Photo 
 
 Mark Zuckerberg likes his privacy, but he’s in an increasingly public battle with a would-be neighbor in Palo Alto, Calif., that threatens to expose details of his personal life and conduct. 
 
 New court documents were filed on Wednesday in a continuing lawsuit against Mr. Zuckerberg, the Facebook co-founder and chief executive, revealing a dispute that touches on various hot buttons of boom-time Silicon Valley: privacy, networking, precious real estate, and the pairing of youth and affluence. 
 
 In one sworn document, a real estate broker for the man suing Mr. Zuckerberg testified that Mr. Zuckerberg’s own real estate broker referred to him as “just a kid.” 
 
 It appears to be the kind of gloves-off tenor characterizing the dispute. One of the documents asks the court for permission to get details about Mr. Zuckerberg’s personal finances and net worth, creating yet another potential opening in the walls Mr. Zuckerberg has sought to build around his private life. 
 
 Lawyers for Mr. Zuckerberg have said in court documents that the suit involves aggressive tactics aimed at leveraging a settlement and that the would-be neighbor is “going out of his way to embarrass Mr. Zuckerberg and pressure those around him at every turn.” 
 
 Separately, Mr. Zuckerberg was deposed for the case in law offices in San Jose, Calif., for part of the morning and much of the afternoon. A spokeswoman for Facebook said the company does not, as a matter of policy, comment on Mr. Zuckerberg’s personal affairs. But Patrick Gunn, a lawyer for Mr. Zuckerberg, said “the claims asserted in the lawsuit have no merit and my client intends to defend them vigorously.” 
 
 As described in the lawsuit, in 2012 a part-time local developer named Mircea Voskerician went under contract to spend $4.8 million to buy a house adjoining Mr. Zuckerberg’s residence. The developer expressed interest in building a nearly 10,000-square-foot house on the property. 
 
 But late that year, he offered to sell a small section of the property to Mr. Zuckerberg as a way for the Facebook chief to have more privacy. 
 
 A meeting that took place at Facebook headquarters in Menlo Park, Calif., on Dec. 4, 2012, lies at the heart of the suit. Mr. Voskerician contends that he discussed a deal to sell his interest in the entire property, not just part of it. In exchange, he says, Mr. Zuckerberg would make introductions between him and powerful people in Silicon Valley, potential future business partners and clients. 
 
 But Mr. Voskerician claims in the suit that Mr. Zuckerberg did not follow through. The latest documents, filed on Wednesday, find some corroboration for that position in the form of a sworn declaration by John Forsyth James, a real estate agent for Mr. Voskerician. The declaration was filed by Mr. Voskerician’s lawyer. 
 
 In the declaration, Mr. James said that by the time the meeting took place, Mr. Voskerician had already gotten an offer from another party to take over his contract to purchase the property for $4.3 million — a figure that does not include the actual price of the house. It would have been a huge overnight profit, perhaps reflecting the heat of the market in some of the most desirable locations, rubbing elbows with the technorati. 
 
 Mr. James says that at the meeting at Facebook headquarters, Mr. Zuckerberg said he could not match the $4.3 million price. Instead, he expressed an interest in getting a discount on the property and, according to the court filings, “could offer him a relationship if he were to agree to a discount,” Mr. James said in his statement. The statement reads that Mr. Zuckerberg “would introduce Mr. Voskerician to other influential people (including persons associated with Google, Facebook and Apple) who might be interested in real estate or other transactional relationships.” 
 
 “He indicated that he would refer Mr. Voskerician to others and promote him through his connections, his friends, clients of Facebook and others that Mr. Zuckerberg knew to be influential,” the declaration says. 
 
 It says that at the conclusion of the meeting, Mr. Zuckerberg’s real estate agent, Terri Kerwin, said, “Mark always keeps his promises,” according to Mr. James’s declaration. (It was Ms. Kerwin, said Mr. James, who referred earlier in the negotiations to Mr. Zuckerberg as “just a kid.”) 
 
 A few days later, the sides reach a deal: Mr. Zuckerberg would pay Mr. Voskerician $1.7 million — a steep discount compared with $4.3 million — to take over the contract to buy the house and, according to Mr. James, would provide the developer a social network. It was not to be, Mr. James said in his declaration: “Ultimately, Mr. Zuckerberg failed to honor his promise.” 
 
 In court documents previously filed, lawyers for Mr. Zuckerberg have said that the Facebook chief purchased the right to the adjoining property to protect his privacy. Mr. Voskerician “threatened” to build “a 9,600-square-foot mansion stretching nearly to Mr. Zuckerberg’s property line.” ||||| The e-mail was blunt: Mark Zuckerberg had no interest in playing nice with the guy from next door. 
 
 “How do we make this go away?” a Zuckerberg adviser wrote to his real estate agent. “MZ is not going to take a meeting with him ... ever.” 
 
