Colacurcio Partners Sued; Ex-Strip Club Pal Says They Asked Him to Help Pay Crime Fine

The blowback from the Frank Colacurcio Sr. racketeering case continues to spread with yet another lawsuit, this one filed by a former part-owner of Honey's, the Everett-area strip property turned over to the government as part of a plea-bargained settlement. Phil McKibben says he was screwed over by his four partners, including Frank Colacurcio Jr. Never indicted, McKibben says he got nothing in return for the club and was even told to pay $145,000 as part of his partners' plea. He didn't.

McKibben is suing Leroy Christiansen, David Ebert and Steven Fueston, partners of late stripper king Colacurcio Sr. The three pleaded guilty to racketeering and prostitution charges in connection with their operation of Honey's, Rick's in Lake City, and two other Colacurcio clubs. They received probation in return for forfeiting the four club properties, worth $4.5 million, to the U.S.

Also being sued by McKibben in King County Superior Court is Frank Jr., who pleaded guilty in the federal case and faces a year in prison. In a separate King County civil case, Frankie is being sued by the Christiansen-Ebert-Fueston threesome, who accuse him of siphoning off $9 million in club receipts. Frankie is being sued by one of his ex-wives as well for failing to make child support payments.

In his lawsuit filed July 30, McKibben, who owned 25 percent of the now-demolished Honey's, says he and the threesome (Frankie was absent) met prior to the criminal plea agreement and voted 3-1 to forfeit the property to the feds; he voted against the deal, but was supposed to get a cash settlement (amount undisclosed) anyway. He didn't, he says.

Additionally, the other partners voted to hand over an additional $725,000 from Honey's corporation to the U.S. as part of the plea agreement - $145,000 from each of the five partners, including Colacurcio. McKibbon voted no.

Though he was identified on tax forms as a partner/investor in the club, McKibben apparently was not an active participant in the operations. He is seeking unspecified damages, claiming that his partners' illegal activities destroyed the business, resulting in a "substantial financial loss" to him.

comments powered by Disqus