Filing # 32901633 E-Filed 10/06/2015 03:04:21 PM. IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE 11TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA CIRCUIT CIVIL DIVISION CASE NO. ANITA NAJIY, an Individual, Plaintiff, vs, JAVIER ORTIZ, an Individual, and MIAMI FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE, LODGE NO. 20, INC., a Florida Non-Profit Corporation, Defendants. Se PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT Plaintiff, ANITA NAJIY (“Najiy’), sues Defendants, JAVIER ORTIZ (“Ortiz”) and MIAMI FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE, LODGE NO. 20, INC. (“FOP”) and alleges as follows: 1. This is an action to recover damages in excess of $15,000, exclusive of interest, costs, and attorney's fees, resulting from Defendants’ tortious acts. 2. Atall times material hereto, Plaintiffis a natural person, is sui juris, and resides within Miami-Dade County, Florida 3. Defendant Ortiz is a natural person, is su/ juris, and based upon reasonable information and belief, resides within Miami-Dade County, Florida. Page 1 of 510. 1. 12 13. Defendant FOP is a non-profit Florida corporation with its principal place of business in Miami, Florida. It is @ union for Miami police, Plaintiffs an assistant chief with the City of Miami Police Department. Defendant Ortiz is a sergeant/lieutenant with the City of Miami Police Department and the President of FOP. On or about April 17, 2015, Defendants posted a video recording on to the “Javier Ortiz Fop” facebook page of Plaintiff and other police officers during the Pledge of Allegiance at a ceremony. On the facebook page, the caption under the video read: “Watch a Miami Police ‘Assistant Chief’ refuse to selute our U.S. flag at a ceremony today.” The video focused in on Plaintiff, who was standing at attention with her arms to her side according to military code. The video was recorded by Ortiz. On facebook and in their subsequent online postings, Defendants omitted the fact that Plaintiff was following military code during the Pledge of Allegiance. Ortiz stated that she had ‘no respect” and urged facebook members ta “share” the video online. This video was posted onto several other social media sites, such as Twitter and Scrib. Page 2 of 514. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. Ortiz also stated Plaintiff was not loyal to the U.S., and suggested it was due to her Musiim faith. Ortiz explained “you either are with America, or you aren't [This has nothing to do with race, but being 2 true American law enforcement officer accountable to their oath.” As a result, many people commented, resulting in hundreds of comments calling for Plaintiff to be removed from her position. Plaintiff was called disrespectful, and she received several death threats, Atter the local and national news media posted the video, Defendants shared it again on the internet, and continued to state that Plaintiff was being disrespectful. Even after Plaintiff gained support from the community and the media, since she was indeed following proper protocol during the Pledge of Allegiance, Defendants continued making statements on the internet that Plaintiff was disloyal to America and that she had turned her back on the USA, Defendants targeted Plaintiff because she is Muslim. Defendants even called Plaintiff a terrorist and a member of ISIS over the Internet. Defendant FOP adopted and ratified Ortiz’s conduct. Page 3 of 521. 22, 23, 24. 25. 26. 27, 28. 29, COUNTI Defamation Plaintiff re-alleges and re-states paragraphs 1 through 20 as alleged herein and further states as follows: Defendants published a video of Plaintiff not placing her hand over her heart during the Pledge of Allegiance. Defendants targeted Plaintiff and emphasized she was Muslim over the Internet. Defendants continued to attack Plaintiff for not placing her hand over her heart and stated she was disloyal to the U.S However, Defendants ignored that Plaintiff was following military code in respecting the flag during the Pledge of Allegiance, and never stated this on the Internet. Rather, Defendants continued with their attacks because Plaintiff is Muslim. Defendants juxtaposed these facts to create the false impression that Plaintiff isa Muslim extremist and terrorist. Defendants’ statements prejudiced Plaintiff end implied that Plaintiff did not place her hand over her heart during the Pledge of Allegiance because she was a Muslim extremist and terrorist. Adcitionally, Defendants falsely stated over the Internet that Plaintiff was 2 member of ISIS. Page 4 of 530. Defendants’ primary purpose in committing these acts was to attack Plaintiff and harm her. 31. As a result, Plaintiff suffered damages in the form of public ridicule, humiliation, harassment, death threats, and mental anguish and suffering WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment ageinst Defendants for damages, including compensatory damages, special damages, punitive damages, attorney's fees and costs, pre and post-judgment interest, and all other further relief that this Court deems necessary and proper. Demand for Jury Trial Plaintiff demands a trial by Jury for each issue so triable herein. Respectfully Submitted, ‘THE HARRIS LAW FIRM GROUP, P.A. 201 South Biscayne Blvd. Suite 2650 Miami, Florida 33131. Tel: 305.536.6131 Fax: 305.536.6130 By: _s/ Robert N. Harris Robert Newton Harris, Esq. Fla. Bar No.: 87671 robert@harrislawinfo.com DATED: October 6, 2015 Page 5 of 5