Fp r 07 2O O g 4: 5 6 P t' l p.

-ic
\.
I
DREIER STEIN KAHA}I
BRO\ryNEWOODSGEORGELLP
Sanon L. Stein(SBN 045997)

3
lstein(ddreierstcin,com
FredBl Griffrn (SBN 066027)
LOS'.,#?PP*
\ fgriffi n@dreicrstein.com
4 Muibeth Annaguey(SBN228431)
mannaguey@dreierstein.oom
\
N 5 TheWaterCruden
162026lh Steet
"a, 6 6th Floor, North Tower
SantaMonisq CA 90404
\
\
q { N"' 87 Telephone;3 10.828.9050
Facsimile:310.828.9 l0l

H
\ AtlomeysforPlaintilh

G \9

io
7la
ROB LOWE and SHERYL LOSf,E
SUPERIORCOURTOF T}IE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

,gi !r
Ff
rJ
te
0
,B9
lt22
COTJNTYOF LOS ANGELES

a
o t3 ROB LOWE, an individual;andSHERYL c As ENo. 8C388579
zo ]tl LOWE, anindividual,
v) t4 COMPLAINT FOR:
o Plaintiffs,
v o o l5 (r) BREACII OF WRITTEN CONTRACT
zF v9, (CONfl DENTHLITY AGREEMENT);
|ll EI
F 7 t6
ct tAIrM BOYCE,ar individua!and
4 F {Z', I}EFAFIATION;
EI o 1 7 DOESI through100,inchxive,
q fran (3) BREACA Or DrrIY OF LOYALIY;
&
ct r8 Defcndaffi.
(4) BREACHOr flDUCIARY DUTY;
19
(5) TNTENTTONAL TNFLTCTTONOF
20 EMOTIONAL IIISTRESS;

2r (o NEGLTGET{TINELICTION OF
EMOTIONAL IIISTRESS;
22
(7' INTENTIONAL fiSgEI
23 irsnnpnrsENrArroN(oMrss$pf gF
24 (B) I\EGLrcENr
MrsRgEE$DthiBtd#
(ourssrox)i FFof
u25 s.,F
s=s
\- 6

{ \ \ r\o
ar)
26 za lJ t;
fi ,. 8{.
Lo 13ifi
t 27 gll
co rG
e
J (i t:4
FJ28 Ll
F?
c,r =
a
U
95t090_l.DoC
COMPI.AINT
Ffp r 07 2O O B 4: 5 6 P1 ' 1 p.2

t
I Plaintiffs Rob Lowe ('Rob Lowe") andSherylLowc (She;ryl Lowe') (collectively

2 "Plaintiffs" or lhe "Lowcs'), for $eir complaintagainstDefendantLauraBoyoe,an indMdual

3 ("Defendant");andDOBS I tluough100,inqlusive,allcgeasfollows:

4 NATTJREO.FIHp ACTTON
5 1- We livc in an agewhereinformmioncanbc distributedworldwidein a matsr of

6 seconds.That tlpe of access,combin€dwith the public's ttrirst for detailsaboutthe pdvatelives

7 ofcelebrities, hasforccd celebritiesto zealouslygrrardtbeir privacy andthe prinacy interestsof

I their loved ones. This r€quiresthat thosein their employbe rrsnrrorthy andloyal bccauseaoy
9 information abouta celebrityfrom his/lreranployee- no mau€rhow patentlyfalse- will be

1 0 instanhneouslydisseminatedand (at leastinitially) believedtobe true, As sct forth in this

O.
ll laursuit,LauraBoyoe,a formeremployeeof the Loweswho wasohargcdwith lhe careof thcir
"l
Fl
lll
1 2 two childruruhasmadestatemenbin violuion of ber prorfse not tq andhasmadefaleo
(?
&
o l3 slatcrneotsaboutRob Lowe andhis wife, Sheryl[,owe. The effect of her betayal reachesfar
-Fl
1e
;tn t4 buyondpossiblymarring the Lowos' imagein thepublic eyc,tut hasalreadycauseda
<ti
v6 l5 Semendowamountof barmto the entirefamily. Thry areall now grapplingwiththe rcality tbat
zFl ,st>
=z I6 someonewho waspart of their lives for thc last year ol so hasbee,ndisclosingdctailsabouther
z >
;fi o t7 crnplolmcnt with them aod evenmorecgregiouslSlying aboutthe oonditionsin which she
4&
EE
A t8 u'orked. By hcr intentionalandmaliciouscondust in completedisregardfor the futh or the
r9 confidencesentnrstcdto hcr, Dcfendanthascausedsubstantialharrnto thc lowcs, The Lowcs
20 bring this suit to sct the rocordshaightandto lake a standagaiostall thosewho, by beuayingthe
2l confidencesof thoscthey workfor, celebrityor not, scekto oapitalizeon their positionsfor their
22 own Enancialbenefit anil to tbe emotionalandfinancialdstrimentof their cmployers.
23 JURISDTCTIONAND \{ENUE
24 2. This Court hasjurisdiotion ovcr lhis action pursuantto its gencnaljurisdiaion

#zs
il
Powerssetforth in dre Constitutionof tbe Sate of Califomia and becaruethe arnoun in
't
i26 controv€rsycxceeds$25,000.
r.
it
12? 3. The Lowes areinficrrnedandbelierre,andon that basisallegg that vqruo in this
Countyis pmperbecauselhe Defendantresidesin the Couutyof Los Angeles.
b28
tt gscpo_r,Doc _z-
r.

CPMPLAINT
Ffp r O ? 2O O g 4: 5 6 PM p. 3

I THE PARTIES
) 4, PlaintiffRob Lowe is an individualresidingin the Countyof Sana Barbara.He is
3 a well-known actorvrho hasbad may leadandsupportingroleson Elcvision, film andthcahe.

4 5, PlaintiffSherylLoua is an individualresidingin the Countyof SantaBarbara.

f Sheis the wife of Rob Lowe andhasbeena make-upatist for telcvisionand filrn.
6 6. The l,owes malntaintheir r€sidencein SantaBarbara.
I 7. Lawa Boyce,an individual,is a fomer employeeof the Lourcs, Shemaintainsher
E residencein thc County of Ins Angelcs.

9 8. The Lowesare irfonned andbclieve,andon tbat basisall"ge, pursuant1oCodoof

t0 Civil ProccdureSection474rtbatthe fiotitiouslynaurodDefendantssuedhereinasDOES I

A
1l through100,inclwivc, andcachof themwcrc in somemarucrrcsponsibleor legallyliablefor
-t
Fl
El t2 theactions,evcnls,transactionsandcircumstanccs
allegedberein. The rue ftrmeeandcapacities
(,
&
o l3 of suchfictitiously namedDefendants,whetherindividual,corporate,assooiate,or othenn'ise,
arc
lrl

33
-
t4 pesently unlcnown!o the Lowes. TheLoweswill soekleaveof this Court to amendthis
TR
!46 l5 Complaintto asscfr&e eue lrameoandcapacitiesof suchfictitiously nanredDefendantsuilrenthe
4>
ltl cl 1 6 samehasbecnascertained.For convenience,
.1 , eachreferenceto DefendantsshallincludetbeDOE

7
-,/
1 7 Defendants,
andeachof them. BoyceanddreDOE Defendants
shatlbe collectiv€lyrefe,lredto as
2n
A 1 8 Defcndants.
l9 9. Thp Lowes areinformcdandbclieve,andon that basisallegc,that Def€ndaols,and
20 eachoftherq mc and wereat all timeshoreinmentioned,the agents,senrants,etnployoes,
joint
2l venhuers,or co-conqpiratorsof eachof the otherDefendants,and at all tirosshereinnrentioned

22 were aotingwithin thc courseandscopeof saidsgmW, employuen" or servicein filtherance of

23 thejoint vcntuIeor conspiracy,
24 ll

it ll 2 5 tl

.i
i26 tl
Ezt /l
I
)
i.28
tn
958090_t.DOC
n
COMPLAINT
Ffp r O ' 7 2O O g 4: 5 6 P M p.4

'I
GENERAL FACKqROUI{D

2 10. Rob lowe is a 'rcll-known celebritywho hasbeenin the public cye for many
J yeaxs. Due to his celcbrity sktus andthc public's seemingunqucnchablethirst for the intirratc

4 detailsof all cclebritics,Rob Lowemust- asmwt all celebrities- be abloto tnrstNs cmployces

5 not to discloseanv informationor detailspertainingto Ns personallifc bccausesuchinfouration

6 to the globalpublicjn a matterof scconds.

maybe disseminatcd

7 I t. Thus,all employeesofthe Lowes,andin particularthoseernployeeswho work in

E 6e lowes' householdand bavehelpedto carefor the Lowes' childrerl re roquiredto sign a

9 confidendalityagreernentasa conditionof their gmploFtrent, The confidentialityagEement

l0 providesin relevantpafl that thc employcc:

F{
il Srill not givc an/ interviews(whetheroral or written) or wrile or
J prcpar€,or assistinpreparationof anybooks,articles,priograrns, or
lTl
t2 otlrcr oral or rnnittencommunications dealingwith the businessor
(f
co personalaffairsof the 'Lowe's' andthe '[.owE'sParties',nor
l3 confirm or denyanyinfonnadonof any kind (whetherrumorpdor
-c I J
ee known in any wey) relatingto businessor personalaffairs of rhe
14 olov/E's'andthe
;ra 'Lowe'sParti€s'."
JO
FO l5
e >
Ft Et l6 IIpF'ENDAI{T'S pMpLOyMENT WITH TIIE LOWES
2
6a
E
qE 17 12. Defendantworkedfor the [-owpsoverthe last year or so :ts a f,aflnyto their two
!+€
ct l8 sons,Matthcw andJobn Owen(eolloctivelywith the Lowes,the 'T-owe Fanrily'). As a condition
t9 of hct employment,Dcfendantsigneda confidendalityagreement(the "Confidentiality
20 Agreement')jwt as every otherenrployeeof thc Lowes hassigncd
2l 13, Defendantgcnerdlyworkod2-4 daysper weekfor appmximately8-10hours,
22 sometimesrnoreandtravcledwith the [.oweaon at loasttwo family vacations.
23 14. Over the coutscof her employment,Defendantdevelopeda closerelrtionshipwith
24 theLoweFamily andfreely talkedaboutpersonal
andintirnatedetailsaboutberpersonallife with
,r 25 Shcryland otheremployeesand fliends of thc Lowcs,
tl
126 il
I
Y_27 tl
/i+z e
95a090_t.Doc
$
COMPLAINT
Fp n 07 2O O g 4: 5 6 Pt' t .P-:J-==_

1 15, failedto reponto work andfailedto

ln or aboutNovenrler200?,Defendant

2 on behalfof theLowestrying to loceteher. After the

reapondto numerouscallsandmessages

3 I,owes causeda missirg person'sre,portrc befiled on her behaf, Defendantcontactodthe Lowes'

4 throughone of their e,oployeesurd indicatedth* shewould not be rcturningto work

5 i6. SinceDefendarrt's the LowcshavelcarnedthatDefgndanthad,

suddendeparture,

6 on scvcraloccasions,betrayedtheir tust anil hasalsoengagedin a scherneto hurrthe lowes by

7 sprcadingmaliciouslies abouteachof them.
I 17. herjob,the lnwes havealsobeeninformedand
SinceDefendantabandoned

9 believe,andon that basisallege,thatDefendanthasbeen,andis, conspiringwith anothqformer

t0 employeeandthird partiesto spreadmaliciouslies aboutthe Lovrcsto damagethe Lowes'

o<
ll r€putation.
J
F:

lq
t2 18. hastakcna significurttoll onthe
Suchconduct,by onoof theirtrustedemployees,
&
o t3 entirefamily. The Inrvss arefearftl of their safetyespeciallyin light of Deftndant's appalent
*l l J
4r'
*o t4 conte,Eptfor the Lowes andher openlyadminingto lleing involvedwith violent andphysicalty
JF l5 abttsivepeople.
z,
Ft tu
f^z 16
::> FIRST CAUSE OX'ACTION
fio
=d
t7
(Brcech of lYritten Conract -- Confidentirlilv Acrcernent)
P rn l8
A
19. The Lowes reallegeandiucorpomteby referencehereineachof theallegationsin
l9
ParagnphsI througlt 18, above.
20
20, Defendanthasmatcrially breachedthe ConfrdentialityAgreemeutby, amongother
2l
&ings, discussingthe Lowes' businessandpcrsonalaffsirs with third partiesduring andaftcr hcr
22
e,uploymentwith the Lowes.
23
21. The Lowes havefully perfomredall of their dutiesand obligationsin connection
24
with tlre Confideartialityfureemenq exceptfor thoseduticsand obligationsdratharrcbe€o
U 25
-i
cxcusedor renderedIncapableof performingdueto Defc,ndant'sbreachesof thc Confidentiality
26
g Agreementas wt forth above,
? 27

a4
2t
g 9r8090_t.DOC
Lr

COMPLAINT
Rp r o7 2O O g . 1: 5 ? P l ' 1 p. 6

l 22, As a directandforeseeable
resultof Defondant'sbreaches
of theConfidentiality
) Agrcement,the Lowes havesufferedgeneral,specificandincideutaldamagesin an amountlo be
? prove,nat trial.

