5

10

15

20

25

2346789

11

c J 8 ~

 

12

-iN"",

o . : ~ -

-«

a

-

0\

'"

13

~

 

.0

'§

::3

~



tB

:><::

;>

.-

u-

14

c"36

ro

0 •

C.::HXl

$::

....

f!,-;:::

o

;::l::I:

~ ~ ]

 

i E ~ r o

16

01£)]

~

 

"'"

j ~ ~



17

18

19

2122

23

242627

28

Gary Kurtz, Esq.

SBN

128295

LAW

OFFICE OF

GARY

KURTZ

A Professional Law Corporation20335 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 200Woodland Hills, California

91364

Telephone: 818-884-8400Telefax: 818-884-8404E-Mail: gary@garykurtzlaw.comAttorney in

pro

per

SUPERIOR

COURTOF

CALIFORNIA

COUNTY

OF

LOS

ANGELES

GARY

KURTZ,

)

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs.

)

)

A.

J.

WEBERMAN

also known as,

ALAN

)

JULES

WEBERMAN,

DANIEL BEN-TZION

)

and

BENTZION

DANIEL;

and

DOES

1 to )50, inclusive. )

)

Defendants. )

I.

Introduction

Case

No.

LC

084486SUPPLEMENTAL

MEMORANDUM OF

POINTS

AND

AUTHORITIES

IN

SUPPORT

OF

DEFAULT

JUDGMENT; SUPPLEMENTAL

DECLARATION

OF

GARY

KURTZ

Date:

Apri115,2010

Time:

8:30 a.m.Dept.:

NW"I"

At

the

Court's

direction, Plaintiff provides supplemental briefing regarding theCourt's ability to issue injunctive relief and

monetary

damages.

II.

Facts Establishing Liability

Weberman

posted

false

defamatory

information

on

the

webpage

www.steverombom.org. A

true

and

correct

copy

of that

webpage as it

appeared

onSupplemental Points and Authorities

in

Support of Default Judgment

-1

 

5

10

15

20

25

1

2346789

11

0 8 ~

 

12

....iC'l,..,

0.;

" ~

 

;;

<Jl<ll

13

~

 

-d""§

;:3

a

~

 

:><:

>

"-

14

C-3

a

~

 

0•

Oa:l$l

.....

j!!::::

o

;:3

::t:

~ E : - g

 

~ ~ ~

 

16

0","0

~ ~ ~

 

j ~



17

1819

21

2223

24

26

27

28

February

12, 2009, is

attached

as Exhibit "1" to

the complaint

in

this

action The postingcontains defamatory information, including

without

limitation, (a) accusations

that

Kurtz

and

Private Investigator Steven Rombom fabricated

data

to

discredit

MySpace.comregarding Registered Sex Offenders

who

have profiles on Myspace, (b) accusations

that

Kurtz conspired with

the

clerk

of

the

court

for Hon. Lisa Hart Cole to

perpetrate

an injusticeand prevail in a lawsuit against Weberman,

and

(c) accusations

that that

Kurtz

threatened

a14-year old boy

with

rape.Weberman also

posted

false

and

defamatory information on

the

webpage

www.steverombom.org/LisaHartCole.

A

true

and correct

copy

of the relevant

pages

of

that

webpage

as

it

appeared

on

February 12, 2009, is

attached

as Exhibit "2" to

the

complaint inthis action. The posting contains defamatory information, including

without

limitation (a)accusing Kurtz of

working

with

with

Judge Cole

and

her

clerk in

orchestrating

court

hearings to deprive

Weberman

of

due

process; (b) accusing Kurtz

of

being Judge Cole's

partner

in closing

down

anti-nazi wehsites,

and

(c) accusing Kurtz

of

being involved in a"nursing home scam."

III.

Damages

When

the

default was first requested,

damageswere

difficult to ascertain, as

there

had

not

been a loss of any

particular

client. Since

that

time, a

career

changing client hasbeen lost. In

September

2009, Plaintiff

obtained

preliminary

work

from a

new

client.

That

client

is

involved

in

considerable litigation

and spends upwards of

$1,000,000

per

year

onlegal fees. Plaintiff's

work

was confidential, behind

the

scenes,

and

private from the initialengagement.Supplemental Points and Authorities

in

Support of Default Judgment

-2

 

5

10

15

20

25

23467

8

9

11

u8:z

12

....iN""

t:I.;£-

,-

0-

- < b 5 ~



13

N •

'E

t::

'E

0

::l

~

 

...

;:.::

;.

.-

ll.l-

14

csd

~

 

0•

O C O ~

 

l . t - . ~ : =

 

o

;:;::I:

ll.l

...

'0

U

l::

l::

\ E ~ ~



16

Olr\'O

;>

""

8

..

" , , ~

j ~



17

18

19

21

2223

24

2627

28

In

January 2010, the work was still confidential

but

starting

to

increase. Plaintiffwas negotiating a "ramp-up" of

work

to

fill

all available time

at

the

rate

of

$400.00

per

hour.

That

ramp-up" was expected for April 2010, which would allow for

the

disposition

ortransfer

of

matters

at

lower billing rates. The difference would have been a minimumincrease

of

$25,000

per

month for

at

least 3 to 5 years. Plaintiff was looking

at

additionalincome of $900,000 to $1,500,000 over

the

next 3 to 5 years.

1

That work

terminated

in

February 2010. Plaintiff was attempting to do an interview

of

a prospective witness, and

the witness

refused to speak with Plaintiff because he saw

Mr.

Weberman's web page.Plaintiff lost

the

client almost immediately thereafter.While a monetary judgment

of

$1,175,289.25 would be nice to obtain, an injunctionwould

be

the more meaningful solution. The defamation continues to

be worse

and worse,expanding

it

scope and depravity.

The

new iteration of

theweb

page is attached hereto asExhibit

"1."

Plaintiff has received horrified calls from family members

(mother

and sister),friends and clients asking

about

the information on

the

web site.

To

make matters worse, it

is

likely

that

Mr.

Weberman himself has created

some or

all of

the

alleged third-partycontent. For example, the

"BONDAGE"

site

asserts

that

GaryK91364

is

from "BritishColumbia."

Mr.

Weberman once shared

the

same lawyer as

Mr.

Lubymer Prytulak (againstwhom Plaintiff has a $250,000 defamation judgment), who is from Vancouver (BritishColumbia), Canada. It

is

possible

that these

two defamers have conspired, and this

is

justone

example.

1

Assuming a

5%

discount (interest) rate,

thepresent

value is a range of$777,453.84 to $1,175,289.25.

Supplemental Points

and

Authorities in

Support

of

Default

Judgment

-3