ECP - media.bizj.us
Transcript of ECP - media.bizj.us
NOSSAMAN LLF FILEDBrendan Macaulay CAl 62313 Superior Court Of Cailfo riia
bmacauIaynossaman.com SacramentoSylvia Arostegui CA 208452sarosteguinossaman.com50 California Street 34th Floor waquezSan Francisco CA 94111 ________________ Dep tyTelephone 415.398.3600 Casu NumberFacsimile 415.398.2438 34231 5031 78743
Attorneys for Plaintiff Gloria Orozco
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
10 FOR THE COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
Ill
12GLORIA OROZCO an individual Case No
13Plaintiff COMPLAINT FOR
14vs Extortion
Conversion
15 ETHAN CONRAD an individual ETHAN Intentional nfliction of Emotional
CONRAD PROPERTIES INC CaliforniaDistress
16 corporation and DOES to 20 inclusive Negligent Infliction of Emotional
Distress
17Breach of Contract
Trespass to Real Property
18Defendants
Trespass to Chattel
Unfair Competition Bus Prof Code
19 1720OetseqInjunctive Relief
20DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
21
22 Plaintiff Gloria Orozco Orozco brings this Complaint against Defendants
23 Ethan Conrad Conrad Ethan Conrad Properties ECP and DOES 1-20 as follows
24 SUMMARY OF ACTION
25 Defendants have committed extortion conversion trespass and other
26 abusive conduct to forcibly evict paying tenant from her restaurant and steal her
27 personal property Defendants used mob of security guards to surround threaten
28 and intimidate Orozco Defendants touted his personal friendships with the Mayor and
9148030_2 -1-______________________________
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR EXTORTION CONVERSION ETC
Chief of Police of Elk Grove and repeatedly threatened that he would have them bring
criminal charges against Orozco Defendants conduct was so outrageous and extreme
that Orozco had to be hospitalized Among other things Orozco seeks compensation
for Defendants forcible confiscation of her property and her severe emotional distress
plus treble damages under Code of Civil Procedure 735 and punitive damages
THE PARTIES
At all times relevant to this action Plaintiff Gloria Orozco was an individual
and resident of Sacramento County California
Orozco is informed and believes that at all times relevant to this action
10 Defendant Ethan Conrad was an individual working and residing in Sacramento County
11 California
12 Orozco is informed and believes that at all times relevant to this action
13 Defendant Ethan Conrad Properties Inc was California corporation doing business in
14 Sacramento County California
15 Does through 20 are individuals or entities whose identity and
16 involvement in the matters alleged herein is presently unknown to Orozco but who are
17 believed to be responsible in some manner for the actions conduct and damages
18 alleged herein and are therefore identified by these fictitious designations The true
19 names of these defendants will be substituted if and when ascertained Orozco is
20 informed and believes and thereon allege that each such Doe Defendant is legally
21 responsible by contract agreement agency conspiracy negligence or in some other
22 actionable manner for the events or happenings referred to herein which have
23 proximately caused the damages hereinafter alleged
24 Orozco is informed and believes and on that basis alleges that each of
25 the Defendants at all relevant times herein was the agent and/or employee of each of
26 the other Defendants and in committing the acts herein alleged was acting within the
27 scope of his or their authority as such agents and employees and with the permission
28 consent and/or ratification of his or their co-Defendants On that basis Orozco further
9148030 -2-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR EXTORTION CONVERSION ETC
alleges that each of the Defendants was responsible for participated in or contributed
to the conduct Orozco alleges herein
Orozco is informed and believes and on that basis alleges that Conrad at
all relevant times herein was and is the owner of Ethan Conrad Properties and is the
sole officer and director Conrad is the agent for seMce of process for Ethan Conrad
Properties Orozco further alleges that there existed unity of interest and ownership
between Conrad and Ethan Conrad Properties Individuality and separateness between
them does not exist and the two are alter egos of each other
Orozco is informed and believes that at all relevant times herein Conrad
10 completely controlled dominated and operated Ethan Conrad Properties as his
11 individual business and alter ego Conrad referred to himself and Ethan Conrad
12 Properties interchangeably as suited his personal purposes including identifying himself
13 and/or Ethan Conrad Properties as the owner of the real property at issue in this case
14 Ethan Conrad Properties is mere shell instrumentality and conduit through which
15 Conrad carried out his business Ethari Conrad Properties was and is undercapitalized
16 and disregarded and continues to disregard corporate formalities including failing to
17 hold regular meetings and failing to maintain minutes and adequate records Permitting
18 any corporate distinction between these Defendants with respect to Orozcos claims
19 would permit an abuse sanction fraud promote injustice and cause an inequitable
20 result Any corporate or other separateness between these Defendants should be
21 disregarded
22 JURISDICTION AND VENUE
23 Pursuant to Code of Civ Proc 395 jurisdiction is proper in California
24 and venue is proper in Sacramento County because most of the wrongs alleged in this
25 Complaint occurred in Sacramento County the real property at issue is located in
26 Sacramento County and all parties reside and/or are headquartered in Sacramento
27 County
28 /1
9148030 -3-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR EXTORTION CONVERSION ETC
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
10 Plaintiff Gloria Orozco is the owner of Vallarta Restaurant family run
Mexican restaurant located at 2513 Riparian Drive Suite 180 Elk Grove CA the
Premises until March 2015
11 Orozco is informed and believes that in 2006 the then-owner Elk Grove
1-5 LLC Original Owner signed 10-year lease with Samuel and Rubicelia
Sanchez collectively Sanchez which provided that moveable furniture and trade
fixtures remain the property of the tenant This is consistent with California Civil Code
1019 which provides that tenants trade fixtures remain the property of the tenant
10 Orozco was not party to the Sanchez Lease
11 12 Orozco is informed and believes that by 2007 Sanchez was not
12 performing under the Sanchez Lease never took possession of the Premises and later
13 filed for bankruptcy
14 13 In or about 2008 Original Owner and Orozco orally agreed that Orozco
15 would lease the Premises to Orozco on month-to-month basis for the purpose of
16 operating restaurant the Agreement Original Owner agreed that Orozco could pay
17 any amount that she could afford because among other things Original Owner would
18 otherwise receive no rent for the Premises and because the shopping center was 80%
19 vacant and could not generate walk-in traffic for the Vallarta Restaurant
20 14 Orozco invested her life savings to build out and equiplfurnish the
21 Premises as restaurant This included constructing restaurant with all of the kitchen
22 storage service and office components as well as furniture decor supplies and
23 related items She received no tenant improvement funds from the Owner and
24 borrowed from relatives to help finance these improvements and purchases Orozco
25 thereafter occupied the Premises paid rent and otherwise materially performed as
26 agreed The Owner accepted rent in the amounts that Orozco paid for many years
27 before Defendants acquired the shopping center
28 15 In or around 2009 the Original Owners lender foreclosed on the shopping
9148030 4-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR EXTORTION CONVERSION ETC
center and became the new owner of the shopping center Owner and Owner agreed
to honor the Agreement for five years until Owner sold the Premises
16 In November 2012 Sanchez filed petition for bankruptcy protection On
February 19 2013 Sanchez obtained discharge for any debts owed to the Owner
under the Sanchez Lease
17 In or about July 2014 Defendants Conrad and/or Ethan Conrad Properties
purchased the shopping center in which the Premises are located Defendants then
approached Orozco and falsely claimed that she owed hundreds of thousands of dollars
of back rent based on false claim that she was responsible for the rental amounts
10 called for by the Sanchez Lease Defendants threatened to evict her unless she signed
11 written assignment of the Sanchez Lease that had years earlier terminated and/or
12 been discharged in the Sanchez bankruptcy
13 18 Ultimately Orozco signed the purported assignment the Purported
14 Assignment that Defendants induced and pressured her to sign based on fraudulent
15 misrepresentations about her claimed liability and threats to evict Orozco based on rent
16 arrearages she did not owe However the Purported Assignment is unenforceable for
17 many reasons including that the Sanchez Lease and California law require the consent
18 of the assignor the Purported Assignment lacked consideration and was procured by
19 fraud constituted an illegal forfeiture and is unconscionable
20 19 On February 19 2015 just four months after the Purported Assignment
21 Defendants gave notice that they were evicting Orozco effective March 31 2015 even
22 though Orozco was current on her rent Defendants claimed that they had new tenant
23 that would pay more
24 20 During March 2015 Defendants corresponded with Orozcos counsel in an
