SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK

VINCENT YOUNG,

Plaintiff,

-against-

PRO PLAYER FUNDING LLC,

Defendant.

Index No. _____________

Date Purchased: September 5, 2012

SUMMONS

Basis of Venue: CPLR §§ 501 and 503(c).

TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT:

You are hereby summoned to answer the Verified Complaint in this action and to serve a copy of your answer or, if the Verified Complaint is not served with summons, to serve a notice of appearance, on the Plaintiff’s Attorneys within 20 days after the service of this summons, exclusive of the day of service (or within 30 days after the service is complete if this summons is not personally delivered to you within the State of New York); and in case of your failure to appear or answer, judgment will be taken against you by default for the relief demanded in the Verified Complaint. Dated: New York, New York September 5, 2012 DEWEY PEGNO & KRAMARSKY LLP By /s/ Thomas E. L. Dewey

Thomas E. L. Dewey David S. Pegno David C. Marden 777 Third Avenue, 37th Floor

New York, New York 10017 (212) 943-9000 OF COUNSEL: Trey L. Dolezal KASLING, HEMPHILL, DOLEZAL & ATWELL, L.L.P. 301 Congress Avenue, Suite 300 Austin, Texas 78701 (512) 472-6800

Attorneys for Plaintiff Vincent P. Young

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 09/05/2012 INDEX NO. 156111/2012

NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 09/05/2012

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK

VINCENT YOUNG,

Plaintiff,

-against-

PRO PLAYER FUNDING LLC,

Defendant.

Index No. _____________ VERIFIED COMPLAINT

Plaintiff Vincent Young (“Young”), by his undersigned attorneys, as and for his

complaint in this action, alleges as follows with knowledge as to his own actions, and otherwise

upon information and belief:

SUMMARY OF THE ACTION

1. Young is a professional quarterback who has been defrauded by his former

business representatives through a brazen scheme to secure loans using Young’s identity to

satisfy their own personal debts and otherwise line their own pockets.

2. One such loan that was secured as part of that fraudulent conduct was a nearly

$1.9 million loan from defendant Pro Player Funding LLC (“Pro Player”)—a predatory lender

with a history of loaning funds to football players on extraordinarily onerous terms. Under the

onerous terms of the alleged loan to Young, Pro Player retained prepaid interest at the rate of

20% per annum in the amount of $619,112.26, and after other disbursements Young allegedly

was to receive a total of $1,104,902.54—or a mere 59% of the total loan proceeds (the “Pro

Player Loan”).

2

3. On June 6, 2012, an event of default on the loan was declared by Pro Player,

which Pro Player claimed entitled it to commence charging Young interest at the default rate of

30%. Pro Player also filed a Judgment by Confession on July 2, 2012, seeking from Young an

outstanding principal amount of $1,695,070.54, together with post-judgment interest at 9% per

annum until the judgment is paid in full.

4. Young has never received a penny from the purported Pro Player “loan” proceeds,

nor has he ever communicated with anyone from Pro Player or knowingly executed any loan

agreements with Pro Player. Tellingly, the signature pages to the various loan agreements

purportedly signed by Young were executed on May 4, 2011, even though the agreements

themselves were not finalized until two weeks later—on May 17, 2011. Pro Player entered into

this purported loan without taking any reasonable steps to ensure that Young was aware of the

transaction, that he authorized it, or that he would benefit from it. Indeed, the circumstances of

this loan should have given rise to grave suspicions on the part of Pro Player as to whether the

transaction was legitimate. Pro Player, however, turned a blind eye to those circumstances,

motivated by its rapacious desire to earn the exorbitant profits on the loan.

5. Despite Young’s stated belief that the Pro Player Loan was fraudulently obtained

without his knowledge, Pro Player has subjected Young—and his former football team, the

Buffalo Bills—to a barrage of threats and excessive and needless discovery requests in an effort

to enforce its judgment.

6. Accordingly, Young brings this action to vacate the Judgment by Confession

because the underlying loan was obtained by fraudulent means, with Pro Players’ (at minimum)

negligent and reckless assistance.

3

PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE

7. Plaintiff Young is a natural person residing in Houston, Texas.

8. Defendant Pro Player is a limited liability company organized and existing under

the laws of Delaware with a place of business at 152 West 57th Street, 54th Floor, New York,

New York 10019.

