Preview
ANUINNLLLNALL
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
Document Scanning Lead Sheet
Jun-08-2010 10:16 am
Case Number: CGC-10-500516
Filing Date: Jun-07-2010 10:09
Juke Box: 001 Image: 02871734
COMPLAINT
=IRST CRUSH RESTAURANT & BAR OF SAN FRANCISCO, INC VS. JUAN MANUEL RIVA
001002871734
Instructions:
Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.06/04/2018 14:17 9497248707 PAGE @2/11
ORIGINAL
SUM-100
SUMMONS polSB SESE oer
(CITACION JUDICIAL)
NOTICE TO DEFENDANT: ‘
(AVISO AL DEMANDADO): . 2;
Oe A DEL GRION RIVAS an individual and DELIA MUNOZ, an f:
individual, and DOES 1 THROUGH 25, inclusive ie;
i{
YOU ARE BEING SUED BY PLAINTIFF: Es
(LO ESTA DEMANDANDO EL DEMANDANTE): by :
First RS? CRUSH RESTAURANT & BAR, INE=4
OF SAN FRANCISCO, ING. a Ca tee vlan Cov povadvela
[ NoTICET You have been sued. The court may decide against you without your being heard unless you respond within 30 days. Read the aan
below.
served on the plaintiff. A letter or phone call will not protect you, Your written reeponse must be in proper legal form if you want the court to hear your
case. There may be a court form that you can use for your response. You can find these cour forms an
Online Self-Help Center (www. courtinfo.ca.gov/setnelp), your county law library, or the courthouse: nearest you. If you cannot psy the filing fee, ask
the court clerk for a fee waiver form. If you do not file your response on time, you may lose the case by default, and your wages, money, and property
may be taken without further ‘warning from the court.
‘There are other legal requirements. You may want to call an attorney right away. If you do not know an attorney, you may want to call an attorney
referral service. If you cannot afford an attorney, you may be eligible for free legal services from a nonprofit legal services program. You can locate
thesa nonprofit groups at the Califomia Legal Services Web site (www.lawhelpealifornia.org), the California Courts Online Self-Help Center
(waww.courtinfo.ca.gowselihelp), or by contacting your local court or county ber association, NOTE: The court has @ statutory lien for walved fees and
costs on any settlement or arbitration award of $10,000 or more ine civil case. The court's lien must be paid before the court will dismiss the case.
jAVISOI Lo hen demandado. Sino responde dentro de 30 dias, Ja corte puede decidir en su contra sin escuchar su version. Lea la informacion a
colegio de abogados locales, AVISO: Por ley, la corte tiene derecho @ reclamar las cuotes y los costos exentos por imponer un gravamen sobre
cualquier recuperecién de $10,000 6 més de valor recibida mediante un acuerdo o una concesi6n de arbitraje en un caso de derecho civil. Tiene que
pagar ef grevamen de la corte antes de que la corle pueda desechar el caso.
The name and address of the court is: NUM : - 6
(El nombre y direccién de la corte es): . . 0) .
Gan Francisco Superior Court, 400 McAllister Street, San Francisco, C, D N05!
94102
The name, address, and telephone number of plaintiff's attorney, or plaintiff without an attorney, is:
(El nombre, la direccion y el] numero de teléfono del abogado del demandante, o del demandante que no tiene abogado, es):
Nima Nami, 625 Market Street, 16th Floor, San Francisco CA 9415
pate:J JUN -72 . y tH
pave: SVN 772010 CLERK OF THE COURT Gur by P_NATT f ety
(For proof of service of this summons, use Proof of Service of Summons (form POS-010).)
(Para prueba de entrega de esta citatién use el formulario Proof of Service of Summons, (POS-010)).
NOTICE TO THE PERSON SERVED: You are served
1. [_] as an individual defendant.
2. [] as the person sued under the fictitious name of (specify):
3, (J on behalf of (specify):
under: (_] CCP 416.10 (corporation) Co CCP 416.60 (minor)
(5) cep 416.20 (defunct corporation) [1] CCP 416.70 (conservatee)
CCP 416.40 (association or partnership) (J Cccp 416.30 (authorized person)
[--] other (specify):
4. [] by personal delivery on (date): eset
age 1 of 4
Tair Cano Ab Civil Beanadhins 66 417 2 485,@6/04/2018 14:17 9497248707 PAGE @3/11
ORIGINAL
CM-0'
[aggoaney on Pat WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address) | FOR COURT USE ONLY
ima Nami (183042)
Allenbaugh Nami Shabahangi, LLP
a0 TELEPHONE NO: (949) 610-8535, FAXNO: San Frarfcisco eunty Superior COM!
ATTORNEY FOR (Name): 2010
JSUPERIOR COURT OF ae county of SAN FRANCISCO JUN -7
strcer appress: 400 McAllister Street
MAILING ADDRESS: CLEBK OF THE COURT
cry ano zie cove: San Francisco, CA 94102 BY: Deputy Clerk
BRANCH NAME:
‘CASE NAME:
FIRST CRUSH vs. JUAN MANUEL GIRON RIVAS et al
CIVIL GASE COVER SHEET Complex Case Designation CHE ABER
[Z] uniimited [_] Limitea Oe Dewianaton G T0.500516
(Amount (Amount ounter joinder Suge
demanded demanded is Filed with first appearance by defendant
exceeds $25,000) _ $25,000 or less) (Cal, Rules of Court, rule 3.402) DEPT:
‘ems 1-6 below must be completed (see instructions on page 2).
