponsor the Bikini Bottom Surfers for the second Blitz season. Mr. Ubetcha also admits that, Dignity Delegation to which he holds a primary ownership, contracted with the Blackforest Unicorns, Itza Leaping Lizards, Badlands Rejects, Granite City Guardians, Dunsford Do Lilly Taps, and Drumphtopia Winners for the second Blitz season.

II. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

  1. Mr. Ubetcha admits that his Company, Hot Potato, contracted with the Bikini Bottom Surfers for the second season of Blitz. That the Bikini Bottom Surfers met all criteria therein to qualify for sponsorship in the same season, and that the Bikini Bottom Surfers are entitled to the agreed upon terms of that contract.
  2. Mr. Ubetcha admits that Dignity Delegation, to which he is a majority owner, contracted with the Blackforest Unicorns, Itza Leaping Lizards, Badlands Rejects, Granite City Guardians, Dunsford Do Lilly Taps, and Drumphtopia Winners for the second season of Blitz, and that the  Blackforest Unicorns, Itza Leaping Lizards, Badlands Rejects, Granite City Guardians, Dunsford Do Lilly Taps, and Drumphtopia Winners met all criteria therein to qualify for sponsorship in the same season, and that the  Blackforest Unicorns, Itza Leaping Lizards, Badlands Rejects, Granite City Guardians, Dunsford Do Lilly Taps, and Drumphtopia Winners are entitled to the agreed upon terms of that contract.
  3. Mr. Ubetcha admits that Hot Potato lost a lawsuit versus the Bank of Altdorf in which Hot Potato must refund its debtors. Mr. Ubetcha admits that he would cover this debt himself, ensuring that those debtors where paid.
  4. Mr. Ubetcha admits that Dignity Delegation filed for bankruptcy.
  5. Mr. Ubetcha admits to being a co-signer of the $50 million loan secured by Dignity Delegation to continue operations throughout the remainder of the season.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

    Mr. Ubetcha sets forth his affirmative defenses. Each affirmative defense is asserted as to all claims against him. By setting forth these affirmative defenses, Mr. Ubetcha does not assume the burden of proving any fact, issue, or element of a cause of action where such burden properly belongs to Plaintiffs. Moreover, nothing stated herein is intended or shall be construed as an acknowledgement that any particular issue or subject matter is relevant to Plaintiffs’ allegations.

As separate and distinct affirmative defenses, Mr. Ubetcha avers as follows:

First Affirmative Defense

   Plaintiffs have failed to state claims upon which relief can be granted.

Second Affirmative Defense

Plaintiffs’ claims are barred, in whole or in part, by the doctrine of unclean hands.

Third Affirmative Defense

Plaintiffs’ claims fail, in whole or in part, because Plaintiffs cannot prove that any contract was breached or that payment was not intended to be rendered when due.

Fourth Affirmative Defense

Plaintiffs’ claims fail, in whole or in part, because Mr. Ubetcha has already funded Hot Potato sponsor payouts for the remainder of the second season of Blitz.

Fifth Affirmative Defense

Plaintiffs’ claims fail, in whole or in part, because Mr. Ubetcha co-signed a $50 million loan to fund Dignity Delegation through the remainder of the second season of Blitz.

Sixth Affirmative Defense

Plaintiffs’ claims are barred, in whole or in part, by the business judgement Rule.

Seventh Affirmative Defense

Plaintiffs’ claims are barred, in whole or in part, because no contract has yet been breached and all actions have been taken by Mr. Ubetcha to ensure those contracts remain “in good faith”.

Eight Affirmative Defense

Plaintiffs are not entitled to recover attorneys’ fees.

Ninth Affirmative Defense

Plaintiffs are not entitled to punitive damages.

Tenth Affirmative Defense

Plaintiffs are not entitled to injunctive or other equitable relief.

COUNTERCLAIM

   Plaintiffs have alleged that Mr. Ubetcha is entered into contracts under “bad faith” and that Mr. Ubetcha stated that the Plaintiffs would not be paid per the terms of their sponsor contracts. Mr. Ubetcha establishes, by and through undersigned counsel, asserts, in the alternative, the following counterclaim:

I. INTRODUCTION

  1. Mr. Ubetcha brings a claim, in the alternative, for damages and other relief against Counterclaim Defendants for breach of contract and impeding progression.

II. JURISDICTION

  1. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over these counterclaims.
  2. The Court has personal jurisdiction over these counterclaims.
  3. The Court will appoint a Judge to here these counterclaims to which all parties will abide.

III. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

  1. During the off-season of Season one, the Counterclaim Defendants entered into contracts with Hot Potato and Dignity Delegation. Meeting the requirements of the contract the Counterclaim Defendants agreed to the terms of the end of season contract payout.
  2. By bringing suit against Mr. Ubetcha the Counterclaim Defendants have degraded the name of Hot Potato and Dignity Delegation further without seeking an arbitration or other course of resolution.
  3. Counterclaim Defendants continue to utilize the sponsor packages of Hot Potato and Dignity Delegation while at the same time suing the same entities, showing a lack of character and entering into an ethical contradiction.
  4. Counterclaim Defendants continue to utilize a sponsor service that has agreed to pay them.

IV. STATEMENT OF CLAIMS

  1. Mr. Ubetcha is asking for $50,000 from each Counterclaim Defendant to cover damages and fees.

V. TRIAL DEMAND

  1. Alternative Counterclaim Plaintiff Mr. Ubetcha hereby demands a trial on all counts so triable.

Dated: May 31, 2018

Respectfully submitted,

Vinny Winniloti
Attorney for Defendant
Mr. Chet Ubetcha

 

One thought on “Counterclaim, Ubetcha vs IRS et al.

Leave a Reply

MML

25 User(s) Online Join Server
Player Union Central
%d bloggers like this: