Blackhat 2010-5-23 Larry Gabriel Complaint

8/10/2019 Blackhat 2010-5-23 Larry Gabriel Complaint

1/80

2

4

5

6

8

9

70

i 1

~

13

14

1 s

16

17

18

19

Z o

a ~

22

23

24

? s

26

27

28

LARRY

W.

ABRIEL Bar No.

329

STEVEN

.

GUBNER Bar

No.

156593

COREY

. WEBER

Bar

No. 205912

EZRA

BRUTZKUS

GUBNERLLP

21654 Oxnard

S t r e e t ,

S u i t e 500

'Woodland

i l l s ,

CA 1 3 67

Telephone:

(&

8}

8 27-9000

F a c s i m i l e : (818) 27

-9099

Email: l g a b r i e l

ebg-

law.com

sgubner ebg-law.com

cweber ebg-

law.com

A t t o r n e y s .

o r

P l a i n t i f f s

Hal ~ a t e r s k y , Barry Lavine ,

a s t h e

i n d i v i d u a l

t r u s t e e of

h e Am e nde d

and

R e s t a t e d

Hal

a t e r s k ~ ~ y

I r r e v o c a b l e

L i f e I n s u r a n c e T r u s t ,

H i l l a r y A.

a t e r s k y ,

Andrew

a t e r s k y ,

Robin

a t e r s k y ,

J e f f r e y Katersky

and Dylan

Zelman

~ . -

-

-

- ~ ~ i

~

~

~ ~

C E t d T R A L l S R i C I O F

G A L f F O R i d i A

UNITED

STATES

DISTRICTCOURT

CENTRALDISTRICT

OF

;4LIFORNIA

HAL ~ATERSKY, ARRY

AVI~~TE,

AS

THE NDIVIDUALTRUSTEE

4F

THEAMENDED

AND

RESTATED

HALKATERSK~

F~:REVOCABLE

LIFE

INSURI~.NCE TRUST

DTD

8J29/2008,HILLARY .

KATERSKY,

ANDREW

KATERSKY,

OBIN

KATERSKY, EFFREYI{ATERSKY

ANDDYLAN

ZELMAN

P l a i n t i f f s ,

v .

IMPERIAL

PREMIUM

FINANCE,

L L C

IMPERIAL IFE

SETTLEMENTS, LC;

BANK

QF

UTAH, nd THELINCOLN

NATIONAL IFE INSURANCE

COMPANY,

Defendants.

~.,~3~L

itil~.

COMPLAINTFOR;

1 .

DECLARATC?RY

E LI EF;

2 .

INJUTICTIVE RELIEF;

3 . FRAUD;

4.

BREACH 4FCONTRACT;

5 .

INTENTIONAL NFLICTION OF

EMOTIONAL

ISTRESS;

6.

NEGLIGENT

NFLICTION

OF

EM(JTIONAL

?ISTRESS;

7 . UNFAIR

BUSYNESS

PRACTICES;

8 .

ELDER

ABUSE

r

Judge:

Discover~

C u t o f f :

Motion C u t o f f :

T r i a l Date:

1

Case 2:12-cv-04503-DMG-CW Document 1 Filed 05/23/12 Page 1 of 80 Page ID #:3


2/80

a

3

4

s

6

s

9

i o

t i

12

l3

74

IS

1 ~

17

1$

19

2 0

21

22

23

24

25

a ~

27

2 s

P l a i n t i f f s ,

Hai

K a t e r s k y

K a t e r s k y

,

Barry

Lavine Lavine ) , s o l e l y

i n

h i s

c a p a c i t y

a s t h e

i n d i v i d u a l

t r u s t e e of t h e Amended and

R e s t a t e d

Hal

K a t e r s k y

I r r e v o c a b l e L i f e

I n s u r a n c e T r u s t and

H i l l a r y

A. K a t e r s k y ,

Andrew

K a f i e r s k y ,

Rabin

K a t e r s k y ,

J e f f r e y

K a t e r s l ~ y

and Dylan Zelman t h e T r u s t

B e n e f i c i a r i e s

)

( c o l l e c t i v e l y , t h e I ~ a t e r s k y

P a r t i e s

) ,

b y and h r o u g h t h e i r

a t t o r n e y s ,

h e r e b y f i l e s

t h i s

Complaint

a g a i n s t

D e f e n d a n t s I m p e r i a l Premium

F i n a n c e , L L C ,

I m p e r i a l L i f e

S e t t l e m e n t s ,

LLC,

ank

of

Utah and

The L i n c o l n

N a t i o n a l L i f e I n s u r a n c e

Com pa n y,

a l l e g e

a s f o l l o w s :

1 .

This

i s an a c t i o n brought f o r

D e c l a r a t o r y Judgment

under

28

U.S.C.

2201

and

Rule 57of h e F e d e r a l

Rules of i v i l

Procedure

and o r

o t h e r

r e l i e f i n

which

t h e

~atersky

P a r t i e s

seek

a d e t e r m i n a t i o n

a s

. t o

t h e i r

r i g h t s and

i n t e r e s t s i n a $ 10

m i l l i o n

l i f e

i n s u r a n c e

p o l i c y ,

p o l i c y

no.

JJ7031503 ( t h e

Policy

}

i s s u e d

b y Th e

Lincoln

N a t i o n a l L i f e

I n s u r a n c e

C o m p a n y Lincoln ) . Th e

o l i c y

was purchased b y

t h e

Hal ~ a t e r s k y


L i f e I n s u r a n c e Trust t h e

Katersky T r u s t )

o

fund

t h e

e s t a t e

planning

needs

of

Katersky, and

t h e r e a f t e r

f i n a n c e d

b y I m p e r i a l

P remium

Finance,LLC

IPF

) . I ~ a t e r s k y

i s

69

e a r s o l d ,

has

an

n o p e r a b l e

b r a i n

tumor and

i s

g r a v e l y

i l l TPF

and I m p e r i a l

L i f e S e t t l e m e n t s ,

LLC, I L S)

ontend t h a t

they

a r e

t h e

owners

of

h e P o l i c y and or have

a s s e r t e d

dominion an d

c o n t r o l over

h e

P o l i c y

so a s

t o d e p r i v e t h e

Katersky

P a r t i e s

of h e ownership

and b e n e f i t s

of

h e P o l i c y . Th e

Katersky

P a r t i e s ,

t o

w i t :

t h e i n s u r e d , Katersky, h e

i n d i v i d u a l t r u s t e e of h e

T r u s t

t h a t

o w n s h e

P o l i c y ,

Lavine,

and

h e

T r u s t

B e n e f i c i a r i e s , contend t h a t t h e Katersky

T r u s t

o w n s

t h e

P o l i c y , and t h a t IPF's

i n t e r e s t i s

. l i m i t e d

t o

t h e amou nt

owing

f o r

t h e

premium

f i n a n c i n g

provided

b y IPF,

and

t h a t

I L S

has

n o

i n t e r es t i n t h e

P o l i c y

whatsoever.

T h e Katersky

P a r t i e s

f u r t h e r contend t h a t

IPF's

conduct

v i o l a t e s

t h e i r

r i g h t s

and

i n t e r e s t

i n

t h e

P o l i c y ,

and

t h a t

t h e i r

a s s e r t i o n of dominion an d c o n t r o l

over

t h e

Policy

and

t h e Katersky

T r u s t

c o n s t i t u t e s a

f r a u d , u n f a i r b u s i n e s s p r a c t i c e and

e l d e r abuse,

a m o n g t h e r c l a i m s . There

s ,

t h e r e f o r e ,

an a c t u a l c o n t r o v e r s y

of

2



3/80

j u s t i c i a b l e

n a t u r e

c o n c e r n i n g t h e

r i g h t s

and

o b l i g a t i o n s

of h e

p a r t i e s i n and

t o t h e

2 P o l i c y

i s s u e d t o

t h e

K a t e r s l y

P a r t i e s .

3

P A ] [ ~ ' I ' ~ E S

4

2 .

P l a i n t i f f Hal

Katersky

i s

a

i t i z e n of

h e

S t a t e of

a l i f o r n i a r e s i d i n g

i n t h e

5

Caunty

of

e n t u r a , S t a t e of

a l i f o r n i a .

6

3 .

P l a i n t i f f

Barry

Lavine

i s

a

i t i z e n of h e

S t a t e of

a l i f o r n i a

r e s i d i n g

i n

t h e

~

County

of

L o s

Angeles,

S t a t e of

C a l i f o r n i a .

Mr.

Lavine

i s

a c t i n g s o l e l y

i n

h i s

8

c a p a c i t y a s

t h e

i n d i v i d u a l

t r u s t e e

of t h e

A m e n d e d

and R e s t a t e d

Hal K a t e r s k y

9


L i f e

I n s u r a n c e

T r u s t .

l 0

4 .

P l a i n t i f f

H i l l a r y A .

Katersky

i s

a

c i t i z e n

of t h e S t a t e

of

C a l i f o r n i a

l

r e s i d i n g

i n

t h e

County

of

e n t u r a , S t a t e

of

a l i f o r n i a .

1 2

5 .

P l a i n t i f f

A n d r e w

Katersky i s a

c i t i z e n

o f ' t h e

S t a t e

of


1 3

i n

t h e

County

of

os

Angeles, t a t e

of

a l i f o r n i a .

1 4

6 .

P l a i n t i f f

Robin Katersky

i s

a

United

S t a t e s c i t i z e n

and

a

c i t i z e n

of

i s

A u s t r a l i a ,

c u r r e n t l y

r e s i d i n g i n

Tasmania,

u s t r a l i a .

l

~

7 .

P l a i n t i f f

J e f f r e y

Katersky

i s

a

i t i z e n of

h e

S t a t e

of


i n

i ~

t h e County

of

e n t u r a ,

S t a t e

of

a l i f o r n i a .

j 8

.

P l a i n t i f f

Dylan

Zelman s

c i t i z e n

of

h e

S t a t e of

a l i f o r n i a ,

r e s i d i n g i n

t h e

19

County of

entura,

t a t e

of

a l i f o r n i a .