7. Check one box below for the case type that best describes this case:
Auto Tort Contract Provisionally Complex Civil Litigation
‘Auto (22) [_} Breach of contractwarranty (06) (Cal. Rules of Court, rules 3.400-3.403)
Uninsured motorist (46) Co Rule 3.740 collections (09) LC) Antitrust/Trade regulation (03)
Other PUPDIWD (Personal Injury/Property [_] other collections (09) CJ Construction defect (10)
aneoenronat Death) Tort (J insurance coverage (18) [J] Mass tort (40)
‘Asbestos (04) [1 other contract (37) [2 secutties tigation (28)
[_] Product tiabiny (24) Real Property [_] Environmental/Toxlc tort (30)
[_] medical malpractice (48) (] Eminent domain/inverse [1 insurance coverage claims arising from the
[} other puppawn (23) condemnation (14) above listed provisionally complex case
Non-PUPDIWD (Other) Tort Wrongful evietion (33) types (41)
[J pusinoss tortvuntair business practice (07) [£1 otter real property (26) Enforcement of Judgment
[2d ewitrignts (08) Unlawful Detalner TJ Enforcement of judgment (20)
[J Defamation (13) L_} Commercial (31) Miscellaneous Civil Complaint
[Fraud (16) [J Residential (32) (J) rico es
[1] imetiectuat property (19) [1 orugs (38) [1 other complaint (not specified above) (42)
L__] Professionat negligence (25) Judicial Review Miscellaneous Civil Petition
CI Ole ne PHPDIWD tom (35) J Asse et ara (i) [_] Partnership and corporate governance (21)
loyme! ‘ion re: at in awi i 4
[__] Wrongful termination (36) (21 wrt of mandate (02) [1 other petition (ot spected above) (43)
[1 other employment (15) Other judicial review (99) _
2. This case LJis i isnot complex under rule 3.400 of the California Rules of Court. If the case Is complex, mark the
factors requiring exceptional judicial management:
ald Large number of separately represented parties d. Oo Large number of witnesses
b. oO Extensive motion practice raising difficult or novel e. CI Coordination with related actions pending in one or more court:
isgues that will be time-consuming to resolve in other counties, states, or countries, or in a federal court
c. L_] Substantial amount of documentary evidence ¢. [] Substantial postjudgment judicial supervision
3, Remedies sought (check all that apply): a.[¥] monetary b. [7 nonmonetary; declaratory or injunctive relief ¢ (2 |puritive
4, Number of causes of action (specify):
5. Thiscase [_]is isnot aclass action suit.
6. If there are any known related cases, file and serve a notice of related case. (You may use form CM-015.)
Date: June 4, 2010 : .
Nima Nami > —_—
&
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY FOR PARTY)
NOTICE
« Plaintiff must file this cover sheet with the first paper filed in the action or proceeding (except small claims cases or cases filed
under the Probate Code, Family Code, or Welfare and Institutions Code). (Cal. Rules of Court, tule 3.220.) Failure to file may result
in sanctions.
* File this cover sheet in addition to any cover sheet required by local court rule.
© if this case is complex under rule 3.400 et seq. of the California Rules ‘of Court, you must serve a copy of this cover sheet on all
other parties to the action or proceeding.
© Unless this is a collections case under rule 3.740 or a complex case, this cover sheet will be used for statistical purposes only.
aga tof
——= —
"2.220, 3.400-.403,
——s <= —— ———— —
= Cal, Rules of Cour, rules 2
—<$— ——— —
mht FACE CAVED CUFET6/84/2016 14:17 9497248787
PAGE 64/11
CM-010
INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO COMPLETE THE COVER SHEET
To Plaintiffs and Others Filing First Papers. if you are filing a first paper (for example, a complaint) in a civil case, you must
complete and file, along with your first paper, the Civil Case Cover Sheet contained on page 1. This information will be used to compile
sheet must be filed only with your initial paper. Failure to file a cover sheet with the first paper filed in a civil case may subject a party,
its counsel, or both to sanctions under rules 2.30 and 3.220 of the Califomia Rules of Court.
To Parties in Rule 3.740 Collections Cases. A "collections case" under rule 3.740 is defined as an action for recovery of money
owed in a sum stated to be certain that is not more than $25,000, exclusive of interest and attorney's fees, arising from a transaction in
which property, services, or money was
acquired on credit. A collections case does not include an action seeking the following: (1) tort
damages, (2) punitive damages, (3) recovery of real property, (4) recovery of personal property, or (5) a prejudgment writ of
attachment. The identification of a case a6 a rul
time-for-service requirements and case
case will be subject to the requirements for service an
To Parties in Complex Cases. In complex cases onh
case Is complex. If a plaintiff believes the case is comp!
completing the appropriate boxes in items 1 and 2. If a plaintiff designates a case as
management rules,
le 3.740 collections case on this form means that it will be exempt from the general
unless a defendant files a responsive pleading. A rule 3.740 collections
d obtaining a judgment in rule 3.740,
ly, parties must also use the Civil Case Cover Sheet to designate whether the
lex under rule 3.400 of the California Rules of Court, this must be indicated by
complex, the cover sheet must be served with the
complaint on all parties to the action. A defendant may file and serve no later than the time of its first appearance a joinder in the
plaintiffs designation, a counter-designation that the case is not complex, or, if
the case is complex.
the plaintiff has made no designation, a designation that
CASE TYPES AND EXAMPLES
Auto Tort Contract Provisionally Complex Civil Litigation (Cal.
