2

3
~ 4
~ 5
~ 6
K 7
V)
8
"-
~ 9
~
~ \::511
~~2
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24 Eric Baum (Pro Hac Vic~ Application Pending)

Simon, Eisenberg & Baum LLP' ~ \

24 Union Square East, Fifth Floor ' 0

New York, NY 10003 1 C\ 1\

Telephone: (212) 3 53-87~0 rJ; l

Facsimile: (212) 551-301~ \>:, f

Email: ebaum@simonandeisenberg.com '\ \

Toni 1. Jaramilla (State B~r #174625)

TONI 1. lARAMILLA, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORP. 10100 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 300

Los Angeles, CA 900671

Telephone: (310) 551-30+0

Facsimile: (310) 551-3019

Email: toni@tjjlaw.com

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Alyssa Ferguson, Irene Morales, Tesa Lubans-DeHaven

I

SU1ERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COlTNTY OF LOS ANGELES-CENTRAL DISTRICT

I . " 1

AL YSSA FERGUSON, TESA LUBANS-) Case No. B C 4 S 0 i) 3

DEHAVEN, IRENE MORALES, )

individuals; )

) ) )

) ) ) ) AMERICAN APPAREL1INC., A California ) corporation; DOV CHARNEY, an individual,) KYUNG CHUNG, an individual, and DOES ) I-100, inclusive; )

) ) ) )

) ) ) )

Plaintiffs,

vs.

Defendants.

25 III
t~l- 26 III
'.
;I~
~i
t·) 27 II/
l"
~I ..
H
f,. 28 1// FILED

SUPERIOR COURT OF CAlJFORNIA \ COUNTVOFLOSANGELES

APR 26 2011

John Me, Executive Officer/Clerk BY ~ ,Deputy ~

COMPLAINT FOR COMPENSATORY AND PUNITIVE DAMAGES AND FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF:

1.

Violation of Penal Code § 528.5et.seq. Impersonation through Internet or Electronic Means

2.

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

3.

Defamation

4.

Invasion of Privacy; False Light

5.

Invasion of Privacy; Appropriation of Likeness

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
d'i 26
;~"
~'" I
c6 27
,;li.',
;~:(
~ .', 28 3 4

1 Plaintiffs ALYSSA FERGUSON, IRENE MORALES, and TESA LUBANS-DEHAVEN,

2 allege:

THE PARTIES

1. This is a Complaint for damages and Injunctive Reliefby plaintiffs, ALYSSA

5 ,I

FERGUSON, TESA LUBANS-DEHAVEN, and IRENE MORALES ("Plaintiffs") against

6 AMERICAN APPAREL,! INC., DOV CHARNEY, KYUNG CHUNG (referred to collectively as

7 8

"Defendants").

2. AL YSSA FERGUSON, TESA LUBANS-DEHA VEN filed a complaint for

Declaratory Relief againJ CHARNEY and AMERICAN APPAREL on March 24,2011, Case No.

BC457920.

3. IRENE MORALES filed a complaint for sexual harassment and sexual assault against

.1, . .

CHARNEY and AMERICAN APPAREL on March 4,20] 1, Index Number 5018/2011 m Kmgs

County Supreme Court. ft

4. Shortly a er filing their lawsuits against CHARNEY and AMERICAN APPAREL,

I

internet blogs surfaced which impersonated Plaintiffs. The blogs purported to appear as if Plaintiffs,

I . d

FERGUSON, and MORALES created blog profiles themselves, and posted nude or serru-nu e

picture, of themselves onlthe internet. In addition, these blog impersonations of Plaintiffs made it appear as if Plaintiffs wer admitting to an unlawful scheme of extortion against Defendants, which they were not. As to LUrANS-DEHA VEN, blogs falsely attributed to FERGUSON states that LUBANS-DEHAVEN invited her to "join an extortion" scheme by filing a lawsuit against AMERICAN APPAREL and CHARNEY. This statement, as with all statements that Defendants

attributed to Plaintiffs are untrue. Defendants also caused the release of Plaintiffs' photographs to media sources, including but not limited to the Los Angeles Times on March 25,20111 and the New York Post also on March 25,20112• The Los Angeles Times reported for example: "Charney and his

advisors showed Times r ported sexually explicit emails, photos and text messages from some of

I .

-----------------+---

I http://www.latimeJ.com/b~~iness/1 a - fi -american-apparel- 20 11 0325,0,5982208 .story

2 http"lwww.nypostlcom/PlneWSlnat;onalloh_come_on_now _5 KP6JgnetEC6yU4Ho YvCP#.

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 2

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
p' . 26
. : ...
\~
l:.~ 27
'i1
"-
~.J
H 28 the women who sued the company this month."

5. At all time~ relevant to this Complaint, Plaintiff ALYSSA FERGUSON (or "Ms.

I

Ferguson") was an individual residing in Honolulu, Hawaii.

6. At all timek relevant to this Complaint, Plain~iffTESA LUBANS-DEHAVEN (or

"Ms. Lubans-Dehaven") las an individual residing in New Jersey.

7. Plaintiffs Jre informed and believe and on that basis allege that defendant .

AMERICAN APPAREL,! INC. (or "AMERICAN APPAREL") is a publicly traded company and at all times relevant herein las and is a California corporation with corporate offices in the.County of Los Angeles and retail stJres throughout the County of Los Angeles.

8. Plaintiffs Jre informed and believe and on that basis allege that at all times relevant to

this Complaint, defendan~ DOV CHARNEY ("CHARNEY") was the President and CEO of AMERICAN APPARELiand therefore was a managing agent of AMERICAN APPAREL. CHARNEY is and has belen an individual residing in Los Angeles County, California.

9. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and on that basis allege that at all times relevant to

this Complaint, defendani KYUNG.CHUNG ("CHUNG") held various supervisory positions at AMERICAN APPAREL) including Photographer. CHUNG is and has been an individual residing in

I

Los Angeles County, California.

10. Upon infobation and belief, Defendants' unlawful conduct of creating the unlawful,

deceitful, and defamato1 blogs were committed in Los Angeles, California. In addition, Defendants caused the release of Plaintiffs' photographs to media sources, including but not limited to the Los

I .

Angeles Times on March: 25, 2011 and the New York Post also on March 25, 2011. (See fn. I & 2).

II. Plaintiffs fO not know the true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate or otherwise, of defendants DOES 1 to 100, and therefore sue them by such fictitious names. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and on that basis allege that each of the DOE defendants is in some manner responsible for the damages alleged by them in this Complaint. Plaintiffs will amend this Complaint to allege their true names and capacities when the same have been ascertained.

12, Plaintiffs are informed and believe and on that basis allege that at the various times

alleged in this Complaint each of the named and DOE defendants was the agent or employee of each

I

tOMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 3

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I;' 26
II:l
.',
I') 27
i,\
~j"
H
~ .. 28 of the remaining co-defendants and, in doing the actions alleged in this Complaint, was acting within the course and scope of slid agency, employment and service with advance knowledge, consent andlor ratification of eacJ of the remaining Defendants. The named and DOE Defendants are

. I

hereinafter referred to collectively in this Complaint as "Defendants." .