4 SECONDCAUSDOF ACTION
5 (I)efemstion)

6 23, The Lowesreallegeandincorporate

by refcrencebercineachof the allegaionsin
7 ParagraphsI throughZ2,above.
I 24. The Lowesareinformedandbelieve,andbasedthereonallege,that in thc lastfew

9 months,Defendantbasmadesevcralfalsc anddcfamatorystatpmentsaboutthe lowes,

l0 25, The statementsby Defendantagainstthe Lowesarc falseaodde&nalory and

A
ll Exposethe Lowcsto hatcd, conlcmpqridicule andobloqun and/orcausethem to be shuffpd or
J
FJ
trl tz avoidodandtend to injure them in their occupations.
frl
&
o l3 26. The lnwes ale informed'andbelievg andbasedtherconallege,that Defendant
-q)
; u) 1 4 rnadethe falseand defrrnatorystatementsat issuewith knowlodgeof their fatsity and/orwith
<ti
v5 l5 rccklessdisregad for their tnrth or falsity.
=>
!c EJ
Frt t6 27. As a direot andproximarcresultoflhe abovodescribsdconductby Defcndant,thc
2
sv
7 l7 l,owesbavesuffercdgeneraland qpecialdarmages
in an amountto be determinedat fial but
Hn l8 believedto be no lessthan$1,000,000.00,
inoludingwithoutlirnitatioq darnagcto the lrcwes'
a
t9 reputalions,oarEenand standingin thecormmrrnity.
20 28, The lowts ae informedand beliwg andbasodthereonallege,tbat Defendant
2t actcdwith opprcasion,taud andmaliceard that,tberefore,her conductjustifies an awardof
22 punitiveandexemplarydalages.
23 THIRD CAUSE OT'ACTION
24 (Breachof the Dutv of Lovaltv)

6 25 29, Tho Lowesreallcgcandincorporateby referencehereineachof ttreatlegationsin

I
26 ParagraphsI through28, above,
fi 27

ilo 28 95EtD0_t.DOC .G
a't

COMPLAINT
Rpn 07 2O O g 4:5 ? Pl ' 1 p.?

I 30. Deftndant asthenannyandcaretakerfor the Lowes' children, ourcda duty to

z give the Lowes hErundividedloyalty andnot to takeanyactionsduring her employmentthat

3 wouldbe detimenlal to the l,owcsor their childrcn.This includeda duty of loyattynot lo useor
4 discloseconfidentialinformation,assct fortb in thc Confidentialityfureemenf obtaincdby and
5 revpaledto her during the coruseandscopeof her emplolme,lrreitherfor her own personaluse

6 anddealingor to tre detiment of the Lowee.

7 31. The Lowes areinformedandbelieve,andbasedtherconallcge,thatDefendant
I brcachcdhcr duty of loyatty by tbe actsard conduotallegedherein,including (1) impermissibly
9 disclosiugthe Lowes' confideNdial
inforrration b third parties,and (2) mafting libelous
10 statomeffsagainstRob Lowe andSherylInwe.

trr
ll 32, By virtre of Dcfcndant'sbreachof herdutyof loyalty,the Loweshavebeen
Fl
darnagedjn an amountnot yet dctermined,but to bc provcd at bial,
rJ
rr1 t2
-()
d,
o l3 33. The Lowcs arc informedandbelieve,andhsed theroonallege,that Defendant
lrl
-' 2 . 6
Ei (A l4 knewabouther dutiesandobligationsto the lawes, yet intentionaltydisreprded thos€
<it
vE l5 reqPonsibilitiesin doing the ostsdcscribedhercrn,with the intemto causedctrimentto thc Lowcs
z>
FE l6 andfor her own persorralgain and interest.In dolngso, Defendanlactedwirh oppression,fiaud
2=
i.'o
Fg t7 andmalice,and on this basis,the Lowesrcquestthatpunitivedamagcsbc assessed
against
sl e
a l8 Defbndantin an amountto be determinedby the hier of fact.
l9 rouRTrrcAUsE
oI, acTIoN
20 (Breochof Fidnciarv Duties)
2l 34, The Lowes reallegcandincorporateby rcferencehelein eachof the allegationsin
22 Paragrapho
I through 33, above-
23 35. At all timcs rclcvanthercto,Dcfcndantowed fiduciary obligationsandduticsto
24 lhe Lowesby virtuc ofher statusasa nannychargodwith the careof the Lowes' ohildren. In fris

g2s capacity,shebad acce$tto pcrsonalandprivalc inforrnationpcrtainingto every membcrof the