Auto (22)-Personal Injury/Property Breach of Contract/Warranty (06) Rules of Court Rules 3.400-3.403)
Damage/Wrongful Death Breach of Rental/Lease Antitrus/Trade Regulation (03)
Uninsured Motorist (46) (if the Contraet (not unlawful detainer Construction Defect (10)
case involves an uninsured or wrongful eviction) Claims Involving Mass Tort (40)
motorist claim subject to Contract/Warranty Breach—Seller Securities Litigation (28)
arbitration, check this item Plaintiff (not fraud or negligence) Environmental/Toxic Tort (30)
Instead of Auto) Negligent Breach of Contract/ Ino uran torn ie caamety tex
/D (Personal Injury! Warranty: (ari provisionally com
Property Damage roma beath) Other Breach of ContraclWarranty case type listed above) (41)
Tort Collections (e.g., money owed, open Enforcement of Judgment
‘Asbestos (04) book accounts) (02) Enforcement of Judgment (20)
Asbestos Property Damage Collection Case-Seller Plalntiff Abstract of Judgment (Out of
‘Asbestos Personal Injury/ Other Promissory Note/Collections Count
Wrongful Death Case Confession of Judgment (non-
Produet Liability (not asbestos or Insurance Coverage (not provisionally domestic relations)
toxie/environmental) (24) complex) (18) Sister State Judgment
Medical Malpractice (45) Auto Subrogation Administratlva Agency Award
Medical Malpractice— Other Coverage (not unpaid taxes)
Physicians & Surgeons ‘Other Contract (37) Petition/Certification of Entry of
Other Professional Health Care Contractual Fraud Judgment on Unpaid Taxes
Malpractice Other Contract Dispute Other Enforcement of Judgment
Other PI/PD/WD (23) Real Property Case
Premises Liabillty (2.9., slip Eminent Domain/inverse Miscellaneous Civil Complaint
and fall) ‘Condemnation (14) RICO (27)
Intentional Bodily Injury/PDAWD Wrongful Eviction (33) Other Complaint (not specified
(eg., assault, vandalism) Other Real Property (e.9., aulet title) (26) apove) (42)
Intentional infliction of Writ of Possession of Real Property Declaratory Relief Only
Emotional Distress Mortgage Foreclosure Injunctive Relief Only (non-
Negligent infliction of Quiet Title harassment)
Emotional Distress Other Real Property (not eminent Mechanics Lien
Other P/PDWD domain, landlorditenant, or Other Commercial Complaint
Non-PUPDAWD (Other) Tort foreclosure) other Onl Compla
Business ToryUnfair Business Untawful Detainer #t snonhon complex)
Practice (07) oo Commercial (31) Miscellaneous Civil Petition
Civil Rights (6.9. discrimination, Residential (32) Partnership and Corporate
false arrest) (not clvil Drugs (38) (if the case involves illegal Governance (21)
harassment) (08) drugs, check this item; otherwise, Other Petition (not specified
Defamation (e.g., slander, libel) as Commercial or Residential) above) (43)
(13) Judicial Review Civil Harassment
Fraud (16) Asset Forfeiture (05) Workplace Violence
Intellectual Property (19) Petition Re: Arbitration Award (11) Elder/Dependent Adult
Professional Negligence (25) Writ of Mandate (02) Abuse
Legal Malpractice ‘Writ-Administrative Mandamus Election Contest
Other Professional Malpractice ‘Writ-Mandamus on Limited Court Patition for Name Change
(not medical or lagal) Case Matter Petition for Relief From Late
fs Other Non-PuPDNYD Tort (35) Writ-Other Limited Cour Case Claim
:mployment Review Other Civil
Wrongful Termination (36) Other Judicial Review (39) er Gui Petton
Other Employment (18) Review of Health Officer Order
Notice of AppeatLabor
Commissioner Appeals
oe 4 2007)
civi CASE COVER SHEET
Page Bof206/84/2018 14:33 9497240787 PAGE @5/11
ORIGINAL
1 ||Nima Nami (SBN 183042) SUMMONS ISSUED
Allenbaugh Nami Shabahangi LLP sen erankiocl Chimty Superior Court
2 || 625 Market Street, Penthouse
|| San Francisco, Califomia 94105 JUN - 7 2010
Telephone: (949) 612-3839
4 CLERKO) URT
5 |[Attomeys for Plaintiff By: 4tt Deputy Grek
First Crush Restaurant CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE SET‘? NAT?
6 || and Bar, Inc.
7 Nov -5 2010 9% AM
DEPARTMENT 212
8
9 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
10 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
Ml CGC-10.5005'é
12 CASE NO.:
3
FIRST CRUSH RESTAURANT & BAR OF | COMPLAINT FOR:
14 | SAN FRANCISCO, INC. a California
Corporation,
15 1. CONVERSION;
16 Plaintiff, 2, BREACH OF DUTY OF
0 5
17 vs. 3. FRUAD.
18 |! ty AN MANUEL GRION RIVAS an
19 || individual and DELIA MUNOZ, an
individual, and DOES 1 THROUGH 25, Unlimited Civil Case
20 || inclusive
a
22 COMES NOW, FIRST CURSH RESTAURANT & BAR OF SAN FRANCISCO
23
(“Plaintiff”) for its causes of actions against JUAN MANUEL GIRON RIVAS
24
5 (“hereinafter Giron”) and DELIA MONOZ (“Munoz”), an individual (collectively
26 “Defendants”) alleges as follows.
7
28
COMPLAINT FOR CONVERSION, BREACH OF DUTY, AND FRUAD
-1-
42363.186/84/2618 14:33 9497248787 PAGE 06/11
Do or nuner BW N
10
ll
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
GENE! L, ATIONS
1. Plaintiff is a Corporation duly organized under the laws of California.
2. Plaintiff alleges on information and belief that Defendants, Giron and
Munoz, husband and wife are, and at all material times relevant to this Complaint
were residents of San Francisco County.
3. Plaintiff alleges on information and belief that Defendants, and each of
them, doing the things hereinafter alleged, were acting as the agents of their
remaining co-defendants identified here in as DOES 1 through 25 inclusive.
4. Plaintiff represents that the allegations of this Complaint are stated on
information and belief and have evidentiary support or are likely to have evidentiary
support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery.
5. Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities of Defendants sued
herein as Does 1 through 25, inclusive, and therefore sue these Defendants by such
fictitious names. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that these
fictitiously named Defendants are totally or partially responsible for Plaintiff's
damages. Plaintiff will amend this Complaint to allege their true names and capacities
when the same is ascertained.
6. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that at all times
mentioned herein, each Defendant, whether actually or fictitiously named, was the
principal, agent or employee of each other Defendant, and in acting as such principal,
or within the course and scope of each employment or agency, took some part in the
acts and omissions thereinafter set forth by reason of which each Defendant is liable to
Plaintiff for the relief prayed for herein.
COMPLAINT FOR CONVERSION, BREACH OF DUTY, AND FRUAD
4236316/04/2018 14:33 9497248787
oe YN A HW FF WN =>
RY NY N YN NY HD Boe Be me eH SB Se Se Be
eaxN nH PF BH = SSO we NIA DNA FB wWwNH eH SC
PAGE @7/11
7. Beginning in December of 2004, Defendant Giron worked as a
dishwasher for First Crush Restaurant (hereinafter “the restaurant”). Beginning in
July of 2006, Defendant Munoz worked as a dishwasher at the restaurant.
8. Unbeknownst to Plaintiff, at some point during the course of their
employment, Giron began working Munoz’s shifts at the restaurant as well as his own
schedtiled shifts. Giron did so by docking out at the end of his shift and then
immediately docking back in as Munoz. This practice continued unbeknownst to
Plaintiff until on or about July 10, 2009.
