26 /1/ 28 /1/ Donny E. Brand (SBN ) BRAND LAW FIRM E. 4th St., Suite C-473

Transcription

1 Donny E. Brand (SBN 2496) BRAND LAW FIRM 2 22 E. 4th St., Suite C-47 Santa Ana, CA 9270 Telephone (74) Facsimile (74) donny@brandlawfirm.net 6 Atrneys for Plaintiffs RON S. BRAND and ILAN BRAND 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 COUNTY OF ORANGE - CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER 0 RON S. BRAND and ILAN BRAND, Case No.: Plaintiffs, [Unlimited Jurisdiction] vs. Assigned the Honorable David T. 4 DR. ADAM DORIN, an individual; and McEachen, Dept. C-2 DOES THREE through TEN, inclusive, FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES BASED ON: Defendants. 6 () DEFAMATION (LIBEL); (2) DEFAMATION (LIBEL); 7 () INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS; AND 8 (4) NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF 9 20 EMOTIONAL DISTRESS JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 2 NOW COME plaintiffs RON S. BRAND (hereinafter refelted as Ron ) and ILAN 22 BRAND (hereinafter referred as han ) (collectively hereinafter referred as Plaintiffs ), 2 and for their First Amended Complaint for Damages against defendant Dr. Adam Dorm, an 24 individual (hereinafter referred as Dr. Dorm ) and DOES THREE through TEN 2 (collectively hereinafter referred as the Doe Defendants ), hereby allege as follows: 26 // 27 /// 28 //

2 Rising PARTY ALLEGATIONS 2. Plaintiff Ron is a resident of the State of California who resides in Irvine, California. Ron is an atrney licensed practice law before all courts of the State of 4 California and the State of Illinois. Ron has never been disciplined by the State Bar of California nor the Illinois State Bar, and has achieved an AV rating by Martindale-Hubbell 6 (meaning that Ron meets very high criteria for general ethical standards). Ron has also been 7 selected for inclusion in the 20 Southern California Super Lawyers Stars Plaintiff han is a resident of the State of California who resides in Irvine, 9 California. han is an Enrolled Agent who is engaged in the practice of tax preparation, 0 consultation and representation before the United States Internal Revenue Service. As an Enrolled Agent, han is governed by, and complies with, the ethical standards promulgated by 2 the United States Treasury Department in Circular 20. Ilan is also the Managing Member of Herbert Samuel Holdings, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ( HSH ). HSH is in the 4 business of real estate investments.. Defendant Dr. Dorm is a resident of the State of California who, on information 6 and belief, currently resides in Dana Point, California, but is in the process of moving the 7 San Diego area. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that in or about July Dr. Dorm resided at The Village at Irvine Spectrum Center in Irvine, California. Dr. 9 Dorm is an anesthesiologist licensed by the Medical Board of California. Dr. Dorm is an 20 anesthesiologist at Sharp Grossmont Hospital located in La Mesa, California, which is owned 2 and operated by Sharp Healthcare ( Sharp ). Dr. Dorm maintains privileges with Sharp Sharp is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of 2 California. Sharp owns and operates hospitals, affiliated medical groups, urgent care centers, 24 and a health plan in the County of San Diego. Sharp also owns and operates a private internet 2 network for use by its employees, agents, representatives and physicians. Plaintiffs are 26 informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Dr. Dorm has access, and uses, Sharp s private 27 internet network send and receive commi.mications through his personal 28 accounts. 2

3 . Plaintiffs do not know the true names and capacities of the Doe Defendants and 2 therefore sue them by their fictitious names. Plaintiffs are infonned and believe, and thereon allege, that each of the Doe Defendants is or will be, in some manner, responsible for the injury 4 and damages suffered by Plaintiffs as alleged in this First Amended Complaint for Damages. 6. Plaintiffs are infonned and believe, and thereon allege, that the Doe Defendants 6 are jointly, or jointly and severally, liable Plaintiffs for the injury and damages suffered by 7 Plaintiffs as alleged in this First Amended Complaint for Damages Plaintiffs are currently investigating the true identity of the Doe Defendants. 9 Plaintiffs will amend this First Amended Complaint for Damages reflect the true identities of 0 the Doe Defendants once they are discovered. 8. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that the Doe Defendants 2 had an agreement among themselves commit the wrongful acts alleged in this First Amended Complaint for Damages, that they did in fact commit the wrongful acts alleged in this First 4 Amended Complaint for Damages, and that such wrongful acts injured and damaged Plaintiffs as alleged in this First Amended Complaint for Damages. 6 JURISDICTION AND VENUE 7 9. Jurisdiction is proper pursuant Code of Civil Procedure sections 2., and 428.0(a). Venue is proper in this Court pursuant Code of Civil Procedure section 9 9(a). 20 GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 2 0. At all relevaiit times referenced herein, Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and 22 thereon allege, that Dr. Dorm has been involved in a romantic relationship with Ron s ex-wife, 2 Leilah Brand ( Leilah ). Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Dr. 24 Dorm has at various times resided with Leilah at a house located at 8 Spoonbill in Irvine, 2 California (which is the former marital home currently owned by both Ron and Leilah). 26. Ron and Leilah are currently involved in contentious divorce proceedings 27 pending before the Superior Court of California, County of Orange. 28 //