13. The acts commltted by Defendants and as described in this Complaint were duly

authorized and directed b~ its officer~, directors and/or managing agents. In addition, Defendants participated in the acts of its employees and agents as described in this Complaint, and ratified or

accepted the benefits of such acts.

F leTS PERTAINING TO ALYSSA FERGUSON

Ms. Ferguson restates and incorporates by this reference as if fully set forth herein

14.

each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 13 of this Complaint.

15.. Ms. Ferguson filed an action for Declaratory Relief on March 24,2011, Case No.

BC457920. In that complaint, Ms. Ferguson did not state any facts regarding the nature of her

I

lawsuit. This lawsuit further made no request for financial compensation, but rather simply

requested a court ruling on the enforceability of a confidentiality and arbitration agreement.

16. On or aboJt March ·26,2011, just two days after filing her Declaratory Relief

Complaint and service oAhe Complaint on AMERICAN APPAREL and CHARNEY, internet blogs began surfacing on the inJernet as ifcreated by Ms. Ferguson. In addition, Defendants posted nude photographs of Ms. FergJson and co-plaintiff, Ms. Morales, without their permission or authorization. On the blok falsely attributed to Ms. Ferguson, Defendants posted the statement as if by Ms. Ferguson that state: "Partying in NY with Tesa Lubans after filing our lawsuit" as a caption

I

The false statements continue to say: "So I came to LA in January 20 J 1 to another set of photo

shoots with American AP)arel. I was bored of working at the stores in Hawaii. Then my bestie Tesa (aka Tesa Lenee aka TesJ Love aka Tesa Lubans aka Tesa Lubans Dehaven) calls and invites me to join an extortion that her ~oommale Kimbra Lo brewed up with some third rate lawyer from Jersey. Apparently, she was reall} upset that they wouldn't hire her back and 'they just did~ 't want to photograph her no matte~1 how many times she begged. She said it would be real easy. Just make up a story and stick to it. I dr 't even need any evidence because I'm a pure innocent girl and of course

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 4

------------------,-------------------------------------

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
C~l 26
~t~
"
,~~
C'" 27
.'
~I:i
~',l 28 the public will take my side. Anyway, I didn 'I tell anyone and just left LA for NY to PARTY. This is 2 the USA, and if you have Jlawyer working pro bono, you can sue anyone, I'm expecting my

3 billions."

17. Defendants also intentionally and maliciously caused the release of Ms. Ferguson's photographs to media soJces.

18. These mal~cious statements are false and were not posted by Ms. Ferguson, nor did she authorize or permit Jy person to make such po stings on her behalf.

19. The releasJd photographs of Ms. Ferguson and her photographs put into the blogs

were not posted by Ms. Ferguson, nor did she authorize or permit any person to release such photographs or make suc~ postings on her behalf. Many of the photographs appearing on the blog

I

were made personally by Defendant CHUNG as photographer, acting in her capacity as an employee

I

and/or manager and/or agent of Defendant AMERICAN APPAREL and/or Defendant CHARNEY,

I

acting within the scope of his authority as an officer and agent of Defendant AMERICAN

APP AREL and, upon information and belief, were in the sole possession and control of Defendant CHUNG and/or DefendJt CHARNEY at the time the blogs were published. Many of the photographs were made cbntemporaneOUSly with AMERICAN APPAREL Company photo shoots but were outside the authorized scope of the shoot and were never intended by Ms. Ferguson to be seen publicly. Ms. Fergukon was often forced to pose for certain suggestive photos.

20. Defendantk made several more false statements on the internet as if Ms. Ferguson posted the comments. Such statements include but are not limited to a false statement under a nude photograph of Ms. FerguLn which states: "After [his week long shoot in September 20910, [he American Apparel peoPIJ didn 't want to hire me back. Something about me being completely reckless, out of shape, no~ on time, hung over, unprofessional. J thought J was awesome. And then

I

when / heard this empty house belonged to some rich guy, J was more than happy to perform." Like

the other statements Defendants posted or directed to be posted on the internet, these statements are

I

false and were not made by Ms. Ferguson or by her direction.

21. DefendanL posted additional statements falsely attributing them to Ms. Ferguson

which directs the public 10 additional false blogs that purport to be posted by Ms. Irene Morales, who

I

(!:OMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 5

8

filed a lawsuit against CID\RNEY and AMERICAN APPAREL for sexual harassment.

22. These blogis include nude photographs of Ms. Morales. Ms. Morales did not post or

I

direct anyone on her behalf to create the blogs or post her pictures of in that manner. Moreover, the

I

4 photographs of Ms. Morales posted on these blogs were in the exclusive control of CHARNEY.

. FAbTS PERTAINING TO TESA LUBANS-DEHAVEN

23. Ms~ Lubans-Dehaven restates and incorporates by this reference as if fully set forth

7 herein each and every allJgation contained in paragraphs I through 13 of this Complaint.

24. Ms. Lubal-Dehaven filed an action for Declaratory Relief on March 24,2011, Case

9 No. BC457920. In that cbmPlaint, Ms. Lubans-Dehaven did not state any facts regarding the nature 10 of her lawsuit. Furthermore, the Complaint for Declaratory Relief made no request for financial compensation, but rather betitioned the court to issue a ruling on the enforceability of a

12 confidentiality and arbitrdtion agreement.

25 On or aboJt March 26,2011 just two days after filing her Declaratory Relief

14 Complaint and service oflthe Complaint on AMERICAN APPAREL and CHARNEY, internet hlogs 15 began surfacing on the internet about Ms. Lubans-Dehaven that are false and as if made by co-

I

16 plaintiff, Ms. Ferguson. The false statements include but are not limited to: " Then my bestie Tesa

(aka Tesa Lenee aka TesJ Love aka Tesa Lubans aka Tesa Lubans Dehaven) calls and invites me to

2

3

5

6

11

13

17

20
21
22
23
24
25
!~' 26
,j
,~i
"
c·:~ 27
':",
"
f:~
~,! 28 26. Defendants also intentionally and maliciously caused the release of Ms. Lubans-

Dehaven's photographs tb media sources.

27. The releas~d photographs of Ms. Lubans-Dehaven and her photographs put into the

18 join an extortion that her roommate Kimbra La brewed up with some third rate lawyer from

19 Jersey ... "

blogs were not posted by Ms. Lubans-Dehaven, nor did she authorize or permit any person to release

such photographs or make such po stings on her behalf. Many of the photographs appearing on the

I

blog were made personally by Defendant CHUNG as photographer, acting in her capacity as an

employee and/or managJ and/or agent of Defendant AMERICAN APPAREL and/or Defendant CHARNEY, acting within the scope of his authority as an officer and agent of Defendant AMERICAN APPAREL and, upon information and belief, were in the sole possession and control

GOMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 6

3

of Defendant CHUNG andlor Defendant CHARNEY at the time the blogs were published. Many of

. I

2 the photographs were made contemporaneously with AMERICAN APPAREL Company photo

shoots but were outside tJe authorized scope of the shoot and were never intended by Ms. Lubans-

4 Dehaven to be seen publiJlY.

FAbTS PERTAINING TO IRENE MORALES

28. Ms. Morales restates and incorporates by this reference as if fully set forth herein

7 each and every allegation icontained in paragraphs 1 through 13 of this Complaint. .