9. In July of 2009, Plaintiff learned that Giron had been stealing inventory
from First Crush Restaurant and reselling the stolen items to other restaurants. On
one occasion, Plaintiff learned that Giron stole a box of Grey Goose Vodka and sold it
to New Delhi Restaurant, which is located next door to Plaintiff's restaurant. Plaintiff
investigated the theft allegations and interviewed individual witnesses who had
knowledge of Giron’s theft. On or about July 9, 2009, Plaintiff confirming that Giron
was in fact stealing, and thus terminated his employment at the restaurant. Plaintiff
states on information and belief, that during the course of his employment, Defendant
Giron has been stealing inventory from the restaurant and selling the same to
Plaintiffs competitors or otherwise converted the inventory for his own personal use.
10. A few months after Plaintiff terminated Giron’s employment, Plaintiff
received a Notice of Claim from the California Department of Industrial Relations
(“Labor Comumissioner”), where Giron alleged that Plaintiff had failed to pay him
overtime wages for the hours he worked by secretly clocking in as his wife, Munoz.
Plaintiff learned for the first time that Giron was secretly working his wife's shifts
when Plaintiff received the Notice of Claim from the Labor Commissioner.
COMPLAINT FOR CONVERSION, BREACH OF DUTY, AND FRUAD
47363.1Q6/84/2018 14:33 9497248787 PAGE 68/11
FRIST CAUSE OF ACTION
(Conversion Against Defendant Juan Manuel Giron Rivas)
41. Plaintiff refers to and incorporates by reference as is set forth herein at
length the allegations contained in Paxagraphs 1 through 10 of this Complaint.
12. Onor about July 3, 2009, Plaintiff was the owner with right to possession of
certain personal property consisting of a box of Grey Goose Vodka.
43. Onor about July 3, 2009, Giron took inventory from the restaurant, including but
not limited to a box of Grey Goose Vodka, which belong to Plaintiff and sold the same to New
Dethi Restaurant and pocketed the proceeds from the sale.
14. Asa proximate result of Giron’s theft of inventory, Plaintiff has suffered
monetary damages in an amount to be proven at trial.
15. Asaresult of Rivas’ conversion of inventory, which belonging to his employer,
Plaintiff is entitled to punitive damages against Rivas in an amount to be proven at trial.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
(Breach of Duty of Loyalty Against All Defendants)
16. Plaintiff refers to and incorporates by reference as is set forth herein at
length the allegations contained in Paragraphs 1 through 15 of this Complaint.
17. Defendants Munoz and Giron as employees, owed Plaintiff an undivided
duty of loyalty.
18. Defendant Giron, by stealing inventory from Plaintiffs restaurant, and
selling it to Plaintiff's direct competitors, breached his duty of loyalty to Plaintiff.
COMPLAINT FOR CONVERSION, BREACH OF DUTY, AND FRUAD
42363186/84/2018 14:33 9497248707 PAGE 99/11
Co oN DH FF YO NH
Se oe eS
Ne Oo
oe
aR
49. Furthermore, Defendant Giron, by secretly docking in as Munoz and
working his wife’s shifts, breached his duty of loyalty to Plaintiff.
20. Defendant Munoz, by accepting paychecks from Plaintiff beginning from
July of 2006 through July of 2009, but failing to show up to work, or otherwise provide
any services, breached her duty of loyalty to Plaintiff.
21. As a proximate cause of Defendant Giron and Munoz’s breach of their
duty of loyalty as described herein, Plaintiff has incurred monetary damages, induding
but not limited to, loss of inventory, which Giron sold to other restaurants directly in
competition with Plaintiff. Asa further proximate cause of Defendants’ breach of their
duty of loyalty, Plaintiff has incurred damages, including but not limited to paying
Munoz for work she did not perform.
IRD SEO ON
(Fraud Against All Defendants)
22. Plaintiff refers to and incorporates by reference as is set forth herein at
length the allegations contained in Paragraphs 1 through 21 of this Complaint.
23. Defendant Giron, by clocking out at the end of his shift, represented to
Plaintiff that he was that he was working his shift only. Defendant Munoz, by
accepting her paycheck for hours worked at the restaurant, represented to Plaintiff
that she was actually working at the restaurant in consideration for her paycheck.
Defendants Munoz and Rivas, however, failed to reveal and suppressed the fact that
Munoz was not actually working at the restaurant, and that Defendant Giron was
secretly clocking in for Munoz and working his wife’s shifts as well his own shifts. The
suppression of fact that Giron was actually working his shift and his wife shifts, was
_|
COMPLAINT FOR CONVERSION, BREACH OF DUTY, AND FRUAD
“5H
2363.106/64/2618 14:33 9497240707 PAGE 16/11
likely to mislead Plaintiff and did in fact mislead Plaintiff in light of the other
representations made by the Defendants as set forth herein.
24. The representations and failures to disclose information and suppressions
of information herein alleged to have been made by Defendants were made with the
intent to induce Plaintiff to act in the manner herein alleged in reliance thereon.
25, Plaintiff, at the time these failures to disclose and suppressions of facts
occurred, and at the time Plaintiff took the actions herein. alleged, was ignorant of the
existence of the facts that the Defendants suppressed and failed to disdose. If Plaintiff
had been aware of the existence of the facts not disdosed by Defendants, Plaintiff
would have prevented Giron from secretly working Munoz’s shifts, and would not
have paid Munoz, who was not actually working at the restaurant.
26. Inreliance of Defendants representations that each of them were actually
working at the restaurant, and as a proximate result of the fraudulent conduct of
Defendants as herein alleged, Plaintiff continued to issue paychecks to Munoz, even
though Munoz was not actually working, by reason of which Plaintiff has suffered
general and special damages.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays as follows:
1. That the Court order judgment in favor of Plaintiff for the Second and
Third Cause of Actions against Defendants, jointly and severally, in amounts to be
proven at trial, but not less than $25,000.00;
2, That the Court order judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against
Defendant Giron for the First Cause of Action in amounts to be proven at tial
COMPLAINT FOR CONVERSION, BREACH OF DUTY, AND FRUAD
42363.1@6/84/2018 14:33 9497246787 PAGE 11/11
oon nu Fw Nn
3. That the Court order judgment in favor of Plaintiff against Defendants
for all such damages, claims, liabilities, costs, expenses and attorneys’ fees arising from
or in connection with bringing this action;
4. That the Court award Plaintiff prejudgment and post-judgment interest
on all of the above; and
5. That the Court award Plaintiff such other and further relief as the Court
may deem just and appropriate.