Z o

9.

Defendant

I m p e r i a l

Premium

Finance,

LLC

IPF

}

i s a

c i t i z e n

of

~

Delaware,

being

o r g a n i z e d

and e x i s t i n g

under t h e

laws

of

h e S t a t e of

Delaware,

i t h

2 2

i t s

p r i n c i p a l

o f f i c e s i n

B o c a R a t t a n ,

F l o r i d a .

2 3

1 0 .

Defendant

I m p e r i a l L i f e

S e t t l e m e n t s ,

LLC IL S)

s a

c i t i z e n of

2 4

Delaware,

being

o r g a n i z e d and

e x i s t i n g under t h e

laws of

h e

S t a t e of

Delaware

w i t h

2 5

i t s

p r i n c i p a l

o f f i c e s i n

B o c a a t t a n ,

F l o r i d a .

2 6

1 1 .

Defendant B a n k

of

U t ah i s a

c i t i z e n

of

h e

s t a t e

of Utah

and

i s a

U t a h

2 7 s t a t e

c h a r t e r e d

commercial bank with

i t s

p r i n c i p a l

p l a c e

of u s i n e s s i n

Og d e n ,

Utah.

2 8

B a n k of

tah

i s t h e

p u r p o r t e d

c o r p o r a t e

t r u s t e e of h e Hal

K at e r s k y

T r u s t .

3



4/80


5/80

a

3

4

s

6

s

9

l a

12

13

14

i s

16

t ~

i s

19

20

21

a 2

23

24

2 s

26'

a ~

2 s

two

term

i f e

p o l i c i e s of 1

m i l l i o n

e a c h . Those

p o l i c i e s

were

s s u e d by M e t r a p ~ o l i t a n

and

John Hancock, which

o l i c i e s

a r e s t i l l

i n

f o r c e and

e f f e c t .

1 7 .

I n

t h e

f i r s t

q u a r t e r

2008,

Cohen

m a d e i n q u i r y

t o

a p p r o x i m a t e l y 10 l i f e

i n s u r a n c e companies,

a s

t o

t h e i r

w i l l i n g n e s s t o i s s u e

a p o l i c y i n s u r i n g

K a t e r s k y

f o r

$10 m i l l i o n i n

c o v e r a g e .

Although

m u l t i p l e c a r r i e r s

o f f e r e d c o v e r a g e ,

L i n c o l n was

s e l e c t e d a s

t h e

p r o v i d e r .

1 8 .

I n

A p r i l 2008, Cohen

m a d e a p p l i c a t i o n f o r i n s u r a n c e f o r

I ~ a t e r s k y

w i t h

L i n c o l n . T h e

p o l i c y

was o r i g i n a l l y

t o

be

i s s u e d t o P l a i n t i f f ,

H i l l a r y K . a t e r s k y ,

Hal

K a t e r s k y ' s w i f e , a s t h e

owner

and b e n e f i c i a r y of

h e

p o l i c y .

The a p p l i c a t i o n was

not

a c t e d upon and h e

p o l i c y was not s s u e d .

1 9 .

I n June

o r J u l y

204$, Cohen, on

b e h a l f of K a t e r s k y , s u b m i t t e d

a

n e w

a p p l i c a t i o n t o L i n c o l n

fora

$10

i l l i o n p o l i c y , The

o l i c y was o be s s u e d

t o

t h e

Hal

Katersky

I r r e v o c a b l e L i f e

I n s u r a n c e T r u s t .

As

p a r t

of

t h e e v a l u a t i o n p r o c e s s ,

~ , K a t e r s ~ y

was

s u b j e c t

t o

an

i n d e p e n d e n t medical

e x a m i n a t i o n . T h e m e d i c a l

examination

d e t e r m i n e d a t t h e time t h a t Katersky

was q u i t e h e a l t h y , and a t

67

y e a r s

' o l d was

g i v e n a l i f e expectancy

of 270

months by

t h e r a t i n g

a g e n c i e s. S h o r t l y

t h e r e a f t e r

t h e

r a t i n g

agency changed

t h e i r

e x p e c t a n c y

a n a l y s i s ,

r a i s i n g

K a t e r s k y ' s

l i f e

expectancy by 24 months,

20.

In

o r around J u l y

2408, Katersky formed t h e

Hal

K a t e r s k y


L i f e

I n s u r a n c e

T r u s t .

T h e L i n c o l n

0 i l l i o n P o l i c y

was s s u e d

t o

t h e T r u s t on o r

about

J u l y

18, 2008.

Katersky p a i d t h e f i r s t few

months

of

p r e m i u m on

t h e

p o l i c y

( a p p r o x i m a t e l y

$ 2 1 , 0 0 0 ) .

T h e i n d i v i d u a l

t r u s t e e

f o r

t h e

Katersky

T r u s t

i s

Barry

Lavine.

21. In

o r

around August, 200$,

~ a t e r s k y s u b m i t t e d

an a p p l i c a t i o n t o f i n a n c e

t h e

p r e m i u m f o r

t h e

P o l i c y

t o

IPF.

On r about September 21,

200$, t t h e r e q u e s t

of

IPF,

and

i n

o r d e r t o o b t a i n ancing

f o r

t h e premiums on h e P o l i c y , K a t e r s k y s i g n e d

an

A m e n d e d

and

R e s t a t e d

Hal

Katersky I r r e v o c a b l e L i f e I n s u r a n c e T r u s t

( t h e

Katersky T r u s t ) .

B a n k

of

tah

s

d e s i g n a t e d i n t h e

Katersky

T r u s t

a s

t h e

5



6/80

Independent P r o f e s s i o n a l

T r u s t e e

. In

accordance with t h e

terms

o f t h e Katersky

2 T r u s t ,

t h e

Independent

T r u s t e e

` s h a l l

not

have

a n y

o f h e d u t i e s

o r


o f

a n y

3 T r u s t e e

h e r e u n d e r .

A r u e

a nd c o r r e c t c o p y o f h e Katersky

Trust

i s

a t t a c h e d h e r e t o

4 as

E x h i b i t

1 .

5 22.

On r

about

September

26,

20Q8, h e Katersky Trust and IPF

e n t e r e d

i n t o

6 a

L o a n

A p p l i c a t i o n and Agr e e me n t d a t e d a s o f September 26,

2008

{ t h e

Lo a n

~

Agr e e me n t)

u r s u a n t t o

w h i c h

IPF

agreed t o l e n d ,

o n t h e terms

a n d c o n d i t i o n s a nd

8

s u b j e c t

t o t h e

l i m i t a t i o n s s e t

f o r t h i n

t h e

L o a n

Agreement,

funds

t o

pa y

p r e m i u m s

o n

g

t h e P o l i c y o w n e d

b y t h e Katersky T r u s t , t o g e t h e r

with

r e l a t e d

T r u s t e e

Expenses,

I n

~

o

a d d i t i o n

t o t h e

L o a n

Agreement, t h e p a r t i e s e n t e r e d i n t o s e v e r a l o t h e r t r a n s a c t i o n

do c uments,

i n c l u d i n g a

Promissory

Note

( t h e

Note

,

an Assignment o f L i f e

1 2

Insurance

Policy a s C o l l a t e r a l ( t h e Assignment

)

nd a P e r s o n a l

Guaranty

{ t h e

1 3

G u a r a nt y)

c o l l e c t i v e l y t h e

L o a n D o c u m e n t s

) . T h e loan w a s a l l

d u e

a nd p a y a b l e

14

o n

October 15, 2010.

i s

23.

Bet w e e n

October

200$ a n d

October

2014,

IPF

p a i d

t h e

p r e m i u m s

d u e

o n

l 6

the Policy f o r t h e

b e n e f i t o f h e

Katersky P a r t i e s .

T h e r e a f t e r , a

d i s p u t e

a r o s e between

1 7

the

K a te r sk y

P a r t i e s

a n d

IPF

regarding

t h e i r r i g h t s

a nd


unde r

t h e

terms

o f

r

8

the

L o a n D o c u m e n t s , with the

Katersky

P a r t i e s

contending

t h a t

IPF

v i o l a t e d

c e r t a i n

1 9

terms

a n d

c o n d i t i o n s o f the

L a w n

D o c u m e n t s ,

i n c l u d i n g

f a i l i n g t o

provide

t h e

2 a K a t e r s k y

P a r t i e s

w r t h

a

pa y- o f f a m o u n t

o f h e

Loan,

a l t h o u g h

d e m a n d

t h e r e f o r e

had

2 1

been

m a d e

b y t h e K a t e r s k y P a r t i e s .

2 2

24.

IPF r e f u s e d t o comply w i t h P l a i n t i f f s

dem a nd t o

p r o v i d e

t h e p a y -

O f f

2 3

i n f o r m a t i o n ,

i n s i s t i n g t h a t t

had

f o r e c l o s e d o n t h e P o l i c y a s c o l l a t e r a l

f o r t h e

p r e m i u m

2 4

f i n a n c i n g ,

and

f u r t h e r

i n s i s t i n g

t h a t

t

(IPF)

a s

h e o w n e r o f h e P o l i c y .

2 5

25. IPF c o n t i n u e d

t o

advance

f u n d s

o n a monthly

b a s i s

t o

keep

t h e P o l i c y i n

2 ~

f o r c e

and

e f f e c t .

T h e

payments

were

m a d e by IPF d i r e c t l y t o L i n c o l n .

By

u l y

2011

2 7

IPF

had advanced a p p r o x i m a t e l y

$ 4 2 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 , a s

p r e m i u m

f i n a n c e

l o a n s .

Z s

6



7/80


8/80

3

4

s

6

8

9

IQ

1 1

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

2d

21

22

23

24

25

26

2 7

28

among t h e r

s t a t e s , a s t o IPF's b u s i n e s s

p r a c t i c e s .

31.

Because of h e

government i n v e s t i g a t i o n ,

t h e

Katersky

P a r t i e s

became

concerned

t h a t

I P F

would

not

be

b l e

t o perform

t i m e l y

i t s


under h e

terms

of

h e J u l y

L e t t e r

Agreement,

s

p r e s e n t e d i n a e t t e r

t o

I P F

d a t e d Sep~emb~r

30, 01

1 ,

a copy of which s

a t t a c h e d

h e r e t o

a s E x h i b i t 2 .

32.

I P F responded by

r e p r e s e n t i n g

t h a t

i t was u l l y

c a p a b l e ,

w i l l i n g

and a b l e

t o

perform

t h e

terms of h e

J u l y L e t t e r

Agreement, n c l u d i n g

confirming

t h a t I P F had

t h e

wherewithal

t o make

l l premium

payments

r e q u i r e d

t o

be

made t o c o n t z n u e

t h e

P o l i c y

i n f u l l

f o r c e

and e f f e c t ; and f u r t h e r , I P F

would

c o n t i n u e

t o

p r o c e s s

t h e

change

of

ownership

a p p l i c a t i o n

with L i n c o l n ;

a n d ,

t h a t

a I I o t h e r terms and

c o n d i t i o n s of h e

J u l y L e t t e r

Agreement, would

remain

i n f a r c e

and e f f e c t . P l a i n t i f f s

a r e informed

and

I On

p r i l 30,

012,

h e

U.S.

t t o r n e y s

o f f i c e

i s s u e d t h e f o l l o w i n g p r e s s

r e l e a s e

r e g a r d i n g

a

e t t l e m e n t

r e a c h e d

w i t h

IPF:

I m p e r i a l Holdings,

I n c . ( I m p e r i a l ) ,

a

p u b l i c l y t r a d e d

s p e c i a l t y

f i n a n c e

c o r } ~ o r a t i o n

h e a d q u a r t e r e d

i n

Boca

Raton,

F l o r i d a , has e n t e r e d

r o t a

allon-

P r o s e c u t i o n

Agreement{NPA

i t h

t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s

A t t o r n e y s O f f i c e

f o r

t h e D i s t r i c t of New

Hampshire

t o

pay

an

m i l l i o n p e n a l t y t o r e s o l v e

f r a u d

a l l e g a t i o n s

r e l a t e d t o I m p e r i a l s

involvement

i n

making m i s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s on

l i f e i n s u r a n c e

a p p l i c a t i o n s

i n

c o n n e c t i o n w i t h i t s premium

f i n a n c e

b u s i n e s s . .

.

According

t o

t h e

NPA,

rom December

2006

t h r o u g h January

2009,

as p a r t

of t s premium

f i n a n c e

b u s i n e s s ,

c e r t a i n

I m p e r i a l

employees, who were

l i c e n se d i n s u r a n c e a g e n t s ,

worked

w i t h

e x t e r n a l

g e n e r a l

a g e n t s and b r o k e r s ,

t o

o b t a i n

l i f e i n s u r a n c e p o l i c i e s

on

i n d i v i d u a l s

over

65

y e a r s

of

age

f o r

which

I m p e r i a l would o f f e r

premium f i n a n c e l o a n s .

These

m p e r i a l employees had

d i r e c t c o n t a c t

w i t h

t h e

p r o s p e c t i v e i n s u r e d s

and

worked

w i t h t h e i n s u r e d s and e x t e r n a l

g e n e r a l

a g e n t s and

b r o k e r s

t o

complete i f e

i n s u r a n c e

a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r submission t o v a r i o u s

l i f e

i n s u r a n c e

companies.

While

m p e r i a l

employees

were

engaged i n t h i s b u s i n e s s , many i f e i n s u r a n c e

a p p l i c a t i o n s r e q u i r e d

t h e

i n s u r e d

and t h e agent o d i s c l o s e

i n f o r m a t i o n

about whether premium

payments would be

funded

by

a

premium

f i n a n c e

l o a n .

An

n s u r e d

was

y p i c a l l y

r e q u i r e d t o

d i s c l o s e

i f he

or she i n t e n d e d

t o

seek

such

a l o a n t o pay

premiums and o f t e n t h e agent was l s o r e q u i r e d t o d i s c l o s e

i f he

a r she

was aware of

an

i n t e n t

by

h e i n s u r e d t o o b t a i n such

a

l o a n . W h en

a p p l i c a t i o n s

were

u b m i t t e d t o i n s u r a n c e companies

t h a t

l i k e l y would

not have i s s u e d a p o l i c y

i f

t h e a p p l i c a t i o n a c c u r a t e l y d e s c r i b e d

t h e

i n s u r e d s i n t e n t t o

o b t a i n

premium

f i n a n c i n g ,

t h e I m p e r i a l

employees,

who

were

a c t i n g

a s

l i f e

i n s u r a n c e

a g e n t s

on

t h e

p o l i c i e s , made and/ o r f a c i l i t a t e d

m i s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s

an

t h e a p p l i c a t i o n s

t h a t

c o n c e a l e d t h e

i n s u r e d s

i n t e n t

t o seek a premium f i n a n c e l o a n

from m p e r i a l .

The

U n i t e d

S t a t e s A t t o r n e y s

O f f i c e e n t e r ed

i n t o

t h e NPA i t h I m p e r i a l

b a s e d ,

i n

p a r t ,

on

I m p e r i a l s

d e c i s i o n

t o t e r m i n a t e

i t s

premium f i n a n c e b u s i n e s s

and

s e p a r a t e t h e

employees who

r e

known

t

t h i s

time t o

have been

p r i m a r i l y

i n v o l v e d

i n

t h e

misconduct i d e n t i f i e d above,

I m p e r i a l s

s u b s t a n t i a l

c o o p e r a t i o n

t o

d a t e

i n

t h e

i n v e s t i g a t i o n

i n t o i t s

premium

f i n a n c e

b u s i n e s s ,

and t h e

U n i t e d

S t a t e s

A t t o r n e y s O f f i c e s

d e s i r e

t o l i m i t t h e n e g a t i v e

impact

and

a d v e r s e

consequences t o

t h e non

-

premium

f i n a n c e

a s p e c t s

of

m p e r i a l s

b u s i n e s s

and t h e Company's

employees

and

s h a r e h o l d e r s

t h a t

would

r e s u l t from a

r o s e c u t i o n

of m p e r i a l . T n a d d i t i o n t o t h e monetary e n a l t y , m p e r i a l

has g r e e d , among

o t h e r

t h i n g s , t o

p r o v i d e

c o o p e r a t i o n

t o

t h e

U n i t e d

S t a t e s

A t t o r n e y s

O f f i c e

and

i n v e s t i g a t o r y

a g e n c i e s ,

i n c l u d i n g

p r o v i d i n g

documents

and t h e a s s i s t a n c e

of

t s o f f i c e r s ,

a g e n t s

and

employees.



9/80

z

4

s

6

9

i o

i t

l

13

14

15

l ~

t ~

18

1 9

Z o

21

Z a

23

24

z s

26

a 7

a s

b e l i e v e

and

based t h e r e o n a l l e g e t h a t a t

t h e

time

of e n t e r i n g

i n t o t h e

J u l y

L e t t e r

Agree m ent and t h e r e a f t e r

i n c l u d i n g

a s of

September

34,

2011, IPF knew

t h a t

t h e

J u l y

L e t t e r

Agree m ent v i o l a t e d

Utah i n s u r a n c e

l a w s ,

r u l e s

and r e g u l a t i o n s ,

and

t h a t

t h e

s a m e

was

n u l l

and

v o i d

a s

a g a i n s t p u b l i c

p o l i c y .

IPF

f a i l e d

t o

a d v i s e t h e

K a t e r s k y

P a r t i e s

of

h e

s a m e .

33. Subsequent

h e r e t o ,

Mr. a t e r s k y

was

d i a g n o s e d a s

having

an

i n o p e r a b l e

c a n c e r o u s tumor ( b r a i n )

and began

s t e m c e l l t r e a t m e n t

f o r t h e

s a m e a t U.C.L.A.

h o s p i t a l . IPF

was

a d v i s e d of Mr. a t e r s k y s c o n d i t i o n ,

and

was f u r t h e r

a d v i s e d

t h a t

g i v e n

Mr.

a t e r s k y s h e a l t h i s s u e s and t h e

pending

t r e a t m e n t ,

Mr. a t e r s k y was

most

a r i x i o u s t o

put

h i s f i n a n c i a l

a f f a i r s i n o r d e r

so

t h a t

he

would

have

peace of

m i n d

t h a t

h i s

w i f e

and

f a m i l y

were

p r o p e r l y

p r o v i d e d

f o r

i n

t h e

e v e n t

t h e

t r e a t m e n t s

were not

s u c c e s s f u l .

34.

That

communication

r e s u l t e d

i n a

p r o p o s a l by IPF t h a t IPF would

t e r m i n a t e any p r e v i o u s u n d e r s t a n d i n g s of h e p a r t i e s , w i t h IPF o f f e r i n g t o

add

t h e

150,000 payment

t o

any b a l a n c e due t o IPF assum ing arguendo

t h e

J u l y

S , 2011

agreement was

e r m i n a t e d .

IPF f u r t h e r proposed t h e Katersky P a r t i e s would

c o n t i n u e

t o

b e

t h e

owners

/ b e n e f i c i a r i e s

of

t h e P o l i c y ;

however,

t h e y

would

t h e n

b e c o m e

o b l i g a t e d

t o repay

IPF a l l

monies

p r e v i o u s l y

advanced

f o r

t h e

payment of

h e P o l i c y

premiums,

i n c l u d i n g

t h e a d d i t i o n a l

1

5 0 , 0 0 0 .

T h e

t o t a l amount of

t h e

o b l i g a t i o n

would t h u s b e a p p r o x i m a t e l y 700,000.

No

erms

of repayment

o r

f u r t h e r f i n a n c i n g

were

d i s c u s s e d .

