Complaint,Petition: Redenbaugh VS Moodie

On September 21, 2021 a Complaint,Petition was filed involving a dispute between Russell Redenbaugh, and Dahlia Moodie, Future Power Corporation, for Unlimited Civil in the District Court of Alameda County.

Preview
JOSHUA D. BRYSK, SBN 184200 FILED BY FAX
ALAMEDA COUNTY
September 21, 2021

CIRRUS
6600 Koll LAW
CenterPC Parkway. Suite 250 THE SUPERIOR COURT
94566 By Cheryl Clark, Deputy
Pleasanton, California
Telephone: (925) 463-1073 CASE NUMBER:
Facsimile: (925) 463-2937 RG21113936
Attorney for Plaintiff
RUSSELL REDENBAUGH

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA

UNLIMITED JURISDICTION

RUSSELL REDENBAUGH, an individual, Case No.:

Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR:
vs.
BREACH OF CONTRACT
DAHLIA MOODIE, an individual; FUTURE BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY
ye

POWER CORPORATION, a California BREACH OF THE IMPLIED
Corporation, DBA ENERGY COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND
CONSERVATION OPTIONS; and DOES 1- FAIR DEALING
20. UNJUST ENRICHMENT
Ue

CONVERSION
eS

Defendants. INTENTIONAL MISREPRESENTATION
COIN

NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION
FINANCIAL ABUSE OF AN ELDER [Cal.
ee

Welf. & Inst. Code § 15657]
MONEY HAD AND RECEIVED
— im VO

. CONSTRUCTIVE TRUST
=o:

. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF
EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
. NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF
it
nN

EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

|
Plaintiff RUSSELL REDENBAUGH (“Plaintiff”), in his complaint against Defendants Dahlia

Moodie, Future Power Corporation, and Does 1-20, alleges as follows:

-t-
COMPLAINT
FARedenbaugh, RussellPide\Complaint.
docx
PRELIMINARY ALLEGATIONS

1. This is a civil action for breach of an agreement, conversion, fraud, and infliction of emotional
hw

distress arising out of Defendant’s unlawful misappropriation of Plaintiff’s funds, all in direct
ery

contravention of the parties’ agreements and/or duties owed to Plaintiff.

2. Plaintiffis an individual residing in Glen Hills, Pennsylvania.
ta

6 3. Defendant DAHLIA MOODIE is an individual who, at all times alleged herein, resided in the

City of Oakland, County of Alameda, California “(MOODIE”).

4. Defendant FUTURE POWER CORPORATION is a California Corporation, doing business as

ENERGY CONSERVATION OPTIONS (“ECO”) with its principal office in Oakland, California.

5. The true names and/or capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate or otherwise of

Defendant DOES 1-20, inclusive, are unknown to Plaintiff at this time, who therefore sues said

{Defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff are informed and believe and thereupon allege that each

of the Defendants fictitiously named herein as a DOE is legally responsible, negligently or in some

other actionable manner, for the events and happenings hereinafter referred to, and thereby proximately

caused the injuries and damages to Plaintiffas hereinafter alleged. Plaintiff will ask leave to the Court

to amend this Complaint to insert the true names and/or capacities of such fictitiously named Defendant

when the same have been ascertained.

6. Atall times herein mentioned each of the said Defendants was joint venture with, or agent,

servant or employee of, the other Defendants or was otherwise related to or acting for or on behalf of

the other Defendants. Each is bound by or responsible for the acts of the others. Said relationships

between Defendants were and are created by agreement, by ratification, by ostensible authority, or

otherwise, and this paragraph is not a limitation on the matter in which said relationships were created

as a matter of fact or as a matter of law. At all times herein mentioned each Defendant was acting and

acted within the course and scope of his/her/its joint venture, agency, service, employment, and

authority (actual, inherent. implied, ostensible, or otherwise). Each Defendant further was acting with

the knowledge and consent, or ratification of his/her/its principal and employer under such

circumstances and conditions as to give rise to the principal's and employer's responsibility for such

acts.

-2-
COMPLAINT
PaRedenbaugh, Russell\Pldg\Complaint.
docx
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

7. In or around the fall of 2018, following the death of his wife, Plaintiff RUSSELL G.

REDENBAUGH (“Plaintiff”) decided it was time to sell his home at 6555 Oakwood Drive, Oakland,

California 94611.

8. Plaintiff, being both blind and in his seventies, recognized he needed assistance in

selling the house. To this end, Defendant DAHLIA MOODIE, a friend of Plaintiff's deceased wife,

offered to assist him in selling the home. In particular, at the reception following Plaintiff's wife’s

memorial service, Defendant MOODIE offered to assist in finding a real estate agent. Plaintiff accepted

Defendant MOODIE’s offer.

