RHOSLC’s Lisa Barlow Scoffs at ‘One-Time’ Friend’s Claims She Owes Him $400,000: ‘Fanciful Tale’

2 weeks ago 2

Real Housewives of Salt Lake City star Lisa Barlow accused her “one-time” friend, Bart Carlson, of concocting a “fanciful tale” in court as she fought to dismiss his $400,000 lawsuit, In Touch can exclusively report.

According to court documents obtained by In Touch, Lisa, 49, slammed Bart’s accusations she failed to repay him loans he allegedly provided her from 2010 to 2018.

Her lawyer wrote, “Lisa Barlow and Bart Carlson were one time friends and business partners in a restaurant in Park City, Utah, called The Silver Restaurant. They sold that restaurant in 2016. While they had intermittent contact with each other afterwards, they went their separate ways and eventually ceased contact.”

Lisa’s lawyer continued, “Now, years later, Carlson has concocted a fanciful tale in which he purports to have bankrolled Barlow and her companies with an open line of credit that had no terms or conditions and no repayment date.”

In her motion to dismiss, Lisa argued the claims Bart brought were filed past the statue of limitations. Her lawyer also said Bart failed to state the elements of an enforceable contract.

Lisa Barlow

Getty

Further, Lisa’s lawyer said, “[Bart’s] Complaint clearly demonstrates that the payments he contends he made were 14 years ago or similar date in the past. It is simply not equitable or Motion to Dismiss called for by the law to allow claims that have seemingly festered for over 10 years be brought now, especially since [Bart] is in fact a business owner. This unsound commercial practice should not be rewarded by allowing [Bart] to proceed forward.”

On October 7, the judge denied Lisa’s plea to dismiss the case. The court ruled that Bart had pled sufficient facts to withstand dismissal of his case.

Days later, Lisa filed her official answer to her former friend’s lawsuit.

She denied all allegations of wrongdoing. Her lawyer added, “[Bart’s] claims are barred, in whole or in part, by the contributory negligence of [Bart].”

In addition, her lawyer said, “All acts or omissions of Barlow were undertaken in good faith, without malice or recklessness, and were fully justified and reasonable under the circumstance.”

Lisa also argued that Bart’s claims are barred “to the extent they are based on unenforceable or invalid agreements.”

The Bravo star demanded the case be dismissed and her legal fees be paid by Bart.

Lisa Barlow

Mike Marsland/Getty Images for Hayu

Back in June, the reality star’s longtime friend Bart sued Lisa and her companies, Vida Tequila and Luxe Marketing.

Bart claimed that Lisa approached him in May 2010, explaining her companies were “experiencing severe financial difficulties.”

In the suit, Bart said Lisa asked that he loan funds to her and to her companies on an “ongoing basis so that” she could pay personal expenses and also “so that Luxe and Vida Tequila could pay their expenses as well.”

Bart said he agreed to loan Lisa the money. He said he made numerous transfers and paid countless bills for Lisa from May 2010 to 2018.

He said Lisa even had him make direct payments to certain third parties “because she desired that John Barlow, her husband and Vida Tquila’s other principal, not be aware that Vida Tequila lacked sufficient funds to purchase product or pay legal bills.”

Bart said he even made payments on an American Express card issued in Lisa’s name. The suit added, “Additionally, per [Lisa’s] request and pursuant to the Loan Agreement, on or about December 7, 2015, [Bart] paid a total of $32,320.00 as a payment on the balance owing on [Lisa’s] personal Range Rover automobile loan.”

Get This Ultrasonic Jewelry Cleaner for 90% Off!

In the lawsuit, he said the total loaned to Lisa and her companies was $410,842.36.

Lisa Barlow

Axelle/Bauer-Griffin/FilmMagic

In court documents, Bart said he attempted to ask Lisa multiple times for the money, but she kept pushing it off. He said in March he formally demanded full repayment of the loan amount.

“Despite that demand, none of the Defendants have repaid any portion of the Total Loan Amount to Plaintiffs. The Total Loan Amount remains outstanding in full,” the lawsuit read.

A judge has yet to rule.

Read Entire Article