Shohei Ohtani and his agent accused of alleged sabotage of real estate project in Hawaii
Developer claims Ohtani pushed him out of luxury Hapuna Coast home plan
A real estate developer and a real estate agent in Hawaii have filed a lawsuit against Shohei Ohtani and his manager, Nez Balelo, accusing them of orchestrating his dismissal from a luxury residential project valued at $240 million of dollars. The development, called The Vista at Mauna Kea Resort, was planned for the Big Island's coveted Hapuna Coast, the AP reported.
The lawsuit, filed Friday in Hawaii Circuit Court, contends that Ohtani was brought in solely for his promotional and branding value, but that both he and Balelo exploited their celebrity status to destabilize and ultimately dismantle the plaintiffs' roles, Kevin J. Hayes Sr. and Tomoko Matsumoto.
A luxury project and a fractured relationship
According to the lawsuit, Balelo began demanding increasingly larger concessions and threatened to remove Ohtani from the deal if they didn't comply. Eventually, Kingsbarn Realty Capital” a partner with Hayes and Matsumoto” caved and, in what they call a coordinated ambush, fired both men last month. The plaintiffs say they could lose millions of dollars in projected construction profits, management fees, and sales commissions as a result. They also claim that their relationship with Ohtani was part of a bold marketing strategy to appeal to the Japanese luxury vacation home market.
In promotional materials, Ohtani was listed as the development's "first resident" and a spokesperson for the brand. The brochure even indicated that he planned to purchase one of the 14 residences, spend time there during the offseason, and build a private training facility.
The development includes homes with an average price of $17.3 million, access to the historic Mauna Kea Resort, Hapuna Beach—ranked the best in the U.S. by Conde Nast Traveler—and two golf courses designed by Arnold Palmer and Robert Trent Jones Sr.
“This case involves abuse of power,” the legal document states. “Defendants used threats and baseless claims to force a business partner to breach its contractual obligations and deprive plaintiffs of the project they conceived and built.”