 Now that 2013 e-mail, and others like it, are at the center of property war gone rogue. On one side is Zuckerberg, the billionaire founder of Facebook Inc. On the other is the businessman from next door, a real estate developer who hoped to profit from Zuckerberg’s desire for privacy. 
 
 This is no back-fence squabble over who trims the tree. The story laid out in court documents shows how Silicon Valley’s power elite fends off those seeking to force their way into the club and share the wealth. 
 
 At its heart are themes that have been with Zuckerberg since Facebook’s inception and popularized via film in “The Social Network,” the fictionalized look at the hoodied man-boy behind the company: brass-knuckle tactics, bravura performances, whiffs of betrayal. Only this time, the fuss is over his lot in a once ordinary Northern California subdivision. 
 
 The Winklevoss twins once claimed Zuckerberg, their former classmate and business partner, reneged on his promises. The developer in this case, Mircea Voskerician, also says Zuckerberg broke his word. Zuckerberg’s lawyers say that’s nonsense -- and that Voskerician is just trying to squeeze money out of a billionaire. 
 
 ‘Good Neighbor’ 
 
 The facts, in a nutshell, are these: 
 
 In November 2012, Voskerician was in a contract to buy the property behind Zuckerberg’s home in Palo Alto, California. He sent a letter to the Facebook chief executive officer saying he planned to tear down the home and build a 9,600 square-foot replacement. It would overlook the back of the Zuckerberg abode, a view that would include the master bedroom. 
 
 Only then Voskerician made an unusual offer. Calling himself a “good neighbor,” he proposed to sell Zuckerberg a slice of the property at “100% premium” to afford him more privacy. Within two weeks, they agreed that Zuckerberg would buy Voskerician’s contractual rights to purchase the entire property. Voskerician claims he had a competing offer and that he sold Zuckerberg those rights at a steep discount. 
 
 Why would Voskerician do that? This is where the two sides disagree. Voskerician, in court filings, says Zuckerberg promised to introduce him to contacts in Silicon Valley, a valuable endorsement for anyone. Nothing was put in writing. 
 
 Zuckerberg’s lawyers deny that and all of Voskerician’s claims. Whatever the case, the developer sued and unless the two sides reach a deal the case will go to trial. If Voskerician wins, he may get the property back. 
 
 Inner Circle 
 
 The e-mails that have emerged during litigation offer a glimpse into Zuckerberg’s private universe. And it’s clear from the start that his inner circle was livid about their boss’s enterprising neighbor. 
 
 In one e-mail, Divesh Makan, a financial adviser to Zuckerberg, called Voskerician’s offer an “obscene proposal.” 
 
 In another, Anikka Fragodt, then Zuckerberg’s personal assistant, wrote: “This type of behavior makes me want to punch people in the face.” She added a sad-face emoticon. 
 
 Zuckerberg’s wife, Priscilla Chan, lamented: “It’s stuff like this that makes me so sad and angry.” She asked whether Makan could quietly figure out if the couple could buy Voskerician’s entire lot. 
 
 ‘Extortive’ Tactics 
 
 Zuckerberg’s lawyers, in court filings, say the developer employed “extortive” tactics. They cited a Nov. 28, 2012, e-mail that Voskerician sent to his real estate agent in which he suggested the Facebook chief had a chance to buy some privacy. 
 
 If “Mark plans to live there long term,” Voskerician wrote, he has “one shot to ensure his privacy is where it needs to be.” He goes on to say the new home would be built “overlooking his backyard/Master Bedroom.” 
 
 Voskerician’s lawyer says his client wasn’t trying to squeeze anyone. 
 
 E-mails from Voskerician show how much he wanted to gain entry to the rarefied realms of Mark Zuckerberg. 
 
 In an April 13, 2013, e-mail to Zuckerberg, Voskerician asked to “shake hands” on the deal and begin the introductions. 
 
 “Mr. Zuckerberg, First I am happy that I could maintain your privacy by selling you the Hamilton property,” the Romanian-born Voskerician wrote. “Second, I wanted to meet and shake hands for the transaction and discuss your offering of working with you in the future as you stated you have built Facebook on connections that you have with others in Silicon Valley. One of the reasons I went with your offer other than maintaining your privacy was your offering to help me get my homes, development projects, in front of your Facebook employees and build a relationship with you.” 
 
 Sustainable Living 
 
 Voskerician also asked for a 30-minute meeting with Zuckerberg to discuss a project involving “modern science based sustainable social living” using an an “open source” model akin to Facebook’s “Open Compute Platform.” 
 
 E-mails suggest the Zuckerberg team had zero interest. 
 
 Makan, the financial adviser, told Zuckerberg’s real estate agent the Facebook chief was unlikely to meet with Voskerician at all. 
 
