~ Ronald J. Tocchini CSBN Lilia G. Alcaraz CSBN 0 L Street Suite 0 Sacramento, California - USA Telephone: ( ) - Facsimile: ()- Attorneys for MARIA CHAVEZ Supertor Court Of Califs? ila, Sacramento Da,rmi& Jcm«a, *-x«aitiv«fw OT eluna By, Si puty Casts Minsib«r: s.-lkie-uool tt-cu-b~ -QDS Department Assignments Case Management Law and Motion Minors Compromise CALIFORNIA STATE SUPERIOR COURT MARIA CHAVEZ; V. IN AND FOR SACRAMENTO COUNTY Plaintiffs), DAVID L. MCPHERSON; MCPHERSON & ASSOCIATES, LLC; JORGE REY; and DOES -, inclusive; Defendant(s). NO. VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES, RESTITUTION, AND EQUITABLE RELIEF (CAL. Bus. & PROF.CODE.; ClV. CODE,, 0,, 0-0,, and 00) BY FAX Plaintiff MARIA CHAVEZ ("CHAVEZ" or "Plaintiff"), by and through her undersigned attorneys of record, alleges the following: GENERAL ALLEGATIONS. Plaintiff is a natural person who lives in Sacramento County, California. Courthouse News Service. Defendants DAVID L. MCPHERSON ("MCPHERSON") and JORGE REY ("REY") are natural people who live in Sacramento County, California.. MCPHERSON & ASSOCIATES, LLC ("MCPHERSON LLC") is a company doing business in Sacramento County, California.. Plaintiff is informed and believes (and on that basis alleges) that, at all times mentioned by this Complaint, each Defendant was the agent, servant, partner, joint venturer, employee or alter ego of the remaining Defendants, and in doing the things alleged by this Complaint. was acting within the course and scope of such agency, service, partnership, employment --
or joint venture with the permission, consent, and knowledge of the remaining Defendants or as the alter ego of the remaining Defendants.. Plaintiff does not know the true names and capacities of the defendants sued as Does to, inclusive, and therefore sues these defendants by the use of fictitious names. Plaintiff will amend this Complaint to allege these defendants' true names and capacities when ascertained. Plaintiff is informed and believes (and on that basis alleges) that each of the fictitiously-named Defendants is responsible in some manner for the occurrences alleged by this Complaint, and that Plaintiffs damages as alleged were proximately caused by Defendants' conduct.. Plaintiff is informed and believes (and on that basis alleges) that the transactions described below occurred in Sacramento County, California, and any obligations described by this Complaint were to be performed in Sacramento County. COMMON FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS. Defendants conduct business with the public in Sacramento as immigration consultants and lawyers:. At all times relevant to this dispute, none of the Defendants were licensed to practice law in any jurisdiction.. At all times relevant to this dispute, MCPHERSON LLC and KEY were not authorized to act as immigration consultants under the California Business and Professions Code. See CAL. Bus. & PROF. CODE 0 et seq.. At all times relevant to this dispute, MCPHERSON's status as a California immigration consultant had either lapsed or had been secured through false statements to the Secretary of State.. In October 0, CHAVEZ sought Defendants' assistance with her immigration status in the United States.. In October 0, MCPHERSON told CHAVEZ that he was an attorney through his interpreter KEY.. After reviewing her immigration status in this country, MCPHERSON and REY informed --
Plaintiff that there "would be no problem" with getting her an investor visa and work permit "no later" than three months after she hired them.. Based on these opinions and promises, CHAVEZ signed a written contract ("AGREEMENT") with MCPHERSON LLC to have the company, MCPHERSON, and REY help her with her immigration request.. CHAVEZ delivered the required AGREEMENT payments to MCPHERSON LLC; after three months passed, she began to visit MCPHERSON LLC's offices to inquire about her case progress.. On many such occasions, neither MCPHERSON nor REY would appear for pre-arranged appointments, and MCPHERSON LLC employees would simply ask CHAVEZ for duplicate copies of documents (tax and business records) that she had already provided to them; it became clear to CHAVEZ that MCPHERSON and REY were avoiding their meetings with her.. CHAVEZ soon learned that neither MCPHERSON nor REY were attorneys, and she demanded her money back; Defendants refused to refund her money.. Defendants began to harass CHAVEZ by telephone when she refused to pay them; MCPHERSON LLC agents made multiple unwelcome telephone calls at all hours of the day and night to CHAVEZ'S work and home, discussing payment demands with anyone who answered the telephone. During these telephone calls, MCPHERSON LLC agents told CHAVEZ's friends, family, and employees that Defendants would financially ruin her for not paying her bills.. During many such telephone calls, Defendants threatened CHAVEZ with financial ruin if she did not pay them. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (COUNT I) (Breach of Contract - CIVIL CODE 00). Plaintiff alleges as and for a First Cause of Action (Count I) against MCPHERSON LLC in the following manner:. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates Paragraphs () through () (inclusive) above as -- COMPLAINT
i though fully set forth herein.. MCPHERSON LLC failed to properly perform the AGREEMENT with CHAVEZ by not securing secure the promised visa for CHAVEZ within the time period warranted by its agents.. Plaintiff has otherwise performed all of the AGREEMENTS covenants and conditions.. As a result of this breach, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount within this Court's jurisdiction, and is entitled to recover damages from MCPHERSON LLC in an amount according to proof at trial, plus costs of suit and prejudgment interest at the maximum allowable rate under California State law.. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests judgment against MCPHERSON LLC in the manner set forth below. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION (COUNT II) (Breach of Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing). Plaintiff alleges as and for a Second Cause of Action (Count II) against MCPHERSON LLC in the following manner:. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates Paragraphs () through () (inclusive) above as though fully set forth herein.. MCPHERSON LLC has refused to deal fairly and in good faith with Plaintiff in violation of the AGREEMENT and its agents' other promises other promises to Plaintiff. 0. By reason of MCPHERSON LLC's wrongful acts, Plaintiff has been deprived of the AGREEMENT'S benefits and has been damaged thereby.. Defendants' acts in this regard LLC and its agents were willful, wanton, malicious, and oppressive, justifying the award of exemplary (punitive) damages.. As a result of this breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount within this Court's jurisdiction (as set forth above), and is entitled to recover damages from MCPHERSON LLC in an amount according to proof at trial, plus exemplary damages according to law, attorney fees, costs of suit, and prejudgment interest at the maximum allowable rate under California State law. -- COMPr.ArNT
. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests judgment against Defendants in the manner set forth below. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION (COUNT III) (Consumer Legal Remedies Act - CIVIL CODE 0-0). Plaintiff alleges as and for a Third Cause of Action (Count III) against all Defendants in the following manner:. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates Paragraphs () through () (inclusive) above as though fully set forth herein.. At all times relevant to this Complaint. Defendants conducted business in Sacramento and held themselves out to the general public as being qualified to provide legal advice regarding immigration matters, when they are actually unlicensed to dispense legal advice in this State.. At all times relevant to this dispute, none of the Defendants were licensed to practice law in this State or any other jurisdiction.. At all times relevant to this dispute, MCPHERSON LLC and REY were not authorized to act as immigration consultants under the California Business and Professions Code. See CAL. Bus. & PROF. CODE 0 et seq.. Plaintiff is informed and believes (and on that basis alleges) that, at all times relevant to this dispute, MCPHERSON's status as a California immigration consultant had either lapsed or had been secured through false statements to the Secretary of State. 0. Defendants' activities in this dispute constituted the unlawful provision of legal advice, because the AGREEMENT required them to exercise independent legal skill and judgment, and to provide both tactical and strategic opinions regarding current immigration law rules, regulations, and statutes.. On or about May, 0, Plaintiff notified Defendants, demanding that they cease rendering unlicensed legal advice, and that they pay her money equal to the damages suffered as the result of their incorrect legal advice and work on her behalf.. On or about May, 0, Plaintiff sent the foregoing notification to Defendants by --