!t

-r 26 LoweFarnily-
I
827

b" 9tt090_t.Doc

COMPLAINT
Ffp n O ? 2O O g 4: 5 8 P 1 ' l p. 8

I 36. The Lowesareinformedandbeliew, andbasedthereonallege,that Defendanr

2 broachedher fiduciary obligationsaoddutiesowedto the lowes in doing the aclsdesoribod
{ hereinincluding(l)'disclosingconfidenrtial
informationof theLowesto third parties;and(2)
4 while on-duty asa oanny,rcvcalingintimac andsalaciousdctails,in profaneandwlgar
5 language,a[egiEdlyaboutherpersonallife andthat oflrer boyfricnds, Suchbrcachescaused

6 da:nageto the Lowes.

7 37. As a pnoximaieresultof saidbreachof fiduciary obligationsandduties,the l.owes

E in anamowt wbichwill be provodat trial, but whichec<cceds
havebeenandwill be damaged the
I minimurnj urisdlcdonalanrormt.
l0 38. The Lowcs arc informedandbelicw, andbasedthereonallegg that Defendant

tr ll knewabouther dutiesandobligationsto theLowps,yet intentionallydisregarded

thosedutiesand
_l
FI
T2 obligationsin doing the actsdesuibodherein,with the intont to barmthe lnwes andfor ho o,np
I'A
d
o t3 personatgpin and interest In doingso, Defendantactedwith oppressiorgfraud andrnalice,and
-E l
19
lc a l4 on this basis,the Lowes requestthst punitive danagcsbc asseseod
agoinstDefendantin an
:A
l!O
FO t5 amormttobe dcte,minedatAial.
1>
tu
F>
la t6 rIFTrr cAusEoF AgTroN
3E
E9 t7 OntentlonalIn lliction of Emotional Dl stresg)
ae
A l8 39. The Lowesrcallegeandincorporateby rcferenoehereineaohofthe allesdisas in
I9 ParagraphsI through 38, above.
20 40. Dnuingand afterher emplopnentwith the Lowes, Defendantknew that theLowcs
2l werepartisularly susceptibleto any statements
thatwould undqmrinetheh reputationsasgood
22 parents,open-mindcdandprogressirrc
individuals,faltbfirl asspousesandrospectftrlof othen
23 becaweof Rob Lorve's cclebrity$anrs.
24 4l ' Defendastalsokncn'that lhc lrwes arc protectivcof their children andstriveto
fi 25 bepositiverole modelsfor the childra andto havcpositlverole modelsaroundthc children. She
t!
i
26 knewthatthe Lowesareraisingtheir childrenin accordance
with SherylLowe'sJewishreligion
s
7n
andmorals. Shchcw tharthe Lowesumuldbe susccptibtcto any conductthat miglrrjeopardize
28 thc healthn safcty or rnoralrrpbringingof rheir ohildrcn.
H
s 9JE090-I.DC -8-
COMPLAINT
Ffp r 07 2008 4: 5 8 P M p. 9

I Def€ndantalsoknewthatthe Lowesareprotcetiveof their privacy andpersonal

2 space,

3 43- Defendant'scondrrctwhile on-dufyandoffduty is outrageowandbeyondthe

4 personcouldbe expectedto ondureit,
boundsof decenoyzuchthat no reasonable
5 44. andconductaredirtcted at, andtrget, eaahof the Lowes'
Defbndalt's stalernents

6 susceptibilitiesso asto causethemthc mostda.magc,As a result,the Lowes harresuffercd

7 damagecin that they havebeenforcedto en&rregreatmentalanguish,divlress,shock,

I asilrey art underattack.
hurniliatiolUfeelings of helplessness
9 45. As a directandproximaterezultof theintentional,malioious,harmful,unlawful

l0 andoffensiveactsof Defeirdant,the LoweshavesustainedswerEand seriousinj,rry, including

t_1u ll but not limited to severeemotionaldisfiess,humiliatio& andmentalanggishdl to tttc Lowcs' in