IPF f u r t h e r proposed t h a t IPF

would

b e c o m e a b e n e f i c i a r y

of

h e

Katersky

T r u s t ,

w i t h t h e r i g h t t o

r e c e i v e

l l of h e p r o c e e d s from t h e P o l i c y , l e s s

1

m i l l i o n , i f and

wh e n

p a i d ,

r a t h e r

t h a n

t a k i n g

ownership of

h e

P o l i c y , a s

a g r e e d

t o

i n

J u l y

L e t t e r Agreement. At

r

about

h e s a m e

i m e ,

IPF

a g r e e d

t o

r e l e a s e

t h e b a l a n c e

of

t h e 150,000

100,000)

o t h e Katersky P a r t i e s .

35. T h e Katersky P a r t i e s

a r e

informed

and b e l i e v e and

based

t h e r e o n a l l e g e

t h a t

I P F s

p r o p o s a l

was

an

a t t e m p t

t o

circumvent Utah

i n s u r a n c e

l a w s ,

r u l e s

and

r e g u l a t i o n s ,

h a t

p r o h i b i t s

an

i n s u r a n c e

p r e m i u m

f i n a n c e

c o m p a n y

from

o b t a i n i n g

an



10/80

3

s

6

s

9

i o

1 1

12

13

14

I S

16

t ~

r s

19

Z a

21

23

4

a s

26

a ~

a s

i n t e r e s t

i n

an

i n s u r e d ' s

p o l i c y , over and

above any

and

l l

amounts due

based s o l e l y

o n h e

f i n a n c i n g .

See, . g . Utah

Cade

Annotated

(U.C.A)

3 A

- 2 1

-104

I n s u r a b l e

i n t e r e s t and

c o n s e n t ,

r e q u i r e s t h a t an

i n s u r a b l e i n t e r e s t

e x i s t

not o n l y an

t h e

e f f e c t i v e

d a t e

o f h e

i n s u r a n c e b u t

a l s o

a t

t h e time

o f

h e

l a t e r

procurement

o f an

i n t e r e s t

i n

t h e

p r o c e e d s .

F u r t h e r ,

s u b s e c t i o n

U.C.A.

3 A

- 2 1 -

104(2)

b}

t a t e s t h a t a person

m a y n o t

knowingly

p r o c u r e , d i r e c t l y , b y

assignment o r

o t h e r w i s e ,

an

i n t e r e s t

i n

t h e

p r o c e e d s

o f

an i n s u r a n c e

p o l i c y

u n l e s s t h a t

p e r s o n

h a s o r

e x p e c t s t o have an

i n s u r a b l e i n t e r e s t i n

t h e

s u b j e c t

o f

h e

i n s u r a n c e .

A s

d e f i n e d ,

IPF o n l y

had an i n s u r a n c e

i n t e r e s t

up

and

t o t h e

e x t e n t o f

h e

f i n a n c i a l

o b l i g a t i o n

o w e d

o i t f o r

t h e

p r e m i u m

i n a n c i n g .

Because

IPF

had a i m i t e d

i n s u r a b l e

i n t e r e s t ,

IPF

k n e w t h a t

t h e

Utah

Department

o f n s u r a n c e

and

L i n c o l n

would not

a l l o w any IPF i n t e r e s t

i n

t h e P o l i c y t o exceed

t h e

am ount o r

which IPF

had an

n s u r a b l e

i n t e r e s t .

36.

The Katersky

P a r t i e s

a r e

informed and b e l i e v e

t h a t n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g

t h a t

IPF f a i l e d

t o o b t a i n

a p p r o v a l

from t h e Utah Department

o f

I n s u r a n c e

f o r t h e J u l y

L e t t e r

Agreement,

and

t h a t

IPF f a i l e d

t o complete t h e t r a n s a c t i o n s

a s c o n t e m p l a t e d

by

' t h e

J u l y L e t t e r

Agreement,

and

t h a t

t h e Katersky

P a r t i e s and IPF

had

n o t

c o n c l u d e d

any

o t h e r b i n d i n g

a r r a n g e m e n t ,

IPF

i n i t i a t e d

a

change

o f

r u s t e e

f o r

t h e

K a t e r s k y

T r u s t ,

{ n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g

I P F ' s

r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s t o t h e

c o n t r a r y }

removing

t h e

K a t e r s k y

T r u s t ' s i n d i v i d u a l

T r u s t e e ,

Mr. Lavine,

n

p l a c e o f Defendant

B ank

o f

Utah, which

event

should

have

o c c u r r e d only

u p o n t r a n s f e r o f ownership o f

t h e P o l i c y .

The

Katersky

P a r t i e s

have

d emand ed

t h a t IPF immediately a d v i s e

L i n c o l n and B a n k

o f

Utah o f h e

e r r o n e o u s

removal o f h e i n d i v i d u a l

T r u s t e e

and r e i n s t a t e

Mr.

Lavine a s

t h e

i n d i v i d u a l

T r u s t e e . The

Katersky P a r t i e s a r e

informed

and b e l i e v e and b a s e d

t h e r e o n

a l l e g e t h a t

IPF

has

a i l e d

t o do

s o .

37. Base d u p on

t h e

f o r e g o i n g , i n o r around

N o v e m b e r

and

D e c e m b e r

2011,

t h e

Katersky

P a r t i e s

n o t i f i e d

IPF

t h a t

t h e y

d e e m e d IPF t o be i n

b r e a c h o f

h e J u l y

L e t t e r

Agr e em ent and d emand ed

t h a t

IPF

p r o v i d e

t h e Katersky

P a r t i e s

w i t h

t h e

e x a c t

amount

due

and o w i n g

IPF so

h a t

t h e

Katersky

P a r t i e s could pay-

o f f

any

amounts



11/80

3

4

s

s

9

10

1 1

l2

13

14

i s

I d

17

1 8

19

2 0

2 r

22

2~

24

2 s

26

27

Z s

owed

t o IPF a n d .

own t h e

P o l i c y

f r e e

and

c l e a r of

any l i e n

o r i n t e r e s t

of

IPF.

IPF

r e f u s e d t o comply w i t h

t h e demand.

3

.

On

r about J a n u a r y 5,

2Q

2 ,

t h e K a t e r s k y

P a r t i e s

o b t a i n e d


t h a t IPF was

a t t e m p t i n g

t o s e l l t h e P o l l e y

on

t h e

s e c o n d a r y

m a r k e t .

The

K a t e r s k y

P a r t i e s

demanded

t h a t

IPF c e a s e

and

d e s i s t i t s a c t i v i t i e s ,

and

a g a i n

demanded

IPF

provide the

Katersky P a r t i e s with

the

pay-

off demand

p r e v i o u s l y

r e q u e s t e d . A

r u e

and c o r r e c t copy of

h e

demand l e t t e r

i s a t t a c h e d

h e r e t o

as

Exhibit 3.

IPF r e f u s e d

t o

compl y

with

the

demand,

and r e f u s e d t o

provide

t h e

Katersky

P a r t i e s

w i t h apay- o f f

demand.

39.

Between

January 5 , 2012,

and u p

t o

May

, 2012, he

Katersky P a r t i e s

and

IPF

engaged i n a

s e r i e s of

i s c u s s i o n s

i n

an

attempt

t o r e s o l v e

t h e i r

d i f f e r e n c e s .

The

d i s c u s s i o n s f a i l e d , and no w r i t t e n

agreement was e n t e r e d

i n t o .

On

May

,

2012,

the


n f l t i f i e d IPF of

t s

p o s i t i o n t h a t (a) no f i n a l

agreement

has

been

reached

and

b )

PF's only i g h t s

a r e t o r e c e i v e repayment

of ny amounts paid

b y

IPF

in regard

t o the f i n a n c i n g

of

the

p o l i c y .

F u r t h e r , the Katersky P a r t i e s once

again

demanded a payoff

i g u r e of he

a mount IPF contends

t

i s

owed

f o r

t h e

f i n a n c i n g of

the

p r e m i u m

as

of

he

May

, 2012.

IPF

r e f u s e d

t o

comply

with

t h e

r e q u e s t .

A

r u e

and

c o r r e c t

copy of h e l e t t e r i s

s e t

f o r t h

as

E ~ i b i t 4.

On May 1, 2012,

IPF

m ade

dema nd on the

Katersky

P a r t i e s t o

repay

the $150,000

but

f a i l e d

t o

provide t h e

Katersky

P a r t i e s with

the

amou nt owing IPF f o r

the

p r e m i u m

f i n a n c i n g

so t h a t

t h e

Katersky

P a r t i e s could p ay off he

IPF

f i n a n c i n g o b l i g a t i o n , i n c l u d i n g

t h e $1

50,000.

At

the same time,

IPF

n o t i f i e d

the

Katersky

P a r t i e s t h a t Imperial

Finance

w i 1 1

b e

e x e r c i s i n g a l l

a v a i l a b l e

r i g h t s

under

t h e

Loan

Agreement and r e l a t e d documents. A

t r u e and

o r r e c t of h e l e t t e r i s s e t f o r t h

as Exhibit

5.

40.

As f

he

i l i n g of h i s complaint, o n t r a r y t o

the

Katersky

a r t i e s r i g h t s ,

t i t l e

and

i n t e r e s t s

i n

and

t o the P o l i c y ,

the Katersky P a r t i e s

a r e

informed

and b e l i e v e

t h a t :

(a) IPF

continues t o m a k e

t h e monthly p r e m i u m

payments

t o Lincoln;

(b )

Defendant

B ank

of t ah s

a c t i n g

as the o l e t r u s t e e of he

Katersky T r u s t ,

i n

v i o l a t i o n



12/80

3

4

.

s

8

9

10

1 1

12

I3

14

15

16

r s

19

2 0

a i

Z a

23

2 4

2 s

2 6

2~

2 s

of

h e r i g h t s and

i n t e r e s t s of

h e

I ~ a t e r s k y P a r t i e s ; (c) IPF

r e f u s e s

and c o n t i n u e s

t o

r e f u s e

t o

p r o v i d e t h e

l o a n pay

- o f f

n f o r m a t i o n n e c e s s a r y

f o r

t h e

I ~ a t e r s k y

P a r t i e s t o

pay IPF t h e money

due i n

r e g a r d t o

t h e

premium f i n a n c i n g of

h e

P o l i c y ;

(d)

IPF

a s s e r t s t h a t

i t

i s t h e owner

of

h e

P o l i c y and t h a t

t h e

K a t e r s k y P a r t i e s h a v e

no n t e r e s t

i n t h e same, and

i s a t t e m p t i n g t o o b t a i n

c o n t r o l of

t h e

P o l i c y

and

t h e e v e n t u a l

p r o c e e d s

of

h e same,

o t w i t h s t a n d i n g

i t h a s n o t l e g a l

b a s i s t o do

o .