9. Defendant MOODIE agreed to assist Plaintiff, and signed a Power of Attorney

agreement (POA) which authorized Defendant MOODIE to “act for [Plaintiff] in any lawful way with

respect to any and all real property transactions pertaining to the sale of [Plaintiffs] residence, and to

hire a real estate broker or agent.” A true and correct unexecuted copy of the POA is attached hereto as

Exhibit A. The POA was executed, and never revoked by Plaintiff.

10. In preparation of the sale of the home, a Realtor identified by Defendant MOODIE

ordered an inspection on the house. Defendant MOODIE then proceeded to hire a company to perform

the recommended work. The business Defendant MOODIE hired was none other than ENERGY

CONSERVATION OPTIONS (ECO), a fictitious business name filed by Defendant FUTURE POWER

CORPORATION, where Defendant MOODIE operates as Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial

Officer, and Director.

11, Defendant ECO is a licensed contractor in the State of California, and its license number

is 948946,

12. California Business & Professions Code § 7159 sets forth numerous requirements for

home improvement contracts. Among these are that the contract be in writing, limits on down

payments, and scheduling requirements.

13. At no point did Defendant MOODIE memorialize the work to be done on Plaintiff's

home in a written contract.

14. At no point did Defendant MOODIE acquire the necessary permits to perform electrical

3-
COMPLAINT
F ARedenbaugh, Russeli\Pldg\Complaint.docx
or plumbing repairs on the house.

15. After hiring her own company to perform the work on Plaintiff's home, Defendant
NK

MOODIE billed Plaintiff $93,689.58. Plaintiff paid all of the invoiced amounts via wire transfer. A true
a

and correct copy of this invoice is attached hereto as Exhibit B.

16, In or around June of 2019, Defendant MOODIE and the Realtor she had hired had a

falling out. After some discussions, Plaintiff elected not to renew the Realtor’s listing agreement.

Particularly concerning to Plaintiff was the Realtor’s assertion that around $16,000.00 worth of repairs

was still required, and suggested that Defendant MOODIE had not completed the repairs she had

agreed to.

V7. Skeptical of the work performed by Defendants, Plaintiff began requesting invoices,

permits, and other evidence to support Defendants’ repairs and adequate performance.

18. The requested permits were never supplied. What were supplied were a smattering of

invoices for sub-contractors for house cleaning, window cleaning, and some painting. These invoices

covered only a small fraction of the amount Defendant MOODIE billed Plaintiff, and did not include all

the work identified in the original inspection report. Furthermore, it also included work that was not

included in the original inspection report, but rather for roofing and termite control, which ought to

have been specified in other inspection reports. Defendant MOODIE has not provided these inspection

reports.

19, On June 15", 2019, with some assistance, Plaintiff documented the house’s condition

with photographs showing the areas that were purportedly addressed by Defendant ECO. These

photographs show that the work included in the invoice from Defendant ECO was either unsatisfactory,

or not completed at all.

20. Plaintiff hired another realtor June 15, 2019 who recommended additional work in order

to prepare the house for sale. This work was done for an additional $12,130.67, and included many
qe
i

things listed in the invoice from Defendant ECO. The necessity for this work to be done a second time

confirmed Plaintiffs suspicions that much of the work he had paid Defendants for had not been

completed,

21. Specifically, the work billed by Defendants MOODIE and ECO not completed includes:

4.
COMPLAINT
EARedenbaugh, Russell PidgiComplaint docx
a. Termite Work in the amount of $3,120.00

b. Roof Repair in the amount of $890.00
nN

c. House Deep Cleaning in the amount of $850.00
hed

d. Interior Painting in the amount of $15,000.00

e. Electrical Repairs in the amount of $10,830.00
wa

6 f. Window Cleaning in the amount of $725.00

g. Interior Shade Cleaning in the amount of $150.00

h. Plumbing Repairs in the amount of $5,557.58

i. Sereen Door Repair in the amount of $250.00

J. Rescreening Damaged Screens in the amount of $450.00

22. Furthermore, Plaintiff contests the following additional charges in Defendants’ invoices:

a. Emergency Tree Removal in the amount of $29,650.00, Defendant MOODIE proceeded

with removing a tree at the expense of Plaintiff without consulting his insurance provider or the Home

Owner's Association.

b. Project Management in the amount of $8,764.00. Defendant MOODIE charged Plaintiff

for “managing” a project that was not completed.

