I'm sure you've heard that for a hot minute Vicki Gunvalson's business partner, Robert Williamson III, was suing her alleging that she attempted to defraud him of partial ownership of Vicki's Vodka.
It turned out the Real Housewives of Orange County star "gifted" Brooks Ayers 16.67% of her stake of the company and then Brooks proceeded to re-sell that percentage to Robert for $50,000 right out from under Vicki's surgically altered nose!
Long story short, Vicki and Robert worked out their issue, he appeared on last week's episode of RHOC (convenient timing, no?) and dropped the suit against Vicki. But he is still suing Brooks! For what, I don't know? Maybe Brooks can sell him a pair of slightly used veneers. Or some ocean front property in Mississippi.
Brooks is responding to Robert's allegations and finding that Hallmark cards and petty threats don't always make the bad guys go away, but he wants the suit dismissed anyway. He also admits that sure he sold his shares, but it was to help his child Your Honor!
CLICK THE CONTINUE READING BUTTON FOR MORE!
In response to the suit (information obtained by RadarOnline), Brooks told a Nevada judge, "Gunvalson gave him a membership interest in VV LLC to compensate him for the services he had provided.”
Vicki announced on last Monday's episode that there wouldn't be a Vicki's Vodka were it not for Brooks who put the entire thing together, including introducing Vicki to Robert. I personally think that's BS and she was just trying to make him look better to viewers, but whatever!
Brooks admitted that he re-sold his shares to Robert for $50,000 because "he needed money for child support and an IRS payment.” A statement Robert echoed in his initial lawsuit against Brooks. Robert said Brooks told him if he didn't obtain the money immediately he would be jailed.
Imagine Robert's surprise when later Vicki and Brooks demanded the company be returned to a 50-50 partnership. “Upon information and belief, it was the intent of Brooks and Vicki to lure RW III into the purchase of Brooks interest without the good faith intent to move forward with the company and make it successful,” Robert's suit alleged.
Brooks confirmed to a judge that Vicki demanded the company be returned to a 50-50 partnership (Vicki also signed an affidavit attesting to that), but Brooks denied any bad faith intentions.
"He denied that he and Vicki had used this purchase as a way to obtain additional money from Williamson and rejected that Vicki had offered a 'total lack of cooperation or effort' to promote the organization and make it successful."
Brooks attests that Robert “suffered no legally cognizable damages” of his actions or Vicki's and therefore he wants the suit dismissed.
[Photo Credit: BravoTV.com]
TELL US – DID BROOKS TRY TO SWINDLE ROBERT WITH A BAD FAITH DEALING? SHOULD THE SUIT BE DISMISSED?