9. This Court has jurisdiction over the parties pursuant to CPLR § 301 or, in the

alternative, CPLR § 302(a)(1). Venue is proper in the county of New York pursuant to CPLR §§

501 or, in the alternative, 503(c).

FACTS COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION

A. Fraudulent Conduct of Young’s Former Business Representatives

10. Young’s ex-business representatives include his former financial advisor, Ronnie

T. Peoples (“Peoples”), head of Peoples Financial Services, Inc. (“PFS”), a Raleigh, North

Carolina financial services firm, and his former sports agent, Major L. Adams II (“Adams”).

11. On or about January 18, 2006, Young executed an Authorization for Attorney in

Fact (the “Authorization”) in favor of Peoples and PFS. Pursuant to the Authorization, Peoples

and PFS were authorized by Young to act in his name and on his behalf in all financial matters.

PFS established several accounts in Young’s name through which transactions were conducted.

On or about January 18, 2006, a Management Services Agreement (the “MSA”) was executed by

Peoples as President and CEO of PFS. The MSA was made effective as of January 18, 2006,

and provides that it will run for the period of Young’s current National Football League (“NFL”)

contract and/or for the duration of the next NFL contract entered by Young.

12. Pursuant to the MSA, Peoples and PFS agreed to provide Young with financial

planning, credit management, investment counseling, estate planning and bill paying, among

4

other services. In exchange for these services, Young agreed to pay Peoples and PFS a flat

yearly fee of $65,000. Young also agreed to reimburse Peoples and PFS for all out-of-pocket

expenses incurred in connection with services provided to Young.

13. Since 2006, Young also was represented by Adams—an attorney from Houston,

Texas—as his original player agent.

14. Upon information and belief, Peoples and Adams undertook a series of

financial transactions—both individually and collaboratively—aimed at defrauding Young of

approximately $5.5 million while his assets were under PFS’ control. To facilitate these

fraudulent transfers from Young’s accounts, Peoples and Adams resorted to a myriad of

deceptive practices: impersonating Young in order to secure bogus loans in his name; forging

Young’s signature on financial documents; and using fake e-mail addresses in Young’s name

that Young neither authorized or of which he was even aware.

15. Young was audited for 2006-2008 and it was discovered that roughly $3 million

in marketing/endorsement income had not been reported on Young’s tax returns. Young was

assessed (and paid in 2011) a tax bill of approximately $1.4 million on this income. During this

time, marketing/endorsement income was paid directly to Adams and another individual who

were trusted to take their own fees out and forward the net to Young. Adams had multiple joint

accounts with Young and therefore could withdraw funds at will. Peoples informed Young that

the tax bill had already been paid, knowing full well that it had not. (Indeed, Peoples would

eventually arrange the Pro Player Loan knowing that the IRS debt was still outstanding, a direct

contravention of certain Pro Player Loan agreements.)

16. Upon information and belief, Peoples and PFS repaid some of Adams’

unauthorized debts by using Young’s funds without his knowledge. Indeed, Adams has admitted

5

that he forged Young’s signature on various documents in order to perpetuate this fraud against

Young.

B. Young Discovers the Fraud

17. In late August of 2011, Young transferred management of his assets to a new

firm, KM Capital Management. Upon completion of KM Capital’s review of six years’ worth of

Young’s bank statements, significant transfers between Young’s accounts and accounts owned

by PFS were noted, as well as evidence of comingling of Young’s funds with PFS-owned

accounts. This investigation revealed a substantial net transfer in favor of PFS in the amount of

roughly $7.854 million (i.e., PFS received $7.854 million more than it transferred over to

Young’s accounts).

18. When the questionable financial transactions involving Peoples and Adams came

to light, Young immediately terminated his relationship with Peoples and Adams.

19. On November 1, 2011, Young and PFS entered into an Agreement and Mutual

Release (the “Release”), whereby the parties terminated their business relationship and released

each other from various responsibilities. Most significantly, the Release absolves Young of his

personal guaranty of $1.9 million in loans from PFS to Adams and $500,000 in loans from PFS

to Keith Young (Young’s uncle).

20. Peoples and Adams are accountable for misappropriating, improperly converting

and/or squandering the funds missing from Young’s accounts or fraudulently obtained under his

name.

