PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION & REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE. COMES NOW, JANE DOE, Plaintiff, complaining of SEA WORLD PARKS &

Similar documents
CAUSE NO. JANE DOE IN THE DISTRICT COURT Plaintiff, JUDICIAL DISTRICT v.

Plaintiffs OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS v. Defendants JUDICIAL DISTRICT PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL PETITION, JURY DEMAND AND REQUEST FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL PETITION

PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL PETITION & REQUESTS FOR DISCLOSURE

CAUSE NO. MELANIE MENDOZA, IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF Plaintiff, VS. HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS

UnofficialCopyOfficeofChrisDanielDistrictClerk

Unofficial Copy Office of Loren Jackson District Clerk

PREVIEW PLEASE DO NOT COPY THIS DOCUMENT THANK YOU. LegalFormsForTexas.Com

DENISE CANTU, IN THE DISTRICT COURT. VS. JUDICIAL DISTRICT JP MORGAN CHASE & CO., LIONOR DE LA FUENTE and CARLOS I. URESTI

UnofficialCopyOfficeofChrisDanielDistrictClerk

Case 5:17-cv Document 2 Filed in TXSD on 01/17/17 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS LAREDO DIVISION

PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL PETITION, RULE 194 REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURES AND RULE NOTICE

CAUSE NO. PLAINTIFFS APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND TEMPORARY INJUNCTION

D-1-GN Cause No. v. JUDICIAL DISTRICT

CAUSE NO. JANE DOE, Individually and as IN THE DISTRICT COURT Next Friend of JOHN DOE, a Minor Child, Plaintiffs,

CAUSE NUMBER PLAINTIFF S FIRST AMENDED ORIGNAL PETITION AND REQUEST FOR DISCOVERY AND REQUEST FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

CAUSE NO. SUSAN DAVIS and IN THE DISTRICT COURT PRASHANTH MAGADI

The Law Offices. John S. Morgan, Esq.

CAUSE NO. C E RICARDO DIAZ MIRANDA IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF. vs. HIDALGO COUNTY, TEXAS SECOND AMENDED ORIGINAL ANSWER OF PLAINSCAPITAL BANK

DC PLAINTIFFS' ORIGINAL PETITION COME NOW, PLAINTIFFS DEE VOIGT, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS

For Preview Only - Please Do Not Copy

DJAS FILED. eelveo PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES. Case 1:18-cv RP Document 1 Filed 02/20/18 Page 1 of 18. Case No.

/ Court: 055

DC NO. PLAINTIFFS' ORIGINAL PETITION AND REQUEST FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

DEFENDANT S 1st AMENDED MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE files this his Defendant s

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

For Preview Only - Please Do Not Copy

Case 4:09-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 10/13/2009 Page 1 of 8

CAUSE NO. v. FALLS COUNTY, TEXAS I. DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN LEVEL

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MADISON COUNTY, ALABAMA

Case 3:12-cv JPG-DGW Document 2 Filed 12/21/12 Page 1 of 21 Page ID #3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Status Conference - 05/04/2017

2016CI21911 CAUSE NO. v. JUDICIAL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL PETITION. COMES NOW GRUPO INTEGRADORA SOLAR, SAPI DE CV (hereinafter, GIS ),

Case 2:17-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 12/12/17 Page 1 of 10

1 of 1 DOCUMENT. SHERYL JOHNSON-TODD, Appellant V. JOHN S. MORGAN, Appellee NO CV COURT OF APPEALS OF TEXAS, NINTH DISTRICT, BEAUMONT

PLAINTIFF S MOTION FOR ENTRY OF FINAL JUDGMENT. Plaintiff Jo N. Hopper ( Plaintiff ) asks the Court to enter a final judgment based on the

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS GALVESTON DIVISION

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY FAYETTE CIRCUIT COURT FOURTH DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO. 94-CI-2671

PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL PETITION

Case 6:14-cv JDL Document 1 Filed 03/26/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 1

C CAUSE NO. ARBUCKLE MOUNTAIN RANCH IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF TEXAS, INC.,

STATE OF OHIO IN THE MENTOR MUNICIPAL COURT CIVIL DIVISION. Case No. Hon. PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT (JURY DEMAND ENDORSED HERON)