~

r j ~-

r r

{ ~ o r

~eelaratory

R e l i e f

as

to

the

Rights a n d

n t e r e s t s

of he

a r t i e s

i n a n d

t o

the

o l i c y

Against

t a l i

Defendants)

41.

P l a i n t i f f s r e a l l e g e

and i n c o r p o r a t e paragraphs 1 through

4 0

above by

r e f e r e n c e

a s though

f u l l y

s e t

f o r t h

h e r e i n .

42.

Qn

h e f a c t s

a l l e g e d above,

t h e r e

i s now an

a c t u a l

c o n t r o v e r s y

of

a

j u s t i c i a b l e

n a t u r e as t o

whether

t h e P o l i c y i s ow ned

by

t h e

Katersky P a r t i e s , whether

Barry

Lavine

and / o r t h e

B a n k

of

Utah

i s

t h e

T r u s t e e of h e T r u s t , a n d

what r e t h e

r i g h t s

and n t e r e s t s of

PF

and

TLS i n and

t o

t h e

P o l i c y .

43.

The

Katersky

P a r t i e s

a r e

e n t i t l e d

t o

a

u d i c i a l d e c l a r a t i o n , i n

view

of

h e

circumstances surrounding

t h e

P o l i c y

as

t o

t h e r i g h t s ,

t i t l e

and i n t e r e s t s

of

t h e

P l a i n t i f f s

and

h e

Defendants

n and t o t h e P o l i c y .

44.

The

Katersky

P a r t i e s r e s p e c t f u l ly r e q u e s t

t h e

e n t r y

of a n Order

by t h i s

Court

d e c l a r i n g t h a t :

(a}

The Katersky a r t i e s a r e

t h e

owners,

nd

b e n e f i c i a r i e s of

h e P o l i c y ;

{b}

IPF's only

r i g h t s

a r e t o r e c e i v e repayment of any

amounts

p a i d

by

IPF t o

Lincoln or

t o

t h e

Katersky

a r t i e s

i n

r e g a r d t o t h e

f i n a n c i n g

of h e

p o l i c y and t h a t IPF

must

provide t h e

Katersky

P a r t i e s

with a proper

demand f o r repayment of

i t s


and

h a t

IPF has

n o

o t h e r

i n t e r e s t

i n

or

o

t h e

P o l i c y ;

(c) arry Lavine

s

t h e

i n d i v i d u a l

T r u s t e e

f o r

t h e

T r u s t ;

( d )

a n k

of tah

s

not a

T r u s t e e

of

h e

T r u s t ;

12



13/80

3

4

5

6

s

9

14

l l

IZ

13

14

15

16

I7

i s

19

a o

21

2 2

23

24

25

26

a ~

a s

(e)

i n c o l n

i s

bound

t o honor t h e

terms and

c o n d i t i o n s

of h e

P o l i c y a s

t o t h e

Katersky

a r t i e s ;

{~

LS

has

no i g h t , i t l o r

i n t e r e s t i n

t h e

P a l i c y .

~ E C f ~ I ~ T I ~

C L A I I V V Y F~JR I~EIl~~~

(~ emporary L e s t r a i n i n g

o rd e r

and

Preliminary

~ n j u n c t i a n

Against

A i l

Defendants)

45.

P l a i n t i f f s r e a l l e g e

and

i n c o r p o r a t e

p a r a g r a p h s

1

t h r o u g h 44 above

by

( r e f e r e n c e

a s though

f u l l y

s e t

f o r t h

h e r e i n .

46,

Based

upon t h e

c o n t r o v e r s y

a s

between

t h e

p a r t i e s a s

h e r e i n a b o v e

a l l e g e d , P l a i n t i f f s

seek

a

temporary r e s t r a i n i n g

o r d e r and

p r e l i m i n a r y

i n j u n c t i o n ,

r e s t r a i n i n g

and

e n j o i n i n g

D e f e n d a n t s , and each of

t hem ,

from s e l l i n g ,

t r a n s f e r r i n g ,

a s s i g n i n g ,

o r

o t h e r

a t t e m p t i n g

t o

e x e r t

dominion and c o n t r o l

over t h e

P o l i c y ,

d u r i n g

t h e pendency of h i s

a c t i o n .

47.

Should

a r e s t r a i n i n g

o r d e r

not

i s s u e , P l a i n t i f f s

w i i i

s u f f e r

i r r e p a r a b l e

h a r m

s h o u l d t h e P o l i c y be

t r a n s f e r r e d , s o l d o r

o t h e r w i s e

a s s i g n e d by

D e f e n d a n t s ,

i n

t h a t any

p o t e n t i a l

t h i r d

p a r t y

a c q u i r i n g c o u l d a s s e t an

ownership i n t e r e s t i n

and

t o

t h e

P o l i c y ,

and

t h u s s u b j e c t

P l a i n t i f f s

t o

a

L o s s

of

h e i r i n t e r e s t s

i n

t h e

P o l i c y .

48.

P l a i n t i f f s

a r e

e n t i t l e d t o

such i n j u n c t i v e

r e l i e f a s P l a i n t i f f s do not

have

an

a d e q u a t e

re med y

a t

law, n t h a t

t h i s c o n t r o v e r s y i n v o l v e d t i t l

t o p e r s o n a l

p r o p e r t y ,

which

i s unique

and

cannot b~ r e p l a c e d given t h e

f a c t s

and

c i r c u m s t a n c e s of

K a t e r s k y s

h e a l t h .

( ~ o r Fraud Against

Defendant

IPF}

49.

P l a i n t i f f s

r e a l l e g e and

i n c o r p o r a t e paragraphs 1 through

4Q

above

by

r e f e r e n c e

a s though

u l l y s e t

f o r t h

h e r e i n .

S0.

As hereinabove a l l e g e d ,

IPF s

conduct i n

inducing t h e

Katersky

P a r t i e s

t o e n t e r

i n t o

t h e J u l y L e t t e r Agreement,

w a s

based upon m a t e r i a l


of a c t

and

law, n t h a t

a t or

about

h e time

IPF w a s n e g o t i a t i n g

t h e

J u l y L e t t e r

13



14/80

1

2

3

s

s

g

9

t o

t t

12

13

14

i s

16

t ~

1 s

19

2 0

21

22

23

24

2 s

26

z ~

a s

Agreement and

h e r e a f t e r ,

IPF

knew

h a t i t

was engaged

i n

i l l e g a l

c r i m i n a l conduct

of

such

a a t u r e

a s

t o t h r e a t e n e d I P F s

f i n a n c i a l

v i a b i l i t y , knew

o f h e r e q u i r e m e n t s

o f

t h e

Utah

Department

o f n s u r a n c e w i t h r e s p e c t

t o

t h e s a l e

o f

i f e

i n s u r a n c e p o l i c i e s ,

knew t h a t

such

s a l e

agreements

had t o

be

p r e a p p r o v e d b y

t h e Utah Department

of

I n s u r a n c e , and y e t , induced

t h e Katersky P a r t i e s

t o

e n t e r

i n t o

t h e J u l y

L e t t e r

Agreement

and

t h e r e a f t e r t o n e g o t i a t e

w i t h IPF t o

a

s t r u c t u r e

o f h e

s a l e

o f h e

P o l i c y

t o IPF

a i l i n g

t o

d i s c l o s e d t h e s e m a t e r i a l

f a c t s

t o

t h e

I ~ . a t e r s k y

P a r t i e s

p r i o r

t o

t h e time

t h e

J u l y L e t t e r

Agreement

was

s i g n e d and t h e r e a f t e r

i n r e g a r d t o t h e

n e g o t i a t i o n s

between

IPF and

h e


a s t o

t h e s a l e o f h e P o l i c y .

51. I n

making

h e f r a u d u l e n t


o r

o m i s s i o n s

of a t e r i a l f a c t

t o

t h e Katersky P a r t i e s ,

IPF i n t e n d e d t h e

I ~ a t e r s k y

P a r t i e s

t o

r e l y

o n t h e

same,

and i n

f a c t

t h e I ~ a t e r s k y

P a r t i e s d i d

r e l y an

I P F s


and o m i s s i o n s o f

m a t e r i a l f a c t i n e n t e r i n g

i n t o t h e J u l y L e t t e r

Agreement and

t h e r e a f t e r

i n

engaging i n


w i t h

IPF e g a r d i n g

t h e s a l e

o f h e

P o l i c y .

I n f a c t

and

i n

t r u t h , IPF

had

no

i n t e n t i o n o f p e r f o r m i n g

i t s

o b l i g a t i o n s under

t h e

J u l y

L e t t e r

Agreement,

n

t h a t IPF

knew t h a t

t h e

same was

i l l e g a l

and v o i d ,

and

was

i n v i o l a t i o n o f U t a h s

i n s u r a n c e

laws,

and

f u r t h e r

t h a t

IPF

was

u s i n g t h e J u l y

L e t t e r

Agreement and

t h e


t h a t took p l a c e t h e r e a f t e r t o

o b t a i n

ownership and

c o n t r o l o f t h e P o l i c y .

I P F s

f r a u d u l e n t

conduct

i s

f u r t h e r d e m o n s t r a t e d by

t s a)

n i l a t e r a l l y changing t h e

t r u s t e e

o f

h e Katersky

T r u s t t o t h e

Bank

o f

Utah, and

b )

e f u s a l

t o

p r o v i d e

t h e

K a t e r s k y

P a r t i e s

w i t h

a payoff

demand o f t h e

amounts

i t i s

owed

f o r

t h e

f i n a n c i n g

o f

t h e

premium

o f

h e

P o l i c y .