an anrolrritwhich will bs provcd at rial, but which exceedstheninimum jurisdictional amount.
E: t.r
H r.
()
513 46. In doing thc astsdescribedhercin Defendatt sct€d'ilith olryrtssion,fraudand
--1 lfl
fr
s; 14 malice,and on this basis,thc Lowesrequestthat punitive damagesbe asscssedagainstDefendant
tv R
d 15 in an amountto be det€rnined by thc tricr of fast.
7,>
Fg 16 srxrH cAUsEor AcTroN
2F
Eg t7 lNesllqentInfliction of DmolionelDistrcss)
,q al
618 47. Tbe Lowps reallcgeandincorporateby rcfcrencehercin eacbof tlre allegationsin
l9 ParagraphsI tlrough 46, abovc,
20 48. Defetrdaotowtd a dutyto the Lowespursusntto (l) her employmentrelationship
2l with themwhcrebyshewaschargedwith thecareandsupervisionof their two yourg sons,drd
22 (2) the ConfidentialityAgreemeotwith the Loweswherebysheagreedrnt to disclosoany

23 informationaboutthe Lowesto anythird puty at anytime (cxceptwhencompelledby legal

24 process),

$ 25 49. Defendantknew, or shouldhaveknowa,that her failure to exerciseduecaroin (1)

IT

i2 6 thc performanceof her dutiesasthe naruryfor the Lowcs' children ard (2) thc performance
il
prusuautto the Confidentialily Agreementwould causethe Lowes sever€emotisnaldistress.
727
I

;r 28
t.!
tt
958000_t.Doc
Lr
COMPLAINT
Ffp n A 7 2O O B 4: 5 8 P M p. 1o

I
a 50. Defendanthasheachedthosedutiesby (l ) makingfalseanddefanatory
2 statments aboutthe Lowesmd (2) disolosingpersonal
informarionaboutthc lnwcs, both mre

3 anduntnre,to third paftigs.

4 5l, As a poximate resultof Defeudant'sactsconstitutingbrcachcsof his dutiesto the

5 Lowes,the Lowes havesustainedsevsroqrd serieusinjury, includingbut not limiled to severe

6 emotionaldistress,humiliation,andrnentalanguishall to thc LowBs'damagein anamountwhich
7 will be provedat trial.

8 SEVPNTH CAUSEOFACTION
9 - Omissiou)
flntentionalMisreoresentelion

l0 52. The Lowts reallcgcandincorporateby refarencetreneineactrof the allegationsin

or 1l I through51,above,
Paragraphs
F.l

d
o
tz 53. Dcfcndarq by virtue of her fidrriary ernploymentrelationshipwith $e lowes and

6 13 frrrtherby virtue of her obligationpwsuantto the ConfidentialityAgrcement,owed tbc Lowcs a

_a
3: u duty to fi.illy and complaely discloseto tho Louresany andall oonfidentialinformationaboutthe
iv n
d l5 Lowesthat sheintendodto disclosetothird parties.
4>
Hg 16 54. At all titnes relerrantherein,Defcndantfailed to discloseto the lorrres,and
2F
Eg t7 from the l,owes,the fact that shehadviolatedthe ConfidentialityAgreenccrtand
suppressed

H' r8 discloscdpersonalinformationof theLowcglo third parties. The supprosdonof thcsefactswas

t9 likely to misleadtheLowcs,ancldid in factmisleadthelowps in light of Dcfcndant'scontinucd
20 employmentwith ths Lowes.
2l 55. Defendant'sfailuresro disclosethe informationand sup,prcssions
of thc
22 informationallegedhereinweredonewith rhe intentionto inducethe l,owes to oontinuously
?3 employDdendant.
24 /l
It
$2s
u
i26 ll
'f i|
4 2 7 il
izs
7_2

s 9s8090-l.Doc

COMPLAINT
Rpr 07 2008 4: 5 9 P1 ' l p. l1

APn- 0?- 3008 t 2t 2 1 P.002

I 56, andrupprcssion
Thstowc*, et thc tinresthercfailur* to discloec of faots
2 ' occunrd,andat tlrctimcrhcl,owcstookthcrcllonsallogcdhcrcin,wcreigrrorant
of thc
3 otict€nssoftfie focteu,hichDefendarlsupprctsed
andfailedto disclosc.lf thc lpweshadbecn
4 awtt of tlrecxlstrnceof rhefactsnotdiscloeed thc L,owcswouldnothevgasdrey
byDefcoder4
5 dl4 oontintndto havocmpbycdDefsndad,rllowcdDcfcndant
to sarcfor theirchildrcn.allowsd
6 esccnb tlpir homceor rllowcdDcfcnd*ot
Dcfendant ssoersto thcirconfidcnrialinformarion.
7 57. As a prorcirnatc flauduhntfaifurcto dis{losefacc endhcr
rcgultof Defcndant's
8 supprersion !o ernployDefcnduLcontinucd
oflbcrsasallegodkrein, theLnwcscontinued to
9 allowDsfendant to dlow Defendant
to carcfortheirshildnn,csntinued to theirhomes
apccss
t0 rnd continuad sccstrto thcltggnfijsfiialinfomationby mson of which
to allov/Defcndant