8 29. Ms. Morales filed a lawsuit in NY Supreme Court on March 4,2001 alleging sexual

I

9 harassment against CHARNEY and AMERICAN APPAREL. After her lawsuit was filed and

10 served, false blogs surfaced on the internet as if Ms. Morales herself created and posted them. The

I .

blogs further state to "visit myfriend's pages ... " and identifies blogs that purport to be created by

12 Alyssa Ferguson. l

13 30. Ms. Moral s alleges that these photographs were provided to the defendants as part

of on-going acts of quid bro quo sexual harassment and gender discrimination, in the belief that her 15 employment would be terminated or discipline imposed should the demands of defendants for such

I

16 photographs be refused. Ms. Morales never intended that such photographs be seen by any other

17 person and provided theJ to Defendant CHARNEY involuntarily. Other than Ms. Morales, Defendant CHARNEY hL exclusive possession and control of these photographs.

31. Without ht permission, Defendants released her photographs as well as posted nude

I

20 photographs of Ms. Morales on the blogs as if she posted them herself and gives the false impression

that her sexual harassmerit lawsuit was for the purpose of extorting money from CHARNEY and

22 AMERICAN APPARELJ

32. Defendantl also intentionally and maliciously caused the release of Ms. Morales'

24 photographs to media sources, including but not limited to the New York Post also on March 25,

5

6

11

14

18

19

21

23

25 2011. (See fn. 2). 26 III

27 III

28 III.

fMN.AINT FOR DAMAGI:,S AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
l:;i 26
,1:1
~; "
I I,~ 27
Ii,
"
f1
~,,\ 28 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

VIOLATION OF PENAL CODE § 528.5 et.seq., (Impersonation through Internet or Electronic Means)

(By PIJintiffs Ferguson and Morales Against all Defendants)

Plaintiffs restate and incorporate by this reference as iffully set forth herein each and

I

every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 to 31 of this Complaint.

34. Defendants' conduct towards Plaintiffs as described in this Complaint constitutes

illegal conduct in violatioh of Penal Code § 528.5 et.seq. The statue provides as follows: "(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any person who knowingly and without consent credibly impersonates another actual person through or on an Internet Web site or by other electronic means

I

for purposes of harming, intimidating, threatening, or defrauding another person is guilty of a public

offense punishable pursu+tto subdivision (d); ... (d) A violation of subdivision (a) is punishable by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($,1,000), or by imprisonment in a county jail not

33.

exceeding one year, or by both that fine and imprisonment."

35. Penal Code §528.5 (e) provides "In addition to any other civil remedy available, a

person who suffers damage or loss by reason of a violation of subdivision (a) may bring a civil action against the violator for cobpensatory damages and injunctive relief or other equitable relief pursuant to paragraphs (1), (2), (4)1, and (5) of subdivision (e) and subdivision (g) of Section 502."

36. As a direct an~ proximate result of Defendants' unlawful conduct, Plaintiffs have sustained and will continue to suffer damages in an amount within the jurisdiction of this Court, the exact amount to be proveA at trial. Such damages include:

I

a. loss of salary and other valuable employment benefits;

I

b. preiUdgment interest and interest on the sum of damages at the legal rate; and

c. other consequential damages, including damages for shame, humiliation,

mental anguish and emotional distress caused by Defendants' conduct. .

37. Further, bJcause the wrongful acts against Plaintiffs were carried o~t or ratified by

directors, officers and/or ianaging agents, acting with malice, oppression or fraud, or were deliberate, wilful and in conscious disregard of the probability of causing injury to Plaintiffs as

I

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 8

(!.i 26
~~,
"
t~J 27
~'"
~,~
H
.',. 28 3 4 5 6

demonstrated by their actions and as described earlier in this Complaint, they seek punitive damages

I '

2 against Defendants, in order to deter them from such and similar conduct in the future.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

(By All Plaintiffs Against All Defendants)

Plaintiffs restate and incorporate by this reference as if fully set forth herein each and

I

8 every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 to 31 of this Complaint.

39. The actioJs of Defendants as described throughout this Complaint, in particular their

10 creating false blogs, relealing highly sensitive photographs to media organizations, and i~personating Plaintiffs 06 the internet which purports to have Plaintiffs admit to an unlawful scheme of extortion against Defendants and filing false sexual harassment and sexual assault claims were extreme and outrageous and beyond the bounds of common decency. Such actions were intended to cause, or were' engaged in with a conscious disregard of the probability of causing severe emotional distress to PlaiJtiffs.

40. The actions of Defendants as described throughout this Complaint, in particular their

I

posting of explicit photographs without Plaintiffs authorization or permission were extreme and

outrageous and beyond thl bounds of common decency. Such actions were in'tended to cause, or

I

were engaged in with a co1pscious disregard of the probability of causing severe emotional distress to I

Plaintiffs. I

41. The actions of Defendants as described throughout this Complaint, in particular their

release of photographs to media sources ~ithout Plaintiffs authorization or permission were extreme

I

and outrageous and beyond the bounds of common decency. Such actions were intended to cause, or

24 were engaged in with a conscious disregard of the probability of causing severe emotional distress to

7

38.

9

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

25 Plaintiffs.

42. As a direct and proximate result of the acts of Defendants, Plaintiffs have sustained

and continues to suffer severe emotional distress. They seek general damages for their severe emotional distress and othbr consequential damages in an amount within the jurisdiction of this

I

C0MPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 9

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
!~ 26
t~
,',
~'J 27
(".
"
I~
\"\ 28 Court, the exact amount to be proven at trial.

43. Further, because the wrongful acts against Plaintiffs were carried out or ratified by

directors, officers andlor managing agents for Defendants, acting with malice, oppression or fraud, or

I

were deliberate, wilful and in conscious disregard of the probability of causing injury to Plaintiffs as

demonstrated by their actions and as described earlier in this Complaint, they seek punitive damages

I '

against Defendants, in order to deter them from such and similar conduct in the future.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION DEFAMATION

(By All Plaintiffs Against All Defendants)

44. Plaintiffs restate and incorporate by this reference as if fully set forth herein each

and every allegation contJined in paragraphs 1 to 31 of this .Complaint.

45. During relevant times as described in this Complaint, defendant CHARNEY and

CHUNG, acting in the cotse and scope of their agency and employment with defendant AMERICAN APPAREL ind/or DOES 1-100, defamed Plaintiffs and made false statements about them to the public. Such kitten statements to the public are slanderous and libelous per se, because they charge Plaintiffs wit~ dishonesty and a commission of a crime of filing false lawsuits and committing extortion agai6st Defendants, thereby injuring Plaintiffs' reputations. Such statements were caused by Defendants to be published in the Los Angeles Times on March 25, 2011 and in the

I

New York Post also on March 25, 2011. (See fn, 1 & 2).

46. Defendants' conduct of making false blogs and impersonating Plaintiffs in these blogs

in which Plaintiffs sUPPOS~dlY admitted to a scheme of extortion and filing false sexual harassment lawsuits against Defendants, constitutes defamation. Plaintiffs did not create the blogs nor did they commit any act of allegedl extortion and filing of false claims.