4 2. On July 9, 202 at :6 p.m., Dr. Don using the private internet network 2 owned and operated by Sharp, sent an under the name of Jack Lew regarding Ron his employer at the time, Fisher & Phillips LLP (hereinafter referred as the July 9 ). 4 Dr. Dorm used the fictitious name Jack Lew conceal his true identity, as part of his unlawful campaign impugn and disparage Ron and somehow create an unfair advantage 6 Leilah in the divorce proceedings. 7. Through the July 9 , Dr. Dorm wrote that on July 6, 202, in front of the 8 house currently occupied by Leilah, Ron committed various wrongful and/or criminal acts. 9 Also through the July 9 , Dr. Dorm wrote various statements about Ron, including but not 0 limited, that Ron has a police record and has had several altercations with the law. 4. The statements contained in the July 9 are emphatically false. 2. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that on July 7, 202 at 7:2 p.m., Dr. Dorm sent an under the name of Kathryn Kate Saftine regarding 4 Plaintiffs the State Bar of California and Ron s employer at the time, Fisher & Phillips LLP (hereinafter referred as the July 7 ). Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and 6 thereon allege, that Dr. Dorm prepared and sent the July 7 from a computer located at 7 the Business Center of The Delrey Apartment Homes located at The Village at Irvine Spectrum 8 Center, in Irvine, California. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Dr. 9 Dorm used the fictitious name Kathryn Kate Saftine conceal his true identity, as part of 20 his unlawful campaign impugn and disparage Plaintiffs and somehow create an unfair 2 advantage Leilah in the divorce proceedings Through the July 7 , Dr. Dorm wrote various statements about Plaintiffs, 2 including, but not limited, that Ron has used his legal expertise bend the definition of 24 the law his own fmancial benefit, that Ron unethically withheld payment a client referred 2 him by an atrney named Elliott Wiczer out of Chicago, Illinois (who happens be 26 Leilah s brother-in-law), and that Ilan created HSH run bought companies in the ground 27 and then turn around and buy them up at bargain prices with a sister company owned by Ilan 28 (thereby clearly implying that Ilan has engaged in unethical and/or unlawful conduct). 4 FIRST AIMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

5 7. The statements contained in the July 7 are emphatically false The July 9 and the July 7 are collectively hereinafter referred as the False s. 4 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (Defamation Libel) 6 (By Ron against Dr. Dorm) 7 9. Ron re-alleges and incorporates by reference Paragraphs I through 8 herein Dr. Dorm intentionally disseminated the July In disseminating the July 9 , Dr. Dorm knew the claims contained therein 0 be false, or acted with reckless disregard for the truth or falsity thereof 22. The July 9 tends directly injure Ron in respect his profession, trade 2 or business, either by imputing him general disqualifications in those respects which his profession, trade or business requires, or by imputing something with reference his 4 professional practice that has a natural tendency lessen his profits, or which, by natural consequences, causes actual damages Ron The July 9 exposes Ron hatred, contempt, ridicule or obloquy, or cause 7 him be shunned or avoided, or have a tendency injure him in his occupation The statements contained in the July 9 are defamary per Se, thereby 9 eliminating the need for Ron prove special damages. Nevertheless, by engaging in the 20 malicious libel against Ron, Dr. Dorm has directly and proximately impugned and disparaged 2 Ron s reputation such that Ron has been damaged in an amount currently unknown, but in an 22 amount that will be proved at the time of trial The aforementioned acts of Dr. Dorm were willful, oppressive, despicable and 24 in conscious disregard of the rights of Ron, and the resulting harm Ron. Ron is therefore 2 entitled punitive damages in an amount according proof at the time of trial. 26 // 27 // 28 II!

6 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 2 (Defamation Libel) (By Plaintiffs against Dr. Dorm) Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference Paragraphs 27. Dr. Dorm intentionally disseminated the July 7 . through 8 herein In disseminating the July 7 , Dr. Dorm knew the claims contained therein 7 be false, or acted with reckless disregard for the truth or falsity thereof The July 7 tends directly injure Plaintiffs in respect their 9 profession, trade or business, either by imputing them general disqualifications in those 0 respects which their profession, trade or business requires, or by imputing something with reference their professional practice that has a natural tendency lessen their profits, or 2 which, by natural consequences, causes actual damages Plaintiffs. 0. The July 7 exposes Plaintiffs hatred, contempt, ridicule or obloquy, or 4 causes them be shunned or avoided, or have a tendency injure them in their occupation.. The statements contained in the July 7 are defamary per Se, thereby 6 eliminating the need for Plaintiffs prove special damages. Nevertheless, by engaging in the 7 malicious libel against Plaintiffs, Dr. Dorm has directly and proximately impugned and 8 disparaged Plaintiffs reputation such that Plaintiffs have been damaged in an amount currently 9 unknown, but in an amount that will be proved at the time of trial The aforementioned acts of Dr. Dorm were willful, oppressive, despicable and 2 in conscious disregard of the rights of Plaintiffs, and the resulting harm Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs 22 are therefore entitled punitive damages in an amount according proof at the time of trial. 2 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 24 (Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress) 2 (By Plaintiffs against Dr. Dorm) 26. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference Paragraphs through 2 herein. 27 // 28 // 6

