THE LAWSUIT FILED AGAINST ME BY THE RALEIGH MAFIA TO KEEP ME QUIET

0
584

I will post the lawsuit here, online in it’s entirety, so that everyone who wishes to view it, can do so, and you will be able to make up your own mind about the corruption and the manipulation of the system of Bail Bonding in this State to include the direct involvement by Wayne Goodwin, the now EX Commissioner of Insurance and his attorney buddy’s that include the office peddling and political favors for campaign contributions. Who I can guarantee you he now wishes to have this office back.

Verified Complaint say’s that the people have sworn under oath that everything that is made onto this complaint is true.   Well I know for a fact that this is not the case. I will post emails, and documents that will prove out the liars that these people are. So don’t believe everything that you read under this complaint. It is just what these Plaintiffs wish were the truth.

 

HERE WE GO…………

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA                                     IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE

WAKE COUNTY                                                                SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION

17 CVS 003831

DALLAS MCCLAIN;

LYNETTE THOMPSON;

CARL VALENTINE;

PREMIER JUDICIAL CONSULTANTS LLC;

NC BAIL ACADEMY LLC;

CANNON SURETY LLC,

PLANTIFFS’

VS                                                                VERIFIED COMPLAINT

MARK WAYNE CARTRET;

NORTH CAROLINA HOLDING GROUP, LLC;

FORMALLY KNOWN AS JUDICIAL ASSOCIATES LLC;

AGENT ASSOCIATES INSURANCE LLC;

ALSO KNOWN AS AAI AND FORMALLY KNOWN AS CATTLEMANS SURETY LLC.

RONALD PIERCE;

PIEDMONT DISASTER SERVICES LLC;

CLYDE ROBERT BRAWLEY, JR.;

KEN ROBOL

NOW COME the above-captioned Plaintiffs, Dallas McClain, Lynette Thompson, Carl Valentine, Premier Judicial Consultants, LLC, Cannon Surety LLC, and NC Bail Academy LLC. The foregoing shall be collectively referred to herein as “Plaintiffs”, complaining of the acts of Defendants, and hereby state and allege unto the Court, this Verified Complaint, as follows:

  1. Mr. McClain is a citizen and resident of Greensboro, Guilford County, North Carolina.
  2. Miss. Thompson is a citizen and resident of Franklinton, Franklin County, North Carolina,
  3. Mr. Valentine is a citizen and resident of Greensboro, Guilford County, North Carolina.
  4. Premier is a North Carolina limited liability company duly incorporated and validly existing under the laws of the State of North Carolina, with its principal office located in Greensboro, Guildford County, North Carolina.
  5. At all times pertinent to this action, Premier has been engaged in the business of providing surety bail bonding services and bail surety through its wholly owned subsidiary, Cannon.
  6. Cannon is a North Carolina limited liability company duly incorporated and validly existing under the laws of the State with its principal office located in Greensboro, Guilford County, North Carolina.
  7. At all times pertinent to this action, Cannon has been engaged in the business of providing surety bail bonding services and bail surety as a special captive entity wholly owned by Premier and approved and duly licensed by the State’s Department of Insurance “DOI”.
  8. At all times pertinent to this action, Cannon has been solely owned by Premier.
  9. At all times pertinent to this action, Premier has been the sole owner and parent company of Cannon.
  10. At all times pertinent to this action, the Academy was a limited liability company duly incorporated and validly existing under the laws of the State with its principal office located in Wake Forest, North Carolina and owned by Miss Thompson and in the business of providing required educational and licensure classes for bail bonding in the State of North Carolina.
  11. On information and belief, Defendant, Mark Wayne Cartret, is a citizen and resident of Whiteville, Columbus County, North Carolina.
  12. Defendant, Agent Associates Insurance LLC, is a North Carolina limited liability company with its principal office located in Wake County, North Carolina, with a registered office address of 615 Oberlin Road, Suite 104, Raleigh, North Carolina 27605-3129.
  13. Prior to 28 October 2014, AAI’s corporate name was Cattlemen’s Surety, LLC. A North Carolina limited liability company.
  14. On or about 28 October 2014, Cattlemen’s name was changed to AAI.
  15. On information and belief and at all times pertinent to this action, Cartret has held himself out as “Chairman”, “CEO” and or “Managing Member” of AAI.
  16. On information and belief and at all times pertinent to this action, Cartret has also held himself out as owning a majority of interest in AAI or, at the very least, representing that there were no owners in AAI that owned more interest in AAI than he.
  17. Defendant North State Holding Group, LLC is a North Carolina limited liability company with its principal office located in Wake County, North Carolina with a registered office address of 615 Oberlin Road, Suite 104, Raleigh, North Carolina 27605-3129.
  18. Prior to 2 June 2016, North State’s corporate name was “Judicial Associates LLC, a North Carolina limited liability company”.
  19. On or about 2 June 2016, JA’s name was changed to North State.
  20. On information and belief and at all times pertinent to this action, Cartret has held himself out as “Chairman”, “CEO” and or Managing Member” of North State.
  21. At all times pertinent to this action, AAI has been solely owned by North State.
  22. At all times pertinent to this action, North State has been the parent company of and sole owner of AAI.
  23. On information and belief, Defendant Ronald Pierce, is a citizen and resident of Mecklenburg County, Charlotte, North Carolina.
  24. Defendant Piedmont Disaster Services LLC, is a North Carolina limited liability company with its principal office located in Mecklenburg County, Charlotte North Carolina with a registered office address of 4917 Cedarforest Drive, Charlotte, North Carolina 28226.
  25. On information and belief and at all times pertinent to this action, Pierce was and remains the President and registered agent of Piedmont and owner of the email address of “piedmontdisasterservicesllc@twc.com.
  26. On information and belief, Defendant Clyde Robert Brawley Jr. Is a citizen and resident of Mooresville, Iredell County, North Carolina.
  27. On information and belief, Defendant Ken Robol, is a citizen and resident of Greenville, North Carolina.
  28. On information and belief and at all times pertinent to this action, Robol was and remains Registrant, Admin, and Tech contact person for the “NCADVOCATE.NET” website.
  29. On information and belief and at all times pertinent to this action, Robol and or Pierce have been and or remain the owner(s), operator)s), manager(s) and or controller(s) of the aforementioned website.
  30. References in this Verified Complaint to “North State” shall mean and include North States previous corporate name of Judicial Associates LLC.
  31. References in this Verified Complaint to “AAI” shall mean and include AAI’s previous corporate name of Cattlemen’s Surety LLC.
  32. On 17 October 2013, North State’s Articles of Organization were filed with the State Secretary of State’s Office.
  33. At the time North State was formed and incorporated, Mr. McCain and Ms. Thompson were owners in North State along with Defendant Cartret and others.
  34. On 17 October 2013, the Articles of Organization of AAI were filed with the State’s Secretary of State’s Office.
  35. At the time AAI was formed and incorporated, North State was the parent company and sole owner of AAI, and AAI was a “pure captive” of North State.
  36. On or about 29 July 2014, AAI was approved by the DOI as the State’s first ever “special purpose captive insurance company” for bail bonding and surety.
  37. With the DOI’s approval of AAI, bail bondsman in the State could write bonds with AAI as an insurer of the bonds.
  38. Owners of North State ( and, hence, AAI ), such as Mr. McClain and Ms. Thompson and Defendant Cartret, were also licensed bail bondsmen and could write bonds that were insured through AAI.
  39. Since approximately December 2008, Mr. McClain has been a duly licensed bail bondsman in the State of North Carolina.
  40. Prior to North State and AAI being approved and formed in the manner in which they were in the State, for any bonds that Mr. McClain or Defendant Cartret wrote, they would have to pay a percentage to a surety company to insure the bonds.