S2. As

a

d i r e c t and

p r o x i m a t e

c a u s e

o f

P F s f r a u d

a s


a l l e g e d ,

t h e Katersky P a r t i e s have

been

damaged

i n an

amount

o be

d e t e r m i n a t e

a t

t h e

time

o f

t h e t r i a l

o f

h i s

m a t t e r ,

but

n

e x c e s s

o f

h e j u r i s d i c t i o n a l

l i m i t s o f h i s

c o u r t .

53. I P F s

conduct

a s


a l l e g e d was done,

n t e n t i o n a l l y ,

w i l l f u l l y ,

m a l i c i o u s l y

and

w i t h r e c k l e s s

d i s r e g a r d t o

t h e r i g h t s o f h e


s o

has

o

i

14



15/80

1

2

3

s

6

9

10

i t

12

13

14

I S

16

1 ~

i s

19

2 0

2 l

2 2

2 3

2 4

2 s

2 6

27

28

e n t i t l e t h e


t o p u n i t i v e damages

a s

a g a i n s t I P F , ~

i n t h e

amount

t o be

determined a t t h e time

of

r i l of

h i s

m a t t e r .

(Breach of

Contract and the Implaed covenant

of

Good

wi t h

and

Fai r

~ l e a i i n g

Against

IPF)

54.

P l a i n t i f f s

r e a l l e g e

and

i n c o r p o r a t e paragraphs 1

through

40 above

by

( r e f e r e n c e

a s

though

u l l y s e t f o r t h h e r e i n .

55. The Katersky

P a r t i e s

f u l f i l l e d

l l of

h e i r


owed

t o IPF under

( t h e

terms

of

t h e Loan Agreement, a nd t o t h e e x t e n t a p p l i c a b l e t h e J u l y L e t t e r

Agreement,

except where excused

by

t h e f a i l u r e

of

IPF t o

perform

i t s o b l i g a t i o n s

(owed o t h e

Katersky

P a r t i e s .

56.

IPF

breached

t s o b l i g a t i o n s owed o t h e

Katersky P a r t i e s under t h e terms

(of

t h e

Loan Ag reem ent and

t o

t h e

e x t e n t

a p p l i c a b l e t h e J u l y

L e t t e r

Agreement,

i n c l u d i n g

i t s o b l i g a t i o n

t o a c t i n

goad

f a i t h and d e a l f a i r l y

with t h e I ~ a t e r s k y P a r t i e s

by

r e f u s i n g

t o provide t h e


with

t h e a p p r o p r i a t e i n f o r m a t i o n

so t h a t

t h e


could

pay

off

h e i r

o b l i g a t i o n s t o

IPF, a nd by

a i l i n g t o

respond

t o t h e

I ~ a t e r s k y

demand

f o r

a p a y -

off

n f o r m a t i o n ,

and

b y

a c t i n g

i n

such

a manner

i n

an

attempt

t o

r e s t c o n t r o l and t h e b e n e f i t s of h e P o l i c y from t h e

Katersky

P a r t i e s

a l l

a s

h e r e t o f o r e

d e s c r i b e d .

57.

As d i r e c t and proximate

r e s u l t of

IPF s

breach of

h e

Loan

Agreement,

and t o t h e e x t e n t

a p p l i c a b l e t h e

J u l y

L e t t e r

Agreement,

IPF

has caused damages o t h e

I ~ a t e r s k y P a r t i e s i n

an

amount

t o be proved

a t

t h e time of r i l but i n

e x c e s s

of h e

mi n i mum

u r i s d i c t i o n a l l i m i t s

of

h e c o u r t .

~ r

(~nten~ional

I n f l i c t i o n

of

emotional

D i s t r e s s

of l a i n t i f f K a t e r s k y

b y

I ~ F }

58.

P l a i n t i f f

I ~ a t e r s k y r e a l l e g e s

and i n c o r p o r a t e s

paragraphs 1 through 4

above

b y r e f e r e n c e

as

though

f u l l y s e t f o r t h h e r e i n .

~ ~ ~

15



16/80

59. The conduct of PF a s

t o Katersky a s d e s c r i b e d above

i s

o u t r a g e o u s i n

2

t h a t

IPF

i n t e n t i o n a l l y a nd

w i l l f u l l y

f a i l e d

t o

p r o v i d e t h e Katersky

P a r t i e s

w i t h

3 i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t would

a l l o w

t h e Katersky

P a r t i e s t h e

o p p o r t u n i t y

t o

pa y o f f a ny

4

o b l i g a t i o n

owed

t o IPF so

t h a t

IPF could

o b t a i n

dominion a nd c o n t r o l over a nd t o

t h e

5 P o l i c y , a n d o b t a i n t h e

P o l i c y s b e n e f i t s , a l l t o t h e

d e t r i m e n t and

L o s s t o t h e Katersky

6 P a r t i e s . IPF's

conduct s

extreme

and

o u t r a g e o u s a n d goes

beyond l l

p o s s i b l e

bounds

~

of

decency s o a s t o be regarded a s a t r o c i o u s a nd

u t t e r l y

i n t o l e r a b l e i n

a c i v i l i z e d

8

c o mmu n i t y

i n t h a t

IPF k new

t h a t

Katersky w a s a nd i s s u f f e r i n g from an i n o p e r a b l e

g

b r a i n tumor,

w a s

and i s

undergoing

s e v e r e and e x t e n s i v e

stem

c e l l t r e a t m e n t

a t

t o

U.C.L.A.

o s p i t a l

and

f u r t h e r

k n e w

h a t Katersky v v a s d e s p e r a t e l y a t t e m p t i n g t o put

i

h i s

f i n a n c i a l a f f a i r s

i n

o r d e r

f o r

t h e

b e n e f i t of

h i s

wife a nd c h i l d r e n , w h i l e f a c i n g a

1 2

l i f e-t h r e a t e n i n g

c o n d i t i o n . 1 ~ T o t w i t h s t a n d i n g t h i s knowledge,IPF used K a t e r s k y s l i f e

i 3

t h r e a t e n i n g s i t u a t i o n i n a n

a t t e m p t t o

o b t a i n ownership a nd c o n t r o l of h e P o l i c y

from

14

t h e

Katersky P a r t i e s ,

by

r e f u s i n g

t o

c o o p e r a t e

with Katersky a nd

t h e

K . a t e r s k y

P a r t i e s

l s

i n

t h e i r

a t t e m p t t o pay off h e

IPF

o a n , a nd

by

a s s e r t i n g ownership

r i g h t s

t o t h e

1 6

p o l i c y , i n c l u d i n g u n i l a t e r a l l y

changing

t h e t r u s t e e

of

h e t r u s t from t h e i n d i v i d u a l

i ~

t r u s t e e

t o

Utah Ban k, n d by

t a k i n g

e f f o r t s

t o

s e l l

t h e P o l i c y

i n t h e

secondary

market

I

$

f o r i t s

ow

e n e f i t a nd

g a i n .

i g 60. IPF's extreme a nd

outrageous

conduct

a s

s e t f o r t h

above

goes

beyond

2 0 mere

i n s u l t s ,

i n d i g n i t i e s , t h r e a t s ,

annoyances,

e t t y

o p p r e s s i o n s

o r

o t h e r r i v i a l i t i e s

2 1

but s

conduct

which

would cause

a n

average

member of

h e

c o mmu n i t y

o

2 2

immediately

r e a c t

i n

o u t r a g e ,

p a r t i c u l a r l y

so

given

t h e

r e l a t i o n s h i p of

h e

p a r t i e s

2 3

where

IPF has

t h e

a b i l i t y a n d power t o a f f e c t

K a t e r s k y s

f i n a n c i a l i n t e r e s t s

and

f u r t h e r

2 ~ t h a t IPB

k n e w

t h a t

K a t e r s k y s h e a l t h c o n d i t i o n s p l a c e d Katersky i n a p o s i t i o n t h a t

2 5

m a de

him s u s c e p t i b l e

t o

emotional

d i s t r e s s

by reason of

h i s

p a r t i c u l a r p h y s i c a l a r

2 b

mental

c o n d i t i o n .

Yet,

IPF

proceeded t o a t t e m p t

t o d e p r i v e

Katersky a nd t h e Katersky

2 7

P a r t i e s

of h e

b e n e f i t s

of h e P o l i c y they

d e s p e r a t e l y

need t o

i n s u r e

t h a t

t h e i r f i n a n c i a l

2 8

concerns would

be a d d r e s s

u po n t h e

d e a t h of a t e r s k y .

lb



17/80

3

4

s

6

s

9

i o

i t

12

13

14

i s

16

17

i s

19

Z o

a t

Z a

23

24

25

a ~

a ~

a s

61. I n

a c t i n g

i n

t h e

manner h e r e i n a b o v e

a l l e g e d ,

IPF

n t e n d e d

t o i n f l i c t

emotional

d i s t r e s s

upon K a t e r s k y

i n

t h e

IPF

knew

h a t

such

d i s t r e s s was

u b s t a n t i a l l y

c e r t a i n t o r e s u l t from

I P F s

conduct

and a c t e d i n t e n t i o n a l o r

i n r e c k l e s s

d i s r e g a r d o f

t h e

p r o b a b i l i t y

o f a u s i n g

h i s

e m o t i o n a l d i s t r e s s ;

62.

As n

a c t u a l and p r o x i m a t e

r e s u l t

o f

I P F s conduct s


a l l e g e d , Katersky

has and i s s u f f e r i n g s e v e r e

o r

extreme

e m o t i o n a l

d i s t r e s s ,

i n c l u d i n g

(mental d i s t r e s s ,

mental

s u f f e r i n g

and

mental a n g u i s h ,

i n c l u d i n g ,

n e r v o u s n e s s , g r i e f ,

a n x i e t y ,

worry,

o r t i f i c a t i o n , shock,

u m i l i a t i o n

and i n d i g n i t y ,

b 3 .

As u r t h e r

a c t u a l

and p r o x i m a t e r e s u l t o f

h e

e m o t i o n a l

d i s t r e s s c a u s e d

t o

Katersky

by IPF,

atersky

has

been

damaged

n

an

am oun t

n

e x c e s s

o f h e

j u r i s d i c t i o n a l

l i m i t s o f h i s c o u r t .

