A closely watched lawsuit in Las Vegas, Nevada, Case No. A-18-779645-B, between businessman Michael Evers and serial debtor in default, Eric Brashear came to its conclusion on January 24, 2020, after nearly two years of contentious litigation. The facts of the case were simple. Evers, who has business interests ranging from highly profitable Las Vegas tourist attractions to the world's largest solar-powered data center worth billions, and Brashear, who owns a struggling shooting range geared toward tourists, used to be close friends.

Evers loaned Brashear a large six-figure sum of cash as a lifeline to bail out Brashear's plague of poor financial decisions as Brashear was in imminent danger of his Las Vegas home being foreclosed.

Brashear showed his gratitude by failing to repay his friend in a timely manner as they had previously agreed. Perhaps Brashear's desperate need for an infusion of cash should have been a red flag to Evers, but Evers was doing as any loyal friend would and gave Brashear the benefit of the doubt. Brashear did not refute he breached the loan agreement, but he brazenly sued Evers after Evers attempted to recover money which was legally his to recover.

What was Eric Brashear's justification? He claimed his failure to repay was due to a slump in business caused by the 2017 Las Vegas massacre where 58 people were killed and another 413 were wounded. This line of defense taken by Brashear caused outrage and Brashear found himself the subject of media scrutiny and contemptuous public comments.

The entire 148-minute video deposition of Eric Brashear is included at the bottom of this article.

There are also video clips of the deposition for readers to view. Below, Eric Brashear contradicted his claims of being unable to pay his debts due to financial hardship caused by the 2017 mass shooting when he stated under oath his profits soared in 2018.

Plainly spoken, Eric Brashear attempted to manipulate the circumstances following the murder of innocent concert-goers for his financial benefit and when he was forced to tell the truth he admitted his lies for the public to see in shock and horror.

Eric Brashear's sympathy seeking didn't impress the judge

Eighth Judicial District Court Judge Elizabeth Gonzalez, who presided over the case, was not persuaded by Brashear.

Gonzalez found it as a conclusion of law, "The Court concludes failure to make timely payments on the Promissory Note is a default." Gonzalez also decisively found as a conclusion of law, "There is no breach of the covenant of good faith or fair dealing." This conclusion eliminated Eric Brashear's argument which attempted to muddy the waters by accusing Evers of business interference.

Gonzalez further wrote, "The interference claims did not cause damage to the Plaintiffs [Brashear]; Plaintiffs' [Brashear's] decision to terminate the employees resulted in the loss claimed by the Plaintiffs." In other words, Eric Brashear fired his own employees and then attempted to blame the firing on Evers, by apparent osmosis, when it was the largess of Evers who graciously hired several of Brashear's former employees to work for him.

Furthermore, an exposé published during the trial that interviewed Brashear's former employees uncovered treatment which was described as abusive and was corroborated by multiple sources. Judge Gonzalez found it as fact, "Evers accused Brashear of sending empty envelopes with no checks for the November and December 2018 payments." During his deposition, Eric Brashear opened the envelope sent to Michael Evers in December of 2018 and it was empty.


Eric Brashear denied by Steve Wynn's former business partner's brother

Fred Doumani, the brother of Ed Doumani, Steve Wynn's former business partner, was brought forward as a witness by Eric Brashear. Discussions had previously taken place where Brashear sought to gain a loan from Fred Doumani.

Brashear attempted to claim because Evers sought to recover the money he loaned to Brashear, which Brashear then sued Evers for, to thwart the recovery, was the cause of Fred Doumani declining to loan Brashear any cash. The premise of the argument was absurd. During his deposition, Eric Brashear admitted under oath, "Ultimately, Fred made the decision to not get involved based on the lead cleanup." Judge Gonzalez found as fact, "Plaintiffs did not establish that Evers interfered with potential loans from Doumani."

Now Eric Brashear Must Pay Hundreds Of Thousands In Legal Fees

As a consequence of the ruling, Eric Brashear is now liable for all of the legal fees Michael Evers accrued as that too was a stipulation of the loan agreement.

Eric Brashear was asking during his deposition, "What was your understanding of this provision for collection costs?" Eric Brashear conceded, "That if we didn't make the payments that we would be responsible for the collection costs required to recover his money."

Brashear was further asked by Evers' lead counsel Joseph Gutierrez, "And collection costs would include attorney fees. It says whether or not a lawsuit was commenced. Was that your understanding?" Eric Brashear again conceded, "Yeah, my understanding was if we failed to make the payments and he needed to incur collection costs to get that money, to recover his money, that we would cover those costs."

Eric Brashear May have more legal trouble on the horizon

Eric Brashear claimed poverty and that he couldn't afford to pay Michael Evers, but he took it upon himself to retain the services of several law firms and rack up a six-figure bill for services most of which he has not yet been paid.

It is expected some of Brashear's former legal team will soon be filing a lawsuit against him for non-payment. He will now likely be effectively paying over three times what he would have paid had he simply repaid his friend.

Judge Gonzalez ruled as a finding of fact, "Section IV of the Promissory Note states that 'If any payment obligation under this Note is not paid when due, the Borrower promises to pay all costs of collection, including reasonable attorney fees, whether or not a lawsuit is commenced as part of the collection process.'" Those attorney fees are estimated to be at least $100,000 as Evers retained the services of the high powered and nationally feared firm of Maier Gutierrez & Associates who have the distinction of previously winning a $2.2 billion judgment which is the largest single civil case award in Nevada history.