Harvey Weinstein says he was duped into guaranteeing $45M loan, sues brother and other movie execs
Jailed and disgraced movie mogul Harvey Weinstein alleges in a new lawsuit that his brother, Bob Weinstein, and other executives at their now-defunct film company duped him into guaranteeing a $45 million loan in 2016, but diverted funds for their own personal use while setting the stage for his downfall.
Harvey Weinstein, 72, filed the claims Thursday in a long-running civil case in New York City involving a lender accusing him of defaulting on the loan. He is currently detained while awaiting a retrial on sex crimes charges in New York.
'Harvey Weinstein was deceived by those closest to him, and secured a $45 million dollar loan under the pretense of saving The Weinstein Company,' Imran Ansari, Harvey Weinstein's lawyer, said in a statement. 'While Harvey personally guaranteed the loan, others within The Weinstein Company enriched themselves and strategically undermined him, leaving him 'holding the bag' of debt while 'lining their pockets' when the company was in crisis.'
Ansari alleged Bob Weinstein and others at The Weinstein Co. were in on a plot to position Harvey Weinstein for a downfall in an attempt to seize control of the company, which went bankrupt in 2018 as the sexual misconduct scandal surrounding Harvey Weinstein exploded.
An attorney for Bob Weinstein, Brian Kohn, replied with a brief statement Friday saying, 'Harvey's allegations are entirely without merit,' in an email to The Associated Press.
Former Weinstein Co. chief operating officer David Glasser, now chief executive of 101 Studios, known for its production of Paramount's popular series 'Yellowstone,' is also named in Harvey Weinstein's lawsuit. He did not immediately return a phone message left at his office Friday.
AI International Holdings loaned the money to two affiliates of The Weinstein Co. and Harvey Weinstein, and later sued when it said they defaulted.
Harvey Weinstein alleges that his brother, Glasser and others duped him into guaranteeing the $45 million loan by saying the money would help the financially struggling company. Instead, his lawsuit says, they diverted millions of dollars from the company for improper purposes, leaving it short on cash and Harvey Weinstein liable for repaying the loan.
'As a direct result of these actions, the Companies were drained of, at the very least, $12 million in cash that should have been allocated to repay the Loan owed to AI International,' the lawsuit says. 'This mismanagement left the Companies unable to satisfy their financial obligations, resulting in insolvency and placing Weinstein at substantial personal financial risk as the guarantor of the Loan.'
The lawsuit, filed in the state Supreme Court in Manhattan, says Weinstein was made to suffer 'severe and outrageous financial and reputational harm.'
It also makes several allegations of financial misconduct against Bob Weinstein, Glasser and others.
It accuses Bob Weinstein of withdrawing at least $6 million from company accounts under false pretenses, to give himself priority over creditors including AI International.
The lawsuit alleges Glasser approved and received $5 million in excessive bonuses and unauthorized financial transactions, and used company funds to pay his father $1 million despite no legitimate business reason.
AI International Holdings sued Harvey Weinstein and the two affiliates of The Weinstein Co. in late 2017. The lawsuit said they defaulted on the loan after AI International had ordered the entire balance to be paid immediately because Harvey Weinstein had been dismissed as co-chairman amid the sexual misconduct allegations.
According to Harvey Weinstein, Bob Weinstein and Glasser settled their liability for the loan with AI International for about $15 million due to 'bad faith negotiations,' leaving Harvey Weinstein responsible for the remaining $30 million plus interest.
Harvey Weinstein's lawsuit seeks to shield him from any financial liability for the loan, as well as punitive damages for alleged fraud and financial misconduct and his legal fees.
Bob Weinstein recently asked the judge to reject subpoenas for documents and a deposition issued by Harvey Weinstein's lawyer.
Harvey Weinstein, who also co-founded the film company Miramax, was once one of the most powerful people in Hollywood, having produced films such as 'Pulp Fiction' and 'The Crying Game.'
In 2017, he became the most prominent villain of the #MeToo movement, which erupted when women began going public with accounts of his behavior.
He has long maintained that any sexual activity was consensual.
Harvey Weinstein is being retried on charges that he forcibly performed oral sex on a movie and TV production assistant in 2006 and raped an aspiring actor in 2013. Another charge filed in September alleges he forced oral sex on a different woman at a Manhattan hotel in 2006.