certified mail (return receipt requested). See Exhibit "A", attached to this Complaint and incorporated into its terms by this reference (CLRA demand notice).. The law ("CLRA") required Defendants to respond within thirty (0) days of having received the foregoing notice, by either correcting, repairing, replacing, or rectifying the violations) set forth by the notice and demand, or by agreeing to correct, repair, replace, or rectify the violations) within a reasonable time period.. Defendants failed to respond to Plaintiffs notice and demand within the time period contemplated by law.. Defendants' acts in this regard were willful, wanton, malicious, and oppressive, justifying the award of exemplary (punitive) damages.. As a direct and proximate result of these CLRA violations, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount within this Court's jurisdiction (as set forth above), and is entitled to recover damages from Defendants, and from each of them, in an amount according to proof at trial, plus exemplary damages according to law, attorney fees, costs of suit, and prejudgment interest at the maximum allowable rate under California State law; Plaintiff is also entitled to seek and obtain an Order by this Court permanently enjoining the Defendants from continuing their unfair and deceptive trade practices as to her and other members of the general public.. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests judgment against Defendants in the manner set forth below. FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION (COUNT W) (Immigration Consultant Fraud - Bus. & PROF. CODE.). Plaintiff alleges as and for a Fourth Cause of Action (Count IV) against all Defendants in the following manner:. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates Paragraphs () through () (inclusive) above as though fully set forth herein. 0. At all times relevant to this Complaint. Defendants conducted business in Sacramento, California, and held themselves out to Plaintiff as being qualified to provide advice -- rrivfpt ATNTT
regarding immigration matters, when they are actually unlicensed to dispense such advice in this State.. At all times relevant to this dispute, none of the Defendants were licensed to practice law in this State or any other jurisdiction.. At all times relevant to this dispute, MCPHERSON LLC and REY were not authorized to act as immigration consultants under the California Business and Professions Code. See CAL. Bus. & PROF. CODE 0 et seq.. Plaintiff is informed and believes (and on that basis alleges) that, at all times relevant to this dispute, MCPHERSON's status as a California immigration consultant had either lapsed or had been secured through false statements to the Secretary of State.. At all times relevant to this dispute, neither MCPHERSON LLC nor REY were bonded by a recognized surety in the manner required by law. See Bus. & PROF. CODE... The actions that Defendants undertook on Plaintiffs behalf constituted the unlawful provision of legal advice, and none of the Defendants are licensed to dispense legal advice. See BUS. & PROF. CODE.. At all times relevant to this dispute, MCPHERSON was unauthorized to act as an immigration consultant because, among other reasons, he was convicted of a "disqualifying misdemeanor" in the manner contemplated by State law. See Bus. & PROF. CODE... The AGREEMENT failed to meet the statutory requirements for immigration consultant contracts. See Bus. & PROF. CODE.. Defendants failed to keep or maintain the records and disclosures contemplated by California law. See Bus. & PROF. CODE.,, and.. Defendants identified themselves to Plaintiff as attorneys in written documents provided to Plaintiff. See Bus. & PROF. CODE.. 0. Defendants, and each of them, have falsely advertised and continue to falsely advertise their services as those of bonded immigration consultants in this State. See Bus. & PROF. CODE.. rt»x^pt ATMT --
. Defendants made "false and misleading statements" and "guarantee[s] or promise[s}" to Plaintiff that violate California State law. See Bus. & PROF. CODE.. Defendants' acts in this regard were willful, wanton, malicious, and oppressive, justifying the award of exemplary (punitive) damages.. As a direct and proximate result of this immigration fraud, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount within this Court's jurisdiction (as set forth above), and is entitled to recover damages from Defendants, and from each of them, in an amount according to proof at trial, plus exemplary damages according to law, attorney fees, costs of suit, and prejudgment interest at the maximum allowable rate under California State law; Plaintiff is also entitled to seek and obtain an Order by this Court permanently enjoining the Defendants from continuing their unfair and deceptive trade practices as to her and other members of the general public. '. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests judgment against Defendants in the manner set forth below. FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION (COUNT V) (Common-Law Fraud). Plaintiff alleges as and for a Fifth Cause of Action (Count V) against all Defendants in the following manner.. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates Paragraphs () through () (inclusive) above as though fully set forth herein.. MCPHERSON LLC, MCPHERSON and REY warranted to CHAVEZ that they were qualified to assist her and that they could and would secure immigration relief on her behalf.. Defendants intentionally misled Plaintiff, knowing that she would rely on their false promises.. Plaintiff relied on the foregoing promises to her detriment; she has not secured immigration relief, she has since been placed in removal (deportation) proceedings by the federal government, and she has been forced to engage qualified counsel to repair her -- rompt.atnt