25 effort to get Orozco to agree that the Purported Assignment was valid and that Orozco
26 would leave behind all of her restaurant furniture fixtures and equipment when she
27 vacated at the end of March Orozcos counsel refused and stated that the Purported
28 Assignment was unenforceable
9148030 -5-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR EXTORTION CONVERSION ETC
21 Crozco is informed and believes that Defendants stationed security guards
outside Vallarta Restaurantfor 24 hours day to spy on Orozco and her employees
22 Orozco is informed and believes that Defendants began calling and
harassing Orozco and her relatives including her sister and her sisters children to
collect allegedly past due rent and threatened to pursue them for these debts which
did not actually exist
23 On March 17 Orozcos counsel wrote to Defendants
Finally we understand that you and/or your agents have been
repeatedly harassing Ms Orozco her sister her sisters children
and others with your attempts to collect what you claim to be debtYou compound this improper conduct with threats of criminal
10 prosecution over lease issue Such efforts are an unfair debt
collection practice and violate the California Fair Debt Collection
11 Practices Act Civil Code 1788 et seq as well as 15 United States
Code Section 1692d2 These efforts must stop immediately
1224 But Defendants did not stop On the contrary Defendants increased their
13improper behavior with explicit threats of criminal prosecution coupled with bragging
14about Conrads self-avowed importance and vast business empire Defendants also
15touted Conrads claimed personal friendship with the Mayor of Elk Grove and with the
16Chief of Police Elk Grove suggesting that these elected officials would do Defendants
17bidding and prosecute Orozco
1825 On March 19 2015 at 844 am Defendants wrote to Orozco counsel to
19threaten criminal prosecution unless Orozco left behind all of her property as
20Defendants claimed was required under the invalid Purported Assignment
21 Please be advised that if the tenant does take any of the FFE at
all and/ordoes notpaythe March rentbyMarch 31 2015 wewill22
proceed with theft charges relative to the removal of any of the
FFE and we will proceed with legal action against the tenant and
the guarantôrs for any FFE that is removed as well as the March
24rent if its not paid by March 31 2015
26 On March 19 2015 at 1159 p.m Defendants wrote to Orozcos counsel
25
You should be aware that the tenant appears to be trying to steal
26 my property from the premises and we were dispatched to security
guard is there on site now27
We will dispatch the police if needed and will press criminal and
28 civil charges if any of my property is taken
9148030 -6-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR EXTORTION CONVERSION ETC
changed the locks on the restaurant doors white Orozco and her
employees and movers were still inside and
tried to lock out Orozcos and her employees/movers as they
entered/left the Premises
30 One of the mob of Defendants security personnel individual identified
himself as Spencer Wegley He shouted that Orozco and her helpers were thieves
and that we will hunt them to the ends of the earth He said that Conrad was friends
with the Mayor of Elk Grove and the Chief of Police of Elk Grove that they are involved
now and that they will have you arrested
10 31 short time later different group of Elk Grove police officers arrived
11 These officers refused to listen to Orozco They ordered Orozco and her crew to unload
12 everything from the truck and leave it Orozco was prevented from taking numerous
13 items of personal property including restaurant equipment ovens buffet tables
14 cleaning supplies food items in storage etc friend was not allowed to retrieve his
15 phone Orozco was not even allowed to retrieve her eyeglasses
16 32 Conrad wrote to Qrozco counsel later on March 20 at 1052 am17 You should know that have great relationship with the mayor of
Elk Grove as well as Elk Groves Chief of Police They are both
18 aware of this matter now and will be pursuing full criminal
charges against your clients
19If your clients return the items that they stole today Ive informed
the police that will consider dropping the charges against them20 Otherwise your clients can expect to receive jail time for theft in
addition to ultimately having to return the items they stole from us21
or we will seek restitution for such
2233 Later on March 20 at 113 p.m Conrad wrote
23 look forward to your response to this email and sincerely hope that
your firm will correct this matter by having your clients return the24
personal property that they stole from me Otherwise will have nochoice but to press criminal charges against them and to seek
25 recourse in civil court
2634 On March 25 Orozcos counsel wrote to Defendants to demand access to