CAUSE NO. DEFENDANTS. JUDICIAL DISTRICT PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL PETITION I. SUMMARY AND KEY FACTS

Case 1:14-cv MAC Document 22 Filed 07/15/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: 123

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII

How to Use Torts Tactically in Employment Litigation

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

CAUSE NO. INTERNATIONAL CENTER IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF DEVELOPMENT, IX, LTD., VS DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. Defendant JUDICIAL DISTRICT

Case 5:10-cv FB Document 25 Filed 03/11/11 Page 1 of 7

CAUSE NO. COMES NOW, Plaintiff, Colin Shillinglaw, and files this Original Petition, complaining

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

Case 2:12-cv SRC-CLW Document 1 Filed 12/24/12 Page 1 of 17 PageID: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY. Case No.

Intentional Torts. What Is a Tort? Tort Recovery

19-CV-0222 CAUSE NO. Plaintiff, v. GALVESTON COUNTY, TEXAS

No SHERBERT & CAMPBELL, P.C. IN THE DISTRICT COURT Plaintiff PLAINTIFF S FIRST AMENDED ORIGINAL PETITION AND REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE

Courthouse News Service

Case 1:17-cv JCB Document 5 Filed 02/15/17 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS CIVIL ACTION NO.

Courthouse News Service

I. DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN

No. PLAINTIFF S ORIGINAL PETITION, REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS. Plaintiff, MIKE complains of defendants STEPHEN and

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA FOR SANTA CRUZ COUNTY

2:16-cv DCN-MGB Date Filed 06/06/16 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 13

Unofficial Copy Office of Chris Daniel District Clerk

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. Plaintiff, DRAFT. Defendants. CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. Plaintiff, DRAFT. Defendants.

Case3:14-cv MEJ Document1 Filed11/24/14 Page1 of 18

SUIT NO. 342-D TARRANT COUNTY, ET AL IN THE DISTRICT COURT MICHAEL P RILEY TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS PLAINTIFFS' FIRST AMENDED PETITION

No. D-1-GN

FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 03/20/2013 INDEX NO /2013 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 03/20/2013

CAUSE NO. ROGELIO LOPEZ MUNOZ, et al., IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

Case 4:10-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 04/06/10 Page 1 of 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

Case 2:19-cv RSWL-SS Document 14 Filed 02/19/19 Page 1 of 12 Page ID #:164

Case 4:08-cv Document 1 Filed 01/04/2008 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

DC CAUSE NO. CDK REALTY ADVISORS, LP IN THE DISTRICT COURT. v. DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS. Defendant. JUDICIAL DISTRICT

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

HYDERALLY & ASSOCIATES, P.C.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. Plaintiff, DRAFT. Defendants.

Auto accident Motion for Summary Judgment complete package

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:18-cv-3055

Case 2:16-cv JRG-RSP Document 44 Filed 06/15/17 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 457

LegalFormsForTexas.Com

SUIT NO. 096-D TARRANT COUNTY, ET AL IN THE DISTRICT COURT CHARLES R CARTER, DECEASED, ET AL TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS

1. Under what theory, or theories, if any, might Patty bring an action against Darby? Discuss.

CC A CAUSE NO. STEVEN AKIN, IN COUNTY COURT

D-1-GN PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL PETITION AND REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE

: : her undersigned attorneys, as and for her Complaint against the Defendant, alleges the following

CAUSE NO. PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL PETITION AND REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE. PLAINTIFF, TIMOTHY PETERS, complains of RICHARD TAMARO, CASEY

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF WAYNE. vs.

Washoe Tribe of Nevada and California. Law & Order Code TITLE 3 TORTS. [Last Amended 10/1/04. Current Through 2/3/09.]

