Trial Date Set for Former Shareholder's Lawsuit Against Writers' Group Film Corp; Defendants Lose Motion to Quash Service

La Jolla, California, UNITED STATES

LOS ANGELES, Sept. 4, 2011 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Private investor, George Sharp, who has filed a civil action (Los Angeles County Division of California Superior Court Case No. BC461550) for Fraud, Negligent Misrepresentation, violation of California Corporations Code Section 25400, and violations of the California Business and Professions Codes 17200 (Unfair Business Practices) and 17500 (False Advertising) against Writers' Group Film Corp., Inc. ("Writers' Group") (Pink Sheets:WRIT), its wholly owned subsidiary Front Row Networks, Inc ("Front Row"), and its current and former officers, announced today that a date of April 30, 2012 has been set for a jury trial.

The trial date was set following a hearing on a motion brought by Defendants Writers' Group, Front Row and CEO and President, John Diaz to quash the service of the complaint filed in this case.

In ruling against the Defendants, the Honorable Judge Amy Hogue lamented the fact that, "a lot of energy and money was expended", in bringing this needless motion. Defendants' Attorney, W. Joseph Anderson of Hamrick & Evans, LLP, argued that the Defendants were not servable at the address listed as the corporate office, namely, 8200 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 8200, Beverly Hills, California. Judge Hogue called the argument "disingenuous", as both Writers' Group and Front Row filed that address with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Judge questioned Writers' Group and Front Row for not having registered an Agent for Service of Process as required by the State of California. Within his opposition, Mr. Sharp claimed that he would not have had to avail himself of the right to substitute service had the Defendants complied with the law.

Judge Hogue also agreed with Mr. Sharp's representation that under the California Code of Civil Procedure, substitute service of Mr. Diaz at the Writers' Group office was reasonable, in spite of Mr. Anderson's claims that Mr. Diaz maintains no presence at the company's only known office.

Mr. Sharp, who is not represented by counsel, commented, "What was the sense of spending the Defendants' limited resources on such a frivolous motion? If the Defendants are so eager to 'actively contest' the lawsuit, as Mr. Diaz has claimed, and 'expect to be fully exonerated', then why try and argue service which can only delay the proceedings?"

In a nod to his supporters, Mr. Sharp continued, "Many of you have asked to join me in this litigation. While I appreciate your kind words with respect to my efforts, I am not an attorney and therefore cannot offer to add Plaintiffs to my complaint or provide legal advice, except to say that you should seek the counsel of an attorney."

Further and ongoing information about this lawsuit and a copy of the complaint as well as the aforementioned motion and opposition can be obtained at the website: Get instant alerts about this lawsuit by becoming a follower at



Contact Data