My Fashion Life » Posh set to sue Denim label
Home » Features

Posh set to sue Denim label

Posted by Michele Obi on Monday, 11 December 200623 Comments

Victoria Beckham to sue Rock and Republic ? [m&c]

Tags: , ,
Related posts

Michele Obi is the publisher and founder of My Fashion Life. In between editing, freelancing and spending most of her time on the internet, she also finds time to shop (too much) and obsess over shoes. She loves sushi and counts Matthew Williamson, John Galliano, Valentino and Hussein Chalayan as her favourite designers. Her biggest regret - never seeing Prince in concert!
| All posts by Michele Obi

23 Comments »

  • Jessica said:
    Interesting, Victoria Beckham isnt the only one having problems with Rock & Republic. This suit between photographer Markus Klinko and Rock & Republic is even in the New York post at http://www.nypost.com/seven/01262007/news/nationalnews/fashion_passion_sextortion_nationalnews_dareh_gregorian_and_bill_hoffmann.htm and
    http://www.nypost.com/seven/01272007/news/regionalnews/4_way_triangle_regionalnews_dareh_gregorian.htm

    Theres an interview Michael Ball did about working with Markus, and it was pretty nice. Its on youtube at http://youtube.com/watch?v=2bsXaWdhHC8

    Check out this lawsuit, what do you guys think about this?:

    SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
    COUNTY OF NEW YORK
    ——————————————————————–X
    MARKUS KLINKO and MARKUS KLINKO
    Index No.
    PHOTOGRAPHY, INC., d/b/a MARKUS KLINKO & INDRANI PHOTOGRAPHY,
    V
    ERIFIED COMPLAINT
    Plaintiff,

    -against-

    ROCK & REPUBLIC ENTERPRISES, INC., d/b/a ROCK & REPUBLIC JEANS and
    MICHAEL BALL, individually,

    Defendants.
    ———————————————————————X
    Plaintiffs MARKUS KLINKO and MARKUS KLINKO PHOTOGRAPHY, INC.,
    d/b/a MARKUS KLINKO & INDRANI PHOTOGRAPHY, by and through their
    attorneys,
    MELTZER LoPRESTI, LLP, as and for their complaint against Defendants
    ROCK &
    REPUBLIC ENTERPRISES, INC., d/b/a ROCK & REPUBLIC JEANS and MICHAEL
    BALL, allege as follows:

    NATURE OF ACTION

    1. This action responds to a pattern of threats and extortion
    perpetrated by defendant
    Michael Ball (ìBallî), the CEO, founder and head designer for
    defendant Rock & Republic
    Enterprises, Inc. (ìRock & Republicî), a manufacturer of fashionable
    denim jeans under the
    brand name ìRock & Republicî.
    2. Fueled by jealousies over an ex-fiancÈ that abandoned Ball and who
    subsequently
    entered into a long term romantic relationship with plaintiff Markus
    Klinko (ìKlinkoî), and
    seeking to protect himself from potentially damaging information
    regarding his past, Ball
    embarked on a crusade to intimidate Klinko personally and
    professionally. Upon obtaining
    possession of intimate e-mails and sexually explicit photos exchanged
    by Klinko and Ballís exfiancÈ,
    Ball proceeded to threaten Klinko to ìwalk awayî from his ex-lover
    and any monies
    owed to plaintiffs, because if he didnít, Ball would use his ìpower
    and influenceî in the fashion
    industry, as well as the photos and e-mails, to publicly embarrass
    and ruin Klinko personally and
    professionally. Ballís threat: ìyou donít want to fuck with meî.
    3. In December 2006, Klinko, together with his business partner
    Indrani Pal-
    Chaudhuri (ìIndraniî) and their studio, Markus Klinko & Indrani
    Photography (ìMKIPî), had
    originally been hired by defendant Rock & Republic to shoot an
    international advertising
    campaign for their brand.
    4. Klinko, a highly successful, internationally acclaimed, fashion/
    celebrity
    photographer who has become well known for his work with A-list
    actors, musicians and models
    in the entertainment industry such as Jennifer Lopez, Britney Spears,
    Mariah Carey, Janet
    Jackson, Beyonce, Lindsay Lohan and David Bowie, among many others,
    as well as for his work
    in major advertising campaigns and fashion magazines, was introduced
    to Ball by Ballís exfiancÈ
    while she was in a romantic relationship with Klinko. However, upon
    information and
    belief, Ball was unaware of this relationship.
    5. Thereafter, despite being admittedly extremely pleased by Klinko
    and MKIPís
    work and the obvious success of the photo shoot, instead, Ball later
    sought to humiliate and
    embarrass Klinko and MKIP by making unreasonable and nonsensical
    demands. Ball followed
    by then refusing to use any of plaintiffsí images, by refusing to use
    Klinko and MKIP in any
    further ad campaigns (as defendants had promised), and by refusing to
    compensate plaintiffs
    without any viable reason.
    6. One week later, upon coming into possession of the aforesaid
    sexually explicit
    images and personal e-mails, Ball then proceeded to threaten Klinko,
    claiming to be a ìbig shotî
    in the industry (ìdo you know who I amî), and that Klinko would be
    embarrassed, humiliated
    and professionally ruined by this personal information and the
    release of the photos if he didnít
    simply ìwalk awayî from any of his claims against defendants or his
    former lover, repeatedly
    intimidating Klinko with such statements as ìdonít fuck with me or
    youíll regret itî, ìyou donít
    want to fuck with meî and ìlet it go, or elseî.
    7. At that time, Ballís threats also included him assisting in the
    filing of a
    harassment claim against Klinko with local police and spending
    whatever money it took for his
    attorneys to pursue Klinko through representation of his ex-fiancÈ.
    8. As alleged herein, in conjunction with the making of such threats,
    Ball feigned the
    act of ìprotectingî his former lover as if a ìknight in shining
    armorî, while portraying Klinko as
    a disgruntled boyfriend. However, numerous e-mails and communications
    between both Klinko
    and Ballís ex-fiancÈ subsequent to their separation and prior to
    Ballís threats, belie such a
    characterization. Rather, these communications support plaintiffsí
    claims of Ballís jealous and
    vindictive motivation, as they detail numerous times a loving desire
    by Ballís ex-fiancÈ to
    continue to remain in a relationship with Klinko, or in the least to
    remain in communication with
    him. In an e-mail to Klinko dated December 28, 2006, she elaborated:
    ìListen [ ]now that you
    met Michael you can understand why I got so traumatized.î
    9. Defendant Ball has continued to act in bad faith through such
    threats, and has
    benefited by improperly retaining the fruits of plaintiffsí labor, by
    preventing plaintiffs from
    recovering what is rightfully theirs, by use of threats intended to
    destroy Klinkoís personal life
    and professional career and to embarrass and severely injure
    plaintiffsí reputation and financial
    interests. Threats of ruining someoneís career through extortion and
    blackmail should not be
    tolerated - and resorting to bully tactics in avoidance of proper
    resolution through the judicial
    system is simply unacceptable.

