Mark Zuckerberg vs. neighbor dispute gets even weirder

[irfan_pak10]

A California state judge has refused Mark Zuckerberg's request to dismiss fraud charges that his neighbor brought against him.

In the latest turn in this crazy story, a jury will now have to decide if the Facebook CEO perpetrated fraud. Real estate developer, Mircea Voskerician, claims that Zuckerberg promised to introduce him to his high-powered friends in Silicon Valley -- which he apparently didn't follow through on.

And in yet another twist, Voskerician's attorney David Draper also appealed the court to withdraw from the case. Draper cited two rules that state his participation could present ethical dilemmas.
Judge Lucas is expected to make a ruling on Draper's petition next week, which could potentially delay other decisions in the case.

What's going on here?
Voskerician had owned the rights to buy the property adjoining Zuckerberg's backyard in 2012, according to court documents. He offered to sell his interest in the land to Zuckerberg so the Facebook (FB, Tech30)CEO could gain more privacy.
Zuckerberg opted to buy the rights, but Voskerician rejected that deal. That's when things got messy.
At a meeting with Zuckerberg's financial advisors, Voskerician says he offered Zuckerberg a discount, in exchange for introducing him to his Silicon Valley network of friends and associates and providing referrals to help boost his business.
Voskerician says he agreed to sell for $1.7 million "plus [Mr. Zuckerberg's] promises of personal referrals and business promotion activities" -- promises Voskerician claims Zuckerberg hasn't kept.
Judge Lucas still needs to rule whether the breach-of-contract claims should be thrown out.
David Draper did not respond immediately to requests for comment.

[bryant.coleman]

This Voskerician guy sounds like a fraud to me. If Zuckerberg had promised him something, then he should come up with the proof. As far as I know, this guy doesn't have any evidence to prove his stupid claim. I know these real estate guys. Most of them are thugs and crooks, who try to steal money from both the buyer and the seller.

[Bit_Happy]

This Voskerician guy sounds like a fraud to me. If Zuckerberg had promised him something, then he should come up with the proof. As far as I know, this guy doesn't have any evidence to prove his stupid claim. I know these real estate guys. Most of them are thugs and crooks, who try to steal money from both the buyer and the seller.

...and Zuck is a fraud and cheat who hacked into Harvard computers to get free hosting to start Facebook.
"Thugs and crooks" everywhere.

[Possum577]

This Voskerician guy sounds like a fraud to me. If Zuckerberg had promised him something, then he should come up with the proof. As far as I know, this guy doesn't have any evidence to prove his stupid claim. I know these real estate guys. Most of them are thugs and crooks, who try to steal money from both the buyer and the seller.

Yeah, I agree.

This is a great lesson for people - don't say something like "sure I'll introduce you to some people" as part of a formal contract. It's so vague there's no telling  where this guy and Zuck would agree on the correct volume of people that could have been considered introductions to call the contract complete.

This is bound to get dropped from court because it's ridiculous. It's a waste of the courts time. And both of them got something out of the contract. Zuck got his rights to buy the land and this other guy got paid for those rights. That's it!