Gold admits to the $6m agreement, but but still isn't paying up.
Forget about that message on the answering machine.World Series of Poker champion Jamie Gold says he has no intention of sharing half of his $12 million winnings with a man he met during the recent poker tournament.
Bruce Crispin Leyser, described at times as a television development executive, claims Gold, a Hollywood talent agent, promised him half of his top prize in the famed tournament because of a role he played in Gold's appearance. Leyser even has a voice-mail tape of the promise.
After Gold didn't pay up, Leyser filed a lawsuit in Clark County District Court.
Last week , Gold filed a court brief weighing in with his side of the story: that the agreement was "nothing more than a promise to make a gift."
Leyser's attorney, Richard Schonfeld, said Gold's position is "absurd." That Gold admitted to the deal further affirms that Leyser is entitled to the $6 million, Schonfeld said in an interview. "We're glad they finally took a position," he said. "Even though we were extremely confident in our case, we are more confident now that we will prevail."
At issue is whether the verbal agreement is binding.
Leyser claims Gold had a contract with Internet casino Bodog.com, in which it agreed to pay Gold's $10,000 entry fee if he found celebrities to wear clothing featuring the Bodog logo during the tournament.
According to the suit, Gold asked Leyser to help him find those celebrities and in return, "share" the seat and any potential winnings. Leyser says he held up his end of the bargain by finding two actors to play in the tournament and wear the Bodog logo.
In his brief, Gold claims that Bodog paid for his seat at the tournament because of his success winning previous poker tournaments and that his contract only required that he wear the company's logo and participate in media events.
But Gold said he felt so sorry that Leyser wouldn't be playing in the tournament , since he had neither a sponsor nor the cash to buy a seat, that he agreed to share his winnings with Leyser.
Gold said that as he moved to the front in the tournament, Leyser and his wife began calling and text-messaging him "every hour" and also spread word that Gold owed Leyser half of any winnings.
On the final day of the tournament, after "incessant badgering and continuous phone calls" from Leyser, Gold left Leyser a voice mail message confirming his promise to share half of the winnings "after taxes," Gold acknowledged in his court filing.
Leyser maintains that the voice mail and other facts show an "acknowledged agreement" between the two men. But Gold argues the agreement isn't enforceable because there were no terms or conditions attached. He wants the Rio, the casino hosting the tournament, to release to him the other $6 million.
In his filing, Gold says he didn't intend to give Leyser, who he said had "serious financial problems" and was looking for a job, literally half of the winnings, but rather some money. Gold says he broke his promise because Leyser "unnecessarily" filed suit and tarnished Gold's reputation.
Leyser "acted unreasonably" and didn't take such factors into account such as taxes, Gold said. Instead of continuing good faith negotiations, (Leyser) sued and drew unfavorable media attention to the dispute, Gold said.
In August, Chief District Judge Kathy Hardcastle signed a temporary restraining order freezing the funds based on Leyser's argument that the money, in Gold's hands, might disappear before the matter is resolved. Attorneys expect her to rule before the end of the year.
Shane @ Poker.com
Posted at 10:35 PM Permalink | Talk on the Poker Forum




9 Comments:
$6 agreement?
By
Anonymous, at 4:41 AM
I'd probably try not to pay up too. Gold made a silly mistake and now he has to pay for it.
Karma, what goes around comes around. Gold will get his.
By
Anonymous, at 6:27 PM
They may be more to this story than we know , but I've always said a man is no better than his word...
By
Skinski, at 10:51 PM
i would not pay anyone anything. Your money. Do what u please.
If the guy gets half of the money, Its B.S.
By
Anonymous, at 6:45 PM
What really happened to this fiasco? Jamie Gold is a good and lucky poker player, but he screwed up by making the aggreement with his friend. Now Gold regrets the mistakes he has done. I don't know how he is going to get away from this one. Was he using his brain?
By
Fernando Spindola - Poker Information, at 9:43 AM
This is a bogus case, number one he should have not made a verbal agreement, and even in real estate anyone knows that by law, nothing is binding until it is into contract with that persons signture, quite frankly this is a non binding contract cause it is verbal, how the judge froze the funds is beyond me, must not be U.S law, if this was the case you would not be able to tell your friend over the phone, hey I will sell you my million dollar home for 2 bucks, then the next day your in court having your home taken away for 2 dollars, its the law. Rule of thumb, no contract is binding unless its in black and white.
By
Anonymous, at 9:05 PM
Verbal contracts are actually enforceable, especially if he left a voicemail message!
By
Poker.com, at 9:30 PM
The Statute of Frauds requires any agreement over $500 to be in writing. Any lawyer (which I am) knows that. However, there is also a doctrine under the law called unjust enrichment, and if it can be shown Gold was unjustly enriched by his friend's actions (getting the actors to wear the logo-ed clothing, and thereby having the company cover Gold's entry fee), the court could award a fair amount for the friend's help. I don't think it's going to be $6 million dollars though.
By
Dr. Cecelia J.D., at 10:27 PM
"At issue is whether the verbal agreement is binding."
Incorrect. The issue is whether there is a contract or just a promise of a gift. Your headline makes the same mistake.
Also "After Gold didn't pay up, Leyser filed a lawsuit in Clark County District Court."
You've got that reversed. After Leyser sued Gold decided not to give him any money.
By
Anonymous, at 3:46 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home