C. The Pro Player Loan Transaction

21. Unfortunately, Young’s discovery of the massive fraud against him did not occur

before he was the victim of another scheme: the Pro Player Loan. In addition to the nearly $5.5

6

million in fraudulent transfers described above, Peoples’ and Adams’ deceptive financial

schemes included obtaining a high-interest loan under Young’s name in the amount of nearly

$1.9 million from Pro Player. Upon information and belief, Peoples and Adams conspired to

obtain this loan from Pro Player without informing Young, and with Peoples acting as the

primary contact with Pro Player’s representatives.

22. Young has no recollection of ever discussing a loan transaction with Pro Player,

and he never had any communications with anyone at Pro Player or any attorney advising him

about such a loan.

23. Michael W. Simon, an attorney with the law firm of Simon & Sigalos, LLP

located in Boca Raton Florida, communicated with Peoples by e-mail to provide advice about

certain of the Pro Player Loan documents, but none of those communications were sent to Young

himself or forwarded to Young by Peoples. Simon also exchanged e-mails and documents

regarding the Pro Player Loan directly with Darien Dash, a senior executive with Pro Player, and

Pro Player’s transactional counsel in New York. Again, Young was not included on any of these

e-mail communications. Young has no recollection of ever discussing the Pro Player Loan with

Mr. Simon or any other attorney.

24. On or about May 17, 2011, Young purportedly entered into a Loan and Security

Agreement with Pro Player pursuant to which Pro Player loaned Young $1,876,876.88. A copy

of the Loan and Security Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by

reference.

25. Among the additional documents Young was required to execute as the

“borrower” in order to close the Pro Player Loan were the following:

a. Promissory Note in the amount of $1,876,876.88;

7

b. Escrow Agreement, under which certain of Young’s salaried/bonus payments are subject to deposit in an escrow account and subsequent dispersal to Pro Player;

c. Employer Agreement, pursuant to which Young and his then-current employer irrevocably agreed that all sums payable to Young from his employer are subject to deposit in an escrow account;

d. Affidavits of Confession, pursuant to which Young as the borrower confessed judgment to Pro Player fro all sums due and owing under the Note; and

e. Closing Statement detailing the sources of funds and disbursement of funds under the Pro Player Loan.

Copies of the aforementioned documents are attached hereto as Exhibits B through F,

respectively, and incorporated herein by reference.

26. Young has no recollection of executing the signature pages to any of the Pro

Player Loan agreements—let alone the long, complicated legal documents that were necessary to

complete the Pro Player Loan transaction. The signature pages to the Pro Player Loan

documentation bearing Young’s alleged signature are each dated May 4, 2011, even though the

documents themselves were not finalized and signed off on until May 17, 2011—nearly two

weeks after Young supposedly executed such agreements.

27. The Pro Player Loan had a maturity date of January 7, 2013, and an interest rate

of 20%, which could fluctuate up to 34% in the event of default. Pro Player retained

$619,112.26 as prepaid interest on the loan, and, after other disbursements, Young was to receive

a total of $1,104,902.54, or 59% of the total loan proceeds.

28. Upon closing the Pro Player Loan, almost all of the loan proceeds were

immediately transferred over to a PFS-owned account.

29. Pro Player took no steps to ensure that Young actually was aware of or authorized

this loan. That was so despite the fact that, among other things: (i) the onerous terms of the loan,

8

including its very high interest rate, large immediate prepayment of interest (after that

prepayment and the deduction of various expenses only about 59% of the proceeds were being

paid over to Young); (ii) Young purportedly executed the loan documentation 13 days before the

documents themselves are dated; (iii) the signature pages on the loan documents are on separate,

unpaginated sheets so there is no assurance that Young was presented with the accurate or

complete copies of documents. These were, of course, facts that Pro Player well knew or should

have known, since it targeted—or perhaps more accurately victimized—these professional

athletes for its predatory lending practices. Indeed, a month before the Pro Player Loan was

finalized in May of 2011, Pro Player’s Darien Dash provided an interview to Yahoo!’s online

sports magazine in which he publicly “expressed concern that players might be entering into

these [high risk] agreements without competent legal counsel[.]” Rand Getlin, Cash-Strapped

NFL Players Seeking High-Risk ‘Lockout Loans’, ThePostGame.com (April 12, 2011).1 Having

openly acknowledged the inherent potential for abuse with such predatory loans to NFL players,

Mr. Dash and Pro Player nevertheless facilitated the very same type of high-risk loan to Young

without making a modicum of effort to ensure that Young himself was aware of the loan—let

alone that he fully understood the extraordinarily onerous terms of such loan.