    THE PARTIES

    10. Plaintiff Markus Klinko (ìKlinkoî), is an individual and resident
    of New York
    County. Klinko is an internationally known, high-end fashion/
    celebrity photographer, catering to
    numerous well-known actors, musicians and models in the entertainment
    industry, as well as
    international advertising campaigns and magazines.
    11. Plaintiff Markus Klinko Photography, Inc., d/b/a Markus Klinko &
    Indrani
    Photography (ìMKIPî), is a corporation duly organized under the laws
    of the State of New
    York, and maintains a principal place of business in the City, County
    and State of New York.
    MKIP is in the business of photographic and imaging services.
    12. Upon information and belief, defendant Rock & Republic
    Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a
    Rock & Republic Jean (ìRock & Republicî), is a corporation organized
    under the laws of the
    State of California, with a principal office located at 3525 Eastham
    Drive, Culver City,
    California 90232. Rock & Republic is a manufacturer of, among other
    things, denim jeans,
    which are sold in New York.
    13. Upon information and belief, Michael Ball (ìBallî), is a resident
    of the State of
    California and is the CEO and founder of defendant Rock & Republic.

    VENUE

    14. In accordance with Rule 503(a) of the New York Civil Practice Law
    and Rules,
    venue is appropriate in this Court.

    STATEMENT OF FACTS

    15. Plaintiffs maintain a well-known business in photography and
    photographic
    imaging, catering to a high-end fashion/celebrity clientele of
    actors, musicians and models in the
    entertainment industry, also creating images seen in international
    advertising campaigns and
    magazines.
    16. Defendants Ball and Rock & Republic represent the brand ìRock &
    Republicî, a
    clothing line that primarily features fashionable denim jeans.
    17. On or about November 22, 2006, defendants sought a high-end
    photographer to
    shoot their major advertising campaign for Spring 2007, to be
    revealed at Fashion Week in New
    York, February 2007.
    18. At that time, defendant Klinko was romantically involved with
    Fernanda Romero
    (ìRomeroî), a soap opera actress and aspiring model. Romero
    introduced Klinko to Ball, in an
    apparent attempt to garner a position as featured model in the Rock &
    Republic campaign.
    19. Several years earlier, defendant Ball had been romantically
    involved with
    Romero, and had even proposed to her. The couple subsequently became
    engaged.
    20. Upon information and belief, after a tumultuous relationship in
    which Ball had
    several violent incidences with Romero, Romero left Ball and ended
    the relationship.
    21. Upon information and belief, at various times during 2005, Ball
    assisted and/or
    aided Romero in procuring a fraudulent marriage for immigration
    purposes, and also assisted and
    advised Romero in obtaining a false social security identification
    card while utilizing two
    different social security numbers.
    22. In about January, 2006, Romero became romantically involved with
    plaintiff
    Klinko. Upon information and belief, this occurred despite Ballís
    attempts to woo Romero back
    by buying her a new car during that same time.
    23. During Romero and Klinkoís relationship, Romero would often
    reveal to Klinko
    highly confidential and intimate details about her relationship with
    Ball, and at times she would
    even broadcast phone conversations with Ball via speakerphone or by
    placing the phone at full
    volume.
    24. On numerous occasions, Romero referred to sensitive matters
    regarding their
    prior relationship, such as instances of violence by Ball leading to
    police involvement and
    Romeroís complaints to the police, immigration fraud and his
    complicity in her fraudulent
    marriage and the procurement of false social security numbers, tapes
    of their therapy sessions
    and conversations regarding his sexuality.
    25. Upon information and belief, Klinkoís acquired knowledge of such
    accounts was
    the partial motivation for Ball to eventually seek to silence and
    extort Klinko.
    26. In about November 2006, Romero introduced Klinko to Ball in an
    apparent effort
    to be featured in the Rock & Republic advertising campaign.
    27. Upon information and belief, until that time, Romero had never
    told Ball that she
    was involved with Klinko for fear of not being awarded a model
    contract with Rock & Republic.
    28. Upon meeting, Ball represented that since defendants had
    partnered with and/or
    been involved in major campaigns with celebrity personalities such as
    Victoria Beckham (ìPosh
    Spiceî) and plans to feature Jessica Alba in an upcoming fashion
    season, plaintiffs would
    benefit from the added exposure of a full advertising campaign with
    the Rock & Republic
    brand.1
    29. As defendants were aware, Klinko and MKIP demand a superior ìday
    rateî in the
    industry due to their status and impressive client roster.
    Plaintiffsí images are known worldwide,
    as they have produced many instantly recognizable photographs for A-
    list celebrities, musicians
    and models in the entertainment industry, such as Jennifer Lopez,
    Britney Spears, Mariah Carey,
    Beyonce, Lindsay Lohan, Mary J. Blige, Kate Winslet, Keanu Reeves,
    David Bowie, among
    others, as well as major advertising campaigns for highly visible
    clients such as L’Oreal Paris,
    Pepsi, Hugo Boss, Nike, Elizabeth Arden, Baby Phat, and many others.
    Such images have also
    appeared in well-known magazines such as Vanity Fair, V, GQ,
    Interview, Arena and Playboy,
    among others. (See http://www.markusklinko-indrani.com/photoGallery/ )
    30. On or about December 5, 2006, the parties agreed that plaintiffs
    would be retained
    by defendants in relation to the advertising campaign for defendantsí
