ee ee 10 ML 12 1B 4 15 16 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 26 21 28 | JAY M. COGGAN, SBN 86107 DAVID N. TARLOW, SBN 214050 wd Dd HEATHER BE. STERLING, SBN 209891 Loe ANGELES SCPERION COURT JAY M. COGGAN & ASSOCIATES 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2320 JAN 05 2007 Los Angeles, California 90067 aa Tel: (10) 407-0922 n Fax: (310) 407-0923 yy. Enacutve OticarClork + Deputy Attomey for Plaintiff MICHAEL CROOK comet Sssann Byuguerd SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA D a] FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Bc364372 MICHAEL CROOK, an individual, Case No. Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF v JEFFREY HELFER, as Trustee of the KEITH A. FINK AGREEMENT OF TRUST; KEITH A. FINK, an individual; and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive Defendants. PLAINTIFF ALLEGES AS FOLLOWS: FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION FOR DECLARATORYRELIEF AGAINST DEFENDANTS, AND EACH OF THEM. 1. Plaintiff, MICHAEL CROOK (hereinafter “Crook” is a resident of the County of Clark, State of Nevada, 2. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that at all times material hereto, Defendant JEFFREY HELFER, AS TRUSTEE OF THE KEITH A. FINK AGREEMENT. OF TRUST, (hereinafter “Helfer”) is, and was, an individual residing in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that Helfer is an attorney duly licensed to practice law in the State of California, whose law offices are ‘COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY RELIEFee ee) 10 u 12 1B 14 15 16 7 18 19 2 22 B 25 26 2 28 located in the County of Los Angeles, State of California 3. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that at all times material hereto, Defendant, KEITH A. FINK (hereinafter “Fink”), is, and was, a resident of the County of Los Angeles, State of California. Plaintiff is further informed and believes and thereon alleges that Fink is duly licensed to practice law in the State of California, and he maintains law offices within the County of Los Angeles, State of Califomia, Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Fink is both the settlor and the beneficiary of the Keith A. Fink Agreement of Trust (hereinafter “trust”), and that all actions taken by Helfer on behalf of the trust have been taken solely at the express instruction of Fink. 4. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that neither Helfer nor Fink ‘are members of a class of exempt persons pursuant to Section 1 of Article XV of the California Constitution. 5. Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities of those Defendants sued herein as DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, and therefor sues these Defendants under such fictitious names. Plaintiff will amend this complaint to allege their true names and capacities when the same have been ascertained. 6. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that at all times material hereto, Defendants, and each of them, including those named herein as DOES, are, and were the agents, managers, representatives, servants, and employees of the other Defendants, and in doing the acts herein mentioned, were acting within the course and scope of such agency, employment, and service, and with the knowledge, permission and consent of the remaining Defendants, fhe On or about May 17, 2006, Helfer, in his capacity of trustee of the trust, loaned Crook $250,000.00 of trust money pursuant to a promissory note (“original promissory note”) which Plaintiff is informed and believes that he signed. The actual promissory note is in the exclusive possession, custody and control of Defendants. Pursuant o the original promissory note, Plaintiff was required to repay the principal, plus $25,000.00 in interest and 300,000 shares of stock in a company called Bluko Information Group (“Bluko"), on or before July 24, 2006, orelse Plaintiff would be in default of said promissory note. The interest owed by Plaintiff to Defendant ‘COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY RELIEFYau ek wn . @ 10 ul 12 1B 14 15 16 7 18 19 20 21 23 24 25 26 27 28 pursuant to the promissory note equaled approximately 60% interest per annum. 8. On or about July 24, 2006, Plaintiff defaulted on the original promissory note. 9. On or about July 24, 2006, after Plaintiff's default, Helfer sent Plaintiff a First Amendment to Promissory Note, whereby, Plaintiff was granted another month to repay the loan, A true and correct copy of the First Amendment to Promissory Note is attached hereto as Exhibit “A.” Pursuant to Exhibit A, Plaintiff was required to repay the principal, plus pay $25,000.00 in interest for the time period of May 17, 2006 through July 24, 2006, $27,500 in interest for the time petiod of July 24, 2006 through August 24, 2006, and 300,000 shares of stock in Bluko. The three months worth of interest in the amount of $52,500.00 on a $250,000.00 loan was equal to a yearly rate of interest of 84%, 10. ‘On or about August 24, 2006, Plaintiff defaulted on Exhibit A. 11. On or about August 24, 2006, after Plaintiff had defaulted, Helfer sent Plaintiff a Second Amendment to Promissory Note, whereby, Plaintiff was granted another month to repay the loan. A true and correct copy of the Second Amendment to Promissory Note is attached hereto as Exhibit “B.” Pursuant to Exhibit B, Plaintiff was required to repay the principal, plus pay $25,000.00 in interest for the time period of May 17, 2006 through July 24, 2006, $27,500 in interest for the time period of July 24, 2006 through August 24, 2006, $30,250.00 in interest for the time period of August 24, 2006 to September 24, 2006 and 700,000 shares of stock in Bluko, ‘The four months worth of interest in the amount of $82,750.00 on a $250,000.00 loan was equal toa yearly rate of interest of 99.3%. Plaintiff never signed Exhibit B. 12, On or about September 24, 2006, Plaintiff defaulted on Exhibit B. 13. On or about September 24, 2006, after Plaintiff had defaulted, Helfer sent Plaintiff a Third Amendment to Promissory Note, whereby, Plaintiff was granted another month to repay the loan. A true and correct copy of the Third Amendment to Promissory Note is attached hereto as Exhibit “C.” Pursuant to Exhibit C, Plaintiff was required to repay the principal, plus pay $25,000.00 in interest for the time period of May 17, 2006 through July 24, 2006, $27,500 in interest for the time period of July 24, 2006 through August 24, 2006, $30,250.00 in interest for the time period of August 24, 2006 to September 24, 2006, $50,000.00 in interest from September ‘COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF