Caroline Roffman Asks Court to Dismiss Lawsuit Over Horse Sale on Grounds No Written & Signed Contract, Only With Lionshare Dressage
7 years ago StraightArrow Comments Off on Caroline Roffman Asks Court to Dismiss Lawsuit Over Horse Sale on Grounds No Written & Signed Contract, Only With Lionshare Dressage
By KENNETH J. BRADDICK
WEST PALM BEACH, Florida, Nov. 15, 2017–Caroline Roffman has filed a motion to dismiss a civil suit alleging the 2012 FEI Rising Star sold a horse for $900,000 while paying owner Alice Tarjan $300,000, primarily because there was no written and signed contract with Caroline personally but an agreement with Lionshare Dressage, a corporation.
The response to the suit filed by Alice in Palm Beach County Circuit Court asks for dismissal on the grounds that the lawsuit intertwines the complaint against Caroline of Wellington, Florida as an individual and Lionshare Dressage, LLC also in Wellington that is protected by Florida corporate law.
Caroline’s five-page response and accompanied by two other filings were made by her attorney, Alan S. Zangen of Wellington.
The court was asked to require Alice of Frenchtown, New Jersey to produce a lengthy list of documents, emails, videos, wire transmittal forms and other information involved in the sale of the horse, Faberge, as well as a complete history of the horse and other information.
Alice filed the suit at the end of September naming Caroline Roffman, 29 years old, and Lionshare Dressage, LLC both of Wellington as defendants in an alleged scheme over the Hanoverian mare that was six years old when sold in 2015. Alice competed Faberge at the 2013 U.S. four-year-old championships.
The suit alleged that Caroline informed Alice that Peter Eeckman Horses of Belgium had offered $300,000 for Faberge and would pay a $30,000 commission directly to Caroline and Lionshare. The money, according to the suit, was paid to Alice by Lionshare Dressage.
“Unbeknownst to plaintiff, Roffman actually sold Faberge to Bethany Peslar and/or Everglades Dressage LLC for $900,000,” the suit alleged. “Endel L. Ots, a former partner of Roffman’s and former manager of Lionshare, is Peslar’s trainer.”
“Roffman intentionally misrepresented to plaintiff (a) the sale price for Faberge was $300,000 and (b) the identify of Faberge’s buyer in order to illegally obtain $600,000.00 for herself and Lionshare.”
The suit seeks a jury trial of nine counts including fraud, breach of contract, unjust enrichment and violations of Florida’s Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Alice is seeking $500,000 in damages for each of eight counts.
Caroline’s response stated: “The complaint on its face alleges that both Roffman and Lionshare entered into an agreement with the plaintiff. No copy of any agreement is attached to the complaint…
“Further a copy of the sales and purchase agreement attached to the complaint… states that the commission was being paid to Lionshare, the purchase price was to be wired to Lionshare bank account and the bill of sale delivered to Lionshare to transfer title to the horse to buyer.
“Roffman was not a party to the agreement.”
The response said: “As a result of Roffman not being a party to the transaction and no agreement between the plaintiff and defendants being attached to the complaint, this count should be dismissed for failing to state a cause of action against the defendants.”
Alice had failed, the response said, to state a cause of action involving the other counts in the suit.
“Plaintiff alleges that Lionshare was deliberately set up, and used by Roffman, for an improper purpose, including but without limitation, to conduct fraud on innocent person such as plaintiff and shield Roffman from personal liability.
“However, plaintiff alleges that prior to September 14, 2015 plaintiff had engaged defendants as sales agents in the sale of two other horses without any allegation of fraud.”
Caroline Roffman is named as manager and registered agent of Lionshare Dressage, LLC, according to Florida state records.
However, courts generally, the response said, are reluctant to “pierce the corporate veil,” and would do so only in exceptional cases.