Having already sued her former business managers for allegedly making her breast cancer worse by neglecting to pay a medical insurance premium on her behalf, former “Beverly Hills, 90210” actress Shannen Doherty wants to expand her complaint to add new allegations, including that she was overcharged of thousands of dollars in management fees.
But lawyers for Steven D. Blatt, a defendant in the suit along with the firm of Tanner, Mainstain, Glynn & Johnson, state in court papers filed Wednesday that the proposed revisions are the actress’ answer to the defendants’ refusal to accede to her demands to agree to settle the case for a large sum.
Doherty, 44, filed her original suit Aug. 19 in Los Angeles Superior Court, alleging negligence, breach of contract and claiming the company put its own interests ahead of those of the actress. Blatt is a former partner with Tanner, Mainstain, Glynn & Johnson, the suit states.
According to the lawsuit, Doherty lost her Screen Actors Guild medical insurance in February 2014 after the company failed to pay her premium, causing the policy to be canceled. Because she had no insurance, she did not regularly visit a physician, the suit states.
After the coverage was reinstated, Doherty made a doctor’s appointment and was told in March that she has breast cancer, according to her court papers.
“Plaintiff also was informed that had she been insured and able to visit her doctor, the cancer could potentially have been stopped, thus obviating the need for the future treatment that (she) likely will have to suffer through now,” according to the complaint.
Doherty has not been able to work since the diagnosis and the news of her illness has caused her “severe emotional distress,” the suit states.
According to Doherty’s lawyers’ most recent filing, accounting records provided by the Tanner firm show that in addition to the alleged overcharges in management fees, there have been “numerous unexplained transfers” to unidentified individuals and accounts from Doherty’s holdings.
Her taxes have not been managed properly and $50,000 in insurance proceeds meant to compensate her for poor work done on a property she owned that was damaged in a storm was not turned over to her, her attorneys’ court papers allege.
“Further, defendants, including Blatt, improperly disclosed private details of (Doherty’s ) financial affairs to third parties without (her) authorization,” Doherty’s attorneys state in their court papers.
“After gaining control of their clients’ cash and assets, they find a way to lose it, sometimes by gross incompetence, sometimes by self-dealing and outright theft,” the proposed Doherty amended complaint alleges.
But Blatt’s lawyers state in their court papers that Doherty has “improper motives” in asking to file an amended complaint.
“Specifically, plaintiff’s counsel send defendant’s counsel a letter in which plaintiff made a demand to settle the case for a substantial amount of money,” Blatt’s attorneys wrote. “In the absence of such accession, plaintiff’s counsel threatened to expand the litigation in this case.”
Lawyers for the Tanner firm have filed court papers joining Blatt’s opposition to Doherty’s motion to expand her complaint. A hearing is scheduled Nov. 3 before Judge Susan Bryant-Deason.