  41. After the creation of North State and AAI, AAI would receive the percentage payments to insure the bonds that bail bondsmen wrote rather than an outside or separate surety company.
  42. Shortly after the DOI’s approval of AAI, all of Mr. McClain’s and Ms. Thompson’s respective ownership rights and interests in North State (which was also the 100% owner of AAI), were voluntarily purchased and acquired by North State and or its other members in the total monetary consideration amount of $ 70,000.00.
  43. In November 2014, after all of their ownership rights and interests in North State and AAI had been purchased and they were no longer part of nor affiliated with North State and AAI, Mr. McClain and Ms. Thompson incorporated and formed Premier and Cannon under the laws of the State in a similar manner and for similar and competitive business as that which had been done and was being done by North State and AAI.
  44. At the time Cannon was formed and incorporated, Premier was the parent company and sole owner of Cannon, and Cannon was a “pure captive” of Premier.
  45. On or about 22 December 2014, Cannon was approved by the DOI as a “special purpose captive insurance company” for bail bonding and surety similar to and competitive with that of North State and AAI with similar advantages to the owners of Cannon and its bail bondsmen.
  46. With the DOI’s approval of Cannon, bail bondsman in the State could write bonds with Cannon as the insurer of the bonds.
  47. At all times pertinent hereto, Cartret has also been licensed bail bondsman and, on information and belief, has been writing bonds with the support of and trough North State and AAI.
  48. At all timers pertinent hereto, Cartret, in the performance of his roles as a licensed bail bondsman and in his role(s) as Chairman, COE and or Managing-Member of North State and AAI, has been and remains in business competition with Mr. McClain, as well as his Premier and Cannon Companies.
  49. At all times pertinent hereto, Premier has been engaged in the business of providing surety bail bonding services through its wholly owned subsidiary, Cannon.
  50. By no later than 24 November 2014, Mr. McClain became a 75% percent owner in Premier (which was the sole owner of Cannon) and Defendant Brawley was the other 25% percent owner in Premier.
  51. Brawley is not and never has been a licensed bail bondsman in the State or any other jurisdiction.
  52. Brawley has never owned more than 25% percent ownership in Premier (which includes Cannon).
  53. At the time Premier and Cannon were incorporated and authorized by the DOI to do business, the DOI required Premier to post $1,250,000.00 in reserve and surplus funds under the control of the DOI into US Bank so as to enable it and Cannon to write and issue bonds.
  54. In connection with the creation of Premier and Cannon and in order to satisfy the DOI’s monetary requirement, Brawley (1) contributed the sum of $ 700,000.00 in the form of a Letter of Credit pledged as a security interest in real property owned by him and his wife; (2) contributed $ 100,000.00 to Cannon’s operating account; and (3) contributed 50,000.00 for legal and start-up expenses (collectively, “Brawley Loan”).
  55. To date, Brawley has been repaid the sum of approximately $ 300,000.00, of which the sum of approximately $ 90,000.00 was interest.
  56. In return for his loan, Brawley acquired 25% percent ownership in Premier.
  57. In addition to acquiring a 25% percent ownership in Premier, Brawley also receives 8% percent interest on the outstanding Brawley Loan amount from Cannon.
  58. Cannon’s obligations for repayment of the Brawley Loan are set forth in the Certificate of Contribution numbered “00001” and issued by the DOI, the terms and provisions of which were required to be approved by the DOI and which, in fact, were approved by the DOI on or about 16 December 2015. (hereinafter, “Certificate”). A true and correct copy of the Certificate, with Brawley’s signatures and initials is attached hereto a Exhibit A.
  59. In sum, pursuant to the Certificate, Brawley could only be paid by Cannon on the principal of the Brawley Loan “only out of excess of admitted assets of Cannon”, over the sum(s) as calculated in the parties’ Certificate.
  60. The Certificate’s restrictions on payments by Cannon towards the principal sum of the Brawley Loan were required by the DOI to ensure the DOI that anon and Premier were adequately solvent in the eyes of the State and DOI to operate Cannon as a captive bail surety.
  61. At all pertinent times to this action, bail bonding is governed and regulated by the State’s DOI.
  62. At all times pertinent to this action, there have been approximately 1,700 duly licensed bail bondsmen in the State, all of whom are regulated and supervised by the State’s DOI.
  63. Cannon and Premier have had approximately 200 bail bondsmen across the State writing bonds for them.
  64. At all pertinent times to this action, AAI and North State have had approximately 60 bail bondsmen across the State writing bonds for them.
  65. At all pertinent times to this action, AAI, North State and Cannon, Premier are the only two special captive surety companies authorized by the State’s DOI.
  66. As a result of the Certificate’s restrictions on Cannon’s payments on the Brawley Loan, Brawley is not receiving the financial returns and, frankly, money he believed he would receive in connection with his involvement in Cannon and Premier.
  67. On information and belief, beginning in or around the Summer of 2015, Brawley, Cartret, and AAI and North State (through the actions and conduct of Cartret) formed an agreement to take unlawful and improper damaging actions against Premier and Cannon that included, inter alia, (1) Brawley providing Cartret and AAI, North State-direct competitors of Cannon and Premier, with sensitive and proprietary confidential information about Cannon and Premier, including without limitation, Cannon’s agreements with its bail bondsmen; (2) communicating, orally and or in tangible mediums, directly and or indirectly through Pierce and or the Website and possibly others, to third parties, including without limitation the DOI, defamatory statements about all Plaintiffs ( as more specifically described below) in an effort to cause uncertainty with Cannon’s bail bondsmen, business, operations, and interactions with the DOI; and or, (3) taking additional actions and engaging in additional unfair, deceptive and unscrupulous conduct in a joint effort to devalue and or destroy the business and value of Cannon and Premier so as to either compel and or force a sale by Mr. McClain off all of his interest in Cannon and Premier to Brawley or third party purchaser, such as Cartret, or to cause Cannon and Premier to go out of Business.