7 4. The aforementioned acts of Dr. Dorm were extreme and outrageous, in that by 2 disseminating the False s against Plaintiffs, Dr. Dorm went beyond all possible bounds of decency, and such acts are atrocious and utterly inlerable in a civilized society. 4. Dr. Dorm intended cause, or acted with reckless disregard for the probability of causing, emotional distress on Plaintiffs As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned acts of Plaintiffs have suffered severe emotional distress, and have been damaged an amount according proof at the time of trial. as a Dr. Dorm, result thereof, in 9 7. The aforementioned acts of Dr. Dorm were willful, oppressive, despicable and in conscious disregard of the rights of Plaintiffs, and the resulting harm Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs are therefore entitled punitive damages in an amount according proof at the time of trial. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress) (By Plaintiffs against Dr. Dorm) Plaintiffs a Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference Paragraphs Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that duty take all reasonable steps not through 2 Dr. Dorm herein. owed impugn nor disparage Plaintiffs reputation Dr. Dorm breached his duty Plaintiffs by disseminating the False s As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned acts of Plaintiffs have suffered serious emotional distress, and have been damaged in an amount according proof at the time of trial. as a Dr. Dorm, result thereof, 22 PRAYER FOR RELIEF 2 24 follows: WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment in their favor and against Dr. Dorm as 2. General, special and consequential damages in excess of $2,000.00, with the 26 tal amount be proven at the time of trial; Punitive damages; 28. Costs of suit incurred herein; 7

8 4. Interest as permitted by law; 2. Atrney s fees as permitted by law; and 6. Alternative and additional relief as the Court deems just and proper. 4 DATED: December, 202 BRAND LAW FIRM 6 By: 7 8 RON and ILAN BRAND 9 0 ii

9 . PROOF ATTORNEY OR PARTY WTI-rOUT ATTORNEY (Name, Slate Bar number, and address): Brand (SBN 2496) BRAND LAW FIRM Donny 22 E E. 4th Santa Ana, St Ste CA C TELEPHONE NO.: ADDRESS (Opbonaf).doflfly@brafldlawfirm.net ATTORNEY FOR (Name):PlaifltiffS RON S. and SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF Orange STREET ADDRESS: 700 MAILING ADDRESS:700 BRAND Civic Center Drive Civic Center Drive CITYANDZIPCODE:Saflta Ana, CA 9270 BRANCH NAME:Cefltral PETITIONERIPLAINTIFF:RON S. Justice Center ri.x NO (Optic,nal): ILAN BRAND BRAND and ILAN BRAND RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT: SHARP HEALTHCARE, a DR. an ADAM DORIN, California Corporation; individual; et al. OF SERVICE BY FIRST-CLASS MAIL CIVIL CASE NUMBER: FOR COURT USE ONLY POS-00 (Do not use this Proof of Service show service of a Summons and Complaint.). I am over 8 years of age and not a party this action. I am a resident of or employed in the county where the mailing ok place. 2. My residence or business address is: 22 E 4th St Ste C-47, Santa Ana, CA On (date): 2/0/202 I mailed from (city and state): the following documents (specify): Santa Ana, CA BASED DEFAMATION (LIBEL); () NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF ON: () DEFAMATION (LIBEL); (2) (4) INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS; AND EMOTIONAL DISTRESS EZJ The documents are listed in the Attachment Proof of Service by First-Class Mail Civil (Documents Served) (form POS-00(D)). 4. I served the documents by enclosing them in an envelope and (check one): a. depositing the sealed envelope with the United States Postal Service with the postage fully prepaid. b. LZJ placing the envelope for collection and mailing following our ordinary business practices. I am readily familiar with this business s practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing. On the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business with the United States Postal Service in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid.. The envelope was addressed and mailed as follows: a. Name of person served: Gary b. Address of person served: 40 W A St Ste 78 San Diego, CA 920 Lee Eastman The name and address of each person whom I mailed the documents is listed in the Attachment Proof of Service by First-Class Mail Civil (Persons Served) (POS-00(P)). I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Date: 2//202 Donny E. Rrand (TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF PERSON COMPLETING THIS FORM) (SIGNARSON COMPLETING THIS FORM) FOrmApOV6 foropbonal Use PROOF OF SERVICE BY FIRST-CLASS MAIL CIVIL Code Of Civil Procedure, 0, 08 POS-00 lnew January, 200) (Proof of Service)