27the Premises to finish moving her belongings out of the Premises and to recover
28
9148030 -8- ________________________COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR EXTORTION CONVERSION ETC
27 On March 20 Orozco and her movers were vacating the Premises
Suddenly large group of security guards showed up claiming to work for Defendants
They tried to block one of the moving trucks with their security vehicles and chased the
movers down the block Orozco is informed and believes that Defendants called the
police and falsely reported that theft was in progress
28 Multiple police cars arrived Officers detained the driver of the moving
truck and placed him in police car Officers questioned Orozco and others and
reviewed proof that Orozco had purchased the restaurant fixtures and equipment and
properly concluded that the issue was civil lease dispute not criminal matter that
10 called for any action by police The officers stated that they would not prevent Orozco
11 from removing her belongings and Orozco and her crew continued to do so
12 29 Evidently unhappy with the conclusion of the first set of police officers
13 Defendants sent numerous other private security guards to create an intimidating
14 bullying mob Defendants henchmen
15 surrounded and invaded Vallarta Restaurant
16 refused to leave the Premises despite numerous requests
17 yelled confronted physically intimidated threatened surrounded
18 Orozco and her employees
19 acted as if they were armed with weapons e.g guns
20 blocked the path of Orozco and her employeeslmovers
21 tried to blockade Orozcos moving truck with the security vehicle
22 chased Orozcos moving truck on foot and tried to open the door and
23 board it while moving
24 threatened to arrest Orozco and others pretending that they were
25 legitimate law enforcement although some hid their faces when
26 anyone tried to photograph them
27 grabbed large stove and wheeled it away until stopped by police
28 demanded that Orozco and her helpers leave immediately
9148030 -7-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR EXTORTION CONVERSION ETC
property that had been wrongfully takenlconverted by Defendants The letter further
demanded that none of Orozcos personal property be disposed of Attached hereto as
Exhibit is copy of Orozcos counsels March 25 letter
35 On March 26 Conrad made further extortionate statements and again
touted his claimed political influence by mentioning my conversation with the City of Elk
Groves Chief of Police Robert Lehner on Tuesday and twice mentioning an ongoing
police investigation Once again Conrad said he would not press charges if Orozco
returned the few items she was able to remove
36 Defendants have failed and refused to provide access to the Premises
10 after March 20 or to return any of the items Orozco was forced to leave behind
11 including many items that Defendants have never claimed ownership of Defendants
12 appear to have permitted the subsequent tenant to use Orozcos restaurant furnishing
13 and equipment Worse still Defendants have thrown some of Orozcos personal
14 property into the garbage despite Orozcos March 26 request forcing her to dig in the
15 garbage to retrieve some of her personal property
16 37 Orozco was so emotionally traumatized stressed and physically taxed by
17 Defendants conduct that she was admitted to the hospital with chest pains similar to
18 heart attack She was finally discharged on March 25 but is still receiving treatment
19 She has suffered severe emotional distress and related physical suffering
20 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
21 Extortion Against All Defendants
22 38 Orozco realleges and incorporates by reference 37 above
23 39 Defendants by and through Ethan Conrad committed extortion as
24 prohibited by California Penal Code 518 As described above Defendants and their
25 agents used force and threats in an effort to compel Orozco .to give up her property and
26 threatened criminal prosecution on multiple occasions unless Orozco complied with
27 Defendants demand to pay rent and/or comply with contract to which Orozco was not
28 party and/or which was patently unenforceable
9148030 -9-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR EXTORTION CONVERSION ETC
40 Defendants also committed extortion by threatening letter as prohibited
by California Penal Code 523 Defendants by and through Ethan Conrad wrote
multiple letters to Orozcos counsel in which he accused Orozco of crime and
threatened criminal prosecution unless Orozco did not comply with demands about
civil matter
41 Defendants intended that their threats and extortionate letters would obtain
money and property from Orozco Indeed they expressly conditioned criminal
prosecution unless Orozco complied with Defendants demands and also stated that
they would not have charges brought against Orozco if she complied
10 42 Punitive damages should be assessed against Defendants in an amount
11 not less than $10000000 Such punitive damages should be sufficient to punish and
12 make an example of Defendants and should be based on his financial net worth which
13 stands in marked contrast to Orozco In connection with the computation of punitive
14 damages and as evidence of Defendants pattern and practice of abusive and/or
15 fraudulent conduct the trier of fact will be asked to consider the following facts alleged
16 on information and belief
17 Conrad repeatedly boasts of real estate empire including such his
18 March 20 statement my company is the fasting growing
19 commercial real estate landlord in the Greater Sacramento Area We
20 own approximately 4.4 million square feet of commercial space in over
21 150 buildings with over 650 tenants
22 Conrad boasted during an interview for an October 13 2013 article in
23 the Sacramento Business Journal that he regularly drives 2013
24 BMW M6 sticker price $100000 or more he also is on his fourth
25 Ferrari
26 Conrad has been party to over 60 lawsuits in he last 10 years in
27 Sacramento County alone including multiple lawsuits against him for
28 fraud
9148030 __________________ -10- _________________COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR EXTORTION CONVERSION ETC
Conrad was sued in 2010 for securities fraud resulting in alleged
losses of over $1500000 Miyagi Conrad eta Sacramento
Superior Case No 34-2010-00094291
Conrad was sued in 2010 for running Ponzi scheme in which the
plaintiffs were allegedly defrauded out of over $8200000 Urata
Conrad et Sacramento Superior Case No 34-201 0-00073753
Conrad was sued by group of defrauded investors for allegedly
breaching settlement agreement of the first lawsuit by taking
numerous secret commissions and prohibited payments SFC
10 Leasing et at Conrad et Sacramento Superior Case No 34-
11 2014-000159680.
12 Conrad was sued for conversion and fraud in 2015 for allegedly bilking
13 prospective tenants out of non-refundable security deposits Pate/v
14 Conrad Sacramento Superior Case No 34-2015-00175575
15 SECOND CAUSEOFACTION
16 Conversion Against All Defendants
17 43 Orozco realleges and incorporates by reference IT -42 above
18 44 Orozco is and at all times relevant herein was the owner of and entitled to
19 immediate possession of the furniture trade fixtures1 equipment and personal property
20 at the Premises including but is not limited to the following items
21 Two convection ovens
22 Burner range
23 Dishwasher
24 Griddle
25 Freezer
26 Larger server buffet table
27 Salad bar
28 Kitchen and serving utensils including pots and pans
9148030 -11-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR EXTORTION CONVERSION ETC
Foodstuffs
Cleaning and other supplies
Telephones
Desk and filing cabinets and
Ms Orozcos eyeglasses
45 Defendants wrongfully interfered with Orozcos ownership possessory and
other interests in the above-described property by seizing the property and failing to
return it despite demand therefor or allow Orozco to retrieve it Defendants conduct
was intentional or at minimum done with reckless disregard for the rights and
10 physicalwell-being of others
11 46 Even if it were determined that Defendants originally took possession of
12 under mistaken claim of ownership Defendants improperly retained it after Orozcos
13 demand for return of the property
14 47 The individuals who engaged in the conduct alleged above including
15 entering the Premises to confiscate property acted or purported to act within the scope
16 of their employment Some of the individuals wore shirts that said Ethan Conrad
17 48 As result of Defendants acts of conversion Orozco has been damaged
18 in the sum or sums to be proven at trial but not less than $100000 Alternatively
19 Orozco is entitled to damages and possession of the converted property and will seek
20 elect her remedies at trial Orozco is further entitled to compensation for the time and
21 money expended pursuit of the property
22 49 In doing the acts herein alleged Defendants acted with oppression fraud
23 malice and in conscious disregard of the rights of Orozco and Orozco is therefore
24 entitled to punitive damages according to proof at trial but not less than $10000000
25 /1
26
27
28
9148030 -12-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR EXTORTION CONVERSION ETC
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Against All Defendants
50 Orozco realleges and incorporates by reference fff 1-49 above
51 Defendants conduct was outrageous and abusive in its nature and
designed to result in Orozcos distress
52 The conduct was intentional and/or done with reckless disregard of the
potential to cause injury to Orozco
53 The conduct was purposefully directed at Orozco
54 Orozco has suffered severe physical and emotional distress and mental