  68. In Either of the scenarios in Paragraph 67 (3) above, the net effect would be AAI and Cartret having a monopoly in the State as the State’s only remaining bail surety captive enterprise and compelling Cannon’s bail bondsmen to seek surety from AAI or go to other surety companies outside of the State, which would generally charge the bondsmen more money to act as the surety on bonds they wrote.
  69. As of the filing of this action and at all times pertinent to this action, there have been at least 92 complaints filed with the DOI against Premier and Cannon (collectively, “False Complaints”).
  70. On information and belief, the False Complaints have been pursued by Brawley, Pierce, Piedmont (through the actions and conduct of Pierce), Cartret, and AAI and North State (through the actions and conduct of Cartret).
  71. All of the False Complaints were false, unfounded, malicious, willful, reckless, baseless, abusive, and or otherwise entirely improper and without merit when they were made and they continue to be so to this day.
  72. In addition to the False Complaints, and on information and belief, Brawley, Cartret, and AAI/North State (by and through the actions of Cartret), have provided false and defamatory information about Plaintiffs to Pierce, which Robel, Pierce, and Piedmont (through the actions of Pierce), in turn, posted, caused to be posted, and or allowed to be posted on the Website, further enhancing and exacerbating the defamation and damage to Plaintiffs.
  73. In addition to the information they receive from persons and entities for posting on the Website about Plaintiffs, and in addition to the information they allow, enable and or promote to be posted on the Website about Plaintiffs, Robol, Pierce, and Piedmont (through the actions of Pierce), directly post false, unfounded, malicious, willful, reckless, baseless, abusive, and or otherwise entirely improper meritless statements and information about Plaintiffs and or allow and permit the posting of false, unfounded, malicious, willful, reckless, baseless, abusive, and or otherwise entirely improper meritless statements and information about Plaintiffs, and they continue to do so to this day.
  74. On or about 23 May 2016, one example of a grossly defamatory article (of the numerous other articles and postings) was posted on the Website entitled, “Bail Bonds Corruption at It’s [sic] Finest “Editorial”, a true copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
  75. In the 23 May 2016 article, Pierce and Piedmont (through the actions of Pierce), and Robol (by, inter alia, allowing the article to be posted on the website), lead off in all caps, “CORRUPTION. CORRUPTION. CORRUPTION…..” The article makes it clear the statements about the corruption are specifically targeted at Premier and Cannon. The article then makes statements about Premier’s Operating Agreement, which is a private, non-public record and could not have been obtained by Pierce without having been provided by Brawley directly or through other persons and or entities to whom Brawley provided it.
  76. On or about 24 may 2016, Pierce and Piedmont (through notice to Pierce) and Robol (as Registrant of the Website) received a cease and desist letter from attorney, Mark L. Bibbs, Esquire, on behalf of Plaintiffs Cannon, Mr. McClain, and Mr. Valentine, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit C (“Desist Letter”).
  77. The Desist Letter was emailed in addition to being served by first class, United States mail, and certified mail.
  78. The Desist Letter noted the defamatory and false, damaging information being posted on the Website about Cannon, Mr. McClain , and Mr. Valentine and demanded, inter alia, Pierce, Piedmont and Robol immediately cease and desist from making and or allowing further defamatory postings and issue a full and complete retraction of all mention of Cannon, Mr. McClain and Mr. Valentine from the Website.
  79. Instead of following the Desist Letter’s demands, Pierce and Piedmont (through the actions of Pierce), and Robol (through his continued silence and, presumed, support) have continued to publish and post and allow to be posted defamatory materials and postings about not only Cannon, Mr. McClain and Mr. Valentine, but also all of the other Plaintiffs on the website, and Pierce even brags of his ability to do so because of his belief and contention he can do so because he is “judgement proof” and or otherwise unreachable by legal process and or the authority of our States Courts. True and correct, non-exhaustive of examples of Pierce’s statements that he is untouchable under the law and unaccountable to and or by State’s courts for his and his Website postings are collectively attached hereto as Exhibit D (entitled, “I have a Subpoena from Mark Bibbs for Information “) and Exhibit E (notably entitled, “Legal Action Against Me by Corruptors Editorial”) (emphasis added).
  80. the article Exhibit E noted it was being posted by Pierce and Piedmont (through the actions of Pierce), and Robol (through his continued silence and, presumed, support) after receiving the Desist Letter and states, inter alia, that Mr. McClain is a liar, has made “lies”, and is upset that Pierce’s efforts and the Website, generally, are exposing Mr. McClain’s corrupt actions and conduct at the DOI.
  81. On the same date of receiving the Desist Letter, Pierce and Piedmont (through the actions of Pierce) and Robol (through his continued silence and, presumably, support) posted another article on the Website entitled, ” Bail Bond Corruption at it’s [sic] Finest Part II Editorial”, a true copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit F.