    brand ìRock & Republicî
    (hereinafter, ìthe Workî), on the following terms: (i) plaintiffs
    would be guaranteed ìon page ad
    creditî for their work; and (ii) plaintiffs were to be granted
    exclusive rights to shoot future
    campaigns for the brand. In return, plaintiffs agreed to: (a) waive
    their session fee (which
    consisted of a day rate of $ 30,000.00); (b) grant international
    usage of images produced for one
    year (valued at $ 30,000.00); and (c) provide digital post production
    services at cost. Attached as
    Exhibit ìAî is the partiesí agreement. As is standard, up front
    expenses of the photo shoot were
    to be paid prior to the shoot.
    31. At this time, by the explicit instruction of Ball, Romero was not
    to be used in the
    1 Unknown to Klinko, defendants and Victoria Beckham had parted ways,
    and upon
    photo shoot because ìshe cheated on meî, as Ball stated before both
    his and plaintiffsí staff.
    32. Pursuant to said agreement, on about December 14, 2007,
    plaintiffs duly
    performed the required services in connection with the Work.
    33. The photo shoot was a great success, and defendant Ball openly
    praised the
    plaintiffsí work, which he also declared on camera in a video
    produced for the campaign. As
    stated by Ball:
    ìI just wanted to say working with Markus and Indrani was
    amazing . . . they’re
    the future of fashion, I mean I’m really stoked as a young company to
    be working
    with them and I think this is the beginning of greatness . . .
    honestly. It was quite
    a shoot, and . . . you guys will see it, it’ll be on the pages, of
    March . . .
    I’d be honest I look forward to work with them again and again. I
    mean honestly .
    . . this is a relationship and a partnership that is going to create
    some really
    amazing, amazing things, and I look forward to it. It’s going to be
    really fucking
    cool . . .î.
    34. By about December 21, 2007, plaintiffs had already prepared seven
    (7) composed
    ad proposals for presentation to defendants.
    35. On that date, following plaintiffsí submission of images for
    consideration,
    defendant Ball suddenly contacted plaintiffs and for no reason,
    demanded that plaintiffs
    immediately turn over all images taken - even test images. Such a
    demand under these
    circumstances is unheard of and is not standard in the industry.
    36. Despite Ballís unreasonable demand, plaintiffs additionally
    provided several
    dozen images to defendants on December 22 and December 29, 2006.
    37. At this time, plaintiffs further explained that the edited
    selection of images was
    ready for review, however, defendant Ball simply refused to
    communicate at all with plaintiffs
    information and belief, has recently sued defendants.
    about the proposed image selection.
    38. Thereafter, defendants notified plaintiffsí agent that they were
    not only refusing to
    use any of plaintiffsí images, but were refusing to use Klinko and
    MKIP in any further ad
    campaigns (as promised).
    39. Defendants also notified plaintiffsí agent and Klinko directly
    that they were
    refusing to compensate plaintiffs at all, without any viable reason.
    40. Upon information and belief, on or about January 15, 2007,
    defendant Ball came
    into possession and/or viewed highly personal, sexually explicit
    photos and e-mails, shared
    between Klinko and Romero.
    41. On January 18, 2007, defendant Ball contacted Klinkoís attorney
    by telephone,
    stating he had viewed the sexually explicit photographs and e-mails.
    42. In that conversation, Ball threatened that if Klinko contacted or
    pursued Romero
    any further, Klinkoís reputation would be damaged by the exposure of
    such information.
    43. On about January 21, 2007, Klinko contacted Ball by telephone,
    whereupon Ball
    proceeded to threaten Klinko that if he did not ìback offî and simply
    ìwalk awayî from any
    claims he had against defendants or Romero, Ball would expend all of
    his power and influence to
    embarrass, humiliate and professionally ruin Klinko by exposure of
    this personal information.
    44. On that phone conversation, defendant Ball repeatedly threatened
    and intimidated
    Klinko with statements such as ìdonít fuck with me or youíll regret
    itî, ìlet it go, or elseî, ìyou
    donít want to fuck with meî and ìdonít fuck with me on a personal
    levelî.
    45. Ballís threats also included that he would assist Romero in
    filing a bogus
    harassment claim with local police and spend ìany amount of moneyî on
    attorneys for Romero
    to pursue Klinko, in addition to causing crippling financial loss to
    plaintiffs.
    46. On that phone conversation, Ball threatened and intimated that if
    Klinko did not
    ìback offî and ìwalk awayî, he would use all of his influence and
    connections in the industry to
    prevent Klinko and MKIP from earning money with other clients, and
    would openly and publicly
    refuse to use plaintiffsí work, thus causing further embarrassment
    and humiliation.
    47. On that phone conversation, Ball also threatened to force Klinko
    to expend great
    sums of money via legal battles and attorneysí fees, that would
    essentially put Klinko out of
    business.
    48. In conjunction with making such threats, Ball feigned the act of
    ìprotectingî
    Romero. However, upon information and belief, Ball is simply
    protecting his own interests and
    using the opportunity of Romeroís romantic relationship with Klinko,
    and the sexually explicit
    photos and personal e-mails, to avoid his own liability and to strike
    out maliciously against
    Klinko.
    49. Upon communicating with defendant Ball on January 21, 2007, and
    in fear and
    apprehension over the aforesaid threats received from Ball, Klinko
    decided to forgo pursing Ball,
    Rock & Republic and/or Romero for monies owed and services performed.