His 2020 conviction and 23-year prison sentence were overturned last year, as an appeals court found the trial judge unfairly allowed testimony against Weinstein based on allegations that weren't part of the case.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
8 hours ago
- BBC News
Underhanded Shopping Tactics
"Dark Patterns" - What Are They?Which?, externalWebsites and apps spend millions working out how to present choices to consumers in order to impact their decision-making. Through the use of design features such as colours, placement of options, defaults and information provided at certain moments in certain ways, they can influence consumers to take certain actions, for example to buy something, spend more than they intended or give their data this can be to the benefit of consumers, for example by helping them to quickly find a product they want. However, these design features can also be used to manipulate consumers into actions they don't necessarily want to take - known as "dark patterns".Dark patterns manipulate consumers into doing things that they didn't mean to do or into making a choice which favours the website or app rather than the consumer. They work on a subconscious level, exploiting consumers' cognitive vulnerabilities such as biases and limited of "Dark Patterns"1. Activity MessagesActivity messages are messages about other consumers' actions. It creates a sense of scarcity, and can be designed to pressure consumers into believing they must act quickly to secure a product. It also creates a sense of fear of missing sold!""User123 bought 5hr ago""50 sold in the last hour"2. Low Stock MessagesLow stock messages refer to when consumers are informed about the limited quantity of a product. It creates a sense of scarcity, and is designed to pressure consumers into believing they must act quickly to secure a 5 items left""Stock is running low""Limited stock"3. Countdown TimersCountdown timers and limited time messages may contain incorrect visual information about an opportunity, usually a discount, which will end soon. It can also be defined as fake urgency, creating a sense of time pressure, compelling consumers to make a quicker sale""Special deals just for you""Hurry! This item is now £0.50 cheaper"4. Confirm ShamingConfirm shaming is a type of design or wording that creates the illusion of being dishonest or stupid for the consumer. It is also described as emotionally manipulating consumers by making them feel guilt or are eligible for a discount! Are you sure you want to leave?""Don't miss out on this offer! Would you like to continue shopping?"5. NaggingNagging is a form of design requesting consumers repeatedly and constantly to do something. It is when an app or website interrupts the consumer with a request, taking the consumer's time and attention, or sending many undesired notifications via pop-ups and flash To ReportYou can report any misleading adverts that use "dark patterns" to the Advertising Standards Authority by clicking here., externalYou can also report to Trading Standards, via their advice partners:England and Wales (Citizens Advice, external)Scotland (Citizens Advice Scotland, external)Northern Ireland (Consumerline, external)
Telegraph
8 hours ago
- Telegraph
How ‘12 Angry Men' caused Weinstein mistrial
All eyes may have been on Harvey Weinstein as he awaited his fate on the 13th floor of Manhattan criminal court but it was even tenser behind the scenes. The disgraced movie mogul, who was found guilty of one count of sexual assault on Wednesday but cleared of a second, had an outstanding rape charge collapse on Thursday as tensions in his jury reached breaking point. There had been rumblings of discontent: reports of shouting, bullying – one juror is even said to have challenged another to a physical fight. Judge Curtis Farber tried in vain to keep proceedings on track, insisting these were nothing more than the 'normal tensions' which occur during the course of a trial, particularly one as high-profile as this. Nobody can be quite sure what happened behind the closed doors of the jury room, except for the 12 members of the jury. But on Thursday, the foreman headed into court and refused to return to the deliberations. For Weinstein, a fallen Hollywood titan, the drama could have challenged any of the hundreds of films he produced before he was toppled by the MeToo scandal. Addressing the foreman's concerns, Arthur Aidala, acting for Weinstein, claimed he had never heard of a case where a 'grown man who was in good physical shape' was 'so intimidated' that he point-blank refused to go back to the jury room, calling it evidence of 'gross juror misconduct'. The first signs that something was amiss came on Friday, when one of the 12 asked to be removed from the case, aggrieved that a fellow juror was being treated in an 'unfair and unjust' way by others. 'Playground stuff' was happening, with a member of the jury being shunned and spoken about behind their back, he said. Judge Farber, rejecting the defence's request for a mistrial, said: 'This is nothing other than normal tensions during heated deliberations.' Noting the juror who made the request was the youngest of the group, he suggested his age 'makes him uncomfortable with conflict'. 