I

47. . These publications were outrageous, negligent, reckless, intentional, and maliciously

I .'

published and republished by Defendants, and each of them by and through their agents and

I

employees. Plaintiffs are informed and believe that the negligent, reckless, and intentional

publications by Defendant and each of them, were and continue to be, foreseeably published and republished by Defendants, their agents and employees, recipients, in the community. These

I .

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 10

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(" 26
,_
.1;1
"
,;~~ 27
t·,
~, ..
.,'
~" 28 6

1 foreseeable republications included those that Plaintiffs were forced and compelled to republish

I

2 after their employment with AMERICAN APPAREL, and an attempt to obtain an explanation of

I

3 exactly what these allegations were based upon so that they could hopefully refute these allegations.

4 Plaintiffs hereby seek damages for these publications and all foreseeable republications discovered 5 up to the time of trial.

48. During thel above-described time-frame, Defendants, and each of them, conspired to,

7 and in fact, did negligently, recklessly, and intentionally cause excessive and unsolicited publication. 8 of defamation, of and concerning Plaintiffs, to third persons, who had no need or desire to know.

9 Those third person(s) to Jhom these Defendants published this defamation are believed to include, 10 but are not limited to, other agents and employees of Defendants, and each of them, and the public community, including aulintemet users, all of whom are known to Defendants, and each of them, but

I

12 unknown at this time to Plaintiff.

49. The def3l+tOry publications consisted of oral and written, knowi ngly false and

14 unprivileged communications, tending directly to injure Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs' personal, business, 15 and professional reputatiJn. These publications included the false and defamatory statements

16 described in this complaJt in ;iolation of Civil Code §§ 45 and 46(3)(5» with the meaning andlor 17 substance that Plaintiff: engaged in dishonest and criminal behavior of extortion and filing false

11

13

18 claims.

. 50. Plaintiffs are informed, believe and fear that these false and defamatory per se

statements will continue t6 be published by Def~ndants, and each of them, and will be foreseeably

. I

republished by their recipients, all to the ongoing harm and injury to Plaintiffs business, professional,

and personal reputations. Plaintiff also seeks redress in this action for all foreseeable republications, including his own compelled self-publication of these defamatory statements.

51. The defaJatory meaning of all of the above-described false and defamatory

statements and their reference to Plaintiffs, were understood by these above-referenced third person

I

recipients and other members of the community who are known to Defendants, and each of them, but

unknown to Plaintiff at tJis time.

I

52. None of Defendants' defamatory publications against Plaintiff referenced above are

I

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF II

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
(" 26
,«
~!:I
"
I'!
," 27
c'"
"
"
It
II 28 true,

53. The above Idefamatory statements were understood as assertions of fact, and not as

opinion. Plaintiffs are informed and believe this defamation will continue to be negligently,

I

recklessly, and intentionally published and foreseeably republished by Defendants, and each of them, -

and foreseeably republish~d by recipients of Defendants' publications, thereby causing additional

I

injury and damages for which Plaintiffs seeks redress by this action,

54. Each ofthlse false defamatory per se publications (as set forth above) were

negligently, recklessly, arid intentionally published in a manner equaling malice and abuse of any alleged conditional privilege (which Plaintiffs deny existed), since the publications, and each of them, were made with hatred, ill will, and an intent to vex, harass, annoy, and injure Plaintiffs in order to defend their lawslits and declaratory relief claims filed in civil court

55. Each ofthlse defamatory publications by Defendants, and each of them, were made

with knowledge that no iJvestigation supported the unsubstantiated and obviously false statements,

I

The Defendants published these statements knowing them to be false, unsubstantiated by any

reasonable investigation, lnd to be the ~roduct of hostile witnesses. These acts of publication were known by Defendants, and each of them, to be negligent to such a degree as to be reckless. In fact, not only did Defendants, and each of them, have no reasonable basis to 'believe these statements, but they also had no belief in the truth of these statements, and, in fact, knew the statements to be false, Defendants, and each of them, excessively, negligently, and recklessly published these statements to individuals with no need lo know, and who made no inquiry, and who had a mere general or idle

" d' hi Ip .

curiosity regar mg t IS inrormauon.

56. The abovJ complained-of publications by Defendants, and each of them, were made

with hatred and ill will towards Plaintiff and ,the design and intent to injure Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs'

good name, his reputation, employment and employability. Defendants, and each of them, published these statements, with an illegal purpose, not with an intent to protect any interest intended to be

protected by any privilege, but with negligence, recklessness and/or an intent to injure Plaintiff and

I

destroy her reputation'iherefore, no privilege existed to protect any of the Defendants from liability

for any of these aforementioned publications or republications.

, I

10MPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

I 12

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Ii 26
il~
t<:1 27
(1,
1·(
1'-' 28 57. As a proximate result of the publication and republication of these defamatory

statements by Defendants! and each of them, Plaintiffs have suffered injury to their personal,

business and professional reputation including suffering embarrassment, humiliation, severe emotional distress, shunning, anguish, fear, loss of employment, and employability, and significant economic loss in the form oflost wages and future earnings, all to Plaintiffs' economic, emotional,

and general damage in an amount according to proof.

58. Defendants, and each of them, committed the acts alleged herein recklessly,

maliciously, fraudulentlyl and oppressively, with the wrongful intention of injuring Plaintiffs, for an improper and evil motive amounting to malice (as described above), and which abused andlor prevented the existence of any conditional privilege, which in fact. did not exist, and with a reckless and conscious disregard dfPlaintiffs' rights. All actions of Defendants, and each of them, their agents and employees, herein alleged were known, authorized, ratified and approved by the

I

Defendants, and each of them. Plaintiffs thus are entitled to recover punitive and exemplary

damages from DefendantL and each of them, for these wanton, obnoxious, and despicable acts In an

I

amount based on the wealth and ability to pay according to proof at time of trial.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION INVASION OF PRIVACY/ FALSE LIGHT

(By All Plaintiffs Against All Defendants)

59. Plaintiffs restate and incorporate by this reference as if fully set forth herein each

and every allegation contkined in paragraphs 1 to 31 of this Complaint.

60. During relbvant times as described in this Complaint, defendants CHARNEY and

CHUNG, acting in the cJurse and scope of th~ir agency and employment with defendant

AMERlCAN APPAREL and/or DOES 1-100, invaded Plaintiffs' privacy and placed them in a false light when they posted nyde photographs of Plaintiffs on the internet for the public to view without their consent and released such photographs to media organizations. The photographs were posted

I

with false comments as if Plaintiffs were admitting to a scheme of extortion and filing false lawsuits.

61. The facts tsclosed were false, and portrayed Plaintiffs in a false light. The false light

in which Plaintiffs were placed are highly offensive and would be highly offensive to a reasonable

I

G:OMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 13

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I~, 26
.~~
;:~ 27
t"
"
"
t j
H 28 person.

62. Defendants had knowledge of or. acted in reckless disregard of the falsity of the

publicized fact and the false light in which the Plaintiff would be placed.

and committing extortion against Defendants, thereby injuring Plaintiffs' reputations.