    AS AND FOR A FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
    AGAINST MICHAEL BALL
    (Extortion)

    50. Plaintiffs incorporate paragraphs ì1î through ì49î, above by
    reference.
    51. That defendant Ball did threaten and intimidate plaintiff Klinko
    that if he did not
    relinquish his rights to property, namely money plaintiffs are
    entitled to, and if Klinko did not
    cease all communications with Romero, he would expose personal
    documents and photographs
    and publicize the same, subjecting Klinko to contempt, ridicule or
    embarrassment.
    52. That defendant Ball did threaten and intimidate plaintiff Klinko
    that if he did not
    relinquish his rights to property, namely money plaintiffs are
    entitled to, and if Klinko did not
    cease all communications with Romero, he would assist in accusing
    Klinko of a crime and/or
    cause criminal charges to be instituted against him.
    53. That defendant Ball did threaten and intimidate plaintiff Klinko
    that if he did not
    relinquish his rights to property, namely money plaintiffs are
    entitled to, and if Klinko did not
    cease all communications with Romero, he would use his influence in
    the fashion industry and
    spend any amount of money to defame, bad mouth and harm Klinko
    personally and
    professionally, in the fashion and entertainment industry.
    54. That such wrongful actions would cause serious injury to
    plaintiffsí reputations
    and business interests.
    55. That by reason of defendant Ballís threats, defendants improperly
    obtained
    property, namely, services, money and images to which they are not
    entitled.
    56. By reason of defendant Ballís attempted extortion, plaintiffs are
    entitled to
    declaratory and injunctive relief as well as compensatory and
    punitive damages in an amount to
    be determined at trial.

