Jimmy Flynt

October 18, 2011 by staff 

Jimmy FlyntJimmy Flynt, In May, the judge of the U.S. District Court William Bertelsman ruled from his court in Ohio that Jimmy Flynt, the younger brother of Hustler publisher Larry Flynt was not and had never been 50 percent partner in the firm Hustler, as he claimed

. Last Wednesday, the Ohio-based brother filed a lawsuit in Ohio, this time presenting two actions in federal court, one against Flynt Management Group LLC for unfair dismissal and breach of contract, and the other against all Hustler life advice Lipsitz, Green, Scimed & Cambria and five of the firm’s attorneys, alleging legal malpractice and tortious interference.

In a 17-page lawsuit filed by attorney Jimmy, Robert W. Hojnoski, the applicant contends that his dismissal by letter on June 15, 2009, was without cause, and the suspension in February 2009 for alleged salary and 250000, and the termination of their employment benefits in June of that year , and other actions that would have been taken against him.

“Flynt Management did not follow the normal course of events or policy of the company in its alleged” termination “Jimmy,” reads the complaint. “No compensation or compensation was offered. There was no legitimate reason or justification or was” just cause “to terminate Jimmy pay and benefits.”

In fact, according to the account stated in the complaint, the current hostilities between the mother’s brothers failed attempt to sons Jimmy, Jimmy II and Dustin, to create your own Los Angeles-based production company of adults, the media Flynt. The brothers were frustrated with success in that attempt by Larry, who filed suit under the mark against him in January 2009.

“On or about the time this action was filed mark,” the lawsuit alleges, “Larry requiring contact with Jimmy Jimmy ‘take control of their children and put pressure on their children to meet their demands for a solution, which included a monetary compensation (100, 000) and an agreement not to use the name Flynt, alone, to market products. Larry Jimmy made threats that if he could not make the claim disappears (ie, if you could not persuade their children to yield to the demands of Larry), then he “interrupted” financially. Larry told Jimmy that he would take his (Jimmy) compensation / salary to fund the lawsuit brought against the children of Jimmy. Larry was overwhelming and unequivocal threatening economic hardship and damage unless Jimmy Jimmy was willing and able to exert sufficient and effective parental influence to influence the outcome of the federal lawsuit on behalf of Larry Larry. ”

At the same time, according to the complaint, Jimmy began to draw his salary, which he was, and 250,000 a year through Flynt Management LLC and its health and other benefits, a 401k retirement plan, a rental car and an expense account. “Previously, Jimmy received salary and benefits of the LFP, Inc., Hustler Entertainment Inc., Hustler Hollywood, of Ohio, Inc. and / or one or more other entities related / associated in the [Hustler] Company” asserts the claim.

Jimmy was unsuccessful in his attempts to get their children to stop using the name Flynt in his new business, according to the complaint, “From February 2009, Larry embarked on a course of action with the intent of the discharge error / end Jimmy and “otherwise squeeze” Jimmy Hustler out of business / enterprise. ”

The actions included the cessation of his salary, benefits, and the car between February and June 2009, the demand that Jimmy pay legal bills that Larry had incurred in connection with his lawsuit against Jimmy II and Dustin, and situation in April an alleged request by an employee of Hustler long Jimmy’s company, Hustler Cincinnati, will provide a loan of 400,000 and Hustler Internet Group LLC for a “mysterious” big project “.

Jimmy refused to make the loan, believing it was a fraudulent application, and states in the Complant, “Larry has admitted that he gave to the board on or around April 2009 for the use of a fraudulent promissory note / loan application in an effort to obtain “excess cash” bank account (s) and / or possession of Hustler Cincinnati, Inc. Larry believed he was entitled to benefits even though Jimmy was / is the sole shareholder / owner Hustler Cincinnati, Inc. There were no major ‘Internet project, “without other divisions were asked to loan,” “excess cash and Larry / LFP Internet Group, LLC had no intention of paying the loan back and asked for 400,000 . ”

The recriminations escalated after the alleged refusal of the loan, according to the complaint, including an ongoing action evista legal Hustler Cincinnati Hustler center owned property, and the eventual termination Jimmy officer, who is seeking to 20 million dollars in compensatory and punitive damages and attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses.

AVN Hustler reached for comment, but was told that Larry Flynt out of town at this time and that the comment would not be forthcoming immediately.

In other action, Jimmy Flynt is suing Lipsitz, Green, and partners Scimed Paul Cambria Cambria, Jonathan Brown, Jeffrey King, Michael Joseph Gumkowski Deal individual alleging that the firm engaged in legal malpractice and tortious interference for failing to protect the Jimmy’s legal interests between 1998 and 2009, during which time the defendants allegedly provided legal counsel, advice and representation in relation to Jimmy several businesses, including Cincinnati Hustler, Hustler News and Gifts, Inc., and the store Hustler Hollywood in Monroe, Ohio, and other shopping and business of the company made during that period.

The reason for this action, according to the complaint, is that “Cambria and lawyers accused began to take adverse action against Jimmy in 2009 in a concerted and malicious press / push Jimmy Hustler company to create the opportunity Cambria and Lipsitz Green company has increased the power and control of the company Hustler, to protect your retainer agreement and annual revenue stream and increase the likelihood that otherwise the increased income and professional fees in coming years. ”

Much of the basis for the claims of Jimmy seems to be based on the persistent belief that they have property rights in establishments such as Hustler Hollywood stores, but the defendants in this last action seems to be saying that Jimmy’s inability to prevail association in his assertion that argument invalid.

“There is no legal basis for the demand,” said Paul Cambria AVN, when contacted today for comment. “He sued Larry, saying it was your partner, and the court ruled against him. We have given to our attorneys and let the courts resolve.”

In the last action, Jimmy seeks compensatory and punitive damages and $ 2 million plus attorney fees and costs. Both actions seek a jury trial.

Report to Team

Please feel free to send if you have any questions regarding this post , you can contact on

Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site are that of the authors and not necessarily that of U.S.S.POST.


Comments are closed.