63. As a direct and proximate result of the acts of Defendants, Plaintiffs have sustained

and continues to suffer serere emotional distress. They seek general damages for their severe emotional distress and otlier consequential damages in an amount within the jurisdiction of this Court, the exact amount ti be proven at trial.

64. Further, because the wrongful acts against Plaintiffs were carried out or ratified by

directors, officers and/or Lanaging agents for Defendants, acting with malice, oppression or fraud, or were deliberate, wilful and in conscious disregard of the probability of causing injury to Plaintiffs as

I

demonstrated by their actions and as described earlier in this Complaint, they seek punitive damages

I .

against Defendants, in order to deter them from such and similar conduct in the future.

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

INVASION OF PRIVACYI APPROPRIATION OF LIKENESS

(By All Plaintiffs Against All Defendants)

65. Plaintiffs restate and incorporate by this reference as if fully set forth herein each

I

and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 to 31 of this Complaint.

I

66. During rel~vant times as described in this C~mplaint, defendants CHARNEY and

CHUNG, acting in the cdurse and scope of their agency and employment with defendant

AMERICAN APPAREL and/or DOES 1-100, invaded Plaintiffs' privacy by publishing nude photographs of Plaintiffs on the internet for the public to view.

67. During relevant times as described in this Complaint, defendants CHARNEY and

CHUNG, acting in the cdurse and scope of their agency and employment with defendant AMERICAN APPAREL and/or DOES 1-100, invaded Plaintiffs' privacy by releasing photographs

of Plaintiffs to media sources, including but not limited to the Los Angeles Times on March 25, 2011

I

and the New York Post also on March 25, 2011. (See fn. 1 & 2).

68. The apprdpriation of Plaintiffs' likeness were unauthorized and without Plaintiffs'

I

(WMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 14

8

consent.

18 19

A. B.

For economic damages according to proof;

For generJI, special and incidental damages and amounts for emotional distress

69. The appropriation of Plaintiffs' likeness was for Defendants advantage in that

Defendants seek to sway bublic opinion against Plaintiffs in an attempt to protect their reputations

I

4 and unfairly defeat Plaintiffs claims against them.

70. As a direcf and proximate result of the acts of Defendants, Plaintiffs have sustained

6 and continues to suffer severe emotional distress. They seek general damages for their severe

7 emotional distress and other consequential damages in an amount within the jurisdiction of this

. I

Court, the exact amount to be proven at trial. .

71. Further, bJcause the wrongful act~ against Plaintiffs were carried out or ratified by

10 directors, officers and/or 1anagingagents for Defendants, acting with malice, oppression or fraud, or were deliberate, wilful and in conscious disregard of the probability of causing injury to Plaintiffs as

I

12 demonstrated by their actions and as described earlier in this Complaint, they seek punitive damages

I

13 against Defendants, in order to deter them from such and similar conduct in the future.

3

2

5

9

11

14

15 WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFFS FERGUSON, LUBANS-DEHAVEN, AND MORALES

I

16 PRAY FOR JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANTS, AND EACH OF THEM, AS

17 FOLLOWS:

20 according to proof;

21

C.

For punitive damages in an amount appropriate to punish Defendants for their

23
24
25
f~ 26
II~
lj"
!.: 27
r·'
;-,
"
t:~
f .. '. 28 22 wrongful conduct and set an example for others;

D. For prejudgment interest and interest on the sum of damages awarded to the

maximum extent permittJd by law;

E. For an injJnctive relief in that Defendants remove all blogs related to Plaintiffs;

F. For compJnsatory damages pursuant to Penal Code § 528.5 et.seq and all civil remedies provided by thJ code section;

G. F or costs Jf suit herein incurred and attorneys fees pursuant to applicable contractual

I

dOMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 15

3

and/or statutory ProvisiOT;

2 H. For such other and further relief as the Court deems proper.

4 Dated: April 26, 2011 5 6 7 8 9

10

11 PLAINTIFFS FERGUSON, LUBANS-DEHA VEN, and MORALES DEMAND A JURY

TONI 1. JARAMILLA, A PROFESSIONAL LAW

CORPORATION

AL YSSA FERGUSON, TESA LUBANS-DEHA VEN, IRENE MORALES

TONI J. JARAMILLA, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORA TION

AL YSSA FERGUSON, TESA LUBANS-DEHAVEN, IRENE MORALES

<tOMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 16

SHORT TITLE: Ferguson, et al. v. I et al. I

rican Apparel, Inc.,

,

I

CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION

(CERTIFICATE OF GRO~NDS FOR ASSIGNMENT TO COURTHOUSE LOCATION)

I

This form is required pursuant to LASe:; Local Rule 2.0 in all new civil case filings in the Los Angeles Superior Court.

Item I. Check the types of hearing and fill in the estimated length of hearing expected for this case:

JURY TRIAL? [RJ YES CLASS ACTION? CPYES LIMITED CASE? DYES TIME ESTIMATED FOR TRIAL 5-7 II HOURS! IXl DAYS

Item II. Select the correct district and courthouse location (4 steps -If you checked "Limited Case", skip to Item III, Pg. 4):

Step 1: After first completing the Civil Cake Cover Sheet Form, find the main civil case cover sheet heading for your case in the left margin below, and, to the right in Cblumn A, the Civil Case Cover Sheet case type you selected.

Step 2: Check Q.!l! Superior Court type df action in Column B below which best describes the nature of this case. Step 3: In Column C, circle the reason fo~ the court location choice that applies to the type of action you have checked. For any exception to the court location, seJ Los Angeles Superior Court Local Rule 2.0.

,

,

Applicable Reasons for Choosing Courthouse Location (See Column C below)

,

I

1. Class Actions must be filed in the County ,Courthouse, Central District. 6. location of property or permanently garaged vehicle.

2. May be filed in Central (Other county, or no Bodily Injury/Property Damage). 7. location where petitioner resides.

3. location where cause of action arose. I 8. location wherein defendant/respondent functions wholly.

4. location where bodily injury, death or damage occurred. 9. location where one or more of the parties reside.

5. Location where performance required or defendant resides. 10. location of Labor Commissioner Office.

Step 4: Fill in the information requested dn page 4 in Item III; complete Item IV. Sign the declaration.

,
A B C
Civil Case Cover Sheet Type of Action Applicable Reasons -
Category No. (Check only one) See Step 3 Above
Auto (22) D A7100 I Motor Vehicle - Personal Injury/Property DamageJWrongful Death 1.,2.,4.
Uninsured Motorist (46) D A7110 I Personal Injury/Property DamageJWrongful Death - Uninsured Motorist 1.,2.,4.
Asbestos (04) CJ A6070 Asbestos Property Damage 2.
D A7221 Asbestos - PersonallnjurylWrongful Death 2.
Product Liability (24) D A7260 I Product Liability (not asbestos or toxic/environmental) 1.,2.,3.,4.,8.
Medical Malpractice D A721 0 Medical Malpractice - Physicians & Surgeons 1.,2.,4.
(45) D A7240 Other Professional Health Care Malpractice 1.,2.,4.
Other D A7250 Premises liability (e.g., slip and fall) 1.,2.,4.
Personal Injury CJ A7230 Intentional Bodily Injury/Property DamageJWrongful Death (e.g.,
Property Damage assault, vandalism, etc.) 1.,2.,4.
Wrongful Death 1·,0)
(23) [RJ A7270 Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
.. - .
D A7220 Other Personal Injury/Property DamageIWrongful Death 1.,2.,4 .
Business Tort (07) CJ A6029 I Other Commercial/Business Tort (not fraud/breach of contract) 1.,2.,3.
Civil Rights (08) CJ A600S Civil Rights/Discrimination 1.,2.,3.
Defamation (13) CJ A6010 I Defamation (slander/libel) 1.,2.,3 .
Fraud (16) CJ A60131 Fraud (no contract) 1.,2.,3. > ...