    AS AND FOR A SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
    AGAINST MICHAEL BALL
    (Tortious Interference with Prospective Business Relations)

    57. Plaintiffs incorporate paragraphs ì1î through ì56î, above by
    reference.
    58. Plaintiffsí public image and relations with clients and
    advertisers, agents, models,
    make-up artists, hair stylists, and those employed in the
    entertainment industry are crucial to
    their business.
    59. Defendant Ballís wrongful actions, as described in the foregoing
    paragraphs, and
    which include the willful breach of the Rock & Republic advertising
    campaign contract without
    reason, exhibit an intentional, malicious and unjustified
    interference with plaintiffsí current and
    future business relations with said clients and advertisers, and
    those employed in the
    entertainment industry.
    60. Defendant Ballís actions, as described in the foregoing
    paragraphs, were improper
    and beyond the scope of his position as CEO of defendant Rock &
    Republic, such that these
    actions served to interfere with plaintiffsí current and future
    business relations with Rock &
    Republic.
    61. Defendant Ballís interference with plaintiffsí business relations
    was undertaken
    with the sole purpose of harassing plaintiffs and/or with dishonest,
    unfair or improper means.
    62. By reason of the foregoing, and as a direct and proximate result
    of defendant
    Ballís conduct, plaintiffs are entitled to declaratory and injunctive
    relief as well as compensatory
    and punitive damages in an amount to be determined at trial.

    AS AND FOR A THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
    AGAINST MICHAEL BALL
    (Prima Facie Tort)

    63. Plaintiffs incorporate paragraphs ì1î through ì62î, above by
    reference.
    64. Defendant Ballís wrongful conduct was completely unjustified and
    was intended
    solely to inflict substantial harm against plaintiffs.
    65. By reason of the foregoing, plaintiffs are entitled to
    declaratory and injunctive
    relief as well as compensatory and punitive damages in an amount to
    be determined at trial.

    AS AND FOR A FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
    AGAINST MICHAEL BALL
    (Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress)

    66. Plaintiffs incorporate paragraphs ì1î through ì65î, above by
    reference.
    67. Defendant Ballís wrongful conduct, as described in the foregoing
    paragraphs,
    constitutes extreme and outrageous conduct and behavior.
    68. Defendant Ball acted with malice, and with the intent to cause
    severe emotional
    distress to plaintiff Klinko and/or in deliberate disregard of the
    high probability that severe
    emotional distress to Klinko would result.
    69. Defendant Ball has maliciously embarked on a course of conduct
    intended to
    cause Klinko to suffer mental and emotional distress, tension and
    anxiety.
    70. Plaintiff Klinko has suffered and will continue to suffer great
    mental strain and
    anguish and severe emotional distress.
    71. By reason of the foregoing and as a direct and proximate result
    of defendant
    Ballís conduct, plaintiff Klinko is entitled to compensatory and
    punitive damages against
    defendant Ball in an amount to be determined at trial.

    AS AND FOR A FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
    AGAINST DEFENDANT ROCK & REPUBLIC
    (Breach of Contract)

    72. Plaintiffs incorporate paragraphs ì1î through ì71î, above by
    reference.
    73. To date, despite due demand, defendant Rock & Republic has
    refused to pay
    plaintiffs for their services.
    74. That defendant has willfully breached its agreement with
    plaintiffs by failing to
    pay plaintiffs for their services duly rendered.
    75. That defendant has willfully breached its agreement with
    plaintiffs by refusing to
    use plaintiffsí images and provide plaintiffs with credit
    acknowledgment of the same.
    76. That defendant has willfully breached its agreement with
    plaintiffs by failing to
    provide plaintiffs exclusivity for their services as ìpartnersî with
    regard to future advertising
    campaigns.
    77. That as a result of defendantís breach of the partiesí agreement,
    plaintiffs have
    been damaged in a sum to be determined at trial, but believed to be
    no less than Five Hundred
    Thousand Dollars ($ 500,000.00).

    AS AND FOR A SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
    AGAINST DEFENDANT ROCK & REPUBLIC
    (Unjust Enrichment)

    78. Plaintiffs incorporate paragraphs ì1î through ì77î, above by
    reference.
    79. Under the doctrine of quantum meruit, defendant Rock & Republic
    has been
    unjustly enriched by receiving the benefit of the services provided
    by the plaintiffs in a sum to be
    determined at trial, but believed to be an amount no less than Two
    Hundred Thousand Dollars ($
    200,000.00).

    WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendants as follows:
    a. Declaring that the acts and practices complained of herein are in
    violation of the
    laws of the State of New York;
    b. Enjoining and permanently restraining these violations;
    c. Directing Defendants to pay compensatory and punitive damages to
    Plaintiffs in
    an amount to be proven at trial;
    d. Awarding Plaintiffs costs, disbursements and reasonable attorneysí
    fees; and
    e. Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

    Dated: New York, New York
    January 23, 2007

    Respectfully submitted,

    MELTZER LoPRESTI, LLP
    By: /s/ _________________________
    Anthony A. LoPresti
    30 Broad Street, 37th Floor
    New York, New York 10004
    (212) 425-0551
    Attorneys for Plaintiffs

  • RUSTY said:
    IT SEEMS THAT THE PHOTOGRAPHER MARKUS KLINKO IT’S OBSSESED WITH THIS GIRL AND HE IS SO F&%$@wING INSECURE!!!
    MOVE ON MAN….
    HE IS SO TALENTED AND IT’S A SHAME HE IS DOING THIS.

    BEST WISHES.
    RUST T

  • Shawn Tracy Adderley said:
    just get over it, it seems Mr Ball has this shit clocked so this guy sould back of and let it be. all this over some women. markus go home,and ball get new girl, she sound’s cheap anyway,give her the finger and buy a new one. thats my take on this, im out peace.
  • MIRACLE said:
    I think She is too Hot for this old man..
    All of this sound like he is lying.
    Move on.
    Peace
  • Mari Kawa said:
    Not so sure, Miracle. I mean, think about it for just a minute.
    A few short years from now, this guy will still bed a half a dozen 18 year old hotties every month. Wanna bet?
    She (andy gayrumor-spreading fiona banana look alike..oooopss!!!) will have had their 5th lipo -sure it’s cheap in Tijuana!- and after 30, which is pretty soon cause 23 she ain’t (Caras check your facts!)it all
    will smell like rotten fish. Actually it does already.
    Greetings
    Mari
  • RUSTY said:
    BUT MARCUS WAS SOO F&%$@wING SELFISH!!!!
    HOW COULD HE SLEEP WITH ALL THESE GIRLS AND DO THE THREESOMES AND EVERYTHING???? THAT IS NOT RIGHT NO???

    RUST T

  • Laishia Wilkins said:
    wait a second! markus is soo gay!! i know my bf told me.
    markus shoots all the music stuff and he has worked with
    n sync and lance bass…no way he ever slept with a girl.
  • RICK said:
    THIS MARKUS GUY IS VERY GAYYY!
    LOOK AT HIS MY SPACE WHY SOMEONE SO INSECURE ABOUT HIS SEXUALITY WOULD PUT ALL THOSE GIRL PIC’S?
    ITS OBVIOUS RIGHT?
  • TRUTH said:
    Who blames her being screwed up in the head with Michael Ball beating her so much! Poor girl helped him build his Rock & Republic and she deserves a huge chunk of it! AND Markus Klinko is helping her get HALF of it. This is obvious of who’s the bad and good guys. Who the hell care’s who’s gay anyways! The poor girl got beat and threatened since she know of all his illegal activities. Pretty F’ed up that Michael Ball himself arranged for her green card marriage with Kent Ross. Markus Klinko is really the savior of this SOAP OPERA. BALLS to the FLOOR!
  • Rick=Fernanda said:
    Sounds like trouble in the air.
    And now Michael Ball has a new problem. His other ex, Asha Kai just dumped him as well. Too bad, she was sort of cute in those nude shots from the B-day shoot huh? I like them.
    Or did she get a bit too old and tired to get cheated on and screwed over? New love interests like Jamie from the Myspace page have popped up I hear? Calling her poor friend at 5 am?
    Easy on the substances Michael. You are not born in 1968.
    ( Ok, he always has the girl from the nail salon left…she says he is the best f&%# in LA by LA nail salon standards, makes sense they would be on the same intellectual level ! )
    Now Asha knows a lot of shit…..and she has been trying to build the house in Santa Monica. Lots of really pissed of ex’s here. Eloisa Carvahlo is not too happy either they say at Next.
    Better keep handing out the little gift bags Michael, and don’t forget the parents of the very young ones.
    And oh, I looked at People magazine just now. No longer on the hot bachelor list ? Was up with that? People magazine is catching up finally?
  • BIG CHEESE said:
    New information was filed today in the Klinko vs. Rock & Republic
    case. A Memorandum of Law was filed supporting the case. In
    addition, documents were filed with the court about Ball’s violent and
    criminal past, arrest and sentencing records and use of false social
    security numbers. An excerpt follows and the document is attached.