immigration status. 0. Defendants' acts in this regard were willful, wanton, malicious, and oppressive, justifying the award of exemplary (punitive) damages.. As a direct and proximate result of these misrepresentations, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount within this Court's jurisdiction (as set forth above) and is entitled to recover damages from Defendants, and from each of them, in an amount according to proof at trial, plus exemplary damages according to law, attorney fees, costs of suit, and prejudgment interest at-the maximum allowable rate under California State law.. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests judgment against Defendants in the manner set forth below. SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION (COUNT VI) (Actual Fraud by a Party to a Contract - CIVIL CODE ). Plaintiff alleges as and for a Sixth Cause of Action (Count VI) against all Defendants in the following manner.. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates Paragraphs () through () (inclusive) above as though fully set forth herein.. When CHAVEZ agreed to hire MCPHERSON LLC, MCPHERSON and REY warranted that Defendants were qualified to assist her and that they could and would secure relief on her behalf.». Plaintiff relied on the foregoing promises, signed the AGREEMENT, and paid DEFENDANTS.. Defendants intentionally misled Plaintiff, knowing that she would rely on their false promises and sign the AGREEMENT.. Defendants' acts in this regard were willful, wanton, malicious, and oppressive, justifying the award of exemplary (punitive) damages.. As a direct and proximate result of these misrepresentations, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount within this Court's jurisdiction (as set forth above) and is entitled to recover damages from Defendants in an amount according to proof at trial, plus exemplary -- yvvn JTOT A rxrr
damages according to law, attorney fees, costs of suit, and prejudgment interest at the maximum allowable rate under California State law. 0. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests judgment against Defendants in the manner set forth below. SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION (COUNT VII) (Constructive Fraud - CIVIL CODE ). Plaintiff alleges as and for a Seventh Cause of Action (Count VII) against Defendants in the following manner:. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates Paragraphs () through () (inclusive) above as though fully set forth herein.. When CHAVEZ agreed to hire MCPHERSON LLC, MCPHERSON and REY promised to obtain her a visa within three months.. When making the promises and inducing the reliance set forth by this Complaint Defendants had a duty to be truthful in representing their actions and intentions, and to deal with Plaintiff fairly and in good faith.. Defendants breached this duty to Plaintiff in that they willfully or negligently misrepresented their true ability to secure the promised visa.. As a direct and proximate result of these misrepresentations, Defendants gained an advantage over Plaintiff in that Defendants benefited from Plaintiffs payments, while Defendants breached the foregoing duty to Plaintiff and did not secure the promised visa.. Defendants' acts in this regard were willful, wanton, malicious, and oppressive, justifying the award of exemplary (punitive) damages.. As a direct and proximate result of this constructive fraud, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount within this Court's jurisdiction (as set forth above) and is entitled to recover damages from Defendants, and from each of them, in an amount according to proof at trial, plus exemplary damages according to law, attorney fees, costs of suit, and prejudgment interest at the maximum allowable rate under California State law.. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests judgment against Defendants in the manner set forth --
below. EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION (COUNT VIII) (Deceit Based on Intentional Misrepresentation - CIVIL CODE 0,()) 0. Plaintiff alleges as and for an Eighth Cause of Action (Count VIII) against Defendants in the following manner:. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates Paragraphs () through (0) (inclusive) above as though fully set forth herein.. When CHAVEZ agreed to hire MCPHERSON LLC, MCPHERSON and REY warranted that they were qualified to assist her and that they could and would secure relief on her behalf.. Plaintiff relied on the foregoing promises.. Defendants intentionally misled Plaintiff, knowing that she would rely on their false promises and pay them money for services that they could not and did not properly render.. Defendants' acts in this regard were willful, wanton, malicious, and oppressive, justifying the award of exemplary (punitive) damages.. As a direct and proximate result of this intentional misrepresentations, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount within this Court's jurisdiction (as set forth above) and is entitled to recover damages from Defendants in an amount according to proof at trial, plus exemplary damages according to law, attorney fees, costs of suit, and prejudgment interest at the maximum allowable rate under California State law.. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests judgment against Defendants in the manner set forth below. NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION (COUNT IX) (Deceit Based on Negligent Misrepresentation - CIVIL CODE 0,()). Plaintiff alleges as and for a Fourteenth Cause of Action (Count XV) against Defendants in the following manner:. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates Paragraphs () through () (inclusive) above as though fully set forth herein. --
0. Defendants made the statements and promises set forth by this Complaint with the intention of inducing Plaintiff to sign the AGREEMENT and pay them.. At the time these statements were made, they were untrue and Defendants did not have reasonable grounds to believe them to be true.. At the time of the misrepresentations, Plaintiff was unaware of their falsity, but believed them to be true and relied on the misrepresentations when trusting Defendants and signing the AGREEMENT.. Defendants' acts in this regard were willful, wanton, malicious, and oppressive, justifying the award of exemplary (punitive) damages.. As a direct and proximate result of this negligent misrepresentations, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount within this Court's jurisdiction (as set forth above) and is entitled to recover damages from Defendants in an amount according to proof at trial, plus exemplary damages according to law, attorney fees, costs of suit, and prejudgment interest at the maximum allowable rate under California State law.. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests judgment against Defendants in the manner set forth below. TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION (COUNT X) (Deceit Based on False Promise - CIVIL CODE 0,()). Plaintiff alleges as and for a Tenth Cause of Action (Count X) against Defendants in the following manner:. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates Paragraphs () through () (inclusive) above as though fully set forth herein.. At the time that they asked Plaintiff to sign the AGREEMENT, Defendants promised that they could and would secure Plaintiffs visa within three months.. Defendants made these statements with the intention of inducing Plaintiff to sign the AGREEMENT and pay them.. At the time these promises were made, Defendants were obligated to disclose their true qualifications regarding the fact that they were unable to provide legal advice or promise a --
particular result to Plaintiff.. After accepting Plaintiffs payment, Defendants never performed the AGREEMENT.. Defendants' acts in this regard were willful, wanton, malicious, and oppressive, justifying the award of exemplary (punitive) damages.. As a direct and proximate result of these false promises, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount within this Court's jurisdiction (as set forth above) and is entitled to recover damages from Defendants in an amount according to proof at trial, plus exemplary damages according to law, attorney fees, costs of suit, and prejudgment interest at the maximum allowable rate under California State law.. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests judgment against Defendants in the manner set forth below. ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION (COUNT XI) (Unfair Debt Collection Practices - CIVIL CODE et seq.). Plaintiff alleges as and for an Eleventh Cause of Action (Count XI) against Defendants in the following manner:. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates Paragraphs () through () (inclusive) above as though fully set form herein.. Defendants are "debt collectors" under California law. CAL. Civ. CODE.