... ..... ... 0

~I--

O.I:

.........

0... (I) -. Q)

~Cl

::l_

._ ::l

c::_ - OJ

- c::

~ 0

o .....

(f)~

"--.

Q) Q)

0... OJ ..... (I)

Q) E -5 <'t1 00

... > .. ... 0

~)o..c o ... ... (1)

a.. Q)

>.0

.. -

:::l ::I

. _ .....

C Ol

: ~g

til , ...

~~

Q) )0') a.. lit)

~ E

o (1)

20

LACIV 109 (Rev. 01107) LASC Approved 03-04

I

CI~IL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM

AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION

LAse, rule 2.0 Page 1 of4

LA-4B1

,
, e e
~
~ Ferguson, et al. I American Apparel, I CASE NUMBER
~ SHORT TITLE: l
", Cii Inc. , et al.
o~
>"::J ,
- -
w c A B C
Q. 0
:=~ Civil Case Cover Type of Action Applicable Reasons
e=.t:: Sheet Category No. (Check only one) - See Step 3 Above
>- 0
31- Professional I
·c..: D A6017 Legal Malpractice 1.,2.,3.
~ i Negligence D I
::::0 (25) A6050 Other Professional Malpractice (not medical or legal) 1.,2.,3.
g-; ,
t~ I -
Q. - D
:: (5 Other (35) A6025 Other Non-Personal Injury/Property Damage tort 2.,3.
o -
z3: I
C Wrongful Termination I
GJ D
E (36) A6037 Wrongful Termination 1.,2,,3.
>- I
0 D I Other Employment Complaint Case 1.,2.,3.
D. Other Employment A602f
E (15) D
w A6109 Labor Commissioner Appeals 10.
,
D A600~ Breach of Rental/Lease Contract (not Unlawful Detainer or wrongful
Breach of Contract! I ~~ 2.,5.
Warranty 0 A6008 ContractlWarranty Breach -Seller Plaintiff (no fraud/negligence) 2.,5.
(06) D I
(not insurance) A6019 Negligent Breach of ContractlWarranty (no fraud) 1.,2.,5.
D I
A6028 Other Breach of ContractlWarranty (not fraud or negligence) 1.,2.,5.
I
0 I
ij Collections A6002 Collections Case-Seller Plaintiff 2.,5.,6.
I
III (09) 0 A6012 Other Promissory NotelColiections Case 2.,5.
..
C I
0 I
o Insurance Coverage
(18) 0 A6015 Insurance Coverage (not complex) 1., 2., 5.,8.
I
0 I
Other Contract A6009 Contractual Fraud 1.,2.,3.,5.
(37) 0 I
A6031 Tortious Interference 1.,2.,3.,5.
0 I
A6027 Other Contract Dispute( not breachlinsu ra nce/fraud/neg I igence) 1.,2.,3.,8.
I
Eminent I
Domainllnverse D A7300 Eminent Domain/Condemnation Number of parcels ___ 2.
>. Condemnation (14) I
t
GJ Wrongful Eviction D I
Q, A6023 Wrongful Eviction Case 2.,6.
I e (33) !
a. I
~ 0 A5018 Mortgage Foreclosure 2.,6.
GJ Other Real Property I
IX 0
(26) A6032 Quiet Title 2. ,5.
0 I
A6060 Other Real Property (not eminent domain, landlord/tenant, foreclosure) 2.,6.
I
Unlawful Detainer- 0 I
Gi Commercial (31) A602r Unlawful Detainer-Commercial (not drugs or wrongful eviction) 2.,6.
e
'iii Unlawful Detainer - I
ti
c Residential (32) 0 A6020 Unlawful Detainer-Residential (not drugs or wrongful eviction) 2.,6.
3 I
3: Unlawful Detainer - I
III D
'2 Drugs (38) A6022 Unlawful Detainer-Drugs 2.,6.
::::I I
~ D I
'>, Asset Forfeiture (05) A610B Asset Forfeiture Case 2.,6.
GJ. I
IX
JJ I
III D
'u Petition re Arbitration (11) A6115 Petition to Compel/ConfirmNacate Arbitration 2.,5.
;; I
;,
..,
LACIV 109 (Rev. 01(07) CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM LAse, rule 2.0
LASC Approved 03-04 I AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION Page 2 of 4 '" Q)

"'C. E

o c: <.:l 0

~.~ Q.~

c: -

o::J 'ilI

·S

o

d:

,

,
SHORT TITLE: Ferguson, et a jv. American Apparel, I CASE NUMBER
Inc. , et al.

A B C
Civil Case Cover Sheet Type of Action Applicable Reasons·
Category No. (Check only one) See Step 3 Above
D A61S' Writ - Administrative Mandamus 2.,8.
Writ of Mandate CJ I
AS1S: Writ - Mandamus on Limited Court Case Matter 2.
(02) CJ I
AS1S: Writ - Other Limited Court Case Review 2.
I
Other Judicial Review CJ I
(39) AS1S1 Other Writ / Judicial Review 2.,8.
I
AntitrustlTrade D A600~ AntitrustlTrade Regulation 1.,2 .. 8.
Regulation (03)
Construction Defect (10) CJ ASool Construction defect 1.,2 .. 3.
I
Claims Involving Mass D ASOOII Claims Involving Mass Tort 1 .• 2 .• 8.
Tort (40) f
0 I
Securities Litigation (28) A603S Securities litigation Case 1.,2 .• 8.
I
Toxic Tort D AS0311 Toxic TortlEnvironmental 1 .. 2., 3 .. 8.
Environmental (30) I
Insurance Coverage D I
Claims from Complex A601f Insurance Coverage/Subrogation (complex case only) 1 .. 2.,5.,8.
Case (41)
0 A614 Sister State Judgment 2 .• 9.
Enforcement D A6160 Abstract of Judgment 2 .• S.
of Judgment D I
A6107 Confession of Judgment (non-domestic relations) 2 .• 9.
(20) D I
A6140 Administrative Agency Award (not unpaid taxes) 2 .• 8.
0 I
A611f Petition/Certificate for Entry of Judgment on Unpaid Tax 2 .• 8.
D AS112 Other Enforcement of Judgment Case 2.,8 .. 9.
I
RICO (27) D A603 Racketeering (RICO) Case 1 .• 2.,8.
D A6030 Declaratory Relief Only 1 .• 2.,8.
Other Complaints D I
(Not Specified Above) A6040 Injunctive Relief Only (not domestic/harassment) 2 .. 8.
I
0 AS011 Other Commercial Complaint Case (non-tortlnon-complex) 1 .• 2 .• 8.
(42) D A600P Other Civil Complaint (non-tortlnon-complex) 1 .• 2.8.
Partnership voq ... vlC."v, I
Gove ....... " .. ·(21) D AS11 3 Partnership and Corporate Governance Case 2 .• 8.
I
[_] I J
A612 Civil Harassment 2 .. 3 .. 9.
0 A612 3 Workplace Harassment 2 .• 3 .• 9.
Other Petitions 0 A612~
(Not Specified Above) Elder/Dependent Adult Abuse Case 2 .. 3 .• 9.
CJ AS190 Election Contest 2.
(43) I ,
0 AS110 Petition for Change of Name 2.,7.
0 I
A6170 Petition for Relief from Late Claim Law 2.,3.,4 .. 8.
e I
A6100 Other Civil Petition 2.,9.