    Excerpts from Klinko vs. Rock & Republic / Michael Ball

    Introduced to the court 6/15/2007

    23. In fact, as plead in the Complaint, prior to Michael Ball’s
    threats and extortion against me, I was well aware of his violent
    behavior, criminal history and psychological instability, as revealed
    to me by Ms. Fernanda Romero. Compl., paras. 23-25. Such a history
    and predisposition has been corroborated by numerous witnesses,
    further substantiating my fear and apprehension regarding his threats,
    as well as his motivation to silence my knowledge of the same.
    Attached as Exhibit “C” is the Affidavit of Cynthia Pinot (”Pinot
    Aff.”), which was also submitted in opposition to defendants’ motion
    to strike. The car chase and brutal assault by Michael Ball against
    Ms. Fernanda Romero, detailed in the Pinot Affidavit, has been further
    corroborated by both Alex DeFelipe and Pascal Azoulay, the gentlemen
    who were also assaulted and chased by Ball through the streets of Los
    Angeles. Both DeFelipe and Azoulay have also corroborated Ball’s
    pattern of intimidation against those that would expose such criminal
    conduct.

    24. In addition to the above, our ongoing investigation has also
    corroborated various allegations made in the Complaint pertaining to
    defendant Michael Ball’s motive to threaten and extort plaintiffs,
    such as my knowledge of criminal activities, acts of violence, court
    ordered psychiatric treatment, Ball’s own use of a false social
    security number (which he presented to police upon his arrest and
    sentencing in the matter attached), and evidence that at least three
    different social security numbers were used by Fernanda Romero,
    corroborating both Romero’s and Ball’s admission that Ball assisted in
    obtaining the same. Two examples of the above are attached hereto as
    Exhibit “D” (arrest and sentencing report; Solis v. Ford, L.A.
    Superior Court, Case No. BC 228258).

  • BIG CHEESE said:
    EXCERPTS FROM PINOT AFFIDAVIT - MARKUS KLINKO VS ROCK & REPUBLIC / MICHAEL BALL

    2. I write this affidavit to explain what I believe are clear motivations of defendant Michael Ball leading up to the claims made in this lawsuit.

    Based upon my personal knowledge of Fernanda and Michael Ball, I am convinced that Michael Ball’s improper motivations caused the situation that Markus Klinko and his company are facing now. I firmly believe that the entire soap opera that was and is the relationship between Michael Ball and Fernanda directly lead to, contributed to and was the motivation behind the threats allegedly made by Mr. Ball against Markus Klinko and his company.

    5. First and foremost, the sexually explicit photos that are in question in this lawsuit, were indeed shown to Michael Ball by Fernanda. I specifically recall Fernanda telling me that she showed them to Michael Ball, and that she was the one that let him see them.

    Fernanda’s marriage to Kent Ross is common knowledge among all of our friends and associates. What is also common knowledge is that their marriage was arranged by Michael Ball for the sole purpose of gaining U.S. citizenship for Fernanda. No one doubts this as Fernanda made that very clear. In fact, Fernanda has never really lived with her “husband”. Fernanda told me about Michael Ball’s help and his introduction to Kent Ross. Fernanda also explained to me how Kent Ross was even paid to marry her.

    This information is likely something that Michael Ball would not want disclosed to anyone - let alone to plaintiff Markus Klinko, who was living with Fernanda and was in a very close, intimate relationship with her for all of 2006. I know that Fernanda would eventually tell Markus Klinko everything about her relationship with Michael Ball. Fernanda also had a violent and turbulent relationship with Michael Ball, leading to a police involvement that I personally witnessed (described below); something that Mr. Ball would likely not want to be disclosed either.

    10. I have also become aware that Michael Ball did not know of Fernanda’s close relationship with Markus Klinko until after the Rock & Republic photo shoot with Mr. Klinko. With my knowledge of Mr. Ball, it is very likely that such a disclosure evoked a powerful motivation to keep both his violent history with Fernanda and complicity in her immigration status a secret.

    11. I have witnessed Michael Ball’s frightening, violent and jealous behavior firsthand, along with Fernanda and two other friends. In this particular incident in June 2003, not only did Michael Ball physically assault two of my male friends and follow us in a horrific car chase through Santa Monica, Hollywood and Los Angeles, but when he caught up to us, he pulled Fernanda by the hair from our car and kicked her in a jealous rage. In this incident, police were called two times before they arrested him and lead him away in handcuffs.

    22. I remained friends with Fernanda after that horrible night, right up until recently. Despite my total fear and repulsion for Michael Ball, she continued her “relationship” with him, however strange. At a certain point, especially after the incidents leading up to this lawsuit, I could handle it no more.

    23. I firmly believe, and respectfully submit, that such a horrific past clearly is a motivation for Michael Ball to attempt to silence Markus Klinko - and anyone who gets in his way.

  • SUGAR DADDY said:
    What does Kent Ross and his sunset band have to say about Michael Ball and Rock & Republic and all this fake green card
    marriage stuff between him and Ball’s ex Fernanda Romero? Michael Ball set the fraud marriage up to gain leverage over Romero and stop her from suing him for her well deserved half of Rock & Republic.

