United states district court
southern district of new york
amanda masters, justin klentner, case no. 02-cv-4911 carolyn fears, lorelei shellist, barbara hon. Harold h. Baer cheeseborough, and carla gross (d/b/a
sebastian cardon), on their own behalf and on complaint
behalf of a class of similarly situated persons, jury trial demanded
plaintiffs,
v.
Wilhelmina model agency, inc., a/k/a
wilhelmina artist management llc,
ford models, inc. F/k/a ford model agency, elite model management, inc., click model management, inc., next
management company, the mfme model
management company, l td, a/k/a company management, boss models, inc., and zoli management, inc.,
defendants.
Plaintiffs, on their own behalf and on behalf of a class of all those similarly situated persons described below, by their undersigned counsel Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP and Johnson & Rishwain LLP, as and for their Complaint in this action, aver as follows, with knowledge of their own actions and conduct and events occurring in their presence, and upon information and belief as to all other matters:
Nature of the action
1. This is a class action under federal and state law on behalf of present and, former professional models who are or have been under contract to Defendants, various New York modeling agencies. As set forth m detail below, Defendants are and have for several years been engaged in an unlawful combination and conspiracy to violate federal antitrust law and state law. And have each violated state law, including by
A. Conspiring to set the fees they each charge to models, and to fix other terms and conditions of the models' contracts, in violation of federal antitrust law;
B. Knowingly violating state law limiting the fees that Defendants, as employment agencies, can charge; and
C. Deliberately violating their fiduciary duties to their model through various other unlawful practices, such as earning undisclosed profits from third parties, billing models for phony expenses, making a profit from services required to be provided at cost, and imposing excessive charges and fees, as detailed below.
2. Defendants' violations of federal antitrust law and state law regulating employment agencies are legally distinct. But factually interwoven and mutually reinforcing. Thus Defendants have not only conspired to fix their fees - itself a ~ ~ violation of federal law - they have also agreed to set those fees at a level they know to be above what state law allows employment agencies to charge, which is also flatly unlawful, and they have worked together to, hide that fact from their models - to whom they owe fiduciary duties of honesty and full disclosure - through sham contracts and other dishonest tactics that have persisted for years.
3. Defendants have been able to maintain their conspiracy for a very substantial period of time because the reality of the modeling business, for almost all the men and women who seek to make a living as models, is quite different from how the profession is depicted.
Most models' careers usually do not last more than a decade, during which time they are almost completely dependent on their agencies to get them work. The models are given form contracts, which the agencies claim are "standard" and not subject to negotiation. Models who threaten to complain are told they will be blackballed. And the agencies' control over employment opportunities gives them little alternative but to acquiesce to the agencies' practices.
4. Plaintiffs therefore bring this action on their own behalf and on behalf of a class of all models now or formerly employed by Defendants since the inception of Defendants' unlawful conspiracy, which Plaintiffs are intoned and believe to have existed for at least the past several years, and which appears to date back to the 1970's with regard to Defendants Ford, Wilhelmina,
and Elite. Plaintiffs seek (i) damages under Section 1 of the Shennan Act in the form of treble damages for Defendants' price - fixing, (ii) damages under state law, (iii) return of the fees charged by Defendants in violation of state law, (iv) disgorgement of fees that were earned from other parties and which were not the
subject of an express, knowing waiver, (v) refund of various illegal charges to the models' accounts, and (vi) interest.
Dave
Orlando, Florida
0 comments