 “But if it means I have to waste 30 min on MZs behalf I would grudgingly do it if you advised this,” he wrote in an April 2013 e-mail. 
 
 Voskerician kept nudging, to no avail. By November 2013, Facebook employees were starting to worry he could cause problems. Zuckerberg’s assistant, Andrea Besmehn, looped in the company’s head of executive protection in the event the standoff “escalates from either a security or PR standpoint.” 
 
 ‘Light’ Help 
 
 Besmehn sent an e-mail later that day on which the case could now turn: 
 
 “I just had a quick chat with Mark on this issue -- and he said he does remember saying that he would help this guy in a ‘light’ way,” Besmehn wrote to Makan and others. “Is there a way when we chat with him that we can find out a way for us (not necessarily Mark) to help him with something small? Also…we’ll have to manage this carefully because we don’t want to give an inch and then …” 
 
 Voskerician’s attorney, David Draper, declined to comment on the complaint, which includes allegations of fraud, breach of contract and misrepresentation. Zuckerberg denied all the allegations in an October court filing. His lawyer, Patrick Gunn, and Makan’s lawyer, Daniel Bergeson, declined to comment on the case. 
 
 While verbal promises can be difficult to pin down, Voskerician’s claim that he had an agreement stands a good chance of being used as evidence, said Miriam Cherry, a professor at Saint Louis University law school. 
 
 ‘Loose Standard’ 
 
 The e-mail from Zuckerberg’s assistant saying he recalled agreeing to help Voskerician in a “light way,” while not a first-hand account, “is still convincing as to what his state of mind was,” Cherry said in an interview. California, she said, has a “loose standard” of letting such understandings be used as evidence. 
 
 David Min, a law professor at the University of California at Irvine, said the case may come down to whether Voskerician can prove Zuckerberg made a real promise. 
 
 “Oftentimes these can come down to a he-said, she-said face-off,” Min said. 
 
 Exclusive insights on technology around the world. Get Fully Charged, from Bloomberg Technology. 
 
 However the case turns out, Zuckerberg’s privacy is unlikely to be threatened by other neighbors thanks to Makan, the former Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley executive who described his team as “Mark’s family office.” Makan’s clients include Twitter Inc. co-founder Jack Dorsey, Facebook Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg and her husband, SurveyMonkey.com LLC CEO Dave Goldberg, said a person familiar with some of his clients who declined to be identified because the information isn’t public. 
 
 Aaron Zamost, a spokesman for Dorsey, Genevieve Grdina, a spokeswoman for Facebook, and Donna Brown, a spokeswoman for SurveyMonkey, weren’t immediately available for comment. 
 
 As Voskerician pressed his demands more insistently, Makan’s firm, Iconiq Capital LLC, snapped up other properties surrounding Zuckerberg’s home, buying one for $10.5 million, another for $14 million and a third for $14.5 million, according to the Santa Clara County tax assessor’s office. Those prices eclipsed the assessed value of the properties, which in 2013 were less than $3.5 million combined. ||||| Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg. Adnan Abidi/Reuters In 2013, news broke that Facebook billionaire Mark Zuckerberg had bought four houses adjacent to his Palo Alto home. 
 
 Zuckerberg reportedly scooped up the four houses when he heard that a developer planned to build a large home on one of the lots behind his property. 
 
 But in May 2014, the developer, Mircea Voskerician, filed suit against Zuckerberg, claiming that the billionaire never followed through on an agreement the two had made in secret. 
 
 In November 2012, Voskerician reportedly sent Zuckerberg a letter saying he planned to tear down the home behind the Zuckerberg home and build a 9,600-square-foot mansion in its place. The new home, he said, would have a direct view of the Zuckerbergs' house, including the master bedroom. 
 
 Numerous emails between Voskerician and Zuckerberg have been unearthed during litigation. 
 
 According to court filings reported on by Bloomberg, Voskerician then made Zuckerberg an offer that would preserve his privacy: He would sell Zuckerberg the entire property if the Facebook billionaire would introduce the developer to his important Silicon Valley contacts. According to Voskerician's suit, the two parties agreed on this, though it was never put in writing. 
 
 Voskerician writes in an April 13, 2013, email to Zuckerberg: 
 
 "Mr. Zuckerberg, First I am happy that I could maintain your privacy by selling you the Hamilton property. Second, I wanted to meet and shake hands for the transaction and discuss your offering of working with you in the future as you stated you have built Facebook on connections that you have with others in Silicon Valley. One of the reasons I went with your offer other than maintaining your privacy was your offering to help me get my homes, development projects, in front of your Facebook employees and build a relationship with you." 
 
 Zuckerberg's house in Palo Alto. zillow Voskerician expressed interest in discussing a project with Zuckerberg, one that used "modern science based sustainable social living" on an "open source" model. 
 
