Court documents examined by HuffPost Celebrity reveal new details about Nicole "Snooki" Polizzi's October 2011 lawsuit: The star claims that a licensing company led her to believe that she could make $100 million over three years if she signed with the firm. Instead, she earned just $250,000 and decided to sue.
SRG Ventures fought back in December, filing a $7 million counterclaim against Snooki that accuses her of sabotaging the deals the firm was trying to make with several brands.
Snooki's original legal filing also claims (rather surprisingly) that any association with an alcohol brand would be unacceptable to her and inappropriate for her image. In the filing, Snooki is described as "a crowd favorite" who "is now one of the most recognizable faces in the entertainment industry."
"Snooki filed a suit in October 2011 to end her relationship with SRG, as they didn’t deliver the deals or money they had led her to expect she would receive," a friend of the "Jersey Shore" star tells me. "Now she’s fighting back against the counterclaim that she didn't hold up her side of the agreement."
According to court documents cited by the New York Post, SRG is arguing that Snooki's unladylike behavior, culminating in her 2010 arrest for disorderly conduct, made it difficult to find brands that wanted to be associated with her. Disney, Macy's and Target were among those the firm claims to have approached.
But Snooki's lawyers contend that's just an excuse. "Ms. Polizzi recently filed claims for fraud and breach of contract against SRG," Snooki's attorney Brian Procel told me. "The court papers allege that SRG lied about their connections in the industry and failed to secure licensing agreements in accordance with the parties' written contract. We intend to litigate this case aggressively -- SRG's attempt to take advantage of Ms. Polizzi will not be tolerated."