(c).. Defendants' attempts to collect money from Plaintiff violate the Rosenthal Act. See CAL. Civ. CODE.(c), (d), (e), and (f);.(a), (b), (d), and (e);.(a) and (b);.; and... Plaintiff lost money and suffered great emotional distress as a result of the foregoing Rosenthal Act violations. See CAL. Civ. CODE.0.. As a direct and proximate result of these false promises, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount within this Court's jurisdiction (as set forth above) and is entitled to recover damages from Defendants in an amount according to proof at trial, plus exemplary damages according to law, attorney fees, costs of suit, and prejudgment interest at the r~ir\\ Jim maximum allowable rate under California State law. -- A TXTT
. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests judgment against Defendants in the manner set forth below. PRAYER WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests relief against the Defendants DAVID L. MCPHERSON, MCPHERSON & ASSOCIATES, LLC, JORGE REY, and DOES -, and against each of them:. For Counts (I) through (XI) (inclusive), a money judgment against all Defendants, and against each of them, in Plaintiffs favor, in an undetermined amount according to proof at trial, but for purposes of this pleading, of not less than FIFTY THOUSAND AND NO/0 DOLLARS ($0,000), for expectation, restitution, and compensatory damages sustained in the manner set forth by this Complaint, together with prejudgment interest on the judgment at the maximum allowable rate under California State law;. For Counts (I) through (XI), an Order by this Court enjoining Defendants to take, or to refrain from taking (as the case may be), the following actions: a. To permanently cease and desist offering legal advice to the general public without a license to do so; b. To permanently cease and desist offering immigration consulting services to the general public without first complying with the statutory requirements to do so; and c. To permanently cease and desist engaging in unfair and illegal debt collection practices.. For all Counts, a judgment and award of exemplary (punitive) damages according to proof at trial and as the law may otherwise allow.. For all Counts and all defendants, an award of reasonable attorney fees, costs, and disbursements incurred in this suit, according to statute and the terms of the parties' agreement(s). --
. Any other and further relief that the Court considers just and equitable in the circumstances. DATED: June, 0. RONALD J. TOCCHINI LILIA G. ALCARAZ Attorneys for Plaintiffs mmpt.atnt --
i u. mana cnavez K«gc z at 0S-0-00:: «MT) From: VERIFICATION THE UNDERSIGNED DECLARES, aubjcot to penally of penury under California State law, the following: t. I am foe Plaintiff in die above-captioned action.. I have read the above and foregoing Complaint: it is true of my own knowledge, except as to those matters stated on information or belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true. DATED this th day of Junev 0, at Sacramento, California. H CHAVEZ IX Z COMPLAINT
DECLARATION (CAL. Civ. CODE 0(c) and CAL. CODE Civ. P..) THE UNDERSIGNED DECLARES, subject to penalty of perjury under California State law, the following:. I am admitted to practice law before the California State Supreme Court, and I represent Plaintiff in the above-captioned action; I could and would competently testify as to the accuracy of all items stated in this Declaration if called upon to do so.. I make the following statements as true and of my own knowledge, except where I state subject to my personal information and belief.. At least thirty (0) days before filing this Complaint. I mailed notice of its contents in conjunction with a demand to indemnify my client by certified mail (first-class, return receipt requested). See Exhibit "A", attached to this Complaint and incorporated into its terms by this reference (CLRA demand notice).. Before filing this Complaint I investigated the following records to locate DAVID L. MCPHERSON, MCPHERSON & ASSOCIATES, LLC, and JORGE REY: Sacramento County telephone and business records. See Exhibit "B", attached to this Complaint and incorporated into its terms by this reference (Web Pages ()).. Based on the foregoing investigation, I concluded that DAVID L. MCPHERSON, MCPHERSON & ASSOCIATES, LLC, and JORGE REY do business at: 0 Seventh Street, Suite 00, in Sacramento, California -0.. Based on my personal information and belief after conducting the foregoing investigation, I allege that the transactions) of which this Complaint refers occurred at or around 0 Seventh Street, Suite 00, in Sacramento, California -0, and that the Defendants have their principal place of business in Sacramento County, California. DATED this sixteenth day of June, 0, at Sacramento, California.