o' ll Dofbndntthasbccnrmjueilycnriched,
J

i tz 58. mnduclof Dvftndantwasdoncby Defendmtwtth$c

Thsafotqnentioncd
{2
6t3 Lowerinjuryrnd war dospicable
inentlonof causingthe conducr thel,owcsb a
thalsubjcotcd
eF!
*; 14 in conscious
cnrclandunfusthErdEhip dirrcgardof theirrighls. By rcssonof sushcondust,the
iB r5 l,owcsarccntilledto recovercxcmplaryud punitivodanagcsagninstDefendant
E}
Pg 16 nrcrms cAUsEoF AqTIQN
3i
HP I?
(Ncrlircot lfbrepjrserrilioa -- Ontrsion)
8- lE 59, Itc l,swssrcallcgorrd Incorporeto
by rcfcrcncchcrcincaohof thaallegationc
in
le I thrrough
Prragrephs 58,abovc.
20 60. rrlrtionshipwith thr Lpwcsrnd
fo virtucof herfiduelarycrnploytnart
DefcndanL
2 L furficr by virtueof herobligrtionpurusntto thcContldcntidityAgrcernent,
owodthelowesr
22 dircloscto theInwesrny andall detcmcntsthatsheintnndcd
futy to ftlly andoompletely to
27 dlsclosctothid panicsaboutfieInwcc,
24 61. Dcfcnd&rtbrcachcd
hordutyb disclose
m thcInwcs thcsutcnrcntssndcmduct
25 rtlcgodhcrein.
ll
s26
ti 21 tl
-'ti 2t
a
eIGo_r-DoC .l l-
I: COMPIA'NT
il
fl
Rp r O ? 2O O g 4: 5 9 Pl l p.t4

1 62. At all timcs rclcvantherein,Defendantfailed !o disoloseo the Lorves,and

2 tom the [,owes,the fact tlrat shehadviolatedthe ConfiderrtialityAgreenentand
suppressed

3 discloscdpersonalinformaoonof theLowesto thirdparties,The suppression

of thesefactswas
4 likely to nrislcadthc Lowes,anddid in factmisleadthe Lowesin light of Ddendant'scontinucd
5 employmontwith OrcLorves,
6 63, Defendantknew,or shouldhavcknown,that her faihuesto dislose the

7 informationand suppressions
of the infonnationallcgedbereinwould inducelhe Lowegto
E ernployDefendaot

9 64. Ilrc Lowes,at the timesthesefailurcsto discloseand zupp'rcssion

of facts
l0 occuned,andat the time the Lowestook thc actionsallegedherein,were ignorantof the

A.
II existenocof the factswhich Defendentsuppressed
and failed to disclose. If the Loweshadbeen
tl
J
Irl 12 awareof the existenceof the factsnot discloscdby Deli:ndant,the Loweewould not havg asthey
x r3 di4 continuedto have employcdDcfcmdant,
allowedDefendantto cr€ for rhcir childrpn,allowed

3
<=
2
-lll
l4 Dcfcndantacoessto their homesor allowedDcfcndurt aocessto their confidential infonnation,
MX 15 65. As aproxim& resultofDsfcndant'snegligentfailure to disclosefastsc alleged
a,
Ft Er 16 henein,the Iowes continuodto ernployDefendalrt,continuedto allow Defcndantto carefor their
2E^ 1 7
gY children,continucdto allow Defendantaocessto their homesandconrinuedto allow Defendant
H6 1 8 acccssto their confide,ntiallnformationby rcasonof wtridt Defendanthasbecnwrjustly enrichcd,
A

l9 66. As a proximateresultof saidnegligeirtfaihnesto disclosc,the l,oweshavebeen

20 andwill be damagedin an amountwhich will bc provedat tial.
21 67. The aforcmerrtionedcondustof Defendantwas doneby Defendartwith the
22 intentionof causingths Lowes injury andwasdespiceble@nductthat subjcctedthe Iowes to a
23 cruel andwfust hardshipin cousciousdisrcgardof their rigbrs. B5rremonof suchcouduct,lhe
24 Lowesarc entitled to recoverexcmplaryandprrritivc damagesagainstDefcndalrt.