 Emails between Zuckerberg and his inner circle indicate that the Facebook chief had no intention of helping Voskerician other than in a "light" way. 
 
 Divesh Makan, a financial adviser to Zuckerberg, says in an email that Voskerician's offer to maintain the CEO's privacy on these conditions was an "obscene proposal." 
 
 In another, Zuckerberg's wife, Priscilla Chan, writes, "It's stuff like this that makes me so sad and angry." 
 
 Zuckerberg's lawyers are calling Voskerician's offers "extortive." 
 
 Zuckerberg paid Voskerician $1.7 million for the rights to the property, then bought the lot from its owners for $4.8 million, according to county records. But Voskerician says his interest in the property was worth far more than $1.7 million and that he gave Zuckerberg a discount because of the business his referrals would potentially bring in. 
 
 Makan's firm later bought the three other homes around Zuckerberg's house, further guaranteeing his privacy. The homes were purchased for $10.5 million, $14 million, and $14.5 million, according to county records. ||||| It’s a brewing tale of the Valley, big money, youth, privacy, and hubris. 
 
 Facebook chief Mark Zuckerberg was deposed yesterday in San Jose, California for a legal case brought against him by a man who almost became his neighbor. 
 
 The man, Mircea Voskerician, entered a deal to buy the property next to Zuck’s for $4.8 million. Voskerician said he planned to build a 10,000 square foot residence on the property. He also says Zuckerberg offered to buy part of the property from him, which would extend the space between Voskerician’s house and Zuckerberg’s, offering more privacy to Zuckerberg. 
 
 Zuckerberg ended up paying Voskerician $1.7 million for the right to buy the property, then paid another $4.8 million for the property itself. 
 
 But Voskerician is suing because he claimed he could have sold the right to buy to another party for much more, and sold to Zuckerberg at $1.7 million only because Zuckerberg promised to introduce him to influential Valley players and business contacts. He says Zuckerberg never made those introductions. 
 
 Voskerician’s real estate agent referred to Zuckerberg as “just a kid” at one point. 
 
 Now it’s all about to come out in court. Voskerician and his attorneys have taken a combative stance against the Zuckerberg side, hoping to pressure them into a settlement. 
 
 Facebook has said that the CEO intends to defend himself vigorously in court. 
 
 In this setting, it’s very likely that Voskerician’s legal team will spare no expense on discovery, hoping to dig up anything that might paint Zuckerberg as an entitled brat, a liar, and a bad neighbor. 
 
 They have already asked for details about Zuckerberg’s personal finances and net worth. One of Zuckerberg’s attorneys said Voskerician is “going out of his way to embarrass Mr. Zuckerberg and pressure those around him at every turn.” 
 
 You see where this is going. It might end up being some very good entertainment if the thing does go to trial. It could reveal some things about Zuckerberg that we didn’t know, or just dredge up ugly old stories about the social media wunderkind. 
 
 So stay tuned. Mr. Zuckerberg’s life might become a lot less private in the next few months. And a new Silicon Valley melodrama might be on the way. 
 
 Source: New York Times
– Mark Zuckerberg values his privacy so much that he's willing to spend tens of millions to buy up neighboring properties. Now, however, he's in a legal battle with a developer and would-be neighbor that threatens to make public details about his personal life and finances, reports the New York Times. It's a little convoluted, but Russian-born developer Mircea Voskerician accuses Zuckerberg of reneging on a promise to introduce him to Silicon Valley contacts, and one of his court filings demands details about Zuckerberg's personal finances. Team Zuckerberg, meanwhile, accuses Voskerician of extortion and says he's “going out of his way to embarrass Mr. Zuckerberg and pressure those around him.” As Bloomberg previously reported, this began when Voskerician sent Zuckerberg a letter in 2012 saying he was under contract to buy a property next to Zuckerberg's and planned to put up a home with a direct view of Zuckerberg's home. However, he said he'd be willing to sell Zuckerberg part of the property to buffer his privacy. After negotiations, Zuckerberg eventually bought Voskerician's rights to the entire property for $1.7 million, then paid the owners another $4.8 million for the lot, reports Business Insider. Voskerician says he could have gotten a better deal but took the offer because of Zuckerberg's promise. Bloomberg says one 2013 email, from Zuckerberg assistant Andrea Besmehn, could be key: “I just had a quick chat with Mark on this issue—and he said he does remember saying that he would help this guy in a ‘light’ way. Is there a way when we chat with him that we can find out a way for us (not necessarily Mark) to help him with something small? Also ... we’ll have to manage this carefully because we don’t want to give an inch and then...” Zuckerberg had to give a deposition Wednesday. "Stay tuned," advises VentureBeat. "Zuckerberg’s life might become a lot less private in the next few months. And a new Silicon Valley melodrama might on the way." (Click to read Zuck's standard hiring question.)