Teksupport: The Deadlock – Inside the Partnership Dispute and Alleged Corporate Coup
words by Nina K.Malik.
How TCE’s Founders Went from Co-Builders to Co-Defendants
In January 2024, Forbes profiled Teksupport as a family-run business at its peak and positioned it as a powerful force in the industry. The article focused on co-founders Robert Toma and Michael Vitacco as a unified team. By early 2026, that narrative no longer stands. The partnership has seen courts, in plural,and the company is now defined by internal conflict.
The partnership’s public disintegration is going brutal, no doubt. On February 2, 2026, Toma filed a Verified Complaint in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Middlesex County (Case No. MID-C-000018-26), alleging a "fraudulent scheme" and a backroom betrayal. The case is categorized as a Corporate Deadlock and Shareholder Dispute and, as of March 29, 2026, remains active. In a fiery counteroffensive, Vitacco says Toma is not a victim but, instead, a rogue operator whose "destructive conduct" forced the company to its knees. This business dispute is really personal and, honestly, sad; it’s a story of a founding pact shattered, with two warring captains each convinced the other is scuttling their ship.
The battle began when Rob Toma filed an explosive lawsuit alleging Michael Vitacco orchestrated a coup to seize control. The complaint is the claim that Vitacco illegally transferred 10% of his own membership interest in TCE to his mother, Rosemary Vitacco, reducing his stake from 20% to 10% and inflating Rosemary’s from 30% to 40% – all without Toma’s knowledge or written consent as required by the Operating Agreement. Toma’s suit alleges this was a move to sideline him while shielding assets from a divorce. Which should a story of its own... The suit also names the company’s own attorney, Carlos M. Carvajal, Esq., as a key participant, accusing him of acting as a corporate “gatekeeper” to freeze Toma out.
Toma claimed this was the cornerstone of a plan to build a “financial firewall,” locking him out of the books while the Vitaccos racked up shocking expenses – including a $6,000 per week salary Michael paid himself without member approval, in direct violation of the Operating Agreement, and over $600,000 in travel expenses recorded on the 2023 tax returns that Toma had no knowledge of and never consented to.
Vitacco's camp, however, holds a powerful weapon that flips the narrative. According to Vitacco's legal team, a New Jersey State Court judge handed Vitacco a decisive early victory, denying Toma's emergency request to seize control and – they claim – imposing a temporary restraining order against Toma himself. Vitacco's side frames this as the judicial lever that ejected one of the system's two founders from the control room.
To win such an order, a plaintiff must prove “irreparable harm” and a “likelihood of success on the merits” – the two-part Crowe test applied by New Jersey courts. Vitacco's legal team claims Toma failed that standard, and they now wield that narrative as proof that Toma is a bad actor who cannot be trusted. What is confirmed: as of March 29, 2026, the civil case remains active, with no final resolution reached. Both sides are still in the arena.
A 50/50 business partnership is an inherently unstable construct: a system with two processors but no tie-breaker, designed for perfect synchronicity but with no protocol for dissent. TCE's Operating Agreement required majority consent for any transfer of membership interest – a safeguard that, according to Toma, Vitacco simply ignored. In forensic terms, Toma's lawsuit is a bug report alleging an unauthorized modification of the system's core permissions.
The foundational claim is that Vitacco executed a privileged command – the share transfer to his mother – that violated the system's operating agreement. This was not a simple transaction; it was a root-level exploit. It allegedly allowed Vitacco to bypass the two-processor protocol and create a new administrative branch, effectively demoting Toma from system co-administrator to a user with restricted permissions.
Armed with the state court victory, Vitacco's filing attacks these allegations as a “smear campaign.” He flatly denies wrongdoing, insisting Toma “had knowledge of all aspects of what was going on.” The message is clear: Vitacco argues he is the one preserving a functioning business while being attacked by a partner trying to burn it all down.
While lawyers trade blows, the war has spilled onto the dance floor, and the entire TCE portfolio – including brands like Tilt and Gather, and the ambitious Brooklyn Storehouse venue – is caught in the crossfire. Compounding the chaos, TCE’s attempted acquisition of Technical Arts Group LLC (“TAG”), a production company in which Toma and Vitacco held approximately 70–80% interest, remains frozen. TAG filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2025 (Case No. 25-22241), and as of late March 2026, the proceedings are still active, with a final hearing scheduled for April 9, 2026. For fans, a ticket to a Teksupport show now comes with a question: whose version is this?
The brand's integrity is under assault. The public split has turned a name that once symbolized powerhouse production into a synonym for drama. The promises of the Forbes article have curdled.
The Promise: A focus on “unique, raw and industrial spaces.”
The Reality: Fans see the Brooklyn Storehouse as a symbol of broken promises.
The Promise: A premium, boundary-pushing experience.
The Reality: The brand is now associated with “price gouging.” As one user wrote on Reddit, it “sucks when capitalism/mainstream takes over…”
The fans cannot see the legal crash logs or parse the arguments over fiduciary duty. But they can feel the result: “a buggy, overpriced, and culturally dissonant product.”
Five months into open warfare, the Teksupport saga has reached no conclusion at all – and that is precisely the problem. The civil case (MID-C-000018-26) is confirmed active as of March 29, 2026. The TAG bankruptcy final hearing is set for April 9, 2026. The partnership is dead in all but name, the brand identity is in freefall, and the courts are still sorting through the wreckage. The only logical path forward appears to be a forced buyout or a complete dissolution – but neither has been ordered, and neither side is backing down.
We are yet to see its final outcome. Although it has already been proven that a brand's most valuable asset is the trust of its audience. Once that connection is severed by internal chaos and perceived exploitation, the machine, no matter how powerful, cannot be rebooted.
Editor’s Note
What if the underground seized this moment? Not rhetorically. Actually.
What if the summer 2026 season in NYC looked like old-school raves – lean, raw, and built on nothing but the music and the people who actually care about it?
The Mirage has fallen first to greed, then to private equity, and lastly to a Dubai state-backed corporation.
Teksupport is seemingly killing itself.
That is not a tragedy for the scene — it is an overdue correction. The tickets were too expensive. The lineups got safer every year. The rooms got bigger and the culture got smaller. Everyone felt it. Nobody needed a courtroom to confirm it.
If you are throwing parties, this is your moment. Not next year. This summer. Step in, keep it small, keep it honest, and do not repeat the mistakes that are currently being litigated in courts.
The irony of both companies now entangled in court proceedings – with Pacha looming on the horizon – is not lost on anyone paying attention.
The floor is clearing out. Tech bros can have Pacha. The rest of us will take the warehouses, the dark room, and the actually safe dance floor.
So no, we are not angry that this is happening. We are ready.
