Crafton v. Does

7/27/2019 Crafton v. Does

1/29

___________________________________________________________________________ EXHIBIT A

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

27

28

CORRIGAN&M

ORRISLLP

2 0 1 S a n t a

M o n

i c a B l v d . S u i t e

4 7 5

S a n t a

M o n

i c a C a .

9 0 4 0 1 - 2 2 1 2

CORRIGAN & MORRIS, LLPStanley C. Morris (Cal. Bar No. 183620)[email protected] Brian T. Corrigan (Cal Bar No. 143188)

[email protected] 201 Santa Monica Boulevard, Suite 475Santa Monica, California 90401-2212Telephone: (310) 394-2800Facsimile: (310) 394-2825

Attorneys for Defendant FRED WRAY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BILLY CRAFTON

Plaintiff,v.

JOHN DOE: and Does 2-5,inclusive

Defendants.

EXHIBIT A TO

NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF CIVIL ACTION

UNDER 28 U.S.C. 1332

STATE COURT INITIATING DOCUMENTS

Case 3:13-cv-01673-L-JMA Document 1-1 Filed 07/18/13 Page 1 of 29


2/29

SUM-100

SUMMONS(GITAGION JUDICIAL)

NOTICE TO DEFENDANT:(AVISO ALPEMA"IDADO):

John Doe, Does 2-5 , inclusive /: 101Z JUl 21 j P 3: ~q

, . , FOR COURT USE ONL Y '"(SOLO PARA USO [i f LA CORm .

(;rv' . t Il'O ;. fl. 8 U S 1 N t : " , .l ' ~ .,. _ 1 { . . . ) ~OFFICE'" -.- ...... J " J. I n , ~ J ..">.C':"'4'l)f\'-' !'L ! : ,.lJfA- C ~ V. ;\'\fllf!> Aj'eYI+-- ~ v J3_ 0 on behalf of (spec ify): Wt Ikf\. f , ~ i tK'" 0 etA-be I j

, Deputy(Ad unto)

under. 0 CCP 418.10 (corpora tion) 0 CCP 416 .60 (minor)o CCP 4 113.20 (defunct corporation) D CCP 416.70 (conservatee)

Form Ado pted for Mandatory UseJ u dicia l Co u ncil Clf Cali fornia

SUMlO a (Rev. J Uly 1, 2009 )

o CCP 416.40 (association or partnership) C J CCP 416.90 (au thorized person)L C J other (specify):

4. ~ by pers on a l delivery on (date):SUMMONS

Page 1 0[ 1

Cade 01 Ciy ' P'o

EXHIBIT A 000005



3/29

AITOR NEY OR PARTY WITHOUT AITORNEY (N.me. sr . e 881' number. end addm ss ):f..:'Judi M. San:w (l53663)

Sanzo Law3755 Avocado Btvd# 521La Mesa , CA 91941-7301

TELEPHONE NO" 619-579-0299 FAX NO.: 619-579-5888AITORNEYFOR (Nam e): Ji.lilly Crafton

SUPl:RIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF San DiegoSTREET ADDRESS: 330 W. Broadway

FOR COURT US c ONL Y r ' : : lF ~ ~ jBAANCHNAME:Central.uivision - vv ... ,. ! ' ' ' ' J ' \

~ - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~CASE NAME :

Crafton v John DoeCIVIL CASE COVER SHEET CASE NUMBER:

CM010

[ { ] Unlimited D LimitedComplex. Case Designation

o Counter O ' Joinder 37.2012..o0101418-CU-OF.c.TL(Amount (Amountdemanded demanded isexceeds $25,000) $25,000 or less)

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

JUDGE :

DEPT:

Items 1 -6 below must be camp/eted (see instructions on page 2).1. Check one box below for the case type that best describes this case:

Auto Torto AUlo(22)D Uninsured motorist (46)Other PI/PDIWD (Personal Injury/PropertyDamagelWrongful Death) Torto Asbestos i04)D Product liability (24)

Contract

D Breach of contract/warranty (06)

o Rule 3]40 collections (09)D Other collections (09)oD

Insurance coverage (18)Other contract (37)

Real PropertyoD

Medical ma lpractice (45) D Eminent domalnllnverseOther PIIPDIWO (23) condemna tion (14)

Non-PIIPDIWD(Other) Tort D Wrongful eViction (33)o Business lort/unfair business pracUce (07) 0 Other real property (26)o Civil rights (08) Unlawful Detainer[2] Defamation (13) . 0 Commercial (31)D Fraud (16) 0 Residential (32)D Intellectual property (19) D Drugs (38)D ProfeSsional negligence (25) Judicial Review

o Other non-PUPOIWOtort(35)

0Asset forfeiture (05)

Em p loyment D Petman re: arbitration award (11)o Wrongful termination {36) D Writ of mandale (02)o Other employment (15) 0 Other udicial re view (39)

Provisionally Complex Civil Litigation(Cal. Rules of Court, rules 3.400-3.403)

D AntitrusllTrade regulation (03)o Construction defect (10)D Mass tort (40)o Securities litigation (28)o EnvironmentalfToxic tort (30)o Insurance coverage claims arising from the

above listed provisionally complex casetypes (41)

Enforcement o f Judgmento Enforcement of udgment (20)Miscellaneous Civil Complainto RICO (27)D Other complaint (not specified above) (42)Miscellaneous Civil Petition

o Partnersh ip and corporate govemance (21)o Other petition (not specified above) (43)2. This ca s e D is [ l J is not complex under rule 3.400 of the california Rules of Court . If the case is complex, mark the

factors requiring except ional judiCial management:a. D Large number o f separat e ly re presented part iesb. 0 Extensive motion practice raising difficult or novel

issues that will be time-consuming to resolvec. 0 Subs tantial amount o f documentary ev idence

3_ Remedies sought (check all that apply): a .W monetary4. Numberof causes of action (specify): 6

5. This case 0 is [2] is not a class action suit.

d.D Large number of witnessese. D Coordination with related actions pending in one or more courts

in other counties, states, or countries, or in a federal courtt D Substantial posijudgment judicial supervision

b. [Z J nonmonetary; declaratory or injunctive relief c . [2 J punitive

6. If there are a ny known related cases, file and serve a notice of related case. (You ma y u

Date: 27 July 2012 j .JudiM_Sanzo L - ~ ~ ~ ~ t { { ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~____ __

(TYPEOR PRINT NMIE)

NOTICE Plaint iff must file this cover sheet with the first paper fil e d in the action [P rslCeed ing (except small claims ca r cases filed

under the Probate Code, Family Code, or Welfare and InstitutIons Co ) . C a l .Rules of Court, rule 3.220 .) Failure to file may result;n sanctions. '- '

File this c o ve r sheet in addition to any cover sheet required by local court rule. If h is case is complex under rule 3.400 et s9Q_ of the C a lifornia Rules of Court, you must serve a copy of thi s cover sheet on al l

other parties to the action or proceeding. , Unless th is is a co lle ctions case unde r rule 3.740 or a complex cas e , this cove r s he et will be used for st a tistical purposes onlv .