CV. In the Court of Appeals For the Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

1. TRCP 194 created a new discovery tool entitled Requests for Disclosure.

CAUSE NO CV ANNA DRAKER IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF VS. MEDINA COUNTY, TEXAS

Case 3:14-cv MMA-JMA Document 1 Filed 09/09/14 Page 1 of 28

Intentional Torts. What Is a Tort? Tort Recovery

CAUSE NO. D-1-GN THE STATE OF TEXAS, IN THE DISTRICT COURT Plaintiff,

Case 1:17-cv JCB Document 1 Filed 02/13/17 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

NO. IN THE MATTER OF IN THE DISTRICT COURT THE MARRIAGE OF (PETITIONER) and (RESPONDENT) TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. V. JUDICIAL DISTRICT. CORRIE LONG, DAVID TANG AND MICHAEL P. FLEMING & ASSOCIATES, P.C. Defendants. OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS

Transcription:

9/21/15 14:44:09 Orange Cty DC Scanned By Carolyn CAUSE NO. A150310-C FILED: 9/18/2015 12: 00:51 PM Vickie Edgerly, District Clerk Orange County, Texas By: Carolyn Penick, Deputy JANE DOE, Plaintiff, vs. SEA WORLD PARKS & ENTERTAINMENT, INC. d/b/a SEA WORLD PARKS, INC., ORLANDO SENTINEL COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, INC., d/b/a ORLANDO SENTINEL, A WESOMEOCEAN, JIMMY VERA and BRIDGET DAVIS, Defendants. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF ORANGE COUNTY, TEXAS 12 81 _ h _ JUDICIAL DISTRICT PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL PETITION & REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: COMES NOW, JANE DOE, Plaintiff, complaining of SEA WORLD PARKS & ENTERTAINMENT, INC. <lib/a SEAWORLD PARKS, INC., ORLANDO SENTINEL COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, INC. <lib/a ORLANDO SENTINEL, AWESOMEOCEAN, JIMMY VERA and BRIDGET DA VIS, Defendants, and for cause of action would show unto the Court as follows: A. DISCOVERY PLAN LEVEL 3 I. Plaintiff requests that this lawsuit be governed by Discovery Plan Level 3 pursuant to Rule 190.4 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. B. PARTIES 2. Plaintiff, Jane Doe, is a resident of Orange, Orange County, Texas. 3. Defendant, SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment, Inc. d/b/a SeaWorld Parks, Inc. ("Sea World"), is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with its principal place of business being in Orlando, Florida. Defendant Sea World may be served with process by serving its registered agent, CT Corporation System, at 1999 Bryan Street, Suite 900, Dallas, TX 75201.

09/21/15 14:44:11 Orange Cty DC Scanned By Carolyn personal and sensitive in nature. Multiple times during the conversation Hargrove addressed Plaintiff by name. I 0. At no time, either prior to, or during the conversation, did Plaintiff or Hargrove consent to the videotaping or recording of their telephone conversation. 11. Nevertheless, Defendants Jimmy Vera and/or Bridget Davis (who were present with Hargrove at the time of the conversation) video recorded the conversation between Plaintiff and Hargrove. 12. On further information and belief, in March 2015 ( and subsequent to Hargrove having been featured in the 2013 film entitled "Blackfish" -- a documentary aimed at creating public awareness regarding Defendant SeaWorld's alleged propensity to put profits over the safety of the animals kept in captivity), Defendant Sea World, by and through Defendant AwesomeOcean, paid a large sum of money to Defendant Davis and/or Defendant Vera for the video recorded telephone conversation between Plaintiff and Hargrove. On information and belief, both Defendant Davis and Defendant Vera are, and at all times relevant to this lawsuit have been, employees of Defendant Sea World. 13. Shortly after procuring the video recorded telephone conversation from Defendant Davis and/or Defendant Vera, on information and belief, Defendant Sea World forwarded said video to Defendant Orlando Sentinel and requested that Defendant Orlando Sentinel publicly disseminate the video. 14. Thereafter, Defendant Orlando Sentinel publicly disseminated the video recorded telephone conversation at issue through publication in its newspaper, via its website, and ( on information and belief) through vanous other media outlets, including Defendant AwesomeOcean's website, awesomeocean.com. 3

