Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 8
Ce a Auten e @ ori. NAL AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD LLP PETER L. HAVILAND (SBN 144967) FILED TUNEEN E. CHISOLM (SBN 211741) LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR CO'"T. 2029 Century Park East, Suite 2400 iH Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 229-1000 NOV 1 3 2008 Facsimile: (310) 229-1001 JOHN A. CLARKE, CLERK . 3 ad ‘Attorneys for Plaintiff Michael McQuarn BY 6, GABB, DEPUTY Case assigned 10 Mace sudge cy 20 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES MICHAEL McQUARN, an Individual, Case No. go 3059 63 Plaintift, COMPLAINT FOR MALICIOUS PROSECUTION v. KEITHA. FINK, an Individual; SARAH E. | JURY TRIAL DEMANDED HERNANDEZ, an Individual; and DOES 1 through 10, Inclusive, Defendants. Plaintiff Michael McQuam alleges as follows: 1, Defendant Keith A. Fink (“Fink”) is an individual residing in Los Angeles County, California. 2 3 ged and proximately caused damage to Plaintiff. Plaintiff will amend this Complaint to add the trué nantes fictitious names Does 1 through 10, who also were responsible and liable for the injuriég hereirealfe and capacities of the Does when they become known. BS soon eae? 1 ‘Complaint for Malicious Prosecution 4. Onor about August 22, 2003, Fink, represented by Hernandez, initiated a complaint styled Keith A. Fink v. Michael MeQuarn, Case No. $$011993, in the Los Angeles Superior Court in ‘Santa Monica (the “Action”), seeking orders baring Mr. McQuam from appearing at depositions in a related lawsuit in which Mr. MeQuam was a party, Joie Binns v. Edmonds Entertainment Group, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court (Central District). Case No. BC 279665 (the “Related Case”), attorneys” {fees and costs, and asserting various forms of injury and emotional distress. Fink and Hernandez filed false declarations in support of the complaint, and sought to use the complaint improperly to obtain advantage in the Related Case. 5. Onorabout August 27, 2003, Fink and Hemandez dismissed the Action. 6. Fink and Hemandez acted without probable cause in bringing the Action, in that they knew or should have known that it was improper to seek an order barring Mr. MeQuarn from attending, depositions in the Related Case from a different Court than the Court presiding over the Related Case: and Fink was aware that Mr. MeQuam posed no actual threat nor caused any actual injury to Fink. 7. Fink and Hemandez acted maliciously in bringing the Action in that they used the Action to prejudice, annoy. harass and wrong Mr. MeQuarn; in that they sought to cause Mr. MeQuarn needlessly to spend time and attomeys’ fees defending himself in a frivolous new lawsuit: and that Fink himself staged and provoked a scene in a deposition in the Related Case in which Mr. MeQuarm ‘was present in order, unethically, to distribute videotape of the encounter to the press to gain advantage in the Related Case. Fink also caused an unwarranted police investigation of Mr. MeQuam and caused Hernandez to contact Mr. McQuam and Mr. McQuarn’s office directly and to publish to Mr. MeQuam’s office false charges associated with the Action, although Fink and Hernandez. knew Mr. ‘MeQuarn was at the time represented by counsel and that all communications should have been made through counsel. 8. Asaproximate result of Fink and Hernandez bringing the Action against plaintiff, plaintiff has been damaged in amounts to be proven al trial, including incurring costs and attorneys” fees, of not less that $1,000,000 (One Million Dollars). sa9aeay2 2 ‘Complaint for Malicious Prosecution Ah wD ay 9. Fink's and Hemandez’ actions were willful, malicious. and conducted with the intention of causing injury to plaintiff, entitling plaintiff to punitive damages in amounts to be proven at trial. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays for judgment against Fink and Hernandez as follows: 1. For damages according to proof at trial, including special damages, attorneys’ fees, ‘costs, and expert witness fees; 2. For punitive and exemplary damages in an amount to be established at trial; 3. For pre- and post-judgment interest on all sums due; and 4. For such other and further relief as the court may deem proper and just. Dated: November 12, 2003 AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD LLP PETER L. HAVILAND (SBN 149967) Tuneen E. Chisolm (SBN 211741) i Peter L. Havilanc Attomeys for Plaintiff Michael McQuam JURY DEMAND Plaintiff hereby demands a jury by trial. Dated: November 12, 2003 AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER & FELD LLP Peter L. Haviland (SBN 149967) Tuneen E. Chisolm (SBN 211741) By___. be if ter L.. Haviland Attomeys for Plaintiff Michael MeQuarn sooatedy2 3 ‘Complaint for Malicious Prosecution