10 anguish as result of Defendants conduct in an amount to be proven at trial Among
11 other things Orozco was so distressed by the harassment physical and verbal
12 intimidation threats false accusations and theft of her property that she was admitted
13 to the hospital for several days
14 55 As result of Defendants conduct Orozco has been damaged in the sum
15 or sums to be proven at trial but not less than $100000
16 56 In doing the acts herein alleged Defendants acted with oppression fraud
17 malice and in conscious disregard of the rights of Orozco and Orozco is therefore
18 entitled to punitive damages according to proof at trial but not less than $10000000
19 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
20 Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress Against All Defendants
21 57 Orozco realleges and incorporates by reference J1 49 above
22 58 Defendants conduct as alleged above was at least negligent
23 59 Defendants conduct was substantial factor if not the sole factor in
24 causing severe emotional distress and mental anguish to Orozco Among other things
25 Orozco was so distressed by the harassment physical and verbal intimidation threats
26 false accusations and theft of her property that she was admitted to the hospital for
27 several days Defendants conduct caused damages in an amount to be proven at trial
28 but not less than $100000
9148030 -13-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR EXTORTION CONVERSION ETC
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Breach of Contract Against All Defendants
60 Orozco realleges and incorporates by reference 1111 56 above
61 Orozco and the prior owner of the Premises entered into an oral month-to-
month lease of the Fremises the Agreement That Agreement also provided that
Orozco would be entitled to the return of her security deposit at the end of the lease
term if not applied to monies owed
62 When Defendants purchased the Premises in 2014 Defendants took it
subject to the Agreement between Orozco and the prior owners both of which had
10 affirmed and honored the Agreement
11 63 Orozco has performed all of the material provisions of the Agreement
12 except as were excused by Defendants breach
13 64 In or about March 2015 Defendants breached the Agreement by among
14 other things overcharging Orozco for rent improperly charging 10% late fees on
15 monthly rent physically excluding Orozco from the Premises before the end of the lease
16 term on March 31 2015 by wrongfully confiscating Orozcos security deposit and by
17 converting Orozcos furniture fixtures equipment and personal belongings
18 65 Orozco has suffered damages as result of Defendants breach of the
19 Agreement in an amount to be proven at trial but not less than $100000
20 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
21 Trespass to Real Property Against All Defendants
22 66 Orozco realleges and incorporates by reference 56 above
23 67 Beginning on March 20 Defendants forcibly entered Orozcos Premises
24 without consent and refused to leave and forcibly excluded and locked Orozco out of
25 the Premises Such acts were in violation of Orozcos right under the law and the
26 Agreement to quiet possession/enjoyment and the exclusive use of the Premises
27 68 As proximate result of Defendants trespass upon Orozcos Premises
28 the Premises have been wrongfully occupied and Orozcos property has been
9148030 -14-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR EXTORTION CON VERSION1 ETC
confiscated and damaged Defendants have been repeatedly advised that they had no
right to exclude Orozco or take her personal property
69 As result of Defendants trespass Orozco has been damaged in the sum
to be proven at trial but not less than $100000 trebled under Code of Civ Proc 735
70 In doing the acts herein alleged Defendants acted with oppression fraud
malice and in conscious or reckless disregard of the rights of Orozco and Orozco is
therefore entitled to punitive damages according to proof at the time of trial1 in an
amount not less than $10000000
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
10 Trespass to Chattel/Personal Property Against All Defendants
11 71 Orozco realleges and incorporates by reference 1-56 and 67-70 above
12 72 Defendants owned possessed and had right to possess the restaurant
13 furniture fixtures equipment and personal property described above
14 73 Defendants intentionally interfered with Orozcos use and possession of
15 these items in the manner described above but including by changing the locks to lock
16 Orozco out of the Premises by threatening bullying intimidating Orozco by physically
17 preventing Orozco from removing her property by providing false reports to police
18 officers so that they would assist in excluding Orozco from the Premises and lose the
