Matthew Hetland v. Travis Beauchesne et al

Filing 125

AMENDED JUDGMENT ON GENERAL VERDICT by Judge David O. Carter. THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Plaintiff Matthew Hetland shall be deemed to be the prevailing party as a matter of law and shall recover $731,465.80 in damages as against the Defendants Travis Beauchesne, iClick Promotions, LLC and Playa Negra Enterprises. 105 See Judgment for more information. (twdb)

NOTE: CHANGES HAVE BEEN
MADE TO THIS DOCUMENT
1
2
3
4
5
6

ROME & ASSOCIATES, A.P.C.
Eugene Rome (SBN 232780)
[e-mail]
Jerl B. Leutz (SBN 253229)
[e-mail]
2029 Century Park East, Suite 1040
Los Angeles, California 90067
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
MATTHEW HETLAND

7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

CASE NO.: 8:13-CV-00936-DOC-AN

MATTHEW HETLAND, an individual,

12

vs.

Plaintiff,

13
14
15
16
17

TRAVIS BEAUCHESNE, an individual,
iCLICK PROMOTIONS, LLC, a Utah
limited liability company, PLAYA
NEGRA ENTERPRISES, a Costa Rica
entity of unknown origin, and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive,

AMENDED JUDGMENT ON
GENERAL VERDICT

Defendants.

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
AMENDED JUDGMENT ON GENERAL VERDICT

1
2

This action came on regularly for trial on February 5, 2015, in Department 9D

3

of the United States District Court, the Honorable David O. Carter Judge presiding.

4

Plaintiff Matthew Hetland (“Plaintiff”) was represented by Eugene Rome and Jerl B.

5

Leutz of Rome & Associates, and Defendants Travis Beauchesne, iClick

6

Promotions, LLC and Play Negra Enterprises (“Defendants”) were represented by

7

Richard Armstrong of Kirton McConkie.

8

A jury of 8 persons was impaneled and sworn. Witnesses were sworn and

9

testified. After hearing the evidence and arguments of counsel, and after the jury

10

was instructed by the Court, the claims were submitted to the jury with instructions

11

to return a general verdict. The jury deliberated and, on February 5, 2015, returned

12

its verdict by way of answers to the questions propounded to it as follows:

13

Breach of Partnership Agreement (Breach of Contract)

14

1. On plaintiff Matthew Hetland’s claim for breach of partnership agreement,

15
16

X

We find in favor of Hetland and against Beauchesne.

______We find in favor of Beauchesne and against Hetland.

17
18

Breach of Fiduciary Duty

19

2. On Plaintiff Matthew Hetland’s claim for breach of fiduciary duty,

20
21

X

We find in favor of Hetland and against Beauchesne.

______We find in favor of Beauchesne and against Hetland.

22
23

Conversion

24

3. On Plaintiff Matthew Hetland’s claim for conversion against Defendant

25
26
27

Travis Beauchesne,
X

We find in favor of Hetland and against Beauchesne.

______We find in favor of Beauchesne and against Hetland.

28
2
AMENDED JUDGMENT ON GENERAL VERDICT

1

4. On Plaintiff Matthew Hetland’s claim for conversion against Defendant

2

iClick Promotions, LLC,

3

X

4

We find in favor of Hetland and against iClick Promotions, LLC.

______We find in favor of iClick Promotions, LLC and against Hetland.

5
6

5. On Plaintiff Matthew Hetland’s claim for conversion against Defendant

7

Playa Negra Enterprises,

8

X

9

We find in favor of Hetland and against Playa Negra Enterprises.

______We find in favor of Playa Negra Enterprises and against Hetland.

10
11

Fraud

12

6. On Plaintiff Matthew Hetland’s claim for fraud by intentional

13
14
15

misrepresentation,
X

We find in favor of Hetland and against Beauchesne.

_______We find in favor of Beauchesne and against Hetland.

16
17
18
19

7. On Plaintiff Matthew Hetland’s claim for fraud by concealment,
X

We find in favor of Hetland and against Beauchesne.

______We find in favor of Beauchesne and against Hetland.

20
21

Money Had and Received

22

8. On Plaintiff Matthew Hetland’s claim for money had and received against

23
24
25

Defendant Travis Beauchesne,
X

We find in favor of Hetland and against Beauchesne.

______We find in favor of Beauchesne and against Hetland.

26
27
28
3
AMENDED JUDGMENT ON GENERAL VERDICT

1
2
3
4

9. On Plaintiff Matthew Hetland’s claim for money had and received against
Defendant iClick Promotions, LLC,
X

We find in favor of Hetland and against iClick Promotions, LLC.

______We find in favor of iClick Promotions, LLC and against Hetland.

5
6
7
8
9

10. On Plaintiff Matthew Hetland’s claim for money had and received against
Defendant Playa Negra Enterprises,
X

We find in favor of Hetland and against Playa Negra Enterprises.

______We find in favor of Playa Negra Enterprises and against Hetland.

10
11
12

THEREAFTER, as a result of the findings in Questions 1-10, the jury
awarded damages and punitive damages as follows:

13
14

Damages:

15

11. We award Plaintiff Matthew Hetland the following damages:

16

$731,465.80

17
18

Punitive Damages:

19

12. Did Defendant Travis Beauchesne engage in the conduct with malice,

20
21

oppression, or fraud?
X

Yes

_________No

22

If your answer to Question 12 is yes, then proceed to Question 13.

23

If your answer to Question 12 is no, stop here, answer no further questions,

24

and have the presiding juror sign and date this form.

25
26
27
28
4
AMENDED JUDGMENT ON GENERAL VERDICT

1
2
3

13. What amount of punitive damages, if any, do you award Plaintiff Matthew
Hetland?
$1,450,000.00

4
5

Dated: February 5, 2015

/s/_______________
FOREPERSON

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND
DECREED that Plaintiff Matthew Hetland shall be deemed to be the prevailing
party as a matter of law and shall recover $731,465.80 in damages as against the
Defendants Travis Beauchesne, iClick Promotions, LLC and Playa Negra
Enterprises. Further, Plaintiff Matthew Hetland shall recover punitive damages in
the amount of $1,450,000.00 as against Defendant Travis Beauchesne.
Furthermore, Plaintiff Matthew Hetland shall recover prejudgment interest in
the amount of $210,420.00 against Defendants Travis Beauchesne, iClick
Promotions, LLC and Playa Negra Enterprises. Furthermore, Plaintiff Matthew
Hetland shall recover costs in an amount to be determined by the Clerk of the
Court according to the procedure prescribed in Local Rule 54.
Post-judgment interest will accrue as set forth in 28 U.S.C. §1961, all such
post-judgment interest to run until the Judgment against Defendants Travis
Beauchesne, iClick Promotions, LLC and Playa Negra Enterprises is paid in full.

21
22
23

Dated: March 18, 2015

____________________________________

24

Hon. David O. Carter
United States District Court Judge

25
26
27
28
5

AMENDED JUDGMENT ON GENERAL VERDICT