30. Despite repeated inquiries to Peoples and Adams, Young does not know the

current status of, the location of, or who controls the funds from the proceeds of the Pro Player

Loan.

31. By letter dated June 6, 2012, counsel for Pro Player notified Young that certain

amounts due and owing to Pro Player had not been received from his employer and, therefore, an

event of default had occurred under the Loan and Security Agreement. The June 6 letter further

1 Available at http://www.thepostgame.com/features/201104/tpg-exclusive-cash-strapped-nfl-players-seeking-high-risk-lockout-loans.

9

stated that Pro Player had the right to immediately accelerate the loan, including the right to enter

judgment in New York against Young as the borrower, as well as the right to immediately

commence charging interest on the loan at the default rate of 30% per annum.

D. The Texas Action Against Pro Player, Peoples, PFS and Adams

32. On June 11, 2012, Young commenced an action against Peoples, PFS and Adams

for their conspiracy to commit fraud by filing a Verified Original Petition and Request for

Disclosure in the District Court of Harris County, Texas. Pro Player will be added as a

defendant to that action under the Amended Petition. See Young v. Peoples, et al., Case No.

2012-33871 (281st Dist. Ct., Harris Cty., Texas) (the “Texas Action”).

33. The Texas Action not only encompasses the conspiracy by Peoples and Adams to

defraud Young by deceitfully obtaining the Pro Player Loan under his identity—including Pro

Player’s failure to exercise reasonable care or competence in communicating information to

Young—but it also encompasses the litany of other financial schemes undertaken by Peoples and

Adams to misappropriate millions of dollars from Young’s earnings.

E. Pro Player’s Judgment by Confession

34. On July 2, 2012—roughly one month after Young commenced the Texas

Action—Pro Player filed the Confession of Judgment allegedly made by Young. Pro Player

claimed that total regular interest accrued on the $1,876,876.88 principal balance of the loan at

20% per annum amounted to $396,972.32 through June 5, 2012. It further claimed that default

interest on the loan at 30% per annum amounted to $41,651.28 through July 2, 2012. Deducting

the combined $438,623.60 in regular and default interest from the $619,112.26 in prepaid

interest, Pro Player credited Young with prepaid interest equal to $180,488.66 against the

$1,876,876.88 outstanding principal amount—leaving what it alleged was an outstanding

10

balance on the loan of $1,696,388.22. See Pro Player Funding LLC v. Young, Index No.

103168/2012 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. Cty.).

35. After applying certain adjustments, this Court entered judgment that same day for

the total sum of $1,695,070.54, together with post-judgment interest at 9% per annum until the

judgment is paid in full. The Confession of Judgment was supported by both the Affidavit of

Brian J. Jedwab, Managing Director of Pro Player, sworn to on June 12, 2012, and the purported

Affidavit of Young, sworn to on May 4, 2011, which Young asserts he was never shown. Copies

of the July 2, 2012 Judgment by Confession and supporting affidavits (without exhibits) are

attached hereto as Exhibit G and incorporated herein by reference.

Pro Player’s Judgment Enforcement Tactics

36. In May of 2012, Young signed a one-year contract with the Buffalo Bills and

began training camp with the team in July 2012. Thus, the recent public disclosure and ensuing

rumors of Young’s alleged default on the Pro Player Loan has coincided during a particularly

critical period in Young’s NFL career—with potential lasting implications for the upcoming

season and beyond.

37. Compounding the stress of such disclosure has been the harassing efforts of Pro

Player’s counsel in seeking discovery from both Young and the Buffalo Bills—including an

improper attempt to serve Young with papers while he was at the Buffalo Bills’ practice facility

during training camp in early August of 2012.

38. Counsel for Pro Player wrote to senior Buffalo Bills executives on July 24, 2012

to notify them that Pro Player intended to seek documents and depositions from them as part of

its discovery efforts.

11

39. On July 30, 2012, counsel for Pro Players also sent separate notification letters to

both Young and AFGM Enterprises Federal Credit Union enclosing restraining notices and

information subpoenas.