23. After assessing the performance of Defendant MOODIE and her company, Plaintiff

concluded that he had grossly overpaid for the services he received. Furthermore, it cost Plaintiff an

additional $12,130.67 in expenses to prepare the house for sale, much of which covered items

20 referenced in Defendant MOODIE’s invoice. Accordingly, Plaintiff reached out to Defendant MOODIE

to request a refund for the work not completed. Defendant MOODIE did not oblige.
WwW
—

24. Plaintiff proceeded to file a complaint with the California State Licensing Board on or
nw
Ww

about November 11, 2019. This complaint included details of Defendant MOODIE’s incomplete
tad
Te

performance. Defendant MOODIE responded to the complaint, and based upon the evidence she

provided, revealed that she had erroneously over-billed Plaintiff in the amount of $5,846.43, which she

attributed to “clerical errors.”

25. Plaintiff has continued to demand a refund for the billed amount through his attorneys,

but Defendants have not responded to these demands. A copy of a letter sent to Defendant MOODIE

5-
COMPLAINT
VARedenbaugh, Russell PidgiComptaint.docx
demanding refund of payment is attached hereto as Exhibit C.

26. Plaintiff has been damaged in the amount of $105,820.25 exclusive of non-economic
i)

damages.

27. Accordingly, Plaintiff now files this action to recover payments owed by Defendants in

connection to Plaintiff's former residence.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
BREACH OF CONTRACT
(Against all Defendants)

28. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein by reference each and every allegation

contained in the preceding paragraphs as though set forth fully herein.

29. In or around fall of 2018, Plaintiff
and Defendants entered into numerous oral

contracts whereby Defendants agreed to provide Plaintiff with services in preparation for

the sale of his house, and Plaintiff agreed to pay for such services.

30. When entering into this agreement, Defendant ECO was a licensed contractor,

whose contractor’s license number was 948946,

31. Plaintiff has performed all conditions, covenants, and promises required by it on its

part to be performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of the parties’ agreement.

32. Defendants promised to hire and/or perform all the work necessary to prepare

Plaintiffs home for sale. The specific services to be performed were to be identified in

inspection reports of Plaintiff's residence.

33. Defendants sent an invoice to Plaintiffin the amount of $93,689.58, and Plaintiff

promptly paid the full amount via wire transfer.

34. Defendants failed to complete all the work specified in the invoice sent to Plaintiff.

35, As a result of Defendants’ incomplete performance, Plaintiff was forced to hire

other contractors to complete preparing his house for sale. These contractors cost Plaintiff

an additional $12,130.67 for painting and other household repair work.

-6-
COMPLAINT
Pe Redenbaugh, Russell\Pidg\Complaint.docx
36. Although Plaintiff has repeatedly demanded refunding of payment, Defendants have

declined to pay the full amount owed to Plaintiff.
Nm

37. As a result of the breach of the agreement by Defendant, Plaintiff has been damaged
ad

in the sum of $105,820.25, exclusive of costs and fees in bringing this action.
wa

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment against Defendant as set forth below.
6
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY
(Against Defendant MOODIE)
38. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein by reference each and every allegation contained in

the preceding paragraphs as though set forth fully herein.

39. By signing the POA, Defendant MOODIE acted in the capacity of an agent, and owed a

fiduciary duty to Plaintiff. Included in this duty are the duties of loyalty, integrity, candor, and good

faith to Plaintiff to properly manage funds and the repairs of Plaintiff's house.

40. Furthermore, Defendant MOODIE promised to aid a disabled senior in the preparation of his

residence for sale. Plaintiff accordingly placed his trust and confidence in Defendant MOODIE.

41. Defendant MOODIE breached her fiduciary duty by engaging in acts and omissions alleged

herein including, among other things, failing to provide Plaintiff with the invoices and inspection

reports to support the billed amount, intentionally misrepresenting the status of the repairs, and failing

to return the funds paid by Plaintiffto Defendants.

42, As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s breaches of fiduciary duties owed to Plaintiff,

Plaintiff has suffered damages in an amount to be proven at trial, but in no event less than $105,820.25.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment against Defendant as set forth below.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
BREACH OF THE IMPLIED COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND
FAIR DEALING
(Against all Defendants)
43, Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein by reference each and every allegation contained in

the preceding paragraphs as though set forth fully herein.