CI' I
LACIV 109 (Rev. 01 (07) ~IL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM LAse. rule 2.0
LASC Approved 03-04 I AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION Page 3 of4 Vl c: o

'';:

I

American Apparel,

Item III. Statement of Location: Enter J address of the accident, party's residence or place of business, performance, or

other circumstance indicated in Item 11., i 3 on Page 1, as the proper reason for filing in the court location you selected.

REASON: CHECK THE NUMBER UNDER COLUMN

747 Warehouse Street

CITY

Los Angeles

ZIP CODE'

90021

Item tV. Declaration of Assignment I foregoing is true and correct and that

Superior Court courthouse in

(Code Civ. Proc., § 392 et seq., and

are under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above-entitled matter is properly filed for assignment to the Los Angeles

Cen tral District of the Los Angeles Superior Court

Local Rule 2.0, subds. (b), (c) and (d)).

Dated: _"-'A""p-=r-=i-=1----'=2--"6CLI ----'=2'-"0...=1-=1'--_

Toni J.

PLEASE HAVE THE FOL G ITEMS COMPLETED AND READY TO BE FILED IN ORDER TO

p .......... -.c .... L Y COMMENCE YOUR NEW COURT CASE:

1. Original Complaint or Petition.

2. If filing a Complaint, a completed Summons form for issuance by the Clerk.

I I

3. Civil Case Cover Sheet form CM-01 O.

4. Complete Addendum to Civil cJse Cover Sheet form LACIV 109 (Rev 01/07), LASe Approved 03-04.

5. Payment in full of the filing fee, ~nless fees have been waived.

6. Signed order appointing the Gubrdian ad Litem, JC form FL-935, if the plaintiff or petitioner is a minor under 18 years of age, or if required by Court

7. Additional copies of documents ito be conformed by the Clerk. Copies of the cover sheet and this addendum must be served along with the summons and complaint, or other initiating pleading in the case.

H 1/

LACIV 109 (Rev. 01/07) LASC Approved 03-04

I

. CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM

lAND STATEMENT OF LOCATION

LAse, rule 2.0 Page 4 of 4

;.

OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Nama, ' number. and address):

oni J. Jaramilla, Esq. (SBN 174625) May Mallari, Esq. (SBN 207]67)

TONI J. JARAMILLA, A ProfeSsional Law Corp. 10100 Santa Monica Blvd., Ste. 300

Los Angeles, California 90067

TELEPHONE NO.: 310-551-3020 I FAX NO.: 310-551-3019

FOR COURT USE ONL Y

SUPERIOR COURT OF CA.LIFORNIA, COU NTY OF L 's An gel e s STREET ADDRESS: III No r t h Hill S t r e e t MAlliNGAODRESS:111 North Hill Street CITYANDZIPCODE:Los Angeles, CaJliforia 90012

BAANCHNAME: Central I

Ferguson, et al. Iv. American Apparel, Inc.,

FILED

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

APR 26 2011

John A. Clar e, Executive Officer/Clerk BY Deputy

Complex Case Designation D Counter D Joinder

CIVil CASE COVER SHEET

[][I Unlimited D Limited

(Amount (Amount

demanded demanded is

exceeds 000 or

Filed with first appearance by defendant (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.402)

must be completed (see instnsctions on page 2).

DEPT:

CASE NUMBER:

JUDGE:

1. Check one box below for the case type that best describes this case:

Provisionally Complex Civil litigation (Cal. Rules of Court, rules 3.400·3.403)

D AntitrusUTrade regulation (03) D Construction defect (10)

D Mass tort (40)

D Securities litigation (28) D EnvironmentalfToxic tort (30)

o Insurance coverage claims arising from the above listed provisionally complex case types (41)

Auto Tort Contract

D Auto (22) D Breach of contracl/warranty (OS)

D Uninsured motorist (4S) D Rule 3.740 collections (09)

Other PI/PDIWD (Personal Injury/Property D Other collections (09)

DamagelWrongful Death) Tort CJ Insurance coverage (18)

D Asbestos (04) CJ Other contract (37)

D Product liability (24) Real Property

CJ Medical malpractice (45) D Eminent domain/Inverse

CJ Other PI/PDIWD (23) condemnation (14)

Non-PI/PDIWD (Other) Tort D Wrongful eviction (33)

D Busines~ tort/unfair business practice (01) D Other real property (26)

D Civil rights (08) Unlawful Detainer

!Xl Defamation (13) CJ Commercial (31)

C Fraud (16) D Residential (32)

D Intellectual property (19) CJ Drugs (38)

o Professional negligence (25) Judicial Review

D Other non-PI/PDIWD tort (35) D Asset forfeiture (05)

Employment D Petition re: arbitration award (11)

D Wrongful termination (3S) LJ Writ of mandate (02)

D Other employment (15) CJ Other judicial review (39)

Enforcement of Judgment

D Enforcement of judgment (20)

Miscellaneous Civil Complaint D RICO (27)

D Other complaint (not specified above) (42)

Miscellaneous Civil Petition

D Partnership and corporate governance (21) D Other petition (not specified above) (43)

2. This case D is 00 is not complex under rule 3.400 of the California Rules of Court. If the case is complex, mark the

factors requiring exceptional judicial management: ~~

a. D Large number of separately represented parties d. L._j Large number of witnesses

b. D Extensive motion practice raising difficult or novel e. D Coordination with related actions pending in one or more courts

issues that will be time-consuming to resolve in other counties, states, or countries, or in a federal court

c. D Substantial amount of cocumentary evidence f. D Substantial post judgment judicial supervision

3. Remedies sought (check all that apply): ~. DO monetary b. 00 nonmonetary; declaratory or injunctive relief c. [XJ punitive

I

4. Number of causes of action (specify): Five (5)

5. This case D is [XJ is not a cl~ss action suit.

6. If there are any known related cases, file ~nd serve a notice of related case. (You may use fonn CM-015.)

Date: April 26, 2011 I '. "-

Toni J. Jaramilla. Esq. (SBN 174625) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=- ___

(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) I (S NATURE OF PAR A OR Y FOR PARTY)

ii. • Plaintiff must file this cover sheet with thel first paper filed in ~~~~i~n or proceeding (except small claims cases or cases filed

I: ~nder th.e Probate Code, Family Code, or WI elfare and Institutions Code). (Cal. Rules of Court. rule 3.220.) Failure to file may result

;'~ In sanctions. .

