MR FAKE HANDSHAKE LAWSUITS WOWSA!
The following is summary of threatened, pending, asserted or un-asserted claims against us or any of its wholly owned subsidiaries.
1. Regulatory matter before the Corporation Commission of Oklahoma: Oklahoma Corporation Commission v True Wireless, Inc., Cause No. PUD 202000038
On February 14, 2020, the Oklahoma Corporation Commission filed a complaint against True Wireless, Inc., related to a compliance dispute. The Oklahoma Corporation Commission has taken issue with some subscribers enrolled outside the designated service area. Local counsel is preparing filing of exceptions and Motion for Hearing En Banc in before Oklahoma Corporation Commission. The Oklahoma Corporation Commission is seeking a substantial fine in excess of $100,000.00 and revocation of its license in Oklahoma.
2. Global Reconnect, LLC and Terracom, Inc. v. Jonathan Coffman, Jerry Carroll, True Wireless, & Surge Holdings: In the Chancery Court of Hamilton County, TN, Docket # 20-00058, filed on Jan 21, 2020.
On January 21, 2020, a complaint was filed related to a noncompetition dispute. Terracom believes Mr. Coffman and Mr. Carroll are in violation of their non-compete agreements by working for us and True Wireless, Inc. Oklahoma and Tennessee state law does not recognize non-compete agreements and are not usually enforced in the state courts of these states, as such we believe True Wireless has a strong case against Terracom. The matter is entering the discovery process. Both Mr. Carroll and Mr. Coffman are no longer working for True Wireless in sales. Mr. Carroll is off the payroll and Mr. Coffman works for SurgePays, Inc., but not in wireless sales. The complaint requests general damages plus fees and costs for tortious interference with a business relationship in their prayer for relief. They have made no written demand for damages at this point in time. This matter is simply an anti-competitive attempt by Terracom to cause distress to True Wireless.
3. Juno Financial v. AATAC and Surge Holdings Inc. AND Surge Holdings Inc. v. AATAC; Circuit Court of Hillsborough County, Florida, Case # 20-CA-2712 DIV A:
On March 23, 2020, a complaint was filed related to a breach of contract dispute. The complaint was brought by a factoring company regarding Account Stated and Open Account claims against us. We have filed a cross-complaint against defendant AATAC for Breach of Contract, Account Stated, Open Account and Common Law Indemnity. The matter is currently in discovery. Juno Financial, a factoring company, is seeking in excess of $1,700,000.00. Surge never received any goods in this matter and has never owned or possessed the goods in this matter.
4. ALTCORP TRADING, LLC, a Costa Rica limited liability company; et al, Plaintiffs, vs. Surge Holdings, Inc., a Nevada corporation; VSTOCK Ttransfer, LLC, a California limited liability company, et al; District Court Clark County, Nevada; Case No.: A-20-823039-B:
In a settlement agreement signed on January 1, 2021 which became fully effective upon the court entering an order dismissing the case on January 19, 2021, Surge reached a settlement on all claims first asserted by plaintiffs AltCorp Trading, LLC and Stanley Hills, LLC in a case filed in Nevada state court in October 2020. On March 4, 2021, the plaintiffs filed a motion to enforce the settlement agreement (“Motion to Enforce”) in this action, seeking payment of a liquidated damages amount that Surge disputes and deny is due. Surge timely opposed this motion on March 18, 2021. The court heard the Motion to Enforce on April 12, 2021, and deferred ruling on the motion, instead ordering the parties to conduct supplemental briefing before a continued hearing on May 13, 2021. Surge timely filed its supplemental opposition as ordered by the court on April 23, 2020. At the hearing on the Motion to Enforce, the court concluded that a future hearing will be scheduled to consider the issues presented. At this time, such hearing has not been scheduled.
39
5. SurgePays, Inc., formerly named as Surge Holdings, Inc., a Nevada corporation, Plaintiff, vs. Glen Eagles Acquisition LP, a Delaware limited partnership, Defendant; District Court Clark County, Nevada; Case No.: A-21-831204-B:
On March 4, 2021, Glen Eagles Acquisition LP (“Glen Eagles”) demanded payment of either $1,000,000 cash or $2,500,000 worth of Surge’s common stock based on false allegations of impropriety. In sum, Glen Eagles contended that Surge had diluted its shares and denied Glen Eagles the benefit of its June, 2020 stock exchange transaction with Surge. At the time of Glen Eagles’ demand to Surge, however, Surge’s stock price was comparable to and even greater than its price at the time of the June 2020 exchange transaction. On March 16, 2021, Surge filed suit against Glen Eagles, seeking declaratory relief and alleging Glen Eagles breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing inherent in the June, 2020 exchange agreement by demanding additional payment. On April 19, 2021, Glen Eagles filed an answer and a counterclaim against Surge and its Chief Executive Officer, Brian Cox, alleging claims for declaratory relief, breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, unjust enrichment, fraudulent concealment, and seeking the appointment of a receiver. A scheduling order from the court is forthcoming, with tentative dates for a calendar call scheduled for June 2, 2021 and a bench trial scheduled for June 20, 2021.