“Je
COMPLAINT
VF \Redenbaugh, Russeli\Pldg\Complaint.docx
44, in or around fall of 2018, Plaintiff and Defendants entered into numerous oral

contracts whereby Defendants agreed to provide Plaintiff with services in preparation for
nN

the sale of his house, and Plaintiff agreed to pay for such services.
ua

45. Under California law, in every contract there is an implied covenant of good faith and fair
an

dealing. This implied covenant existed in the contract between Plaintiff and Defendants.
6
46. By intentionally representing that work had been performed, and by sending an invoice to

Plaintiff without any support, Defendants breach this implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
47, Asa result of Defendants’ breach of this implied covenant, Plaintiff was damaged in an amount

to be proven at trial, but in no event less than $105,820.25.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment against Defendant as set forth below.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
UNJUST ENRICHMENT
(Against all Defendants)
48. Plaintilf realleges and incorporates herein by reference each and every allegation contained in

the preceding paragraphs as though set forth fully herein.

49. In or around fall of 2018, Plaintiff and Defendants entered into numerous oral

contracts whereby Defendants agreed to provide Plaintiff with services in preparation for

the sale of his house, and Plaintiff agreed to pay for such services.

50. Defendants sent Plaintiff an invoice for the amount of $93,689.58. Plaintiff promptly paid this

invoice in full,

31. However, the work claimed by Defendants to be completed had actually not been completed.

52. Defendant has failed to account for the expenses billed to Plaintiff, but has retained control over

the monies given as payment by Plaintiff to Defendant.

53. Plaintiff in no manner consented to Defendant’s misappropriation of his funds.

34. Plaintiff received no benefit from the payment of funds to Defendant.

55. Under these circumstances, it would be unjust for Defendant to retain the benefit conferred by

-8-
COMPLAINT
FARedenbaugh, Russell: Pidgi\Complaint. docx
Plaintiff. Plaintiff
has suffered damages in an amount to be proven at trial, but in no event less than

$93,689.58,
tw

WHEREFORE, Piaintiff prays judgment against Defendant as set forth below.
ua

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
CONVERSION
(Against ali Defendants)
a

56, Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein by reference each and every allegation contained in

the preceding paragraphs as though set forth fully herein.

57. Atall times herein mentioned, Plaintiff is entitled to possession of the funds in the

amount of $93,689.58 that he provided to Defendant in connection with the repairs to his

house.

58. Defendant has willfully interfered with the right of Plaintiff to possession of benefits

of the monies provided to Defendant in connection with the repairs to his house.

59. The value of the funds and assets converted is in the amount of $93,689.58.

60. As a proximate result of the foregoing, Plaintiff has been damaged in an amount

equal to the value of the converted funds plus interest and incidental expenses incurred in

trying to recover the funds, including but not limited to attorney fees and legal costs.

61. Defendants’ acts were willful, wanton, malicious, and oppressive, and were

undertaken with the intent to defraud, and justify the awarding of exemplary and punitive

damages.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment against Defendant as set forth below.

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
INTENTIONAL MISREPRESENTATION
(Against All Defendants)
62. Plaintitf realleges and incorporates herein by reference each and every allegation contained in

the preceding paragraphs as though set forth fully herein.

63. Defendants promised and represented to Plaintiff that they would oversee and manage all the

-9-
COMPLAINT
FaRedenbaugh, Russell\Pidg\Complaint.decx
work to be performed in preparing Plaintiff's house for sale.

64. These representations made by Defendants were in fact false, and Defendants had knowledge of
to

such falsity. In reality, Defendants did not manage the project and failed to complete it. As a result,
‘ad

Plaintiff was forced to hire additional contractors to complete the work.
TAN

65. Plaintiff, at the time the representations were made by Defendant, was ignorant of the falsity of

Defendant’s representations and believed them to be true. In reliance on the representations made by
ions

the Defendant, Plaintiff was induced and did execute the agreement and allow Defendant to take full

control of management of the Project. Had Plaintiff known the actual facts, he would not have taken

such action. Plaintiff reasonably relied on Defendant’s representations because Defendant was a friend

of Plaintiff's wife, and had her own business.

66. As a proximate result of the fraudulent conduct of Defendant as herein alleged, Plaintiff suffered

damages. As a further direct and proximate result of such conduct, Plaintiff has suffered and continues

to suffer emotional distress, mental suffering, and embarrassment, all to Plaintiff's genera! damages.

67. The atorementioned conduct of Defendant was an intentional misrepresentation, deceit, or

concealment of a material fact known to Defendant with the intention on the part of Defendant, thereby

depriving Plaintiff of property or legal rights or otherwise causing injury, and was despicable conduct

that subjected Plaintiff to an unjust hardship in conscious disregard of Plaintiff's rights, so as to justify

an award of exemplary and punitive damages.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment against Defendant as set forth below.

SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION
(Against All Defendants)

68. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein by reference each and every allegation

contained in the preceding paragraphs as though set forth fully herein.