09/21/15 14:44:12 Orange Cty DC Scanned By Carolyn 15. The above delineated acts and/or om1ss1ons of the five Defendants constitute violations of several laws in both the State of Texas, and the State of Florida, as follows: E. CAUSES OF ACTION Count 1-Texas Civil Wiretap Act (Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ch. 123) 16. The elements of a cause of action under the Texas Civil Wiretap Act are the following: a) The Plaintiff was a party to the communication. b) The Defendants engaged in one or more of the following acts: 1. intercepted the contents of the communication with an electronic, mechanical, or other device without the consent of one of the parties to the communication ("nonconsensual interception"), 11. attempted to make a nonconsensual interception of the contents of the communication, 111. employed or obtained another to make a nonconsensual interception of the contents of the communication, 1v. used information it knew or reasonably should have known was obtained by a nonconsensual interception of the communication, or v. divulged information it knew or reasonably should have known was obtained by a nonconsensual interception of the communication. 17. Accordingly, as delineated hereinabove, because all five Defendants violated one or more of the foregoing provisions of the Texas Civil Wiretap Act, all five Defendants are liable to Plaintiff for damages as prayed for hereinbelow. 4

09/21/15 14:44:12 Orange Cty DC Scanned By Carolyn 18. Exemplary damages. Plaintiff's injuries resulted from Defendants' gross negligence, malice, or actual fraud, which entitles Plaintiff to exemplary damages under Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code 41.003(a). 19. Attorney fees. Plaintiff is entitled to recover reasonable and necessary attorney fees under Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code 123.004(5). 20. Statutory damages. Plaintiff is entitled to recover statutory damages in the amount of $10,000.00 from each Defendant, for each occurrence, pursuant to Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code 123.004(3). Count 2 - Intrusion on Seclusion 21. As delineated hereinabove, Defendants intentionally intruded on Plaintiff's solitude/seclusion/private affairs. 22. The intrusion was a kind that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person. 23. Defendants' wrongful acts caused injury to Plaintiff, which resulted in damages as prayed for hereinbelow. 24. Exemplary damages. Plaintiff's injuries resulted from Defendants' malice, which entitles Plaintiff to exemplary damages under Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code 41.003(a). Count 3 - Public Disclosure of Private Facts 25. In the alternative/addition to other counts, Defendants are liable to Plaintiff for invasion of privacy by public disclosure of private facts, to wit: a) Defendants publicized information about the Plaintiff's private life. b) The publicity of Plaintiff's private information would be highly offensive to a reasonable person. c) The information publicized was not oflegitimate public concern. d) Defendants' wrongful acts caused injury to Plaintiff, which resulted m damages as prayed for hereinbelow. 5

09/21/15 14:44:13 Orange Cty DC Scanned By Carolyn 26. Exemplary damages. Plaintiff's injuries resulted from Defendants' malice, which entitles Plaintiff to exempl ary damages under Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code 41.003(a). Count 4 - Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress 27. In the alternative to all other counts, Defendants are liable to Plaintiff for intentional infliction of emotional distress, to wit: a) The Plaintiff is a person. b) Defendants acted intentionally or recklessly. c) The emotional distress suffered by the Plaintiff was severe. d) Defendants' conduct was extreme and outrageous. e) Defendants' conduct proximately caused the Plaintiff's emotional distress. f) No alternative cause of action would provide a remedy for the severe emotional distress caused by Defendants' conduct. 28. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to monetary damages as prayed for hereinbelow. F. JURY DEMAND 29. Plaintiff demands a jury trial and tenders the appropriate fee with this petition. G. REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE 30. Under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194, Plaintiff requests that Defendants disclose, within 50 days of the service of this request, the information or material described in Rule 194.2. H.PRAYER 31. For these reasons, Plaintiff asks that the Court issue citation for Defendants to appear and answer, and that Plaintiff be awarded a judgment against Defendants for the following: 6

09/21/15 14:44:14 Orange Cty DC Scanned By Carolyn a) Actual damages. b) Statutory damages. c) Exemplary damages. d) Prejudgment and postjudgment interest. e) Court costs. f) All other relief to which Plaintiff may be justly entitled. Respectfully submitted, THE MAZZOLA LAW FIRM, PLLC 505 W Lucas Drive, Floor 2 Beaumont, Texas 77706 ( 409) 898-0690 (409) 898-1394 (FAX) azzola Texas te Bar No. 24037053 bmazzola@mazzolalawfirm.com ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS 7