DATED: June 4, 2010
By:
ima Nami, Esq.
Attorney for Plaintiff
COMPLAINT FOR CONVERSION, BREACH OF DUTY, AND FRUAD
42363.1
Preview
ANUINNLLLNALL SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Document Scanning Lead Sheet Jun-08-2010 10:16 am Case Number: CGC-10-500516 Filing Date: Jun-07-2010 10:09 Juke Box: 001 Image: 02871734 COMPLAINT =IRST CRUSH RESTAURANT & BAR OF SAN FRANCISCO, INC VS. JUAN MANUEL RIVA 001002871734 Instructions: Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.06/04/2018 14:17 9497248707 PAGE @2/11 ORIGINAL SUM-100 SUMMONS polSB SESE oer (CITACION JUDICIAL) NOTICE TO DEFENDANT: ‘ (AVISO AL DEMANDADO): . 2; Oe A DEL GRION RIVAS an individual and DELIA MUNOZ, an f: individual, and DOES 1 THROUGH 25, inclusive ie; i{ YOU ARE BEING SUED BY PLAINTIFF: Es (LO ESTA DEMANDANDO EL DEMANDANTE): by : First RS? CRUSH RESTAURANT & BAR, INE=4 OF SAN FRANCISCO, ING. a Ca tee vlan Cov povadvela [ NoTICET You have been sued. The court may decide against you without your being heard unless you respond within 30 days. Read the aan below. served on the plaintiff. A letter or phone call will not protect you, Your written reeponse must be in proper legal form if you want the court to hear your case. There may be a court form that you can use for your response. You can find these cour forms an Online Self-Help Center (www. courtinfo.ca.gov/setnelp), your county law library, or the courthouse: nearest you. If you cannot psy the filing fee, ask the court clerk for a fee waiver form. If you do not file your response on time, you may lose the case by default, and your wages, money, and property may be taken without further ‘warning from the court. ‘There are other legal requirements. You may want to call an attorney right away. If you do not know an attorney, you may want to call an attorney referral service. If you cannot afford an attorney, you may be eligible for free legal services from a nonprofit legal services program. You can locate thesa nonprofit groups at the Califomia Legal Services Web site (www.lawhelpealifornia.org), the California Courts Online Self-Help Center (waww.courtinfo.ca.gowselihelp), or by contacting your local court or county ber association, NOTE: The court has @ statutory lien for walved fees and costs on any settlement or arbitration award of $10,000 or more ine civil case. The court's lien must be paid before the court will dismiss the case. jAVISOI Lo hen demandado. Sino responde dentro de 30 dias, Ja corte puede decidir en su contra sin escuchar su version. Lea la informacion a colegio de abogados locales, AVISO: Por ley, la corte tiene derecho @ reclamar las cuotes y los costos exentos por imponer un gravamen sobre cualquier recuperecién de $10,000 6 més de valor recibida mediante un acuerdo o una concesi6n de arbitraje en un caso de derecho civil. Tiene que pagar ef grevamen de la corte antes de que la corle pueda desechar el caso. The name and address of the court is: NUM : - 6 (El nombre y direccién de la corte es): . . 0) . Gan Francisco Superior Court, 400 McAllister Street, San Francisco, C, D N05! 94102 The name, address, and telephone number of plaintiff's attorney, or plaintiff without an attorney, is: (El nombre, la direccion y el] numero de teléfono del abogado del demandante, o del demandante que no tiene abogado, es): Nima Nami, 625 Market Street, 16th Floor, San Francisco CA 9415 pate:J JUN -72 . y tH pave: SVN 772010 CLERK OF THE COURT Gur by P_NATT f ety (For proof of service of this summons, use Proof of Service of Summons (form POS-010).) (Para prueba de entrega de esta citatién use el formulario Proof of Service of Summons, (POS-010)). NOTICE TO THE PERSON SERVED: You are served 1. [_] as an individual defendant. 2. [] as the person sued under the fictitious name of (specify): 3, (J on behalf of (specify): under: (_] CCP 416.10 (corporation) Co CCP 416.60 (minor) (5) cep 416.20 (defunct corporation) [1] CCP 416.70 (conservatee) CCP 416.40 (association or partnership) (J Cccp 416.30 (authorized person) [--] other (specify): 4. [] by personal delivery on (date): eset age 1 of 4 Tair Cano Ab Civil Beanadhins 66 417 2 485,@6/04/2018 14:17 9497248707 PAGE @3/11 ORIGINAL CM-0' [aggoaney on Pat WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address) | FOR COURT USE ONLY ima Nami (183042) Allenbaugh Nami Shabahangi, LLP a0 TELEPHONE NO: (949) 610-8535, FAXNO: San Frarfcisco eunty Superior COM! ATTORNEY FOR (Name): 2010 JSUPERIOR COURT OF ae county of SAN FRANCISCO JUN -7 strcer appress: 400 McAllister Street MAILING ADDRESS: CLEBK OF THE COURT cry ano zie cove: San Francisco, CA 94102 BY: Deputy Clerk BRANCH NAME: ‘CASE NAME: FIRST CRUSH vs. JUAN MANUEL GIRON RIVAS et al CIVIL GASE COVER SHEET Complex Case Designation CHE ABER [Z] uniimited [_] Limitea Oe Dewianaton G T0.500516 (Amount (Amount ounter joinder Suge demanded demanded is Filed with first appearance by defendant exceeds $25,000) _ $25,000 or less) (Cal, Rules of Court, rule 3.402) DEPT: ‘ems 1-6 below must be completed (see instructions on page 2). 7. Check one box below for the case type that best describes this case: Auto Tort Contract Provisionally Complex Civil Litigation ‘Auto (22) [_} Breach of contractwarranty (06) (Cal. Rules of Court, rules 3.400-3.403) Uninsured motorist (46) Co Rule 3.740 collections (09) LC) Antitrust/Trade regulation (03) Other PUPDIWD (Personal Injury/Property [_] other collections (09) CJ Construction defect (10) aneoenronat Death) Tort (J insurance coverage (18) [J] Mass tort (40) ‘Asbestos (04) [1 other contract (37) [2 secutties tigation (28) [_] Product tiabiny (24) Real Property [_] Environmental/Toxlc tort (30) [_] medical malpractice (48) (] Eminent domain/inverse [1 insurance coverage claims arising from the [} other puppawn (23) condemnation (14) above listed provisionally complex case Non-PUPDIWD (Other) Tort Wrongful evietion (33) types (41) [J pusinoss tortvuntair business practice (07) [£1 otter real property (26) Enforcement of Judgment [2d ewitrignts (08) Unlawful Detalner TJ Enforcement of judgment (20) [J Defamation (13) L_} Commercial (31) Miscellaneous Civil Complaint [Fraud (16) [J Residential (32) (J) rico es [1] imetiectuat property (19) [1 orugs (38) [1 other complaint (not specified above) (42) L__] Professionat negligence (25) Judicial Review Miscellaneous Civil Petition CI Ole ne PHPDIWD tom (35) J Asse et ara (i) [_] Partnership and corporate governance (21) loyme! ‘ion re: at in awi i 4 [__] Wrongful termination (36) (21 wrt of mandate (02) [1 other petition (ot spected above) (43) [1 other employment (15) Other judicial review (99) _ 2. This case LJis i isnot complex under rule 3.400 of the California Rules of Court. If the case Is complex, mark the factors requiring exceptional judicial management: ald Large number of separately represented parties d. Oo Large number of witnesses b. oO Extensive motion practice raising difficult or novel e. CI Coordination with related actions pending in one or more court: isgues that will be time-consuming to resolve in other counties, states, or countries, or in a federal court c. L_] Substantial amount of documentary evidence ¢. [] Substantial postjudgment judicial supervision 3, Remedies sought (check all that apply): a.[¥] monetary b. [7 nonmonetary; declaratory or injunctive relief ¢ (2 |puritive 4, Number of causes of action (specify): 5. Thiscase [_]is isnot aclass action suit. 6. If there are any known related cases, file and serve a notice of related case. (You may use form CM-015.) Date: June 4, 2010 : . Nima Nami > —_— & (TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY FOR PARTY) NOTICE « Plaintiff must file this cover sheet with the first paper filed in the action or proceeding (except small claims cases or cases filed under the Probate Code, Family Code, or Welfare and Institutions Code). (Cal. Rules of Court, tule 3.220.) Failure to file may result in sanctions. * File this cover sheet in addition to any cover sheet required by local court rule. © if this case is complex under rule 3.400 et seq. of the California Rules ‘of Court, you must serve a copy of this cover sheet on all other parties to the action or proceeding. © Unless this is a collections case under rule 3.740 or a complex case, this cover sheet will be used for statistical purposes only. aga tof ——= — "2.220, 3.400-.403, ——s <= —— ———— — = Cal, Rules of Cour, rules 2 —<$— ——— — mht FACE CAVED CUFET6/84/2016 14:17 9497248787 PAGE 64/11 CM-010 INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO COMPLETE THE COVER SHEET To Plaintiffs and Others Filing First Papers. if you are filing a first paper (for example, a complaint) in a civil case, you must complete and file, along with your first paper, the Civil Case Cover Sheet contained on page 1. This information will be used to compile sheet must be filed only with your initial paper. Failure to file a cover sheet with the first paper filed in a civil case may subject a party, its counsel, or both to sanctions under rules 2.30 and 3.220 of the Califomia Rules of Court. To Parties in Rule 3.740 Collections Cases. A "collections case" under rule 3.740 is defined as an action for recovery of money owed in a sum stated to be certain that is not more than $25,000, exclusive of interest and attorney's fees, arising from a transaction in which property, services, or money was acquired on credit. A collections case does not include an action seeking the following: (1) tort damages, (2) punitive damages, (3) recovery of real property, (4) recovery of personal property, or (5) a prejudgment writ of attachment. The identification of a case a6 a rul time-for-service requirements and case case will be subject to the requirements for service an To Parties in Complex Cases. In complex cases onh case Is complex. If a plaintiff believes the case is comp! completing the appropriate boxes in items 1 and 2. If a plaintiff designates a case as management rules, le 3.740 collections case on this form means that it will be exempt from the general unless a defendant files a responsive pleading. A rule 3.740 collections d obtaining a judgment in rule 3.740, ly, parties must also use the Civil Case Cover Sheet to designate whether the lex under rule 3.400 of the California Rules of Court, this must be indicated by complex, the cover sheet must be served with the complaint on all parties to the action. A defendant may file and serve no later than the time of its first appearance a joinder in the plaintiffs designation, a counter-designation that the case is not complex, or, if the case is complex. the plaintiff has made no designation, a designation that CASE TYPES AND EXAMPLES Auto Tort Contract Provisionally Complex Civil Litigation (Cal. Auto (22)-Personal Injury/Property Breach of Contract/Warranty (06) Rules of Court Rules 3.400-3.403) Damage/Wrongful Death Breach of Rental/Lease Antitrus/Trade Regulation (03) Uninsured Motorist (46) (if the Contraet (not unlawful detainer Construction Defect (10) case involves an uninsured or wrongful eviction) Claims Involving Mass Tort (40) motorist claim subject to Contract/Warranty Breach—Seller Securities Litigation (28) arbitration, check this item Plaintiff (not fraud or negligence) Environmental/Toxic Tort (30) Instead of Auto) Negligent Breach of Contract/ Ino uran torn ie caamety tex /D (Personal Injury! Warranty: (ari provisionally com Property Damage roma beath) Other Breach of ContraclWarranty case type listed above) (41) Tort Collections (e.g., money owed, open Enforcement of Judgment ‘Asbestos (04) book accounts) (02) Enforcement of Judgment (20) Asbestos Property Damage Collection Case-Seller Plalntiff Abstract of Judgment (Out of ‘Asbestos Personal Injury/ Other Promissory Note/Collections Count Wrongful Death Case Confession of Judgment (non- Produet Liability (not asbestos or Insurance Coverage (not provisionally domestic relations) toxie/environmental) (24) complex) (18) Sister State Judgment Medical Malpractice (45) Auto Subrogation Administratlva Agency Award Medical Malpractice— Other Coverage (not unpaid taxes) Physicians & Surgeons ‘Other Contract (37) Petition/Certification of Entry of Other Professional Health Care Contractual Fraud Judgment on Unpaid Taxes Malpractice Other Contract Dispute Other Enforcement of Judgment Other PI/PD/WD (23) Real Property Case Premises Liabillty (2.9., slip Eminent Domain/inverse Miscellaneous Civil Complaint and fall) ‘Condemnation (14) RICO (27) Intentional Bodily Injury/PDAWD Wrongful Eviction (33) Other Complaint (not specified (eg., assault, vandalism) Other Real Property (e.9., aulet title) (26) apove) (42) Intentional infliction of Writ of Possession of Real Property Declaratory Relief Only Emotional Distress Mortgage Foreclosure Injunctive Relief Only (non- Negligent infliction of Quiet Title harassment) Emotional Distress Other Real Property (not eminent Mechanics Lien Other P/PDWD domain, landlorditenant, or Other Commercial Complaint Non-PUPDAWD (Other) Tort foreclosure) other Onl Compla Business ToryUnfair Business Untawful Detainer #t snonhon complex) Practice (07) oo Commercial (31) Miscellaneous Civil Petition Civil Rights (6.9. discrimination, Residential (32) Partnership and Corporate false arrest) (not clvil Drugs (38) (if the case involves illegal Governance (21) harassment) (08) drugs, check this item; otherwise, Other Petition (not specified Defamation (e.g., slander, libel) as Commercial or Residential) above) (43) (13) Judicial Review Civil Harassment Fraud (16) Asset Forfeiture (05) Workplace Violence Intellectual Property (19) Petition Re: Arbitration Award (11) Elder/Dependent Adult Professional Negligence (25) Writ of Mandate (02) Abuse Legal Malpractice ‘Writ-Administrative Mandamus Election Contest Other Professional Malpractice ‘Writ-Mandamus on Limited Court Patition for Name Change (not medical or lagal) Case Matter Petition for Relief From Late fs Other Non-PuPDNYD Tort (35) Writ-Other Limited Cour Case Claim :mployment Review Other Civil Wrongful Termination (36) Other Judicial Review (39) er Gui Petton Other Employment (18) Review of Health Officer Order Notice of AppeatLabor Commissioner Appeals oe 4 2007) civi CASE COVER SHEET Page Bof206/84/2018 14:33 9497240787 PAGE @5/11 ORIGINAL 1 ||Nima Nami (SBN 183042) SUMMONS ISSUED Allenbaugh Nami Shabahangi LLP sen erankiocl Chimty Superior Court 2 || 625 Market Street, Penthouse || San Francisco, Califomia 94105 JUN - 7 2010 Telephone: (949) 612-3839 4 CLERKO) URT 5 |[Attomeys for Plaintiff By: 4tt Deputy Grek First Crush Restaurant CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE SET‘? NAT? 6 || and Bar, Inc. 7 Nov -5 2010 9% AM DEPARTMENT 212 8 9 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Ml CGC-10.5005'é 12 CASE NO.: 3 FIRST CRUSH RESTAURANT & BAR OF | COMPLAINT FOR: 14 | SAN FRANCISCO, INC. a California Corporation, 15 1. CONVERSION; 16 Plaintiff, 2, BREACH OF DUTY OF 0 5 17 vs. 3. FRUAD. 18 |! ty AN MANUEL GRION RIVAS an 19 || individual and DELIA MUNOZ, an individual, and DOES 1 THROUGH 25, Unlimited Civil Case 20 || inclusive a 22 COMES NOW, FIRST CURSH RESTAURANT & BAR OF SAN FRANCISCO 23 (“Plaintiff”) for its causes of actions against JUAN MANUEL GIRON RIVAS 24 5 (“hereinafter Giron”) and DELIA MONOZ (“Munoz”), an individual (collectively 26 “Defendants”) alleges as follows. 7 28 COMPLAINT FOR CONVERSION, BREACH OF DUTY, AND FRUAD -1- 42363.186/84/2618 14:33 9497248787 PAGE 06/11 Do or nuner BW N 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 GENE! L, ATIONS 1. Plaintiff is a Corporation duly organized under the laws of California. 2. Plaintiff alleges on information and belief that Defendants, Giron and Munoz, husband and wife are, and at all material times relevant to this Complaint were residents of San Francisco County. 3. Plaintiff alleges on information and belief that Defendants, and each of them, doing the things hereinafter alleged, were acting as the agents of their remaining co-defendants identified here in as DOES 1 through 25 inclusive. 4. Plaintiff represents that the allegations of this Complaint are stated on information and belief and have evidentiary support or are likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery. 5. Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and capacities of Defendants sued herein as Does 1 through 25, inclusive, and therefore sue these Defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that these fictitiously named Defendants are totally or partially responsible for Plaintiff's damages. Plaintiff will amend this Complaint to allege their true names and capacities when the same is ascertained. 6. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that at all times mentioned herein, each Defendant, whether actually or fictitiously named, was the principal, agent or employee of each other Defendant, and in acting as such principal, or within the course and scope of each employment or agency, took some part in the acts and omissions thereinafter set forth by reason of which each Defendant is liable to Plaintiff for the relief prayed for herein. COMPLAINT FOR CONVERSION, BREACH OF DUTY, AND FRUAD 4236316/04/2018 14:33 9497248787 oe YN A HW FF WN => RY NY N YN NY HD Boe Be me eH SB Se Se Be eaxN nH PF BH = SSO we NIA DNA FB wWwNH eH SC PAGE @7/11 7. Beginning in December of 2004, Defendant Giron worked as a dishwasher for First Crush Restaurant (hereinafter “the restaurant”). Beginning in July of 2006, Defendant Munoz worked as a dishwasher at the restaurant. 8. Unbeknownst to Plaintiff, at some point during the course of their employment, Giron began working Munoz’s shifts at the restaurant as well as his own schedtiled shifts. Giron did so by docking out at the end of his shift and then immediately docking back in as Munoz. This practice continued unbeknownst to Plaintiff until on or about July 10, 2009. 