  82. In this 24 May 2016 article attached as Exhibit F. Pierce and Piedmont through the actions of Pierce), and Robol (by, inter alia, allowing the article to be posted on the Website), again lead off in all caps, “CORRUPTION. CORRUPTION. CORRUPTION……” The article makes it clear the statements about the corruption are specifically targeted at Premier and Cannon, as well as Mr. McClain and Mr. Valentine. The article then makes the additional patently false and defamatory statements that Mr. Valentine is a part owner of 25% percent in Premier, which is not true and was not true at the time of this article, and then contains false statements of violations by said Plaintiffs of bail bonding statutory law.
  83. At all times pertinent to this action and coinciding with the unlawful and damaging actions of Pierce, Piedmont (through the actions of Pierce), Brawley, Cartret, and AAI, North State (by and through the actions of Cartret) towards Premier and Cannon, Pierce and Brawley discussed discussed Pierce possibly purchasing Cannon and Premier.
  84. In furtherance of their unlawful actions, conduct and defamatory statements made about Plaintiffs, particularly including Cannon and Premier, Brawley has unlawfully provided Pierce, Piedmont, and Cartret (as well as, necessarily, AAI and North State) confidential information about Cannon and Premier, including its financial and operational information, and contractual pay rates between Cannon and its bail bondsmen, all of which enabled and continues to enable AAI, North State and Cartret to unfairly and unlawfully undercut and undermine the viability, credibility, goodwill, and profitability of Cannon and Premier.
  85. In conjunction with the False Complaints, and on information and belief, Brawley has requested the DOI to turn over complete control of Cannon and Premier – which is one of the goals that he and Cartret (including AAI/North State through Cartret) agreed to try to attain to the detriment and substantial damage of Premier, Cannon, and Mr. McClain.
  86. In conjunction with the False Complaints and in furtherance of their concerted efforts to destroy Cannon and Premier, on or about 11 January 2017 Pierce and Piedmont (through the actions of Pierce), posted an article on the website entitled, “To All Bail Bond Agents in North Carolina”, a true copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit G.
  87. The article in Exhibit G clearly threatens all bail bondsmen agents working for Cannon and Premier of the supposed crimes and other sanctions which they will face by writing bonds for Cannon and Premier in alleged association with Mr. McClain and his alleged association with Mr. Valentine.
  88. The article in Exhibit G further contains express defamatory statements and false innuendo about Cannon, Premier, Mr. McClain, and Mr. Valentine, and an alleged Internal Revenue Service investigation and other general, criminal wrongdoing, all of which is false.
  89. On information and belief, Robol allowed the article in Exhibit G to be posted on the Website and to remain on the Website and, on information and belief, has never taken any action to thwart, react, remove or otherwise prevent the false and defamatory, postings about the Plaintiffs in this action, including not taking and such actions with the subject article.
  90. At all times pertinent to this action, the term “Internet Protocol Address” , is also known as an IP address.
  91. At all times pertinent to this action, an email user’s email contains an IP address number specific to each email user’s email server’s software, and the IP address number will not change even if the name of the sender of the email changes or even if someone inserts a completely fictitious or “made up” email address.
  92. At all times pertinent to this action, Mr. McClain, Ms. Thompson, and Mr. Valentine received emails from Cartret, examples of which include those received on the dates of 11 November 2015; 5 December 2016, 26 July 2016, true and correct copies of which are collectively attached hereto as Exhibit H. (collectively, “Cartret Emails”).
  93. As shown in the Cartret Emails, the IP Address Number specific to Cartret’s email server’s software is 65.41.161.31 (hereinafter, “Cartret IP Number”).
  94. At att times pertinent to this action, there have been dozens of false, derogatory, and defamatory statements posted on the Website (and other internet sites), about any one or more of the Plaintiffs from not only Pierce, Piedmont (through the actions of Pierce), Robol, and Brawley, but also specifically from the Cartret IP Number. Attached as Exhibit I is a spreadsheet compilation showing various IP Address numbers and specifically noting all of the emails posted to the Website from the Cartret IP Number.
  95. On information and belief, and as evidenced by the Cartret IP Number, Cartret is the actual person that posted the statements (many of which were false and defamatory as to any one or more of the Plaintiffs) in the attached Exhibit I compilation notwithstanding the references of fictitious names and fictitious email addresses.
  96. In addition to all of the foregoing, the following is a non-exhaustive summary of examples of the false and defamatory statements posted on the Website about any one or more of the Plaintiffs:   A; “Dallas McClain lied” to Agent Services Division of the DOI”;  B;  Plaintiffs comprise “a cohesive criminal group running around in the bail industry”;  C;  Plaintiffs comprise of the “Raleigh Mafia”;  D;  Premier and Cannon, by and through Mr. McClain, “does not keep proper books” and “operates in the darkroom”;  E;  “Carl the Godfather Valentine” “unlawfully gets a portion of the agent’s fee routed to him”;  F;  “Mr. Valentine is still here collecting insurance premiums and running his companies”;  G;  Now the trio Dallas, the kingfish, Carl, the godfather, and Lynette, Ma Barker, needs to go to prison” ; and   H;  “Valentine openly worked behind Bankers Surety and managed many of their agents as an intermediary of MGA. You would be taking about hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars”.
  97. In addition to the forgoing, Defendants have stated and depicted Premier and Cannon as illegal companies operated by crooks – Mr. McClain, Mr. Valentine, and Ms. Thompson. Defendants have stated that Plaintiffs bribe DOI officials, sell pills and drugs to DOI officials, and have stated other outrageous and offensive comments about Plaintiffs to numerous to list in this pleading.

