‘Sons Of Anarchy’ Creator Kurt Sutter Inks … 
R.I.P. Zalman King 
Will Studios Waste Money On Their Super Bowl Ads? 
UPDATE: Ex-HFPA President Says Transcripts Of Key Meeting … 
Branko Lustig And Daniela Cretu Launch First Born Films … 
Selma Blair To Star Opposite Charlie Sheen In FX Comedy … 
Pete Berg’s ‘Battleship’ Attacks Super … 
Jane Levy Is New Star Of ‘Evil Dead’ Remake 
Al Pacino Makes Animated Film Debut In ‘Despicable Me … 
Ellen DeGeneres-Portia De Rossi Dueling Sisters Comedy Gets … 
Hugh Grant: We’re Making ‘Bridget Jones’s … 
NBC Sends ‘Firm’ To Saturdays, Schedules New … 
Back On Top? ‘Mission: Impossible 4′ Now Tom … 
Fright Film Hit ‘Insidious’ Scares Up Sequel 
Paramount Gives TV Oscar Push To … 
UTA Signs Kate Beckinsale From WME 
UPDATE: Michael Sheen & Lizzy Caplan To Star In … 
Super Bowl Sneak: ‘The Hunger Games’ 
Why Actors Hate Agents At Pilot Season… 
‘Back To The Future’ Heading To Broadway? 
UPDATE: Viacom Expects Ad Growth Despite Nickelodeon Woes 
David Molner, a prominent Hollywood film financier who runs Screen Capital International and the Aramid Entertainment Fund has been sued in Los Angeles Superior Court by investors in the latter fund. The plaintiffs, Wimbledon Financing Master Fund, WFM Holdings and Stillwater Market Neutral Fund, are charging breach of fiduciary duty and fraud.
The plaintiffs describe themselves in the legal complaint as “non-voting investors” in Aramid Entertainment Fund Limited, a Cayman Islands mutual fund established in 2006. The suit alleges a “systematic looting and unreasonable self-dealing transactions” in a fund that has been behind such ventures as Incentive Filmed Entertainment, Sierra Pictures, and which also bankrolled Stuart Ford’s acquisition of 80% of the equity in IM Global from the troubled financier David Bergstein.
Molner was unavailable to comment and there was no other comment forthcoming from the plaintiffs.
Loading ...
it’s about time….guy has been using other people to keep attention away from his own shenanigans
no one cares. quit fucking whining. unreasonable self-dealing transactions? why don’t you sue a teenager for jacking off too much.
That was bound to happen! this fund was such a scam…
Wasn’t everyone on this site just siding with “morally pure” Molner against the “evil” Bergstein?
Truth is, the people in the know knew from the start that there was never any difference between the two.
David Molner is always lawyered up, which is the basic requirement to avoid fraud litigation. Don’t make a move without the company’s lawyer approving it.
These investors don’t have a hope in hell of winning anything.
some things even a lawyer cannot protect you from…hubris brings people down
Keyser Soze! Molner, now I get it!
Why would Molner’s $250 million fund attack Bergstein over a $90k claim, unless a cheating wife was involved. Why bother? Well, Molner was using his anti-Bergstein campaign as cover while he quietly sneaked his and Aramid assets back to the Caymans, where they are judgment-proof.
Brilliant strategy, except when you get found out to soon!
Something didn’t make sense, with David Molner and his $250 million Aramid fund making a full-time job out of spearheading an expensive legal attack on the insolvent Thinkfilm, over a claim for less than $100 thousand; it seemed out of whack (unless there was some personal blood feud going on). The court held a hearing in June to delve into details about Molner having paid $100 thousand to opposing counsel — the general counsel of Thinkfilm! – for her to give her confidential files to Molner – even more strange! Why would Molner do all of that?
This new lawsuit lays out the real story — Molner’s investors were in revolt the past half year, trying to stop him from making loans to his own entities. Molner ignored, concealed or wrote off 4 huge defaulted loans that he caused Aramid to make to himself? Sounds like an old story, told many times. The psychological profile of this Molner guy will end up as a movie – can’t wait!
I guess that’s how he afforded his wedding at the Cipriani in Venice.
-RnsW
All that is on record at the moment is a pleading — just one rather biased side of the story. Molner and Aramid will respond and then I predict this case will disappear.
Nikki…please follow up on this story. There is more to be uncovered. Molner has been lending his investors’ money to entities that he controls and when these entities don’t repay the loans, he doesn’t go after them for repayment. One of these entities pays him a kickback. He is using fund/investor money to finance his lavish lifestyle (certainly isn’t making the big bucks from the films he picks – which are all turkeys).
Follow this story please
By all means follow the story. The plaintiff vs. Molner turns out to be Joe Bianco!!!!! Bianco sold his company, Sheridan Square to…….wait for it………wait for it……….David Bergstein. Ta Da! All easily found on Google. This seems to be a ploy by Bergstein to deflect attention from his own legal troubles. But this is just an opinion, not to be treated as fact.
word on the street is that criminal charges will be filed against Molner. This is not going away soon.