Quantcast

Trio says defendant refused to pay following settlement agreement

SOUTHEAST TEXAS RECORD

Friday, November 22, 2024

Trio says defendant refused to pay following settlement agreement

Stephens kelly

Three men say they have not received money owed to them following a lengthy court battle.

Rodney D. Vannerson, Enos Cabell and Tom Roberson filed a lawsuit Aug. 7 in U.S. District Court for the Houston Division of the Southern District of Texas against Vincent Paul Young Jr., Vincent Young and Delphine M. James.  In the complaint, the plaintiffs allege they originally were named as defendants in a case in which Young sued for a declaratory judgment concerning the ownership of certain trademark applications. In his original complaint, Young also accused the current plaintiffs of violating the Lanham Act, according to the current lawsuit. 

The current plaintiffs and Young reached a settlement agreement, which stated that Vannerson would assign his entire right, title and interest to Young. In turn, Young would pay the current plaintiffs, the suit states.

Following the settlement, both parties fought back and forth with one another, alleging breach of settlement agreement. At the end of the battle, the court found that Young was still supposed to pay the current plaintiffs money, the complaint says. However, he failed to do so, Vannerson, Cabell and Roberson argue.

They allege breach of trust and fiduciary duty and conversion of funds against the defendants.

In their complaint, the three plaintiffs seek an unspecified judgment and exemplary damages, plus attorneys' fees, pre- and post-judgment interest and other relief the court deems just.

Kelly D. Stephens of Stephens & Domnitz in Texas is representing the plaintiffs.

The U.S. District Court case number: 4:14-cv-2263.

This is a report on a civil lawsuit filed at the U.S. District Court. The details in this report come from an original complaint filed by a plaintiff. Please note that a complaint represents an accusation by a private individual, not the government. It is not an indication of guilt, and it represents only one side of the story.

More News