    Kent Ross and Electric Uh-Oh mates could not have stated it in sweeter words. On YouTube they say:

    Band:
    We got a SUGAR DADDY.

    Interviewer:
    Beautiful, do you want to talk about your sugar daddy…?

    Band:
    All I will say is ….
    ROCK & REPUBLIC…ROCK & REPUBLIC….

    Bright young men they are indeed.

  • FRAUD MARRIAGES!!! said:
    Oh lord! This soap opera keeps getting more interesting!!! Fernando Romero is spilling the truth to investigators on her FRAUD MARRIAGE to Kent Ross!! I can’t believe Michael Ball arranged that and Kent Ross’s girlfriend Gladys Otero must be pissed! Famous people aren’t innocent from what it seems…haha
  • NO MORE MICHAEL BALL said:
    NO one BUY Rock & Republic Clothing!!!! MICHAEL BALL SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    JESSICA ALBA, VICTORIA BECKHAM, and FERNANDA ROMERO need to SHUT THIS CASE and get their MILLIONS from the piece of SHIT!!!!

  • shawn tracy said:
    just get on with your life victoria b. you have money from the spice girls bull shit. as for michael ball get off his nuts, its his company you trick. go kick rocks fake ass buster. ROCK & REPUBLIC is the bomb. and mike keep your pimp hand strong.————–STA.
  • Pimp Daddy said:
    Yes exactly! A pimp or a street hustler seems to be a very accurate comparison with Michael Ball.
    Same idea. Controls and beats women and keeps the money. And throws them a
    bone once in a while. This is all so true. Thanks for the insights Shawn Tracy.
  • Fashionista LA said:
    Victoria Beckham is supposedly planning on suing the LA based premium denim fashion label Rock & Republic. She says that the company owes her more money than they have already paid her for promoting the label which she was associated with in the past.

    Up to $100 million dollars is being sought by her and it looks like it’s going to be a real long legal battle. The ex - Spice girl has recently started her own line of clothing called DVB Style and is in talks to expand further into denim, the product which she promoted R&R so successfully with.

  • Legal Beagle said:
    Here are some facts:
    Michael Ball is being sued for extortion, assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, wrongful eviction and tortious interference, among other things.
    Michael Ball has been involved in criminal activity and acts of violence.
    It’s part of the public record, and the details of what he’s done will amaze you.
    You can read about it here:
    Los Angeles Superior Court, case number BC 228258
    Superior Court of Santa Monica, case number 1SM02392
    Supreme Court of the State of New York, case number 101063/07 and 662018/07
  • denimdetectve said:
    I’ve worked in the LA denim bizz for 15 years and I remember when Michael Ball was bouncing checks on folks with his lil’ tshirt company in North Hollywood called Motor. He was a struggling actor turned “designer” slash tough guy. It was obvious then that he was a nutcase who had been fondled into madness as a child. Years later he was bangin anyone and everyone who would walk through the door at R&R. I can’t tell you how many sewing contractors and assorted vendors have been screwed by Michael Ball-beard. Thats right, he wears a beard of human balls on his chin. Hopefully justice will prevail!
  • Legal Beagle said:
    cool, a shrink has joined the blog. what other insights do you have about Ball and his twisted psychology? must have been pretty intense during those days in Van Nuys.
  • bingo said:
    Jeans CEO Accused of Trying to Get in Employee’s Pants

    08-27-2007

    Rock and Republic clothing’s CEO and lead designer, Michael Ball, is being sued by a former employee for sexual harassment.

    TMZ obtained the lawsuit, filed August 17 in Los Angeles County Superior Court, that claims in November of 2006, Nicole Baros interviewed with Ball to be his personal assistant. During the five-minute interview, Baros alleges Ball asked her if she “had a boyfriend.” The lawsuit claims that during her first month of employment, Ball made unwanted sexual advances towards her, such as “touching her hair, and continually staring at Baros’ breasts and butt,” and one point told her he wanted to “sleep with her.”

    The lawsuit also alleges at the company Christmas party Ball “cornered Baros in a room and attempted to kiss her … then proceeded to stick his hand down plaintiff’s pants.” Later that month, she says she went to Ball’s home to have him sign company checks and he answered the door in his underwear. She then says he chased her “around his apartment, grabbed her and threw her on his bed.”

    In the end, Baros claims she was n ot selected to go to Fashion Week in New York City, and was ! “let go and was told that there was not enough work for her.”

  • fashiondiva said:
    This is so funny! More and more people are realizing how horrible Rock & Republic is…..

    Party girl Paris Hilton kicked off Monday night - which ended after 13 bottles of champagne - by “hosting” a charity event, though she wasn’t in a giving mood.
    According to an insider, Hilton refused to be photographed at the Puck Building event with the AmFAR Rocks co-chairs from Rock & Republic, instead staying behind a velvet rope with her flack all night.

Leave a comment!

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.