64.

I P F s

conduct s


a l l e g e d

was

done,

n t e n t i o n a l l y ,

w i l l f u l l y ,

m a l i c i o u s l y and w i t h

c o n s c i o u s

and r e g a r d l e s s

d i s r e g a r d t o t h e

r i g h t s

o f

a t e r s k y

so

has o e n t i t l e

Katersk~ o p u n i t i v e

damages s a g a i n s t

IPF, n

t h e am oun t o

be

d e t e r m i n e d

a t

t h e time o f r i l

o f

h i s

m a t t e r .

( I ~ t e g l i g e ~ t I n f l i c t i o n

o f E m o t i o n a l

D i s t r e s s

o f

l a i n t i f f I ~ a t

Kagersky

by

I P F )

65. P l a i n t i f f

Hal

~ . a t e r s k ~ r e a l l e g e s

and i n c o r p o r a t e s

p a r a g r a p h s 1

through

40

above by

r e f e r e n c e as though

i t l l y s e t

f o r t h

h e r e i n .

66. A l t e r n a t i v e l y

t o t h e

F i f t h

Claim

For R e l i e f , P l a i n t i f f

Katersky

a l l e g e s

t h a t

t h e

conduct

o f IPF

a s

d e s c r i b e d above

i s

outrageous

i n

t h a t IPF

n e g l i g e n t l y and w i t h .

r e c k l e s s

d i s r e g a r d t o

t h e r i g h t s

o f ~ a t e r s k y ,

f a i l e d t o p r o v i d e

t h e

Katersky

P a r t i e s

w i t h


t h a t would

allow

t h e

Katersky

P a r t i e s

t h e

o p p o r t u n i t y t o pay

off any

o b l i g a t i o n o w e d

t o IPF so t h a t

IPF

could

o b t a i n d om in i on

and

c o n t r o l

over and t o t h e

P o l i c y ,

and o b t a i n t h e

P o l i c y s

b e n e f i t s ,

a l I

t o t h e

d e t r i m e n t

and

l o s s

t o

t h e

Katersky

P a r t i e s .

67.

IPF s conduct

was

extreme

and

outrageous and

goes

beyond

a l l p o s s i b l e

bounds o f

ecency

so

as o

be r e g a r d e d a s

a t r o c i o u s and

u t t e r l y

i n t o l e r a b l e i n

a

17



18/80

2

3

4

s

6

s

9

10

1 1

t2

I3

14

IS

l ~

1 ~

l a

19

2 0

21

a ~

2 3

24

a s

26

27

2 s

c i v i l i z e d community

i n t h a t

IPF knew

t h a t

K a t e r s k y

was and

i s

s u f f e r i n g from an

i n o p e r a b l e b r a i n

tumor, was

and

s u n d e r g o i n g s e v e r e

and

e x t e n s i v e stem

c e l l

t r e a t m e n t a t

U.C.L.A.

h o s p i t a l

and f u r t h e r ,

knew t h a t K a t e r s k y was d e s p e r a t e l y

a t t e m p t i n g

t o

p u t h i s f i n a n c i a l a f f a i r s

i n o r d e r f o r t h e

b e n e f i t of

h i s

w i f e

and

c h i l d r e n ,

w h i l e f a c i n g t h i s

l i f e

t h r e a t e n i n g c o n d i t i o n .

N o t v a i t h s t a n d i n g t h i s knowledge, IPF

r e f u s e d

t o c o o p e r a t e w i t h K a t e r s k y and

t h e

K a t e r s k y P a r t i e s i n t h e i r a t t e m p t t o pay a f f

t h e

IPF l o a n ,

and

a s s e r t e d ownership r i g h t s t o

t h e

P o l i c y , i n c l u d i n g u n i l a t e r a l l y

changing

t h e

t r u s t e e of

h e t r u s t

from

t h e

i n d i v i d u a l t r u s t e e

t o

Utah Bank,

and

by

t a k i n g

e f f o r t s

t o

s e l l t h e P o l i c y i n

t h e

s e c o n d a r y market o r

i t s

own e n e f i t

and

g a i n .

68. I n a c t i n g

i n

t h e manner

h e r e i n a b t ~ v e

a l l e g e d , IPF

a c t e d

n e g l i g e n t l y

and

i n

r e c k l e s s d i s r e g a r d of K a t e r s k y ' s r i g h t s

and

i n so

doing i n f l i c t e d e m o t i o n a l d i s t r e s s

upon

Hal K a t e r s k y

and i n r e c k l e s s d i s r e g a r d

of

h e

p r o b a b i l i t y

of a u s i n g e m o t i o n a l

C ~ 1 S t T ' ~ S S t

.~~BI'S~f~.

69. As

an

a c t u a l and proximate r e s u l t of IPF's conduct

a s

h e r e i n a b a v e

( a l l e g e d ,

Katersky

has

and

i s

s u f f e r i n g

s e v e r e

or extreme emotional d i s t r e s s , i n c l u d i n g

mental

d i s t r e s s ,

mental

s u f f e r i n g

and . m e n t a l a n g u i s h , i n c l u d i n g ,

n e r v o u s n e s s ,

g r i e f ,

( a r i x i e t y ,

worry,

o r t i f i c a t i o n ,

shock,

u m i l i a t i o n

and

n d i g n i t y ,

70.

As

f u r t h e r

a c t u a l

and

proximate

r e s u l t

of

h e

emotional

d i s t r e s s caused

' t o

Katersky

by

IPF,

Katersky has

been

damaged i n

an

amount

i n

e x c e s s

of

t h e

m i n i m u m

u r i s d i c t i o n a l l i m i t s of

h i s

c o u r t .

~ ~ ~T ~~L~~ ~~ ~Y ~

(Unfair Business

r a c t i s e s

V i o l a t i o n

of Cal. Bus.

z

Prof.

C o d e

1 ' 7 2 0 0 ,

e t s e q . Against Defendants YPF

and

I ~ . S )

71.

P l a i n t i f f s

r e a l l e g e and i n c o r p o r a t e h e r e i n

b y

r e f e r e n c e p a r a g r a p h s

1

through 4Q n c l u s i v e , a s thoug h

h e

same

were

u l l y s e t f o r t h

h e r e i n .

72.

Defendants

IPF

and

ILS's

a c t s and p r a c t i c e s a s

d e s c r i b e d h e r e i n '

c o n s t i t u t e unlawful, f r a u d u l e n t , and u n f a i r

b u s i n e s s p r a c t i c e s i n v i o l a t i o n

of

C a l i f o r n i a ' s Business

and r o f e s s i o n s

Code,

e c t i o n s 172Q0,

t s e q . ,

i n

t h a t {1) h e

j u s t i f i c a t i o n

f a r

Defendants'

IPF and

I L S

conduct s outweighed

b y

h e

g r a v i t y

of

h e



19/80


20/80

a

3

5

6

s

9

IQ

t l

12

13

14

15

16

1 ?

i s

19

Z o

a ~

Z a

23

4

25

26

27

28

p e r s o n a l

p r o p e r t y

t h a t

i s

t o be used f o r

f a m i l y

c a r e and

maintenance of

h e

K a t e r s k y

P a r t i e s , and t h a t IPF

and

ILS s

conduct

was

done

f o r a

wrongful use o r w i t h

t h e

i n t e n t

)

t o d e f r a u d o r

b o t h .

78.

Defendants

IPF

and

ILS s c o n d u c t , a s


a l l e g e d ,

was

n t e n d e d

t o

and

d i d

cause

Katersky

t o s u f f e r

s u b s t a n t i a l

p h y s i c a l , e m o t i o n a l

and

economic

d a m a g e s

and

IPF

and I L S

k n e w

o r

s h o u l d

have

k n ow n t h a t t h e i r

conduct

i s

l i k e l y t o

be

harmful o

K a t e r s k y .

79. As

proximate

r e s u l t

of

h e

Defendants IPF and

ILS s wrongful

c o n d u c t ,

P l a i n t i f f

Katersky

has

s u s t a i n e d

and

w i l l

s u s t a i n

s u b s t a n t i a l economic

l a s s e s

and o t h e r

g e n e r a l

and

s p e c i f i c

d amages

l l

an

a m o u n t

o be

d e t e r m i n e d a c c o r d i n g t o

p r o o f .

80.

As a

f u r t h e r proximate

r e s u l t

of

Defendants IPF

and

I L S ' s

w r o n g f u l

c o n d u c t ,

P l a i n t i f f Katersky

has s u s t a i n e d g r e a t

e m o t i o n a l

p a i n and m e n t a l

s u f f e r i n g ,

a l l i n

an

a m o u n t o

be

d e t e r m i n e d

a c c o r d i n g

t o p r o o f .

81.

The

a c t i o n s

t a k e n

b y

Defendants

IPF

and

ILS,

e t

f o r t h

above,

were

i n

a l l

r e s p e c t s

r e c k l e s s ,

m a l i c i o u s , w i l l f u l

and o p p r e s s i v e ,

and

m a n i f e s t e d e i t h e r

d i s r e g a r d o r

contempt o r

t h e

r i g h t s of al

K a t e r s k y .

82. Defendants

IPF

and

I L S

were

f u l l y

c o g n i z a n t

of

h e

p o s i t i o n

of

r u s t

i n

which

t h e y s t o o d .

83.

Ba se d

upon IFP

and

IL5 s

conduct has

h e r e i n a b o v e a l l e g e d ,

K a t e r s k y

i s

e n t i t l e d t o an

award of

u n i t i v e and exemplary

d a m a g e s

a s

w e l l a s

a t t o r n e y s ' f e e s ,

n ,

an

a m o u n t

c c o r d i n g

t o proof

t

t h e

time of

r i a l .

84.