Pa 1 0 ( 2Fol11'lAdopted for MandalOfJ' U

Ju dicia l Coundl 0 ' CaJifumi aCM-OW IRo v_ July 1. 2007]

CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET Ca l. Rule. 01 Court, rule . 2.30. 3.220. 3.4 01).-3.403. 3.740;Cal. Sland",ds 01Judicial Admini. lration. s id. 3.10

www:.co urlinfo.c a _go v

EXHIBIT A 000006



4/29

CM-010INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO COMPLETE THE COVER SHEET

To Plaintiffs an d Others Filing Firs t Papers. If yo u are filing a first paper (for example, a complaint) in a civil case . yo u mustcomplete an d file, along with your first paper, the Civil Case Cove r Sheet contained on page 1. Th is information will be used to compilestatis tics about the types an d numbers of cases filed. You must complete items 1 through 6 on the sheet. In i tem 1, you must checkone box' fo r the case type that best describes th e case. If the case fits both a general and a more specific type of case listed in item 1,check the more specffic one. If the case has multiple causes of action, check the box that best indicates the primary cause of action .To assist yo u in oompl e ting the sheet, examples of the cases that belong under each case type in item 1 are provided below . A coversheet must be filed only with your initial paper. Failure to file OJ cover sheet with the first paper filed in a civil case ma y subject a party.

its counse l, or both to sanctions under rules 2.30 an d 3.220 of the California Rules of Court .To Parties in Rule 3.740 Collections Cases. A "collections case" under rule 3 .74 0 is defined a s an action for recovery of moneyowed in a sum stated to be certain that is no t more than $25,000, e xclusive of interest and attorney's fees, ar ising from a transaction inwh ich property , services, or money was acquired on credi t. A collections case does not include an action seeking the following: (1) tortdamages, (2) punitive damages , (3) recovery of real property, (4 ) recovery of personal property, or (5) a prejudgment writ ofattachment. Th e identification of a case as a rule 3 .74 0 collections c as e on this form means that it will be exempt from the generaltime-far-service requirements and case management rule s, unless a defendant files a responsive pleading . A rule 3 .740 collectionscase will be subject to the requirements fo r service and ob t aining a judgment in rule 3 .74 0 .

To Parties in Complex Cases. In complex cases only, parties must a ls o us e the Civil Case Cover Sheet to designate whether thecase is c omplex . If a plaintiff believes the case is complex under rule 3.400 of the Califomia Rules of Court, this must be indica ted bycompleting th e appropriate boxes in items 1 an d 2 . If a plaintiff de s ignat e s a case as complex, the c o ver shee t must be served with thecomplaint on all parties to th e action . A defendant may file and serve no later than the time of its first appearance a joinder in theplaintiffs designation, a counter-designation that th e case is not complex, or, if the plaintiff ha s made no designation, a designation that

the case is complex. CASE TYPES AND EXAMPLES

Auto Tort

Auto (22)-Personal Injury/PropertyDamag elWrongful DeathUninsured Motorist (46) (if he

case involves an uninsuredmotorist claim subject toarbitration , check this iteminstead of Auto)

other PI/PDIWD (PersonallnjurylProperty DamagelWrongful Death)Tort

Asbestos (04)Asbestos Property DamageAsbestos Per s onal Injury/

Wrongful DeathProduct Liability (not asbestos or

toxic/environmental) (24)Medical Malpractic e (45)

Medical MalpracticePhYSicians & Surgeons

Other Pro fessional Health Ca reMalpractice

Other PI/PD/WD (23)Premises Liability (e. g., slip

and fall)Inte nt ional Bodil y Injury/POIWD

(e.g., a ss ault, vandalism)Intentional Infliction of

Emotional DistressNegligent Infliction of

Emotional D istressOther PI/PDIWD

Non-PI/PDfWD (Other) Tor tBusiness TorVUnfair Business

Practice (07)Civil Rights (e .g. , discrimination.

false arrest) (not civilharassment) (08)

Defa ma tion (e .g., slander , libel)(13)

Fraud (16)Intellectual Property (19 )Professional Neglig ence (25)

Legal MalpracticeOther Professional Malpractice

(not medical or Jeoa l)Other Non-PI/PDIWD Tort (35)

EmploymentWrongful -T ermination (36)Other Employm e nt (15)

CM01O fRev . J u l ~' 1. 2 0 0 7 1

Contract

Breach o f Contract/Warranty (06)Breach of Re ntal/LeaseContract (not unlawful detainer

or wrongful eviction)Contract/Warranty Breach-Seller

Plaintiff (not fraud or negligence)Negligent Breach of Contr ad!

WarrantyOther Breach o f ContracVWarranty

Collections (e.g ., money owed, openbook accounts) (09) .Collection Case-Seller PlaintiffOther Promissory Note/Collections

CaseInsurance Coverage (not p rovisionally

complex) (18)Auto Sub rogationOther Coverage

Other Contract (37)Contractual FraudOther Contract Dispute

Real PropertyEmin ent Domainllnverse

Condemnat ion (14)Wrongful Eviction (33)Other R e al Property (e.g., quiet title) (26)

Writ of Possession of Real PropertyMortgage ForeclosureQuiet TitleOthe r Real Property (not emin entdomain, landlordltena n t, orforeclosure)

Unlawful DetainerCommercial (31)Residential (32)Drugs (38) (if the case involves illegal

drugs , check this item; otherwise,report as Commerc ial or Resid entialj

Judicia l ReviewAsset Forfeiture (OS)Petition Re: Arbitration Award (11)Writ of Mandate (02)

Writ-Adminis tra tive MandamusWrit-Mandamus on Limited Court

Case Matte rWrit-Other Limited C ourt Case

ReviewOther ju d icial Review ( 39)

Re view of Health Officer OrderNo tice of Appea l- La bo r

Commissioner Appeals

CIVIL CASE COVER S HEET

Provisionally Complex Civil Litigation (Cal.

Rules of Court Rules3.400-3 .403)

Antitruslffrade R egulation (03)Constru ction Defect (1 0)Claims Involving Mass Tort (40)Secu rities Litiga tion (28)EnvironmentalfTo xic Tort (30)Insurance Coverage Claims

(arising from provisionally complexcase type listed abov e) (41)

Enforcement of JudgmentEnforcement of Judgmen t (20)

Abstract of Judgment (Out of. county )

Confession of Judgment (nondomestic relations)

Sister State JudgmentAdministrative Agency Award

(not unpaid taxes)Pe tition/Certification of Entry of

Judgment o n Unpaid Taxesother En forcem ent of Judgment

Ca s eMiscellaneous Civil Complaint

RICO (27)Other C omplaint (not specifie d

above) (42)Declaratory R elief OnlyInjunctive R elief Only (non-

harassm e nt)Mechanics LienOther Commercial Complaint

Ca s e (non-tortlnon-complex)Other Civ" Complaint

(non-torilnon-complex)Miscellan eous Civil Petition

Partnership and CorporateGovemance (21)

Other Petition (n ol specifiedabove) (43)CivilHarassmentWorkplace ViolenceEtder/Dependent Adult

AbuseElection Contes tPetifion io r Na me C hangePetition for Reli ef From Late

ClaimOth er Civil Petition

P age 2 012

EXHIBIT A 000007



5/29

1 Judi M. Sanzo, State Bar No. 153663Sanzo Law ,

2 3755 Avocado Blvd, # 5213 La Mesa, CA 91941-7301

Telephone No.: 619-579-02994 Fax No.: 619-579-5888

5Email: iudi@sanzolaw .com

6 Attorney for PlaintiffBILLY CRAFTON

7

8

ji Z311JUt. 21! P ): 4q

9

10

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR TH E COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO11

12

13 BILLY CRAFTON, Case No. 37_2012.oo101418-CU..oF-CTL

14 Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR:

15 vs.1 6

JOHN DOE; and DOES 2-5,

i} fNTERNJ;.T IMPERSONMIQN- (PENAL CODE

528.5)2 FALSE LIGHT3 LIBEL PER SE4! INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL

ISTRESS7

1 8

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

inclusive,

Defendants.(5) APPROPRIATION OF LIKENESS an d(6) INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff Billy Crafton 9"eges as follows:

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

1. At all times relevant hereto,. Plaintiff Billy Crafton ("Plaintiff') was at all

26 relevant times, and presently is, an individual residing in San Diego, California. Plaintiff27

has been a business agent fo r professional sports clients and high ne t worth individuals28

COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND - 1

EXHIBIT A 000008



6/29

1

2

3

4

5

for more than fourteen (14) years and, in that capacity, has been called upon to manage

clients l investments in real and personal property and provide referrals to insurance

brokers, investment brokers and other wealth managers.

2. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon al/eges, that at all

6 times mentioned herein, Defendant JOHN DOE was ' and is an individual. Plaintiff is

7

8

9

1 0

11

12

13

14

15

1 6

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that JOHN DO E has registered and

operated a Twitter account ; however, Plaintiff does not know the true name of JOHN

DOE and therefore sues JOHN DOE pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure

474. Plainti ff will amend this Compliant to state the true name o f JOHN DOE once

Plaintiff discovers this information.-

3. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that each of

Defendants DOES 2-5 is legally responsible in some manner for th e occurrences and

damages herein alleged, and the Plaintiffs damages as herein alleged were d irectly.

proximately, and substantially caused by said Defendants, and each of them . Wherever

it is alleged herein that any act was done or committed by a named Defendant, Plaintiff

intends thereby to allege and does allege, that the same act was also done arid

committed by each and every Defendant named as a Doe, both separately and in

concert with a named Defendant. Plaintiff will amend this Compliant to state the true

name of DOES 2-5 once Plaintiff discovers this information

4. Plaintiffis

informedan d

believes, and thereon alleges, that at al/ timesherein mentioned, Defendants and each of them were the agents, Servants. co-

conspirators, partners, representatives, or employees of each of th e other Defendants,

and were acting at all times individually or within the course and scope of such capacity


EXHIBIT A 000009



7/29

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

1 9

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2 7

28

and a ~ t h o r i t y "and with the advance knowledge, conse,nt, permission, acquiescence and

express or implied ratification of the remaining Defendants.

5. Jurisdiction and venue are proper in this judicial district because many of

the acts complained of by Plaintiff in this Complaint took place within this judicial district,

and many of Plaintiff's losses were incurred in this judicial District.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

6. Plaintiff was born and raised in San Diego, CA , and attended Miami

University (OH) where he played fullback on the football team and majored in finance.

Plaintiff has worked as an investment advisor to professional athletes and high net

worth individuals for more than fourteen (14) years. Plaintiff began his career with

American Express Financial Advisors, where he successfully earned his Financial

Industry Regulation Authority (FINRA) Series 7, 63 and 65 licenses. He continued to

expand his niche representing professional athletes as a Vice President of Wealth

Management with CSI Capital Management in San Francisco . Plaintiff served as a Co

Managing Member of Martin Advisors, LLC, was a general partner of the Mar Vista

Multi- Strategy Fund, LP and was a , founding member of Martin Kelly Capital 's

investment committee. Plaintiff is an executive of Redhawk Capital Management and

SCG Management, LLC .

7. Beginning in or about May 2012, Defendant JOHN DOE and the Doe

Defendants have registered and used the following Twitter accounts, using the name

and photograph of Plaintiff: (1) @BillyCrafton, located at h t t p : / / t w j t t e r . ~ o m / B i I l y C

(The "Billy Crafton Account"), which ;s now disabled; and (2) @BlackCardBandit located

COMPLAINT AND JUR Y DEMAND - 3

EXHIBIT A 000010



8/29

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

\I

at http://twitter.com/BlackCardBandit (The "Black Card Bandit Account") (collectively,

"The Infringing Twitter Accounts").

8. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and therefore alleges, that Defendant

JOHN DOES and the Doe Defendants created the Infringing Twitter Accounts within the

same month. The BlackCardBandit Account was opened after Twit ter shut down the

BillyCrafton Account. Moreover, both accounts contain nearly identical postings and

photographs which link the subject matter, content and likeness to Plaintiff.

9. Defendants' use of the Infringing Twitter Accounts, which incorporate the

name and photographs of Plaintiff, were meant to confuse or mislead viewers into

believing Plaintiff is affiliated with the accounts, to impersonate Plaintiff and to injure his

professional and personal reputation.

10. Beginning in or about May 2012, Defendants knowingly and without

Plaintiffs consent created a Twitter Account using the name @BillyCrafton,

17 impersonating Plaintiff and using his photographic images. Twitter accounts are

18 available and accessible worldwide, including within San Diego County.19

11. According to Twitter, the number symbol (#)' called a hashtag is used to20

mark key words or topics in a Tweet. It was created organically by Twitter users as a21

22 way to categorize messages. Clicking on a hashtag word in a message shows all other

23 . Tweets marked with that same keyword. Hashtagged words that become very popular

24

25

26

27

28

are often used in trending topics in other sites. Twitter postings are commonly referredto as "Tweets."

COMPLAINTAND JURY DEMAND - 4

EXHIBIT A 000011



9/29

1 12. The Twitter Account @8il1yCrafton was used to post numerous postings

2, I

claiming to be authored by the Plaintiff. The Twitter Account @Billy Crafton contained3

the following Tweets:4

5 "If anyone is looking for an investment advisor and likes magic, call me. III

6 make your money disappear right before your eyes! #BlackCard"

7 "I am so excited I got my #taxshelter pregnant.. . i mean #wife. #loveyoubabe8

#BlackCard"9

10 "Just want to Jet my clients know I am now happily married ... what a wonderful11 #taxshelter she is .. .! mean #wife. #BlackCard"

12 "Who needs life insurance? I have a great insurance/baseball agent...Jim13

Lindell ..#highpremiums #highcomissions #kickbacks #BlackCard"14

15 "My heroes .. .#charlesponzi and #berniemadoff. I have a #blackcard"

1 6 "For all your baseball players out there ... 1 have more steals than Ricky

1 7 Henderson. #bemyclient #Westmoore #BlackCard"18

'Wanna know what its like to be me? I have a pet human #Marty #BiackCard n

1 9

20 'Whats up @BrentCelek thanks 4 the follow! 1m all good. Spending your $$

21 better than you could have ... Can I get aRT? #Kickbacks #Blackcard"

22 "@PhilHughes65 @ C ~ B a s e b a l !Phil keep ptichin like uve got nothing 223

lose! (Bc honestly @ this point theres not much left 2 lose) #Ponzi #Nex"24

25 "Hey @HeathBell21 thanks for signing with me despite the fact I'm on my way

26 to prison #gameSaver #SECaintGotShitOnMe"

27 13 . Working with counse l, P/aintiffwas able to have the @BillyCrafton Twitter

28account suspended f or violation of the Twitter's published Terms of Services. This


EXHIBIT A 000012



10/29

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

occurred on or about 14 May 2012. After the @BillyCrafton Twitter account was

s u s p e ~ d e d ,Defendant JOHN DOE and Does 2-5, inclusive, and each of them, opened

a second account @BlackCardBandit with a name of Martin Kelley.

14. On or about 15 May 2012, Defendants knowingly and without Plaintiff's

consent created a Twitter Account using the name @BlackCardBandit, impersonating

Plaintiff and using his photographic images. Twitter accounts are available and

accessible worldwide, including within San Diego County.

15. While Plaintiff no longer works or owns any interest in Martin Kelly

Capital Management, the image that is used on the @BlackCardBandit Twitter Account

as the face of "Martin Kelley" is actually a cropped image from a group photograph.

including Plaintiff taken in May 2008, which appears on other social media sites.

16. The Twitter Account @8lackCardBandit was used to post numerous

postings claiming to be authored by Martin Kelley (a fictitious name meant to relate to

17

the business entity once owned and operated by Plaintiff). Th e Twitter Account18 @B!ackCardBandit contained the following Tweets:

19 "I just banged my wife. I put about as much effort into it as , did

20

21investing my clients money ZERO #Blackcard #PityFuck"

22 "My #Blackcard is blacker than ALL of my wifes ex-lovers"

23 "@PhiIHughes65 Great start today! Keep all your #focus on baseball

24

and none of it on your financials. #thanks #blackcard"25

26 U@MoneyAdvisory are u following me for money advice? I don't care

27 what the @SEC_News says, #Westmoore #gerova #chinatel #rineon

28 has value."

COMPLAlNT AND JURY DEMAND - 6

EXHIBIT A 000013



11/29

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

1 9

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

, . "All my #taxshelter,.1 mean #wife watches on TV is #tylerperry movies,

#BET and #nbaplayoffs .. #idontgetit. #blackguys .. 1 mean #blaekcard."

"Does anyone know which countries don't have extradition with the

USA? #help #blackcard"

"I am the Bernie Madoff of the sports world!!! I've fucked more athletes

than He idi Fleissl!!!"

"Just signed up 4 ETrade! literally takin financial advice frm a fucking

infant @etradebaby Smarter than u takin advice frm me tho

#BlackCard"

"Does anyone know how I can get @Verified on here? I want people

to know that the CashFlow Cowboy - #BlackCardBilly is on Twitter!!"

"Monday .. another "work" week. Spend the days #lying to my clients,

and the evenings racking up #ba 'rtabs on my clients. #blackcard"

"Hey @TheHamels im $orry. Lets try again, ill do a better job of hiding

ur losses & lying 2 u. Just ask @PhilHughes65 #family #Blaekcard"

Sum1 asked me abt the liquidity of my clients aeets, Shit, I couldnt

convert - 1/2 these junk stocks in2 Chuck-E-Cheese tokens, let alone

cash"

"Hey @BrentCelek & @afeeley14 i put a shitload (of your) money on

the races today. Jimmy Lindell & I r laughing our way 2 the bank

#Blackeard"

- - - -- - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - C O M M P ~ L ~ A ~ I N M - T T hM N D n l J~ U DY ~ D~ E ~ M ~~ N~ D- - -~ 7 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

EXHIBIT A 000014



12/29

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

2 6

2 7

2 8

" H ~ y@afeeley14 i mi$$ our wild weekends 2gether . Grab a flight out

West(moore) & lets party like b4 i finger fucked ur finances!

#BlackCard"

"My bed is lumpy as shit bc my mattress is stuffed with my clients cash

#BlackCard"

17. Contrary to the assertions in the Infringing Twitter Accounts, Plaintiff did

not create these accounts, post or authorize the use of his name or likeness and publish

the Tweets. Defendant JOHN DOE and the Doe Defendants, and each of them, acting

individually and in concert with each other, assisted in creating and posting the Tweets.

18. As a' result of the foregoing conduct by the Defendants, and each of

them, Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to suffer, direct and consequential damages

in the amount to be proven at trial. In addition, Plaintiff has suffered, and continues to

suffer, irreparable harm to his reputation and ongoing business relationships.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

INTERNET IMPERSONATION (PENAL CODE 528.5)(Against All Defendants)

19. Plaintiff hereby re-alleges, as if fully set forth herein, the allegations of

the preceding paragraphs.

20. As described fully above, Defendants knowingly and maliciously

impersonated Plaintiff on the intemet without Plaintiff's consent by, inter alia, (i)

publishing the Twitter accounts that used Plaintiff's name, using Plaintiffs name and

photographic images, and posting Tweets purporting to be authored by Plaintiff; and (ii)

posting numerous comments under the Twitter accounts using Plaintiff's name and

likeness,

COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND ~ 8

EXHIBIT A 000015



13/29

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

I B

19

20

21

2 2

23

24

25

26

27

28

21,. As described fully above, Defendants' registration and use of the Twitter

Accounts name was done with bad faith intent to impersonate Plaintiff or identify Plaintiff

with a confusingly similar name to attach Plaintiffs former business.

22. The impersonation, as described above, was credible, as it would lead a

person to reasonably believe that the author of these Tweets was Plaintiff, the person

who was impersonated and contained information known to a limited number of persons

which include these Defendants.

23. The impersonation was done on an internet website or by other

electronic means without Plaint if fs consent.

24. The impersonation was done for purposes of harming, intimidating,

threatening, and/or defrauding Plaintiff.

25. As a result of Defendants' conduct, as described herein, Plaintiff has

suffered and continues to suffer, damages in an amount to be proved at trial, including,

without limitation, past and future lost profits, and injury to reputation, as well as other

consequential damages in an amount to be proven at trial.

26. Defendants' conduct, as described herein, was performed with malice,

oppression, fraud, and reckless indifference. As described fully above, Defendants

clearly intended their conduct to cause injury to Plaintiff. Moreover, this conduct was

despicable, i.e., would be despised by any reasonable person, and it was done with a

willful disregard of Plaintiff's rights, including his privacy andproperty rights. By engaging

in the conduct described herein, Defendants subjected Plaintiff to cruel and unjust

hardship in know ing disregard of his rights and, such conduct warrants punitive and

exemplary damages under California Civil Code 3294.

COMPLAINTANDJURY DEMAND~ 9

EXHIBIT A 000016



14/29

. ' ~

1 27 . Defendants are continuing to engage in the unlawful actions alleged

2 h e r e i ~ ,and' unless restrained and enjoined will continue to do so, causing irreparable3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

18

1 9

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

2 8

harm to Plaintiff. Furthermore, it is impossibly difficult to ascertain the compensation

that would afford Plaintiff adequate relief for Defendants' continuing unlawful acts.

Plaintiffs remedy at law therefore is inadequate to compensate for the injuries

threatened such that the issuance of injunctive relief is warranted.

28. Because Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law to compensate him for

the continuing injuries inflicted by Defendants, Plaintiff is entitled to temporary,

preliminary and permanent injunctive relief and/or other equitable relief pursuant to

Penal Code 528.5(e).

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

FALSE LIGHT(Against All Defendants)

29. Plaintiff hereby re-alleges, as if fully set forth herein, the al.legations of


30. As described fully above, Defend.ants have publicly disclosed information

and materials that portrayed Plaintiff in a false light. Specifically, Plaintiff is informed

and believes, and based thereon alleges, that Defendants have intentionally disclosed

information through the Twitter accounts and their postings, which gives the false

impression that Plaintiff is incompetent, unqualified to work in his field, a fraud, a thief, a

poor businessman, and an individual currently under investigation by the Securities and

Exchange Commission (SEC).

31. As described fully above, Defendants published these statements on the

Internet.


EXHIBIT A 000017



15/29

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

27

28

.~

32. The false light created by the publication of these statements would be

highly offensive to a reasonable person in Plaintiffs' position, because they accuse him

of lacking business competence, pursuing II/egal business strategies, and being unable

to work constructively with. others.

33. Defendants knew the Twitter postings would create a false impression

about Plaintiff and acted with reckless disregard for the truth and Defendants' conduct

was a substantial factor in causing harm to Plaintiff.

34. As a result of Defendants' conduct, as described herein, Plaintiff has

suffered, and continues to suffer , harm to his business, profession and occupation,

including money spent as a result of the false statement to repair his business,

profession and reputation. Plaintiff suffers general damages in an amount to be proven

at trial, including without limitation, past and future lost profits, and injury to reputation,

as well as other consequential damages in an amount to be proven at trial.

35. Defendants' conduct , as described herein, was performed with malice,oppression, fraud, and reckless indifference. As described 'Fully above, Defendants

clea rly intended their conduct to cause injury to Plaintiff. Moreover, this conduct was

despicable, Le . would be despised by any reasonable person, and it was done with a

willful disregard of Plaintiffs rights, including his privacy and property rights. By

engaging in the conduct described herein, Defendants subjected Plaintiff to cruel and

unjust hardship in knowing disregard of his rights and, such conduct warrants punitive

and exemplary damages under California Civil Code 3294.

36. Defendants are continuing to engage in the unlawful actions alleged

herein, and unless restrained and enjOined will continue to do so, causing irreparable


EXHIBIT A 000018



16/29

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

14

1 5

1 6

1718

1 9

20

21

22

23

2 4

25

2 6

2 7

29

harm to Plaintiff. Furthermore, it is impossibly difficult to ascertain the compensation that

would ' afford Plaintiff adequate relIef for Defendants' continuing unlawful acts. Plaintiffs

remedy at law is, therefore, inadequate to compensate for the injuries threatened such

that the issuance of injunctive relief is warranted.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

LIBEL PERSE(Against All Defendants)


the preceding paragraphs.38. The negative internet postings, including the Twitter accounts and the

Tweets related to each statement therein, are libelous because the language contains

defamatory meanings, as opposed to innocent meanings. Th e negative internet

po stings contain false and unprivileged statements about Plaintiff that exposes him to

hatred, contempt, ridicule or obloquy, or that causes Plaintiff to be shunned or avoided,

or that has a tendency of injuring Plaintiff in his business and his reputation.

39. The internet postings are libelous on their face because they charge

Plaintiff with incompetence, malfeasance, sexual harassment, racism, and alleged

lIJegal activities, including theft, fraud and tax evasion.

40. The negative Tweets were known by Defendants to be false or

Defendants acted in reckless disregard of the truth when they wrote and published

these postings with the knowledge that the Tweets would be viewed by persons who

were in existing or potential business relationships with Plaintiff, such as employers and

clients. Defendants even tried to connect with people he thought might be clients of


EXHIBIT A 000019



17/29

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

27

28

Plaintiff, usi,ng the Twitter accounts and the hashtags (#) to link or trend references to

other individuals to gain widespread dissemination of the defamatory comments.

41. As a result of the negative internet postings, Plaintiff has suffered loss of

business opportunities, loss of reputation, shame, mortification and hurt feelings, all to

his general damage in an amount to be proven at trial, but not less than the

jurisdictional minimum.

42. Plaintiff is informed and believes and, upon that basis, alleges that the

negative Tweets were written and published by Defendants with malice and/or

oppression in that the content of the postings contain false, defamatory statements that

were known by Defendants to be false, and their publication was deliberately done with.

the intention of destroying Plaintiffs reputation, and to cause Plaintiff to lose his ability to

pursue his business and/or to be shunned by society, Plaintiff is therefore entitled to

punitive and exemplary damages under California Civil Code 3294.

FOLIRTH CAUSE OF ACTION

INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS(Against All Defendants)



44. The actions of Defendants as described throughout this Complaint, in

particular their creating false Twitter accounts, using photographs of Plaintiff, and

impersonating Pla intiff on the Internet, attempt to attribute Plaintiff with certain unlawful

business conduct. Defendants' claims were extreme and outrageous and beyond the

bounds of common decency. Such actions were intended to cause, or were engaged in

COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND -1 3

EXHIBIT A 000020



18/29

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

1 4

15

16

17

18

1 9

20

21

22

23

2 4

25

2 6

27

28

' ~

with a reckless disregard of the probability of causing, severe emotional distress to

Plaintiff.

45. As a direct and proximate result of the acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has

sustained and continues to suffer severe emotional distress, including anguish, anxiety,

shock, worry, humiliation and shame.

46. Defendants' conduct was a sUbstantial factor in cause Plaintiff's severe

emotional distress. Plaintif fs emotional distress is so substantial and long-lasting that

no reasonable person in a civilized society should be expected to bear it.

47 . Plaintiff seeks general damages for his severe emotional d istress and

other consequential damages in an amount within the jurisdiction of this Court, the exact

amount to be proven at trial.

. 48. Defendants, with malice, and for extortive purposes, did carry out the

unlawful acts detailed herein for the purposes of causing emotional distress to the

Plaintiff. Defendant also carried out these acts with intention to harm, and/or with

reckless dis 'regard for the effects theif acts would have on Plaintiff, his family and all

other parties with whom Plaintiff conducts business . Plaintiff seeks punitive and

exemplary damages under Cal.ifornia Civil Code 3294.

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

APPROPRIATION OF NAME OR LIKENESS(Against Al l Defendants)

49 . Plaintiff hereby r e -alleges, as if fully set forth herein, the allegations ofthe preceding paragraphs .

50. The appropriation of Plaintiffs name and likeness was unauthorized a nd

without Pla intiff's consent.

COMPLA INT AND JURY DEMAND -1 4

EXHIBIT A 000021



19/29

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

-----, - ~ .

51. Defendants' appropriated Plaintiff's name and likeness in order to harm, '

the personal and business relationships of the Plaintiff. Defendants seek to sway public

opinion against Plaintiff in an attempt to ruin his personal and professional reputation.

and therefore gained a commercial advantage in disparaging Plaintiff by disrupting

Plaintiff's business and interfering in Plaintiff's profits.

52. Defendants have used publicly Plaintiff's name and likeness on the

Infringing Twitter Accounts to disparage and humiliate him and in a deliberate attempt to

adversely affect his business and client relat ionships.

53. As a direct and proximate result of the acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has

sustained and continues to sustain general damages and other consequential damages

in an amount within the jurisdiction of this Court, the exact amount to be proven at trial.

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

INJUNCTIVE RELIEF(Against All Defendants)


19 the preceding paragraphs.20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

55. Defendants are continuing to engage in the unlawful actions alleged

herein, and unless restrained and enjoined will continue to do so, causing irreparable

harm to Plaintiff. Furthermore, it is impossibly difficult to ascertain the compensation

that would afford Plaintiff adequate relief for Defendants' continuing unlawful acts.

Plaintiff's remedy at law is therefore inadequate to compensate fully for the injuries

threatened such that issuance of injunctive relief is warranted.

COMPLAJNT AN D JURY DEMAND - 15

EXHIBIT A 000022



20/29

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

1 2

13

14

15

16

1 7

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

56. Plaintiff seeks orders which temporarily, preliminarily and permanently

enjoin and restrain Defendants from maintain any Twitter accounts or other social mediaor Internet websites, which impersonate Plaintiff in ,violation of California Penal Code

528.5.

57. Plaintiff seeks further orders which require Defendants forthwith to ,

transfer all Twitter account registrations (and assign all copyright privileges anent to any

posted Tweets) to Plaintiff so that Plaintiff control the accounts and content, and forever

preclude any other person from opening another Twitter account under these names.PRAYER

1. General damages in the amount according to proof but no less than

$25,000;

2. Special damages in the amount according to proof but no less than

$25.000

3.Punitive damages

in anamount appropriate to punish Defendants for their

wrong'ful conduct and set an example for others; ,

4. A preliminary and permanent injunction ordering that Defendants

immediately:

a. Cease publishing any defamatory statements about Plaintiff on any

Twjtter accounts or other social media or Internet websites; and

b. Require Defendants forthwith to transfer all Twitter accountregistrations (and aSsign al/ copyright privileges, if any , anent o

any posted Tweets) to Plaintiff;

COMPLAINT AND JURY DEM AND -1 6

EXHIBIT A 000023



21/29

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

27

28

. -~ .

5. For compensatory damages pursuant to Penal Code 528.5 and all civil

remedies provided therein;

6. A declaratory judgment from this Court that the Twitter accounts and its

contents are defamatory and injurious to Plaintiff's business or occupation;

7. For prejudgment interest in an amount accordant to proof on the sum of

damages awarded to the maximum extent permitted by law;

8. Reasonable attorneys' fees and coast of suit incurred herein; and

9. Such other relief as the Court may deem just and proper

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff hereby demands a jury trial for a" issues triable by jury.

Dated: 27 July 2012

COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND -1 7

EXHIBIT A 000024



22/29

I

Wflliliffi: 13R1OCEParkingllgat.Inc.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ / ~ !$ 0 . ~ Lot11974

EXHIBIT A 000025



23/29

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTYOF SAN DIEGOSTREET ADDRESS; 330 West Broadway

MAlUNG ADDRESS: a30 West S"",dW3r

CITY AND ZIP CODE: San Diego. CA 92.101

BRANCH NAME: Cttntml

TElEPHONE NIJMilER: (619)450-7062

PLAINTIFF(S)/ PETITIONER(S}: Billy Crafton

DEFENDANT(S)I RESPONDENT(S): John Doe

CRAFTONVS. DOECASe NUMBER:

NOTICE OF CASE ASSIGNMENT 37-2012-0010141B-CU-DF-CTL

Judge: Ronald L. Styn

COMPLAINT/PETITION FILEO: 07/27/2012

Department: C-62

ALL CASES MUST COMPLY WrrH THE CIVIL REQUIREMENTS L1STEO BELOW,EXCEPT FOR PARKING CITATION APPEALS

IT IS THE DUTY OF EACH PLAINTIFF (AND CROSS-COMPLAINANT) TO SERVE A COPY OF THIS NOTICE WITHTHE COMPLAINT (AND CROSS-COMPLAINT), THE AlTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR) INFORMATIONFORM (SDSC FORM #CIV-730), A STIPULATION TO USE ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR) (SDSCFORM #CIV-359), AND OTHER DOCUMENTS AS SET OUT IN SDSC LOCAL RULE 2.1.5.

ALL COUNSEL WILL BE EXPECTED TO BE FAMILIAR WITH SUPERIOR COURT RULES WHICH HAVE BEENPUBLISHED AS DIVISION II, AND WILL BE STRICTLY ENFORCED.

TIME STANDARDS: The following timeframes apply to general civil cases and must be adhered to unless you haverequested and been granted an extension of time. General civil cases consist of all cMl cases except: smallclaims proceedings, civil petitions, unlawful de tainer proceedings, probate, guardianship, conservatorship,juvenile, and family law proceedings.

COMPLAINTS: Complaints and all other documents listed in SDSC Local Rule 2.1.5 must be served on all nameddefendants, an d a Certificate of Service (SDSC forrTi #CIV-345) filed within 60 days of filing.

DEFENDANTS APPEARANCE: Defendant must generally appea r within 30 days of service of the complaint (Plaintiffmay stipulate to no more than 15 day extension which must be in writing and filed with the Court.) (SDSC LocalRule 2.1.6)

DEFAULT: If the def endant has not generally appeared and no extension has been granted, the plaintiff must requestdefault within 45 days of th e filing of the Certificate of Service. (SDSC Local Rule 2.1.7)

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE: A Case Management Conference will be se t within 150 days of filing thecomplaint.

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR): THE COURT ENCOURAGES YOU TO CONSIDER UTILIZING

VARIOUS ALTERNATIVES TO TRIAL, INCLUDING MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION, PRIOR TO THE CASEMANAGEMENT CONFERENCE. PARTIES MAY FILE THE ATTACHED STIPULATION TO USE ALTERNATIVEDISPUTE RESOLUTION (SDSe FORM # C I V ~ 3 5 9 ) .

YOU MAY ALSO BE ORDERED TO PARTICIPATE IN ARBITRATION. IF THE CASE IS ORDERED TO ARBITRATIONPURSUANT TO CODE elY. PROC.14 11.11, THE COSTS OF ARBITRATION WILL BE PAID BY THE COURTPURSUANT TO CODE CIV. PROC. 1141.28 .

FOR MORE INFORMATION, SEE THE ATTACHED ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR) INFORMATIONFORM (SDSC FORM #C1V-730)

S D S C C I V ' 7 2 1 ' O ( R ~ e ; V : v . " 1 1 1 - 1 - { j i 0 6 5 ) - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _NOTICE OF CASE ASSIGNMENT P ~ u : 1

EXHIBIT A 000026



24/29

Superior Court of CaliforniaCounty of San Diego

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENTTO IMAGING DEPARTMENT

Tllis case has been assigned to an Imaging Department and original documents attached topleadings filed with the court will be imaged and destroyed. Original documents should not befiled witb pleadings. I f necessary, they should be lodged with the court under California Rules of

Court, rule 3.1302(b).On August 1, 2011 the San Diego Superior Court began the Electronic Filing and Imaging Pilot

Ptogmm ("Program"). As of August 1, 20 II in all ne w cases assigned to an Imaging Department allfilings will be imaged electronically and the electronic version of the document will be the officialcourt file. The official court file will be electronic and accessible at one of th e kiosks located in theCivil Business Office and on the Internet through the court' s website. This Program will be expandingto other civil courtrooms over time.

You should be aware that the electronic copy of the filed document( s) will be the official courtrecord pursuant to Government Code section 68150. The paper filing will be imaged and held for90 days. After that time it will be destroyed and recycled. Thus, you should no t attach anyoriginal documents to pleadings filed with the San Diego Superior Court. Original documents

fIled with th e court will be imaged an d destroyed except those documents specified i nCalifornia Rules of Court, rule 3.1806. Any original documents necessary for a motion hearing ortrial shall be lodged in advance of the hearing pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.l302(b).

It is the duty of each plaintiff, cross-complainant or petitioner to serve a copy of this notice withthe complaint, cross-complaint or peti tion on all parties in the action.

On all pleadings filed after the initial case originating filing, all parties must, to the extent it isfeasible to do so, place the words "IMAGED FILE" in all caps immediately under the title of thepleading on all subsequent pleadings filed in the action.

Please refer to the General Order - Imaging located on theSan Diego Superior Court website at:

http://www.sdcourt.ca.gov/CivillmagingGeneraIOrder

Page: 2

EXHIBIT A 000027



25/29

. SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR) INFORMATION

CASE NUMBER:37-2012-00101418-CU-DF-CTL CASE TITLE: Crafton vs. Doe

NOTICE: All plaintlffs/cross-complainants in a general civil case are required to serve a copy of the followingthree forms on each defendant/cross-defendant, together with th e complaint/cross-complaint:

(1) this Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Information form (SDSe form #C1V-730),(2) th e Stipulation to Use Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) form (SDSC fonn #CIV.359), an d(3) the Notice of Case Assignment form (SOSe form #CN-721).

Most civil disputes are resolved without filing a lawsuit, and most civil lawsuits are resolved without a trial. The courts,community organizations, and private providers offer a variety of Altemative Dispute Resolution (ADR) processes to helppeople resolve disputes without a trial. The San Diego Superior Court expects that litigants will utHize some for m of ADRas a mechanism for case settlement before trial, and it may be beneficial to do this early in the case.

Below is some information about the potential advantages and disadvantages of ADR, th e most common types of ADR.and how to find a local AD R program or neutral. A form for agreeing to use ADR is attached (SDSC form #CIV-359).

Potential Advantages and Disadvantages of ADRADR ma y have a variety of advantages or disadvantages over a trial, depending on the type of AD R process used and theparticular case:

Potential Advantages Saves time

Saves money Gives parties more control over the dispute

resolution process and outcome Preserves or improves relationships

Most Common Types of AOR

Potential Disadvantages Ma y take more time and money if ADR does not

resolve the dispute Procedures to learn about th e other side's case (discovery),

jury trial, appeal, and other court protections ma y be limitedor unavailable

You can read more information about these ADR processes and watch videos that demonstrate them on the court's ADRwebpage at http://www.sdcourt.ca.govladr.

Mediation: A neutral person called a "mediator" helps the parties communicate in an effective and constructive mannerso they can try to settle their dispute . The mediator does not decide the outcome, but helps the parties to do so.Mediation is usually confidential, and may be particularly usefUl when parties want or need to have an ongoingrelationship, such as in disputes between family members, neighbors, co-workers, or business partners, or when partieswant to discuss non-legal concems or creative resolutions that could not be ordered at a trial.

Settlement Conference: A judge or another neutral person called a "settlement officer" helps the parties to understandthe strengths and weaknesses of their case and to discuss settlement. The judge or settlemen t officer does not make adecision in the case but helps th e parties to negotiate a settlement. Settlement conferences may be particularly helpfulwhen the parties have very different ideas about the likely outcome of a trial and would like an experienced neutral to help

guide them toward a resolution.

Arbitration: A neutral person called an "arbitrator" considers arguments and evidence presented by each side and thendecides the outcome of the dispute . Arbitration is less formal than a trial, and the rules of evidence are usually relaxed. Ifthe parties agree to binding arbitration, they waive their right to a trial and agree to accept th e arbitrator's decision as final.With nonbinding arbitration, any party may reject the arbitrator's decision and request a trial. Arbitration may bea p p r o r : r ; a t ~when the parties want another person to decide the outcome of their dispute bu t would like to avoid theforma lity, ttme, and expense of a trial.

S D SC GIV -7 3D (R ev 12-10)ALTERNATIVE DISPUTERESOLUTf.oN (ADR)'NFORMATlON

P:!gs: 1

1

EXHIBIT A 000028



26/29

Other AOR Processes: There are several other types of ADR wh ich ar e not offered through the court but which may beobtained privately. including neutral eva luat ion, conciliation. fact finding. m ini-tria ls. and summary jury trials. Sometimesp arties will try a combination of ADR processes. Th e important thing is to try to find the type or types of ADR that aremos t likely to re s olve your dispute. Be sure to learn about the rules of any ADR program and the qualtficat ions of anyneutral you are considering, and about their fees .

Local ADR Programs f'or Civil Cases

Mediation: The San Diego Superior Court maintains a C ivil Media tion Panel of approved mediators who have metcertain minimum qualifications and have agreed to charge $150 per hour for each of the first two (2) hours of mediationand their regular hourly rate thereafter in court-referred mediations.

On-line mediator search and sele ction : Go to th e court's ADR webpage at ww w .sdcourt.ca.gov/adr and click on theMMediator Search" to review individual mediator profiles conta ining detailed information about each mediator includingtheir dispute resolution training, relevant experience. AOR specialty, education and employment history, mediation style.and fees and to submit an on-line Mediator Selecti on Form (SDSC form #CIV-005). Th e Civil Mediation Panel List, theAvailable Mediator Ust, individual Mediator Profiles ) and Mediator Selection Form (CIV-005) can also be printed from thecourt's ADR webpage and are available at the Mediation Program Office or Civil Business Office at each court locat ion.

Settlement Conference: The judge may order your case to a manda tory settlement conference. or voluntary settlement

conferences may be requested fr om the court if the parties certify that: (1) settlement negotia tions between the partieshave been pursued, demands and' offers have been tendered in good fa ith. and resolution h as failed; (2) a judiciallysupervised settlement conference presents a substantial opportunity fo r settlement; and (3) the case has developed to apoint where all parties are legally and factually prepared to present the issues for settlement consideration and furtherdiscovery for settlement purposes is not required. Re fer to SOSC Local Rule 2.2.1 for more information. To schedule asettlement conference , contact the department to which your case is assigned.

Arbitration: The San Diego Superior Court maintains a panel of approved judicial arbitrators who have practiced law fo ra minimum of five years and who have a certain amount of trial and/or arbitration experience. Refer to SOSC LocalRules Division I" Chapter III and Code Clv. Proc. 1141.10 et seg or contact the Arbitration Program Office at (619)450-7300 for more information.

More information about court-connected AOR: Visit the court's AOR webpage at www.sdcourt.ca.gov /adr or contact thecourt 's Mediation/Arbitration Office at (619} 450-7300.

Dispute Resolution Programs Act (DRPA ) funded AD R Programs: The following community dispute resolutionprograms are funded under DRPA (Bus. and Prof. Code 465 et seq.):

In Centr a l, East, and So u th San Diego County, contact the National Conflict Re s olution Cen te r (NCRC) atwww.ncrconline .com or (619) 238-2400.In North San Diego County, contact North County lifeline, Inc. atwww.nclifeline.org or (760) 726-4900.

Private ADR: To find a private ADR program or neutral, search the Internet. your local telephone or business directory,or legal newspaper for dispute resolution. mediation, settlement, or arbitration services .

Legal Representation and Advice

To partiCIpate effec tively in ADR) it is generally important to understand your legal rights and responsibilities and thelikely outcomes if yo u went to tria!. AD R neutrals are not allowed to represent or to g ive legal a dvice to the participants in

the AOR process. If you do not a lready have an attomey, the California State Bar or your local County Bar Associationcan assist you In finding an attorney. Information about obtain ing free and low cost legal assistance is also available onthe Califomia courts website at www.courtinfo.ca.govlselfhe /pl/owcost .

I)

SDS C CIV. 730 (Rev 1 2.10)ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR) INFO RMATIO N Paga:2

2EXHIBIT A 000029



27/29

SUPERIOR COURT OF CAUFORNIA . COUNTY OF SAN DIEGOFOR COURT USE ON/..Y

SmEET ADDRESS: 330 West Broadway

MAILING ADDRESS: 330 West Broadway

CrN , STATE, & ZIP CODE: Sa n Diego, CA 92101-3827

BRANCHNAME: Central

IPLAINT1FF(S): Billy CraftonDEFENDANT(S);John Doe

SHORT TITLE: CRAFTONVS. DOE

STIPULATION TO USE ALTERNATIVE CASE NUMBER:DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR) 37-2012-0010141B--CU-DF-CTL

Judge : Ronald L Styn Department : C-62

The parties and their attorneys stipulate that the matter is at issue and the claims in this action shall be subm itted to the followingalternative dispute resolution (ADR) process . Selection of any of these options will no t delay an y case management timelines .

0 Mediation (court-connecled) 0 Non-binding private arbitration

0 Mediation (private) 0 Binding private arbitration

0 Voluntary settlement conference (private) 0 Non-binding judiCialarbitration (discovery until 15 days before trial)

0 Neutra l evaluation (private) 0 Non-bind ing judicial arbitration (discovery until 30 days before trial)o Other (specify J.g ., private mini-tnal, private judge, e tc.): ____________________________

It is also stipulated that the following shall serve as arbitrator, mediator or other neutral: (Name)

Alternate neutral (farcour! CivilMediation Program and arbitration only): _____________________________

Daw: _________________________________ __ Date: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

Name of Pla intiff Name of Defendant

Signature Signature

Name of Plaintiff's Attorney Name of Defendant's Attorney

Signature Signature

If there are more part ies and/or attomeys, please attach additional complete d and fully executed sh e ets .

It is the duty of the pa rties to notify the court of any settlement pursu an t to CaL Rules of Court rule 3.1385 Upon notifrcation of the settlement ,the court wfllplace this ma tte r on a 45-day dism issa l calendar.