 

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

(Defamation; Defamation PER SE; Compensatory Damages; and, Presumed Punitive Damages)

98. Plaintiffs fully incorporate by references the all of the allegations above as if fully set forth verbatim.

99. Defendants Cartret, Pierce, Brawley and Robol, as well as defendants AAI and North State (through the actions and conduct of their “CEO” Cartret) and Defendant Piedmont (through the actions and conduct of its “President” Pierce) orally communicated and or published and communicated in tangible medium to third parties, including natural persons, businesses and, frankly, the entire world vis-à-vis the Website and in other forums, false and defamatory statements of and concerning the individual Plaintiffs ( Messrs. McClain and Valentine and Ms. Thompson) as well as Plaintiffs Cannon, Premier and the Academy, that inter alia- (1) impute Plaintiffs’ trades, reputations, and or professions; and or, (2) accuse them of serious crimes including without limitation; political, personal and or professional corruption; fraud; money laundering; unlawful business operations; tax evasion; undue influence, duress, and coercion of various officials in State government, including the DOI; embezzlement; theft of property; and civil conspiracy to commit serous crimes; and or (3) were intended to subject, and have subjected and continue to subject, Plaintiffs to ridicule, contempt, and disgrace.

100. Said oral and or written defamatory statements made by any one or more of Defendants about and one or more of the Plaintiffs to third parties were understood by the third parties to refer to the Plaintiffs to degrade and disgrace Plaintiffs.

101. In light of the Defendants’ defamation of Plaintiffs to third parties, the Plaintiffs have each been damages in amounts in excess of TWENTY-FIVE THOUSAND AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($25,000.00), respectively, the precise amount to be proven at the trial of this matter, including, without limitation, impairment of reputation and standing in the community, personal humiliation, mental anguish and suffering, lost income, and out of pocket costs and attorneys’ fees.

102. Further, Defendants’ actions are wanton, malicious, and intentionally taken to embarrass, harass, and torment Plaintiffs, and Plaintiffs are entitled to recover punitive damages.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

PUNITIVE DAMAGES

103. Plaintiffs fully incorporate by reference the all of the allegations above as if fully set forth verbatim.

104. Defendants have committed egregiously wrongful acts against Plaintiffs by inter alia making false, offensive, and blatantly derogatory oral and written statements against Plaintiffs, taking out False Complaints, and otherwise causing legal process and related investigatory claims to be pursued, without merit, evidence, good faith, or other basis for doing so.

105. Pursuant to the applicable North Carolina General Statutes, Plaintiffs are each entitled to awards of punitive damages each in amounts in excess of TWENTY-FIVE THOUSAND AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($ 25,000.00), respectively, against Defendants, jointly and severally, to deter said Defendants and others from committing similar wrongful acts.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

(INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS; DAMAGES)

106. Plaintiffs fully incorporate by reference the all of the allegations above as if fully set forth herein verbatim.

107. Defendants’ actions and conduct as set forth and summarized herein are extreme and outrageous and exceed all bounds of decent society and continue to do so.

108. Plaintiffs have demanded for defendants to stop their attacks on and harassment and defamation of Plaintiffs, but Defendants have refused and continue to refuse to stop their unlawful actions, conduct and or statements.

109. Defendants’ actions are intended to cause and or are recklessly indifferent to causing plaintiffs McClain, Thompson, and Valentine severe emotional distress which has affected their daily lives and caused them to seek advice, care, and support.

110. As a result of Defendants’ actions, Plaintiffs McClain, Thompson, and Valentine have each been damaged in excess of TWENTY-FIVE THOUSAND AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($25,000.00), the precise amount to be proven at the trail of this matter.

 

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS; DAMAGES)

111. Plaintiffs fully incorporate by reference the all of the allegations above as if fully set forth herein verbatim.

112. Defendants were negligent in publishing and or communicating the aforementioned false and defamatory statements and failed to use ordinary care to protect Plaintiffs from injury or damage.