19 use/possession of her property and by wrongfully retaining and refusing to allow access
20 to Orozcos property
21 74 Orozco did not consent to Defendants conduct described above
22 75 Orozco has been damaged by the continued substantial and complete
23 loss of her property damage to some of that property as well as the apparent use of
24 certain of such property by the new tenant operating at the Premises
25 76 As result of Defendants acts of trespass Orozco has been damaged in
26 the sum or sums to be proven at trial but not less than $100000
27 77 Defendants conduct was substantial factor if not the exclusive factor in
28 causing the aforementioned harm to Orozco
9148030 -15-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR EXTORTION CONVERSION ETC
78 In doing the acts herein alleged Defendants acted with oppression fraud
malice and in conscious or reckless disregard of the rights of Orozco and Orozco is
therefore entitled to punitive damages according to proof at the time of trial in an
amount not less than $10000000
EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Unfair Business Practices Bus Prof Code 17200 et seq
Against All Defendants
79 Orozco realleges and incorporates by reference 1-56 and 67-78 above
80 California Business Professions Code 17200 et seq defines unfair
10 competition to include any unlawful unfair or fraudulent business act or practice
11 81 As alleged above Defendants have engaged in fraudulent deceptive
12 unfair and unlawful practices with respect to Orozco as proscribed by California
13 Business Professions Code 17200 et seq
14 82 Defendants conduct is part of pattern and practice of unfair unlawful or
15 fraudulent conduct by Defendants against Orozco and others Such conduct includes
16 trespass and conversion as to other tenants defrauding investors and fraud some of
17 which instances were alleged in 41 above
18 83 As result of Defendants unfair and unlawful business practices Orozco
19 has suffered monetary loss in an amount to be established at trial
20 84 Orozco is entitled to restitution of any monies Defendants have received
21 as result of their unlawful unfair and/or fraudulent acts or practices In addition
22 Defendants should disgorge any profits they have received as result of their unlawful
23 unfair and/or fraudulent acts or practices Such disgorgement should include the rental
24 value of Orozcos property being used by Defendants current tenant and/or the
25 increased rent that Orozco has charged by leasing fully equipped restaurant
26 85 Orozco further seeks an injunction against Defendants from engaging in
27 the fraudulent deceptive unfair and unlawful practices described above
28 //
9148030 -16-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR EXTORTION CONVERSION ETC
NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION
injunctive ReliefAgainst All Defendants
86 Orozco realleges and incorporates by reference 11 1-56 and 67-85 above
87 Defendants wrongful conduct as described herein unless and until
enjoined by order.of the Court will cause great and irreparable injury to Orozco and her
property causing additional emotional distress mental anguish and loss of use and
quiet enjoyment of her property
88 Orozco has no adequate remedy at law for the injuries that she will
continue to suffer if such actions are not enjoined by the Court
10 PRAYER
11 WHEREFORE Orozco demands judgment against Defendants as follows
12 For damages according to proof but not less than $100000
13 For treble damages pursuant to Code of Civ Proc 735
14Alternatively for damages and repossession of the converted property
15 upon election of remedies at trial by Orozco
16 For compensation for the time and money expended in pursuit of the
17 property
18 For restitution and disgorgement of sums wrongfully obtained
19 For the imposition of constructive trust on the converted goods and their
20 fruits and tracing with respect to the converted goods
21 For recovery of unjust enrichment
22 For an injunction
23 For costs and attorneys fees
24 10 For prejudgment interest at rate of 10% per annum
25 11 For punitive and exemplary damages in an amount sufficient to punish and
26 make an example of Defendants but not less than $10000000 and
27
28
9148030 -17-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR EXTORTION CONVERSION ETC
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
12 For such other and further relief as this Court deems just proper and
equitable
Dated May 2015
By
Plaintiff Gloria
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR EXTORTION CONVERSION ETC
-j
EXHIBIT
NOSSAMAN34th Floor
San Francisco CA 94111
1415.398.3600
415 398.2438
Brendan Macaulay
VIA EMAIL AND MAIL 04.15.438.7204
brracaulay@ floss Oman corn
ReferTo File 000010-0493
March 25 2015
Ethan Conrad
1300 National Drive Suite 100
Sacramento CA 95834
Re Demand for Return of Converted Property at Vallarta Restaurant
Mr Conrad
Nossaman LLP represents Gloria Orozco who owned and operated Vallarta Restaurant
in property you own at 2513 Riparian Drive Elk Grove CA the Premises The purpose of
this letter is to address incredibly improper conduct by you and your agents and to demand
immediate access to the Premises so that Ms Orozco can retrieve her personal property
Ms Orozco operated restaurant at the Premises for years and always paid the
agreed-upon rent both before And after you bought the Premises in around September 2014In February 2015 you served an eviction notice upon Ms Orozco so you could rent the
Premises to someone else at higher rent We confirmed multiple times that Ms Orozco would
vacate by March31 as you demanded
On Friday March 20 while she was vacating the Premises group of your security
guards attempted to physically stop Ms Orozco and her movers Your agents blocked the
movers with their car Your agents screamed at Ms Orozco and her helpers called the police
and made false reports of theft Multiple squad cars of policemen initially detained one of MsOrozcos movers putting him in squad car before correctly concluding that no theft was
occurring Police officers stated thatthis was civil matter and that no one should be arrested
nor should The move be stopped
Not content with the initial police officers correct conclusions you summoned multiple
other security guards who surrounded the facility blocked exits and started changing the locks
while Ms Orozco and her movers and relatives were still inside They demanded that MsOrozco and others immediately vacate the Premises or the security guards would personally
arrest everyone falsely portraying themselves as authorities with the power of arrest Somecovered their faces or otherwise tried to avoid being photographed Your agent Spencer
Wagley claimed that you were personAl friends with the Elk Grove Chief of Police and the
Mayor of Elk Grove and that they would have everyone arrested You touted such political
connections on March 19 implying that these civic leaders would do your bidding Mr Wegleystated these people are thieves and threatened we will hunt them to the ends of the earth
9030769 vi
ness man cc In
Ethan Conrad
March 25 2015
Page
For the second time on Friday you and/or your agents falsely reported to law
enforcement that criminal conduct was underway1 causing second set of police officers to
arrive Now faced with volatile situation caused by you and your numerous agents police
officers forced Ms Orozco and her movers to unload truckload of her personal property and
ejected them from the Premises Ms Orozco has therefore been unable.to complete her move
or leave the Premises in the condition she planned to leave it She was even forced to leave
items that even you would agree she can take such as restaufant suppiles
The conduct of you and your agents is improper and illegal on too many levels to
describe here Your sole basis for claiming Ms Orozcos property is single page document
from September 2014 that you obtained by fraud lacked any consideration wasunconscionable in its terms and the manner obtained and is facially invalid and illegal
assignment of an expired lease that was already rejected and discharged in the bankruptcy of
the original tenant We told you weeks ago that it was unenforceable
Nevertheless you claim that the September2014 assignment entitles you to
misappropriate Ms Orozcos life savings in the form of her restaurant equipment and
furnishings and security deposit You have forcibly converted her property confiscated
security deposit trespassed on the Premises by force threats intimidation and improper color
of authority breached the parties agreement prevented Ms Orozco from performing
thereunder engaged in unfair debt collection practices harassing Ms Orozco her employeesher relatives and even their children made defamatory statements committed public and
private nuisance and intentionally or negligently inflicted emotional distress which has resulted
in Ms Orozco being hospitalized
Demand is hereby made that within 48 hours of this letter you return all property
converted by your agents and provide access to the Premises to Ms Orozco and her movers to
complete the moving process We further demand that you immediately return Ms Orozcos
security deposit We further demand that no personal property of any kind left at the Property
be disposed of
We reserve the rights of Ms Orozco and those of her employees agents and family
members to pursue any and all legal remedies against you personally your company and your
agents for the conduct described above including but not limited to compensatory damagespunitive damages treble damages under Code of Civ Proc 735 all damages available under
Civil Code 3281 3287 3294 3300 333.3 3334 3336 and 3343 and attorneys fees
Sincerely
dan Macaulayossaman LLP
9033769.v1