i] 25 il
q
i26 tl
n
'i zt II

'* 28
958090_t.DOC
E
COMPT.AINT
Ffp r 07 2O O g 5: O OP M P. l3

I PRAYER
roR RpJLrEr
2 WHEREFORE,Plaintitrs prayfor judgmentagainstDefendantasfollows:

3 AS TO THE IIIRST CAUSEOF ACTION

4 (Bresch of Written Qontr.scr(Co-$tidentialitLAsTeemeg0l

) l. For genetaldamages,
in anamounttobeprovenrat trial;
6 2. For costsincurredhaein:
7 AS TO TIIE SECONDCAUSE OF'ACTION
8 (Pefrmatlon)
9 3. For generaldamages,in an amountto be pmven at trial;
t0 4. For punitive damagosin an anourtt apprcpriateto punishDefendantanddeter

A
ll othersfrom engaginginsimilar conduct;
Fl

ilz
I
5. For costsincunedhcrein;

51 3 AS TO TrIE, THIRD C&iSE Or ACTr9r-{

,rl
-
&Z 14 (Bryachof lhe Duty Of Lovaltv)
J8 15 6. For generaldamages,in an amormtto be pwen at tiah
a>
HE t6 7. For pruritivedamagesin an amourt appropriateto punishDefendantanddeter
3'
E g 17 o(hersfmm engagingin sinilarconducq
9ro
518 E. For oostsincunedherein;
l9 AS TO TnEFOTJRTII9aUSE OFACTTON
20 (Brcachof FiduciarvJ.-Tties\

2l 9- For generaldamagcs,in an amorrntto beproven at trial;

22 10, For punitive damagesin an amourt appropriateto prurishDefeodautanddeter
23 otben from engagingin similar eonduot;
24 11. For cosb incurrpdherein;

n 2s AS TO TIIE FITTH CAUSE OF ACTION

it
(In lenllonal InfUctiouof Epotional Distregg)
"26
Y 27 12, For gcneraldarnages,
in an aruountto be proveoat trial;

{zr
tit
CI
9mo9o_l.Doc
s -13_
@MPI.AINT
Fl p n A 7 2O O g 5: 0 OP l ' l P. l4

I 13. For punitive damagesin an amountappropriaeto punishDefcndantanddeter

n othersfrom engagingin similarconduct;

3 14- For costsjncurrcdhcrein;

4 AS TO THE SDilH CAUSE OJrA-sElON
5 (Neelieetrtlofliction of EmotionalDbtr$r)

6 15. For gencraldamages,

in anmrountto bepmvcnat bial;
7 16. For punitive &-ages in an amountappropriatetopunishDefendantanddeter
8 othersfrom eagagingin similar conducq

9 17. Por costsincurrej heoein;

10 AS TO TIIE SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

A"
1l flntentionsl Misrenreeenlrtion-- Omlsslon)
-l
-)
r'l 12 18. For generaldanages,in an amountto be provenat fial;
(t
E
o l3 19. For pwritivc dauragesin an amountappropriateto punishDefendantanddaer
*F l
33, 7 4 othersfrom cngagingin similar conduct;
fR
v5 l5 20. Forcostsinsunedhe.tein;
=>
9 l tu r6 AS TO TrrE EIGHTTI CAUSE OF.ACIION
2E
Eio t7 (NcsliqentMisrepresenjation- Opisg.io4)
qlre
-&
A 18 21. For ge,neraldarnages,
in an arnountto bcproven at trial;
l9 22. For punitivc darnagesin an amountappropriateto punish Defendantanddeter
20 othercfiorn engagingin similarconduct;
2t 23. For costsing.uredherEin;
22 ll
23 il

24 il

ij25 /l
tl

\2 6 ll
'427 /l
{ 2s.
ei 9tBo9Q_t.DOC
I
COMPI"AINT
Hpn ( ] 7 2O O 8 5:OOP | .1
P. l5

I AS TO ALL CAUSESOF,A.CTrON
2 For any all sushfurthsr elief astheCourtmey deemjust andproper.
5

DATED:April7,2008
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0

F.
1l
J
,l
trt l2
(,
/
o l3
-E l
7)o
x- (, l4
<x
v5 l5
a>
fle t6
3F
H V t7
14 to
g

A l8
l9
20
2l
?2
23
24
!-.r25
g
il
T
26
ii
L!
2t
/
!
28
.fr
tlt I5E090_t.DOC

COMPI.AINT