Gina Mussi-Nelson v. Richard Payne, as Special Administrator of the Estate of Michael Wallace Caplehorn
Published: Mar. 26, 2016 | Result Date: Jul. 21, 2015 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |Case number: 2:15-cv-00714-DSF-JEM Settlement – $500,000
Court
USDC Central
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Donald N. Woldman
(Law Offices of Donald N Woldman)
Defendant
Steven K. Yoda
(Walzer Melcher LLP)
Peter M. Walzer
(Walzer Melcher LLP)
Facts
In 2010, plaintiff Gina Mussi-Nelson, 47, met Michael Wallace Caplehorn, 61, a wealthy Australian businessman. At the time of his death, he had been living with plaintiff, his girlfriend of approximately three years. Plaintiff filed suit against Richard Payne, claiming Caplelhorn had promised to provide for her and her daughter.
Contentions
PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The two had met during one of Caplehorn's trips to California and after 6 months of dating, Caplehorn left Australia to live in Los Angeles. Plaintiff and Caplehorn moved in together, and in 2011, Caplehorn purchased a house in the Pacific Palisades in which the couple resided along with plaintiff's daughter from a previous marriage.
In January 2014, Caplehorn passed away. Plaintiff claimed that defendant Richard Payne had told her that some provision would be made for her from Caplehorn's estate, but none was made. Plaintiff contended that, during her relationship with decedent, he promised to give her full ownership of his $3.5 million house in Pacific Palisades and to support her forever. Plaintiff sought full ownership of decedent's Pacific Palisades property plus $3 million in palimony.
DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendant contended that there was no contract, express or implied, and that plaintiff's purported contract with decedent was illegal to the extent it was a contract for sex. Defendant alleged that plaintiff and decedent met through plaintiff's online sexual-fetish profile and that plaintiff herself admitted serving other "masters" around the world.
Defendant claimed that explicit photographs and e-mails exchanged between plaintiff and decedent, as well as large sums of money, allegedly confirmed the basis of their relationship. To the extent, plaintiff and decedent's alleged contract was not illegal, it was fatally indefinite. During the litigation, defendant alleged that plaintiff had spoliated relevant evidence. Among other things, defendant asserted that plaintiff deleted her online sexual-fetish profile, accessed, and deleted e-mails from decedent's personal e-mail account after his death.
Result
The case settled for $500,000.
Other Information
FILING DATE: Jan. 2, 2015.
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390