I' • File this cover sheet in addition to any cover sheet required by local court rule .

• If this case is complex under rule 3.400 et seq. of the California Rules of Court, you must serve a copy of this cover sheet on all other parties to the action or proceeding. I

• Unless this is a collections case under rule 3.740 or a complex case, this cover sheet will be used for statistical purposes only.

I Pa e 1 of2

Form Adopted for Mandalory Use Judicial Council of California CM·Ol0 [Rev. July 1. 2007)

CIVil CASE COVER SHEET Lezal Cal. Rules of Court. rules 2.30,3220. 3400-3403, 3.740;

Solut'fgns' Cal. Standards of Judicial Administration, std, 310

4b,P!us

I .

INSTR~ONS ON HOW TO COMPLETE THE cc&. SHEET CM-010

·To Plaintiffs and Others Filing First Papers, If you are filing a first paper (for example, a complaint) in a civil case, you must complete and file, along with your first paper, the Civil Case Cover Sheet contained on page 1. This information will be used to compile statistics about the types and numbers of cases filed. You must complete items 1 through 6 on the sheet. In item 1, you must check one box for the case type that best describes the case. If the case fits both a general and a more specific type of case listed in item 1, check the more specific one. If the case has multiple causes of action, check the box that best indicates the primary cause of action. To assist you in completing the sheet, examples of the cases that belong under each case type in item 1 are provided below. A cover sheet must be filed only with your initial paper.!Failure to file a cover sheet with the first paper filed in a civil case may subject a party, its counsel, or both to sanctions under rules 2.30 and 3.220 of the California Rules of Court.

To Parties in Rule 3.740 Collections Cases.IA "collections case" under rule 3.740 is defined as an action for recovery of money owed in a sum stated to be certain that is not more than $25,000, exclusive of interest and attorney's fees, arising from a transaction in which property, services, or money was acquired on credit. A collections case does not include an action seeking the following: (1) tort damages, (2) punitive damages, (3) recovery of real property, (4) recovery of personal property, or (5) a prejudgment writ of attachment. The identification of a case as a rule 3.740 collections case on this form means that it will be exempt from the general time-far-service requirements and case management rules, unless a defendant files a responsive pleading. A rule 3.740 collections case will be subject to the requirements for service and obtaining ~judgment in rule 3.740.

To Parties in Complex Cases, In complex tases only, parties must also use the Civil Case Cover Sheet to designate whether the case is complex. If a plaintiff believes the case is complex under rule 3.400 of the California Rules of Court, this must be indicated by completing the appropriate boxes in items 1 a?d 2. If a plaintiff desiqnates a case as complex, the cover sheet must be served with the complaint on all parties to the action. A defendant may file and serve no later than the time of its first appearance a joinder in the plaintiffs designation, a counter-designation that the case is not complex, or, if the plaintiff has made no designation, a designation that

the case is complex. I CASE TYPES AND EXAMPLES

Auto Tort Contract Provisionally Complex Civil Litigation (Cal.

Auto (22)-Personallnjury/Property I Breach of ContractlWarranty (06) Rules of Court Rules 3.400-3.403)

DamagelWrongful Death Breach of Rental/Lease. AntitrustlTrade Regulation (03)

Uninsured Motorist (46) (if the Contract (not unlawf.ul detarner Construction Defect (10)

case involves an uninsured or wrongful eVictIOn) Claims Involving Mass Tort (40)

motorist claim subject to ContractlWarranty Breach-Seller S T LT ti (2B)

., . . Plaintiff (not fraud or negligence) ecun res I Iga Ion

arbrtratlon, check thrs rtem N I· t B h f C t tJ EnvironmentallToxic Tort (30)

. d fA ) eg Igen reac 0 on rae

rnstea 0 uta . Warranty , Insurance Coverage Claims

Other PIIPDIWD (PersonallnJuryl Other Breach of ContractlWarranty (arising from provisionally complex

Property DamageIWrongful Death) Collections (e.g., money owed, open case type listed above) (41)

Tort book accounts) (09)

Asbestos (04) Collection Case-Seller Plaintiff

Asbestos Property Damage Other Promissory Note/Collections

Asbestos Personal Injuryl Case

Wrongful Death Insurance Coverage (not provisionally

Product Liability (not asbestos or complex) (1 B)

toxic/environmental) (24) Auto Subrogation

Medical Malpractice (45) Other Coverage

Medical Malpractice- Other Contract (37)

Physicians & Surgeons Contractual Frau?

Other Professional Health Care Other Contract Dispute

Malpractice Real Property

Other PI/PDIWD (23) Eminent Domainllnverse

Premises Liability (e.g., slip Condem~at~on (14)

and fall) Wrongful EViction (33) ..

Intentional Bodily InjuryfPDIWD Other .Real Property (e.g., quiet title) (26)

(e.g., assault, vandalism) Writ of Possession of Real Property

Itt' I I fl' ti f Mortgage Foreclosure

n en lona. n IC Ion 0 Quiet Title

Emotlon~1 Distress Other Real Property (not eminent

Negligent Infliction of domain landlordltenant or

Emotional Distress foreclo~ure)'

Other PI/PDIWD Unlawful Detainer

Non-PI/PDIWD (Other) Tort Commercial (31)

Business Tort/Unfair Business Residential (32)

Practice (07) Drugs (3B) (if the case involves illegal

Civil Rights (e.g., discrimination, drugs, check this item; otherwise,

false arrest) (not civil report as Commercial or Residential)

harassment) (08) Uudicial Review

Defamation (e.g., slander, libel) Asset Forfeiture (05)

(13) Petition Re: Arbitration Award (11)

~i~ Fraud (16) Writ of Mandate (02)

t~~ Intellectual Property (19) Writ-Administrative Mandamus

d Professional Negligence (25) Writ-Mandamus on Limited Court

c:,

Legal Malpractice Case Matter

Other Professional Malpractice Writ-Other Limited Court Case

(not medical or legal) Review

Other Non-PI/PDIWD Tort (35) Other Judicial Review (39)

Employment Review of Health Officer Order

Wrongful Termination (36) Notice of Appeal-Labor

Other Employment (15) Commissioner Appeals

Enforcement of Judgment Enforcement of Judgment (20) Abstract of Judgment (Out of County)

Confession of Judgment (nondomestic relations)

Sister State Judgment Administrative Agency Award (not unpaid taxes) Petition/Certification of Entry of Judgment on Unpaid Taxes Other Enforcement of Judgment Case

Miscellaneous Civil Complaint

RICO (27)

Other Complaint (not specified above) (42)

Declaratory Relief Only Injunctive Relief Only (non-

harassment) .Mechanics Lien

Other Commercial Complaint Case (non-tortlnon-complex) Other Civil Complaint (non-lortlnon-complex)

Miscellaneous Civil Petition Partnership and Corporate Governance (21)

Other Petition (not specified above) (43)

Civil Harassment Workplace Violence Elder/Dependent Adult

. Abuse Election Contest

Petition for Name Change Petition for Relief from Late

Claim

Other Civil Petition

CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET

Page 2 of 2

CM'()10 [Rev. July 1, 2007J