113. Due to Defendants’ negligence, Plaintiffs McClain, Thompson and Valentine have suffered severe emotional distress which has affected their daily lives and cause them to seek advise, care, support.

114. Defendants’ negligence proximately caused injuries to Plaintiffs McClain, Thompson and Valentine.

115. As a result of defendants’ actions, Plaintiffs McClain, Thompson, and Valentine have each been damaged in excess of TWENTY-FIVE THOUSAND AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($25,000.00), the precise amount to be proven at the trail of the matter.

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(MOTION FOR ANY AND ALL INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION. PRELIMINARY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANTS)

116. Plaintiffs fully incorporate by reference the all of the allegations above as if fully set forth herein verbatim.

117. Based upon the allegations contained in this Verified Complaint, Plaintiffs are entitled to an adjudication that Defendants have published, orally and or in writing, and are wrongfully continuing to publish, orally and or in writing, false and defamatory statements about Plaintiffs which are causing Plaintiffs substantial damage.

118. Plaintiffs are demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of this action against Defendants for the issuance of injunctive relief to the maximum extent available from the court including, a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against Defendants during the pendency of this action requiring them to remove, delete, and or stop publishing and all aforementioned statements in anyway mentioning and or alluding to any of the Plaintiffs, and to prohibit them from publishing any further defamatory statements aimed at Plaintiffs.

119. Further, based upon the allegations of this Complaint, Plaintiffs have demonstrated they will continue to sustain irreparable damage to their reputation, rights, and interests; the necessity for protection of their reputation, rights, and interests during the course of the litigation; and the urgency to prevent any further injury to their reputation, rights, and interests described in this action, for which no reasonable redress is afforded by law and to which Plaintiffs in equity and good conscience should not be required to submit.

120. For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs move the court for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction requiring them, and any person or entity or websites, including the Website, acting on their behalf and any person or entity over which said Defendants purport to represent and or control, to remove, delete, and or stop publishing any and all of the aforementioned statements regarding and of the Plaintiffs and prohibit Defendants, and any person or entity acting on behalf of any one or more of Defendants, and any person or entity over which said Defendants purport to represent and or control. from publishing and similar defamatory statements aimed at any one or more of the Plaintiffs during the pendency of this action.

121. For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs additionally move the court for a permanent injunction against defendants requiring each of them, and any person or entity acting on behalf of Defendants, and any person or entity over which said Defendants purport to represent and or control, to remove, delete, and or stop publishing any and all aforementioned statements regarding Plaintiffs and otherwise cease and desist from publishing false statements aimed at any one or more of the Plaintiffs and to otherwise permanently protect the rights of Plaintiffs.

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(PLAINTIFFS’ ATTORNEYS’ FEES, COSTS, AND EXPENSES; N.C.G.S. 6-21.5)

122. Plaintiffs fully incorporate by reference the all of the allegations above as if fully set forth herein verbatim.

123. Based on all of the foregoing allegations, Defendants’ actions, conduct, and or positions with respect to Plaintiffs and in publishing and refusing to stop publishing their false and defamatory statements have been and remain completely void of any justiciable issue of either fact or law.

124. therefore, and pursuant to N.C.G.S 6-21.5. Plaintiffs are entitled to recover and so move the court for an order awarding their attorneys, fees, costs, and expenses, and taxing the same against Defendants, jointly and severally.

SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(UNFAIR AND OR DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES AGAINST DEFENDANTS CARTRET, AAI, NORTH STATE, BRAWLEY, PIERCE AND PIEDMONT; DAMAGES; TREBLE DAMAGES

125. Plaintiffs fully incorporate by reference the all of the allegations above as if fully set forth herein verbatim.

126. defendants Cartret, AAI, North State, Brawley, Pierce, and Piedmont have engaged in intentional, willful, and unfair and or deceptive acts in their actions and conduct as generally set forth herein against Plaintiffs.

127. The actions and conduct of Defendants Cartret, AAI, North State, Brawley, Pierce, and Piedmont were in and or affecting commerce.

128. The actions and conduct of Defendants Cartret, AAI, North State, Brawley, Pierce, and Piedmont have proximately caused  actual injuries and damages to Plaintiffs.

129. The actions and conduct of Defendants Cartret, AAI, North State, Brawley, Pierce, and Piedmont were unfair and or deceptive, and constituted unfair and or deceptive trade practices in violation of N.C.G.S  75.1.