9. In July of 2009, Plaintiff learned that Giron had been stealing inventory from First Crush Restaurant and reselling the stolen items to other restaurants. On one occasion, Plaintiff learned that Giron stole a box of Grey Goose Vodka and sold it to New Delhi Restaurant, which is located next door to Plaintiff's restaurant. Plaintiff investigated the theft allegations and interviewed individual witnesses who had knowledge of Giron’s theft. On or about July 9, 2009, Plaintiff confirming that Giron was in fact stealing, and thus terminated his employment at the restaurant. Plaintiff states on information and belief, that during the course of his employment, Defendant Giron has been stealing inventory from the restaurant and selling the same to Plaintiffs competitors or otherwise converted the inventory for his own personal use. 10. A few months after Plaintiff terminated Giron’s employment, Plaintiff received a Notice of Claim from the California Department of Industrial Relations (“Labor Comumissioner”), where Giron alleged that Plaintiff had failed to pay him overtime wages for the hours he worked by secretly clocking in as his wife, Munoz. Plaintiff learned for the first time that Giron was secretly working his wife's shifts when Plaintiff received the Notice of Claim from the Labor Commissioner. COMPLAINT FOR CONVERSION, BREACH OF DUTY, AND FRUAD 47363.1Q6/84/2018 14:33 9497248787 PAGE 68/11 FRIST CAUSE OF ACTION (Conversion Against Defendant Juan Manuel Giron Rivas) 41. Plaintiff refers to and incorporates by reference as is set forth herein at length the allegations contained in Paxagraphs 1 through 10 of this Complaint. 12. Onor about July 3, 2009, Plaintiff was the owner with right to possession of certain personal property consisting of a box of Grey Goose Vodka. 43. Onor about July 3, 2009, Giron took inventory from the restaurant, including but not limited to a box of Grey Goose Vodka, which belong to Plaintiff and sold the same to New Dethi Restaurant and pocketed the proceeds from the sale. 14. Asa proximate result of Giron’s theft of inventory, Plaintiff has suffered monetary damages in an amount to be proven at trial. 15. Asaresult of Rivas’ conversion of inventory, which belonging to his employer, Plaintiff is entitled to punitive damages against Rivas in an amount to be proven at trial. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION (Breach of Duty of Loyalty Against All Defendants) 16. Plaintiff refers to and incorporates by reference as is set forth herein at length the allegations contained in Paragraphs 1 through 15 of this Complaint. 17. Defendants Munoz and Giron as employees, owed Plaintiff an undivided duty of loyalty. 18. Defendant Giron, by stealing inventory from Plaintiffs restaurant, and selling it to Plaintiff's direct competitors, breached his duty of loyalty to Plaintiff. COMPLAINT FOR CONVERSION, BREACH OF DUTY, AND FRUAD 42363186/84/2018 14:33 9497248707 PAGE 99/11 Co oN DH FF YO NH Se oe eS Ne Oo oe aR 49. Furthermore, Defendant Giron, by secretly docking in as Munoz and working his wife’s shifts, breached his duty of loyalty to Plaintiff. 20. Defendant Munoz, by accepting paychecks from Plaintiff beginning from July of 2006 through July of 2009, but failing to show up to work, or otherwise provide any services, breached her duty of loyalty to Plaintiff. 21. As a proximate cause of Defendant Giron and Munoz’s breach of their duty of loyalty as described herein, Plaintiff has incurred monetary damages, induding but not limited to, loss of inventory, which Giron sold to other restaurants directly in competition with Plaintiff. Asa further proximate cause of Defendants’ breach of their duty of loyalty, Plaintiff has incurred damages, including but not limited to paying Munoz for work she did not perform. IRD SEO ON (Fraud Against All Defendants) 22. Plaintiff refers to and incorporates by reference as is set forth herein at length the allegations contained in Paragraphs 1 through 21 of this Complaint. 23. Defendant Giron, by clocking out at the end of his shift, represented to Plaintiff that he was that he was working his shift only. Defendant Munoz, by accepting her paycheck for hours worked at the restaurant, represented to Plaintiff that she was actually working at the restaurant in consideration for her paycheck. Defendants Munoz and Rivas, however, failed to reveal and suppressed the fact that Munoz was not actually working at the restaurant, and that Defendant Giron was secretly clocking in for Munoz and working his wife’s shifts as well his own shifts. The suppression of fact that Giron was actually working his shift and his wife shifts, was _| COMPLAINT FOR CONVERSION, BREACH OF DUTY, AND FRUAD “5H 2363.106/64/2618 14:33 9497240707 PAGE 16/11 likely to mislead Plaintiff and did in fact mislead Plaintiff in light of the other representations made by the Defendants as set forth herein. 24. The representations and failures to disclose information and suppressions of information herein alleged to have been made by Defendants were made with the intent to induce Plaintiff to act in the manner herein alleged in reliance thereon. 25, Plaintiff, at the time these failures to disclose and suppressions of facts occurred, and at the time Plaintiff took the actions herein. alleged, was ignorant of the existence of the facts that the Defendants suppressed and failed to disdose. If Plaintiff had been aware of the existence of the facts not disdosed by Defendants, Plaintiff would have prevented Giron from secretly working Munoz’s shifts, and would not have paid Munoz, who was not actually working at the restaurant. 26. Inreliance of Defendants representations that each of them were actually working at the restaurant, and as a proximate result of the fraudulent conduct of Defendants as herein alleged, Plaintiff continued to issue paychecks to Munoz, even though Munoz was not actually working, by reason of which Plaintiff has suffered general and special damages. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays as follows: 1. That the Court order judgment in favor of Plaintiff for the Second and Third Cause of Actions against Defendants, jointly and severally, in amounts to be proven at trial, but not less than $25,000.00; 2, That the Court order judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant Giron for the First Cause of Action in amounts to be proven at tial COMPLAINT FOR CONVERSION, BREACH OF DUTY, AND FRUAD 42363.1@6/84/2018 14:33 9497246787 PAGE 11/11 oon nu Fw Nn 3. That the Court order judgment in favor of Plaintiff against Defendants for all such damages, claims, liabilities, costs, expenses and attorneys’ fees arising from or in connection with bringing this action; 4. That the Court award Plaintiff prejudgment and post-judgment interest on all of the above; and 5. That the Court award Plaintiff such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and appropriate. DATED: June 4, 2010 By: ima Nami, Esq. Attorney for Plaintiff COMPLAINT FOR CONVERSION, BREACH OF DUTY, AND FRUAD 42363.1