As h e

s u b j e c t

t r a n s a c t i o n s i n v o l v e d s e n i o r

c i t i z e n s ,

K a t e r s k y

i s f u r t h e r

e n t i t l e d

t o

t r e b l e

d a m a g e s

and p e n a l t i e s

p u r s u a n t t o C i v i l

Code s e c t i o n 3345

b e c a u s e

d e f e n d a n t s

IPF

and

I L S k n e w o r

s h o u l d have k n ow n t h a t

t h e i r

conduct

was d i r e c t e d t o

OTle OT

T i O T e

Se1110I

C1tiZB11S.

f~ ~

~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~

n



21/80

1

a

4

s

6

s

9

i o

1 1

i s

13

14

15

i s

1 ~

i s

19

2 a

21

a s

23

24

25

2 6

2 7

a s

~H[EREFOR.E, l a i n t i f f s p r a y f o r

r e l i e f

a s

f o l l o w s :

FIRSTCLAIM

~1~.

RELIEF

For declaratory

e i i e f ~

1 . Entry of

n

Order

by

h i s Court

e c l a r i n g

t h a t :

a ) he

Katersky a r t i e s a r e t h e owners, n d

b e n e f i c i a r i e s ,

of

h e P o l i c y ;

{b)

P F s only r i g h t s

a r e

t o

r e c e i v e repayment

of a n y

amounts p a i d

by

IPF

t o

Lincoln

o r

t o

t h e Katersky a r t i e s i n

r e g a r d

t o

t h e

f i n a n c i n g

of h e

p o l i c y

a n d h a t

IPF

m u s t p r o v i d e t h e

I ~ a t e r s k y

P a r t i e s w i t h a

p r o p e r

d e m a n d f o r repayment

of

i t s

o b l i g a t i o n s a n d h a t IPF

has n o t h e r i n t e r e s t i n o r t o

t h e

P o l i c y ;

c) arry Lavi ne

s

t h e i n d i v i d u a l T r u s t e e

f a r

t h e

T r u s t ;

d }

a n k of

tah

s n o t

a

r u s t e e

of h e

T r u s t ;

e }

L i n c o l n

i s

bound

t o honor

h e

terms an d

c o n d i t i o n s of h e P o l i c y

a s

t o

t h e

Katersky

a r t i e s ;

( f }

ILS

has

n o

i g h t ,

i t l e

o r

i n t e r e s t

i n t h e P o l i c y .

SEC~NI~

LAg1VI

FAR

IELIEF

( ~ + o r T e m p o r a r y

~ e s t r a i ~ a i n g Ord er a n d Preliminary

n j u n c t i o n

Against

l l

Defendants)

2 .

For

a temporary

r e s t r a i n i n g

o r d e r

a n d

p r e l i m i n a r y

i n j u n c t i o n , r e s t r a i n i n g

an d

e n j o i n i n g

Defendants,

a n d each

of hem,

from

s e l l i n g ,

t r a n s f e r r i n g ,

a s s i g n i n g , o r

o t h e r

a t t e m p t i n g t o

e x e r t dominion

and

c o n t r o l

over

t h e

P o l i c y ,

d u r i n g t h e

pendency

of

h i s

a c t i o n .

( I o r

Fraud Again s t

f ~ e f e n d a n t

IPF)

3.

Far

d a m a g e s

c c o r d i n g

t o

p r o o f ;

4.

For u n i t i v e

d a m a g e s

c c o r d i n g t o p r o o f .

21



22/80

1

3

4

s

6

s

9

10

t l

t2

13

14

15

16

i ~

18

19

Z o

21

a s

2 3

24

25

2 6

a ~

a s

1 i l

FoU~~

~;~L~ZM

~o

~~~+ +

(breach

of

ontract and

the

Implied Covenant of

Gaod aith

and

Fair

~ Against P A ' }

5 . For

damages

c c o r d i n g

t o

p r o o f ;

6.

For

e a s o n a b l e a t t o r n e y

f e e s and

c o s t s .

F I ~ ~ F I CLAilYI

FC}R ~E~.I~

( I n t e n t i o n a l

I n f l i c t i o n of

motional

} i s t r e s s

of

l a i n t i f f

3 C a l

~ a t e a - s k y by IPF)

7.

For

damages c c o r d i n g t o p r o o f ;

8 . For

u n i t i v e

damages c c o r d i n g

t o

p r o o f .

S I k ~ CLAIM

~1R R]EI,IF

( l ~ T e g l i g e n t

I n f l i c t i o n

of

Emotional

i s t r e s s of P l a i n t i f f

dal ~ a t e r s k y

by

IPF}

9. For

damages

c c o r d i n g t o

p r o o f ;

SEVlEIVTIH[ ~LAIlVI + t ~ I 2 .

R~LIE~

( Z . l n f a i r

Susiness

r a c t i c e s V i o l a t i o n

of

ai. Bus.

i

Prof,

Code

172Q0, t e r f .

Against i l

Defendants

~PF

nd

~ I . S )

1 1 .

For

damages

according o

proof

s allowed

by

t a t u t e ;

1 2 .

For

e c l a r a t o r y

and

n j u n c t i v e

r e l i e f

as allowed

by

t a t u t e ;

1 3 . For

e a s o n a b l e

a t t o r n e y

f e e s and

c o s t s

as allow ed

by

t a t u t e .

E~G~I~ ~ I ~ A I l i 9 [

F~JR REL~JE~

( For hider

Abuse

by

dal

~tersky

as Against

Defendants

IPF

nd I L S )

1 4 . For

damages c c o r d i n g t o

p r o o f ;

1 5 . For

u n i t i v e damages according

o p r o o f ;

1 6 .

For

r e b l e

damages

as allowed by

t a t u t e ;

1 7 .

For

e a s o n a b l e

a t t o r n e y

f e e s and c o s t s

as

allowed by t a t u t e .

N

LLCLAIMS

f ~ l E 2

k~LIEg+

1 8 . For e a s o n a b l e

a t t o r n e y f e e s ;

1 9 .

For o s t s of u i t i n c u r r e d ;



23/80

2

3

4

5

6

7

s

9

t

I 1

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

2 2

23

2 4

25

2 6

2 7

28

20.

For

n t e r e s t

a s

a l l o w e d by Iaw;

21.

For s u c h o t h e r

and

f u r t h e r

r e l i e f a s

t h e Caurt

deems

u s t

and

p r o p e r .

) D a t e d :

1 V I a y

23

2012

EZPA

BRU ~ ~

G

2 3

A t t u

s o r

P l a i n t i f f s

Ha I

K at y ,

B a r r y

L a v i n e ,

a s

t h e

i n d i v i d u a l

t r u s t e e

of

t h e

Amen ded and

R e s t a t e d

HaI

~ . a t e r s k y


L i f e I n s u r a n c e

T r u s t ,

H i l l a r y

A.

a t e r s k y ,

Andre w

K a t e r s k y ,

Robin

T ~ a t e r s k y ,

J e f f r e y

K a t e r s k y ,

and

Dylan

Zelman



24/80

3

4

5

6

7

8

4

10

1 1

12

13

14

IS

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

~ T U R . Y

~3EMI~.NI~

P l a i n t i f f s demand

a r i a l

by

ury

on

l l

i s s u e s so r i a b l e .

~

Dated;

May 3

2Q

2

EZF

~}



25/80

ST

ATE

OFU

TAH

:

c o ~

~ r

~

a ~

~ ~

~ r

~

:

T h i s

t ~ l m

e n d e

d

and

. e s

t a t e c

i

T z ~

s t

t ~ . g

r e e t n

e u t

c

> f t h e

k L

A . L

TER.

SI~

Y

TR

REV

OG

ABL

E

ICE

IN

SURA

I`~

CE

T R i

3S T

t h e

" S ' r

u ~

. f t

g ~ e e

m e n ~ '

} ,

a t e

d a s

of

e p t

~ m b e

r 21,

U0 8

,

efw

een

~

i Kat

ersk

y

{ t } ~

e

S e t

t l a s

' ~ , a

c c ~ y

L

~v~

~e

t h e

T n 3

s t ~ e

' ~ ,

~ 3 a

r ~ ~

t i f f

Y T # z

~ a { t

h e b a d

e p c ~

c s d e

n t

P r o f

e s s i

o n a l

T r u

s t e e

'

a n

d

~ C

a l l a

r y

A

.

~

a t e r

s k y ,

e ~

n d r

~

ater

s~~

,

o b

i n

~Ee e

r~k

y,e ~ f

f i - e y

T ~ t

e r s ~

C y an

dD ~

y l a ~

z

2

dzn

an,

a s b e

n e f i

c i a r

i e s

( t

h e

`

B e n e

f c i a

r i e s

' ~ ,

m u e s

f d s

a

nd

e s

t a E e s

i

u

i t s

e

nd

h a

t

e r

t a i a 3

T

r n s t

A g

r e , ~

z n e n t

of

t i e T F U S t

,

d

a t e d

a

s

of

At ~

zs t 2

9,

2

30 8

a s

~o

a m e r

~ c ~ e

d , 3 z e

t ? r i

g ~ z a

l

~ r

~ s t

Ag

reem

e nt

".

C

a g i t

a ~ i z

e d

t e r

m s

u s

e d b i

t

n o

t

a

t h e ~

w i s

e

d

ee

d

e r

e i a ~ a i

.

la

ve

i e

me an

ings

e t

a r t

i t

i n

t

h e

Lo

an

p p l

i c a t

i o n

and

A

gre

e men

t

a

s

d e f i

n e d

h e

r e i n

}

.

Vi' ~'~'I~~SSE'i`l ~:

W

HER

EA

S h e

S e t # I

o r

a ~ t

d

i S

s e

T n

z s t e

e

d

t ~ i y

d

e c t a r

e c i

a

nd e s

t a b l i

s h e d

L i e

HA

.L

T~A

TE R

SKY

I

RR

EVQ

CAB

LE

I

FE

~ t S L T

i Z . A

. 3 ~ T C

E TR

UST

i r

e

Tz~

'}

u r s u

a n t

t ~

i h ~

4~

gina

t

r u s t

.

Blackhat 2010-5-23 Larry Gabriel Complaint

Documents

Transcript of Blackhat 2010-5-23 Larry Gabriel Complaint