40. By letter dated August 8, 2012, counsel for Pro Player issued a Notice to Take

Deposition Upon Oral Examination of Vincent Young to Young’s counsel in Austin, Texas via

e-mail. Despite being notified of Young’s unavailability, Pro Player’s counsel responded via e-

mail by threatening Young with a series of harassing enforcement tactics, including

“involve[ing] the sheriff even if that means forcibly removing [Young] from practice.” In

addition, Pro Player’s counsel noted that “[w]e have at least one of [Young’s] bank accounts

with sufficient funds to cover this tied up and will have others similarly situated very soon.” Pro

Player’s counsel also made it clear that its enforcement activities would extend to issuing even

more deposition notices, including notices to Young’s current agent and “others to determine

other sources of funds and anticipated income.”

41. Knowing full well that Young was challenging the validity of the Pro Player Loan

based on his former representatives’ admitted fraudulent conduct—and also knowing full well

that Young was competing in pre-season training camp to secure a quarterback position on the

Buffalo Bills—Pro Player needlessly harassed both Young and the Buffalo Bills by subjecting

them to a relentless series of improper judgment enforcement tactics.

42. On August 27, 2012, the Buffalo Bills announced that Young was released from

the team. Nevertheless, Pro Player Pro Player’s efforts to needlessly harass Young and the

Buffalo Bills has continued unabated.

12

CAUSE OF ACTION

Fraud in the Judgment by Confession

43. Young repeats and realleges the allegations contained in Paragraphs 1 through 42

as if fully set forth herein.

44. Upon information and belief, Peoples, PFS and Adams fraudulently induced

Young to obtain a loan from Pro Player with the intent to misappropriate the loan proceeds for

their own personal use and enrichment.

45. Upon information and belief, the Affidavit of Confession of Judgment allegedly

sworn to and signed by Young on May 4, 2011 is a fraudulent affidavit, which was obtained by

either using a forgery of Young’s signature or without Young’s knowledge or consent.

46. In entering into the Pro Player Loan, Pro Player was, at minimum, negligent

and/or reckless (if not actually knowingly complicit in the fraud). At minimum, it turned a blind

eye to whether the Affidavit of Confession of Judgment and other Pro Player Loan agreements

were made without Young’s knowledge or consent and with the intent to defraud Young.

47. Young did not receive any consideration from Pro Player which would provide a

basis for its Judgment by Confession in the amount of nearly $1.7 million.

48. Young seeks declaratory relief from this Court stating that the Judgment by

Confession is fraudulent and, therefore, null and void and of no force or effect, and damages

against Pro Player for the injuries that he has sustained as a result of its wrongdoing.

13

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Young respectfully demands that this Court issue a judgment against

Defendant:

1. Vacating and setting aside the Affidavit of Confession of Judgment and the

Judgment obtained by Pro Player pursuant to the Affidavit of Confession of Judgment;

2. Damages against Pro Player for its wrongful actions;

3. For the costs and expenses incurred in connection with this action, including

reasonable attorney’s and costs; and

4. Granting such further relief as this Court deems just and proper.

Dated: New York, New York September 5, 2012

DEWEY PEGNO & KRAMARSKY LLP

By /s/ Thomas E. L. Dewey Thomas E. L. Dewey

Thomas E. L. Dewey David S. Pegno David C. Marden 777 Third Avenue, 37th Floor

New York, New York 10017 (212) 943-9000 OF COUNSEL: Trey L. Dolezal KASLING, HEMPHILL, DOLEZAL & ATWELL, L.L.P. 301 Congress Avenue, Suite 300 Austin, Texas 78701 (512) 472-6800 Attorneys for Plaintiff Vincent P. Young

14

VERIFICATION

THOMAS E. L. DEWEY, an attorney admitted to practice in the Courts of the

State of New York, affirms as follows under the penalties of perjury:

I am a member of Dewey Pegno & Kramarsky LLP, counsel to Plaintiff Vincent

Young in this action. I have reviewed the foregoing Verified Complaint and know the contents

thereof and the same is true to my knowledge, except as to the matters stated to be alleged upon

information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true.

I am providing this verification pursuant to CPLR 3020(d)(3), because Mr. Young

is not a resident in the County of New York, which is the county where my office is located.

Dated: New York, New York September 5, 2012

/s/ Thomas E. L. Dewey Thomas E. L. Dewey