'Jurors attacking each other' When proceedings resumed on Monday, the foreman raised concerns that his peers were aggressively pushing others to change their mind, and straying beyond the specifics of Weinstein's charges. 'I feel like they are attacking, talking together, fighting together. I don't like it,' he said, according to a transcript of his conversation with Judge Faber and legal teams. From there the tensions steadily ramped up, with the disgraced producer addressing the court on Wednesday after a fourth complaint from a juror, pleading: 'This is not right for me… this is my life that's on the line.' The same day, Judge Farber told the court there had been 'some fighting in the jury room' and that at least one juror told another: 'I'll meet you outside one day.' 'It's 12 people who don't know each other and are randomly thrown together, and there are so many variables,' Sabrina Shroff, a veteran New York defence lawyer, told The Telegraph. 'Race is a variable, sexuality is a variable, class is a variable. So you don't really know which one of these things is at play when they're deliberating.' Lone holdouts could often end up feeling 'bullied' by their peers, she said – particularly in a high-profile trial, which breeds suspicions they have one eye on a TV or book deal afterwards. For now, the source of that conflict remains a matter of speculation, but John C Coffee, a professor at Columbia Law School, suggests it could stem from the fact that Weinstein was a major figure felled by the MeToo movement. 'This case falls on one of the leading fault lines in our society,' Prof Coffee said, arguing that society had shifted rightwards since Weinstein was first toppled from his Hollywood perch in 2017. 'Seeing this backsliding may enrage some women, or men who share a feminist view. Both sides may be trodding on the other's sensitivities' in the 'packed-in, sweaty tension' of the jury room, he continued. Bill Cosby, who was convicted of sexual assault before the decision was overturned in 2021, was another MeToo casualty. The first attempt to secure his conviction in 2017 ultimately fell apart when the jury failed to reach a consensus, amid fractious scenes that threatened to spill over into violence. According to ABC News, five sheriff's deputies were stationed outside the door of the jury room, and repeatedly barged in during arguments because they feared a brawl was taking place. One male juror on the case, which was held in Pennsylvania, is said to have become so enraged that he punched a wall. 'I think he broke his pinky knuckle,' an juror who served alongside him said. 'If we kept going, there was definitely going to be a fight.' The tensions were reportedly exacerbated by the fact that jurors were crammed into a room so small they could not stretch their legs – a situation so frustrating that some would spontaneously burst into tears. New York, where the Weinstein case was heard, works hard to keep its jurors fed, watered and content to limit disruptions, according to Ms Shroff. 'They get a snack, an 11am break and a 3pm break, and the court will send cookies or something like that,' she revealed. 'And if they don't, the jurors will send a note to the court saying that last week, yesterday, 'we didn't get cookies'.' After throwing out Weinstein's rape charge, Judge Farber said most of the jurors had denied they were riven by bullying and fighting. 'They all thought they were involved in a normal discourse, and they don't understand why the [foreman] bowed out,' he said. In the end, the jury seems to have been so hopelessly at odds that they could not even agree on how divided they were.
Reuters
15 hours ago
- Reuters
AI in the Supply Chain Practical Law The Journal
AI has rapidly emerged as a widely used technology in law and business, including in the supply chain industry. Its ability to quickly process and analyze vast amounts of diverse data (referred to as big data) has made AI a valuable resource for companies and transformed how they engage with their suppliers. At a time when supply chains continue to be volatile and complex, AI is increasingly being integrated by supply chain participants to: Enhance efficiency. Reduce costs. Improve decision-making. This article examines the most common use cases of AI in the supply chain, giving examples of how companies and providers are integrating this diverse and rapidly improving technology into their operations (for more on the supply chain and its participants, see Supply Chain: Overview on Practical Law). This article also analyzes how attorneys supporting the supply chain function can use GenAI and other solutions in their practice. (For a collection of resources to assist counsel on AI and emerging legal issues and regulations across various practice areas, see AI Toolkit (US) on Practical Law; for more on key AI and machine learning concepts, see AI and Machine Learning: Overview on Practical Law.) Use of AI in the Supply Chain Companies continue to integrate AI technologies into all facets of the supply chain. The emergence of agentic AI systems, which are capable of operating more autonomously than traditional AI solutions, will continue to drive efficiencies and enable more sophisticated automation in supply chain management.
