Courtesy another poster.....
I caught wind both here and from other investors about a Zapata filing against Bob directly in NY State Court . It took some digging but I think I have a way for all to access on the web. I apologize for the hoops to jump through to access but I don't feel comfortable publishing all the text here. I will paste an excerpt below just to give everyone some context of what this is all about. The only comment I will say is it stunned me for a minute but at the same time did not seem far from the reality I imagined had occurred. I suppose it's hard to get so incredibly burned (as an investor in this case) and then read about the details ex-post facto and not feel somewhat nauseated and angry. Here is how you access the docs:
iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/Login
Next, you would click on "search as guest"
Then, you would enter in the index number - "154276/2017" into the case number field and hit search.
It will bring up the result list . Click on the case recieved link and you will see links for both the summons and the filing.
At that point you can grab your own PDF of the filing
Here is the heart of the document to get your head somewhat wrapped around this:
Defendant Liscouski’s Breaches of Fiduciary Duties and Tortious Interference With Contract
16. Throughout the period of time in which Plaintiff Zapata and Implant Sciences
were negotiating the contemplated Acquisition, Defendant Liscouski breached fiduciary
obligations owed to Implant Sciences and its shareholders, by seeking to engage in various
forms of secret business dealings from which Defendant Liscouski sought to make millions of
dollars of personal profit at the expense of Implant Sciences and its shareholders.
17. By way of example, Defendant Liscouski asked for a Two Million Dollar
($2,000,000) payment to be made to him personally in connection with the closing of an
Acquisition.
18. By way of further example, Defendant Liscouski asked Plaintiff Zapata to enter
into an agreement with a new company which Defendant Liscouski would personally own
independent of Implant Sciences, from which Defendant Liscouski could personally profit from
sale and/or licensing of Plaintiff Zapata’s technologies independent of Implant Sciences.
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 05/09/2017 08:52 AM INDEX NO. 154276/2017
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 2 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 05/09/2017
19. By way of further example, Defendant Liscouski repeatedly sought equity and/or
other forms of compensation commitments from Zapata.
20. When Defendant Liscouski recognized that the Acquisition would not occur
because Implant Sciences was not ready, able and/or willing to consummate the transaction,
Defendant Liscouski sought to be employed directly by Zapata as a means of receiving
compensation independent of Implant Sciences.
21. Defendant Liscouski thereafter independently concluded that Zapata did not
intend to extend him an offer of employment. Defendant Liscouski retaliated against Plaintiff
Zapata by causing Implant Sciences to materially breach the Agreement, including by failing to
pay Plaintiff Zapata the hundreds of thousands of dollars owed to Plaintiff Zapata under the
Reimbursement Provision and the Break-Up Fee Provision.
AI