130. The unfair and or deceptive actions, practices, and conduct of Defendants Cartret, AAI, North State, Brawley, Pierce, and or Piedmont have damaged Plaintiffs each in excess of TWENTY-FIVE THOUSAND AND NO/100 ($25,000.00) The precise amount to be proven at the trial of this matter, and the Plaintiffs are entitled to have their damages trebled and to recover their attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in this action.

EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(TORTIOUS INTERFERFERANCE WITH CONTRACTS AND OR TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE WITH PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE BY DEFENDANTS; DAMAGES

131. Plaintiffs fully incorporate by reference the all of the allegations above as if fully set forth herein verbatim.

132. The actions and conduct as generally set forth herein pursued by Defendants were designed and intended to divert Cannon’s, Premier’s, and or Academy’s existing and prospective agents away from the businesses of said Plaintiffs to AAI, North State and or other persons and or entities by, inter alia, having Cannon and Premier and or Academy, by publishing and communicating false, malicious, untruthful and defamatory statements among the Cannon’s, Premier’s, and Academy’s current, future and prospective agents and clients, and causing several of said Plaintiffs’ existing and prospective agents to not contract with said Plaintiffs for underwriting, which they otherwise would have done, but for said Defendants’ actions and conduct.

133. the actions and conduct as generally set forth herein pursued by Defendants were designed and intended to affect commerce, restrict trade, and substantially damage and disrupt the goodwill, reputations and revenue of Premier, Cannon and or Academy, and as a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ intentional conduct, Premier, Cannon and or Academy all lost business revenue and contracts from prospective agents.

134. As a result of Defendants’ actions and conduct, Premier, Cannon and or Academy have each been damaged in excess of  TWENTY-FIVE THOUSAND AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($25,000.00), the precise amount to be proven at the trial of this matter.

NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(CIVIL CONSPIRACY; DAMAGES)

135. Plaintiffs fully incorporate by reference the all of the allegations above as if fully set forth herein verbatim.

136 Upon information and belief and as also generally set forth herein, Defendants Cartret, Brawley, Pierce and Piedmont ( through the actions and conduct of Pierce), conspired and or otherwise entered into an agreement, either express or implied, whereby they would exploit Brawley’s fiduciary relationship with Premier, Cannon and Mr. McClain to divert opportunities belonging to Premier and Cannon; destroy the contracts and relationships between Premier and Cannon with their bail agents and customers as well as with the DOI; destroy the ongoing business, goodwill, and reputation of premier, Cannon and Mr. McClain; destroy the assets of Premier and Cannon; and, to otherwise frustrate and interfere with Premier’s and Cannon’s ability to conduct business.

137. In furtherance of and pursuant to this conspiracy, Defendants Cartret, Brawley, Pierce, AAI (through the actions and conduct of Cartret), North State (through the actions of Cartret), and Piedmont (through the actions and conduct of Pierce), did in fact exploit such fiduciary relationship between Brawley and Premier, Cannon, and Mr. McClain to divert opportunities belonging to Premier and Cannon; destroy the contracts and relationships between Premier and Cannon with their bail agents and customers as well as with the DOI; destroy the ongoing business, goodwill, and reputation of Premier, Cannon and Mr. McClain; destroy the assests of Premier and Cannon; and to otherwise frustrate and interfere with Premier’s and Cannon’s ability to conduct business.

138. Each of the Defendants Cartret, Brawley, Pierce, AAI ( through the actions and conduct of Cartret), North State (through the actions of Cartret), and Piedmont (through the actions and conduct of Pierce) took overt acts in furtherance of the conspiracy, and each are therefore jointly and severally liable for one another’s wrongful actions and conduct.

139. As a result of the conspiracy by and between defendants Cartret, Brawley, Pierce, AAI ( through the actions and conduct of Cartret), North State (through the actions of Cartret), and or Piedmont (through the actions and conduct of Pierce), Plaintiffs Premier, Cannon, and McClain have been damaged in excess of TWENTY-FIVE THOUSAND AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($25,000.00), the precise amount to be proven at the trail of this matter.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

The Plaintiffs respectfully demand a jury trial on all genuine issues of material fact, if any, in this action.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFOR, plaintiffs respectfully pray unto the court as follows:

  1. That summary judgment be entered in favor of any one or more of Plaintiffs against Defendants as to any one or more of Plaintiffs’ claims and causes of action against Defendants.
  2. The plaintiffs have and recover on each of their causes of action and the relief requested under each said cause of action against Defendants, as set forth and requested herein.
  3. That Plaintiffs have and recover all of their costs in this action, including court costs, expenses, and attorney’ fees.
  4. for trial by jury on all issues so triable.
  5. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

This 27th day of March 2017

LAW OFFICES OF G. GRADY RICHARDSON, JR., P.C.

SO SIGNED

 

 

LEAVE A REPLY