.No new partie s may be added without leave of courtIT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated : 0712712 012 JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURTsosc Crv-'lS9 (Rev 12-10)

STIPULATION TO USE OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION Page: 1

3

EXHIBIT A 000030



28/29

- - - - - - - - - - -------------------_._--_. _--- -- -----_ ._ --- ------------_ . _ -_ ._~ > .... -TTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT A T ro R NEY(Na me , ..,ta te barnumbe r, and d d r e ~ $ ): FOR COURT USE ONL Y

Judi M. Sanzo, Attorn e y (CSB# 153663)SANZO LAW3755 Avocado Blvd., #521 , La Mesa , CA 91941-7301

F I L E 0TELEPHONE NO.: 619-579-0299 FAX NO .: 619-579-5888 Clark Of the Super ior Court

ATTORNEY FOR (Name ): P iaint iff Billy Crafton

SUPERIOR CO URT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY O F SA N DIEGO JAN 9 20138 ENTRAL DIVISION . HALL OF JUSTICE, 330 W . BROADWAY , SAN DIEGO, CA 92 101EAST COUNTY DIVISION, 250 E . MAIN ST., E l CAJON , CA 92020 By; P. WOODS, DeputyAST COUNTY DIVISION , RAMONA BRANCH . 1428 MONTECITO RD ., RAMONA , CA 92065o NORTH COUNTY OIVISION, 325 S. MELROSE DR. . SUITE 1000, VISTA, CA 920 8 1o SOUTH COUNTY DIVISION, 500 3RD AVE., CHULA VISTA, CA 91910PLAINTIFF (S) JUDGE

Billl'. Crafton Ronald L _StynOEFENDANT(S) DEPT

John D oe; and Does 2-5, Inclusive C-62CASE NUMB E R

AMENDMENT TO COMPLAINT 37 -2012-00101418-CU-OF-CTL' - - - . , -... ~ . _. - .Under Code of Civ , Pr o . 47 4 :FICTITIOUS NAME (Court orde r required once case is at issue. SDSC Local Rule 2 .1.10)

Plaintiff(s). being ignor;3nt of the true name of a defendant when the complaint in the above-named case was filed, and havingdesignated defendant in the complaint by the fictitious name of

John Doeand having discovered the true name of defendant to be

Fred Wray, MCSPA Gertifled :Agentand 'Senio( Client Manager at Octagon Sports, / ;amends tbe c9mp,JaInt byi0serting s ~ c h t r u ename in place of su.ch ficftious name wher v " it appears in the complaint.

Date: ~ ' U A ~ ' ; )'A r 2 - Y2{)13 "" ' _- r - .{--"..,=.:cu-..- .[C.:::::...1' -! - f - = . . - < ~ : . . . - - - - L - ~ ~'~ '---:--:-::---=-:-:--:-:-:::-:-:-

Under Code o f Civ. Pro. 473:NAME - Ad d or Correct (Court order required)

Plaintiff(s) , having designated 0 defendant 0 p laintif f in the complain t by the name of

and having discovered 0 name to be incorrect and the correct name is 0 defendant also us e s the name of

amends the compiaint by 0 substituting 0 adding such name(s) wherever the name of

ap p e ars in the complaint.

Date: ________________________ ___

ORDER.

Da t e : ___________________ __ __ ___

SDSC CIV-{)12 (Re v, 4108) AM ENDMENT TO COMPLAINT

Attorney{s) fo r PJaintiff(s)

.. . .., . -- . - . . . '.

Judge of the Superio r Court

Code Civ. Pro. 4 73 & 474SDSC lo ca l R ule , 2. 1.10

EXHIBIT A 000031



29/29

j ', '

~ = : - : : : : : : - : : = = : - . ; ; ; - ; : ; : - ; : : ; : : ; : ; ; ; : ; : ; : ; ; : ; ; ; ; : ; : = - : ; : ; : - ; : : : - : : = : : : : : - : - : : : : : : ; : : : ; ; : : = : :' " .,ATIORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATIORNEY(Name. s l . l . bar number. and.address): FOR COURT USE ONLY I"~ ,"Judi M, Sanzo, Attorney I ;;.:SANZO LAW h ..3755 Avocado Blvd., # 5 2 1 " " .. . . . . . _ ' ;.:,La Mesa, CA 9 1 4 4 1 ~ 7 3 0

TELEPHONENO" 6 1 9~5 7 9 , 0 2 9:9 FAXNO. :619-579-5888 " F I l E DATIORNEYFOR (Name):PlaintiffBiIIYCrafto'n . . . C I Q ~ o f t h esuperlorcourtSUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNI A,COUNTY .OFSAN DIEGO ,- "013

BENTRALDIVISION.HALL OFJUSTIC E, 330 W . BROADWAY , SAN DIEGO, C .A Q2101 ~ ~ R2 6 L .

EAST COUNTY DIVISION;250E. MAIN ST ., ELCAJON, CA92020 . . ' nEAST COUNTY DIVISION. RAMONA BRANCH. 1428 MONTECITO RD . RAMONA. CA 92065 C C R S : O C ! . \ " Oo NORTH COUNTY DIVIS ION, 325 S. MELROSE DR , .SUITE1000. VISTA, CA 92081 ~ ... I'"o SOUTH COUNTY DIVISION,SOO 3RDAVE CHULA VISTA ,'CA 919iQ .... . ' .. ey: R. .

PLAINTIFF(S) JUDGEBilly Crafton Ronald L Styn

. DEFENDANT(S) DEPT

John Doe; and D o e s 2 ~ 5 , l n c i u s i v e . C-62

;AJ\liENDMENt' :TO :.G:QMPlAiNTCASENUI'v1BER

.. ." :-. .. 3 . ? ~ 2 0 1 2~0 0 10 1 4 1 8 ~ C U - O F - C T

Under Code of Civ. Pro.] 0474:

FICTITIOUS NAME {Court orderreqlJired 'once :case is at i$;>ue. 'SDSCLocal.Rule 2.1.10) :Plaintiff(s). being ignorant f t h e t r u ~n a m ~bfa defendantwhen h e c 6 m p l a : j r i t i R t h e a b o v e ~ n a mwas filed, and havingdesignated d e f e n d a r i t i n * e c o m p l a i n ~ b y t h e f i c t i t i o u s m l m eof .

Doe 1and having discoveredtne' :true ;name qfdefendant to. he .. . . : . - .

'MichaelCommodorei aprofessiona1hOeke.YPla:yer . 1mends the complaint-by inserting sueI') .true 'name in place of such fiotitious name w h ~ r : e v e Tit ,appears In the complaint.Date g 2220/3 .. .. , ~ ~ " ' 1-1 . '

I Attorney(s) for Plaintiff(s)/

.. _" ." .-:; . . . c /Under Code of Civ.Pro.473 : . . ' . . . .. .NAME - Add or o r r e c t ( C o . t l r t o r d e r r ~ q u i r e q ).

- ' , . .

Pla intiff(s), h a V i n g d e s i g r i ~ t e 6;1 ~. d e f e n d a n t.. D : p l a i n t i f f i n t h e : c o m p l a i n t b Y ' l h ~ m l r u e:d f.

and having disGoveredc:Jnatne to belncQrrectandcthecorrf:!ct:nameis . 0 .defendanLalsQ uses the name of

amends the complaint by 0 ~ t i b s t l t u t i n g D. addil")9 such'name(s)wherever'thenariie of

appears in the complaint.

Date: __________________________ _

'ORDER .'.The above ameridmentto t hecomplaintois .allolNed .

Date: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - ' - ' - _ ~ _ , . - _

Attorney(s) for Plaintiff(s)

Judge of the Superior Court


Crafton v. Does

Documents

Transcript of Crafton v. Does