69. Defendants promised and represented to Plaintiff that they would oversee and

manage all the work to be performed in preparing Plaintiffs house for sale.

-10-
COMPLAINT
fARedenbaugh. Russell\Pidg\Complaint. docx
70. These representations made by Defendants were in fact false. In reality, Defendants

neglected to manage the project and failed to complete it. As a result, Plaintiff was forced to
to

hire additional contractors to complete the work.
oy

7. These representations were made by Defendants without any reasonable ground to

believe they were true, and were intended to induce Plaintiff to act in reliance on said
wi

representations.

72. Plaintiff, at the time the representations were made by Defendant, was ignorant of the falsity of

Defendant's representations and believed them to be true. In reliance on the representations made by

the Defendant, Plaintiff was induced and did execute the agreement and allow Defendant to take full

contro! of management of the Project. Had Plaintiff known the actual facts, he would not have taken

such action. Plaintiff reasonably relied on Defendant’s representations because Defendant was a friend

of Plaintiffs wife, and had her own business.

73. The aforementioned conduct of Defendant was a negligent misrepresentation, deceit, or

concealment of a material fact known to Defendant with the intention on the part of Defendant, thereby

depriving Plaintiffof property or legal rights or otherwise causing injury, and was despicable conduct

that subjected Plaintiff to an unjust hardship in conscious disregard of Plaintiff's rights, so as to justify

an award of exemplary and punitive damages.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment against Defendant as set forth below.

EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
FINANCIAL ABUSE OF AN ELDER [Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 15657]
(Against All Defendants)

74, Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein by reference each and every allegation contained in

the preceding paragraphs as though set forth fully herein.

75, In or around fall of 2018, Plaintiff
and Defendants entered into numerous oral contracts whereby

Defendants agreed to provide Plaintiff with services in preparation for the sale of his house, and

Plaintiff agreed to pay for such services.

-He
COMPLAINT
F ARcdenbaugh, Russell\PldgiCompiaint. docx.
76. When Plaintiff entered into the agreement, he was about 74 years of age and disabled. Plaintiff's

age and disability was known to Defendants.
to

77, At the request of Defendants, Plaintiff furnished to Defendants $93,689.58 for services
ros)

supposedly rendered by Defendants. Defendants have retained possession of these funds.

78, Defendants accomplished this retention of Plaintiffs money through undue influence.

Specifically, Defendant MOODIE entered into the POA agreement with Plaintiff, and represented to

Plaintiff that she would pursue his interests. Defendant MOODIE then hired her own company to

perform the work on Plaintiffs house, collected Plaintiff's payment, and failed to complete the

services.

79, Plaintiff relied on Defendants’ representations and influence to his detriment, and has been

damaged in an amount to be proven at trial.

80. Defendant’s conduct was reckless, oppressive, fraudulent, and malicious, and punitive damages

are appropriate under Cal. Weilf. & Inst. Code § 15657.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment against Defendant as set forth below.

NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION
MONEY HAD AND RECEIVED
(Against All Defendants)
81. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein by reference each and every allegation contained in

the preceding paragraphs as though set forth fully herein.

82. In or around fall of 2018, Plaintiff and Defendants entered into numerous oral contracts whereby

Defendants agreed to provide Plaintiff with services in preparation for the sale of his house, and

Plaintiff agreed to pay for such services.

83. Defendant became indebted to Plaintiff for money had and received by Defendant for the use

and benefit of the Plaintiffin the amount no less than $93,689.58.

84. Plaintiff
has made numerous demands for payment.

85. Full payment of all amounts owed has not been made by Defendant to Plaintiff, and there is now

owing to Plaintiff an amount to be proven at trial, including without limitation the $93,689.58 payment

-12-
COMPLAINT
fF ARedenbaugh, Russell:Pidg\Complaint
docx
Plaintiff has made to Defendant, with interest at the legal rate.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment against Defendant as set forth below.

TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
CONSTRUCTIVE TRUST
(Against All Defendants)

86. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein by reference each and every allegation

contained in the preceding paragraphs as though set forth fully herein.

87, In or around fall of 2019, and thereafter, Defendants engaged in the wrongful

conduct alleged in detail above. Defendants took monies from Plaintiff that should have

been used towards repairs to Plaintiff's residence. As a direct and proximate result of said

conduct, Defendants are in possession of Plaintiff's monies in the amount of $93,689.58

and has failed and refused to return the said sum despite multiple demands from Plaintiff.

Plaintiff did not receive the benefit he expected arising out of the parties’ agreement.

88. Plaintiff therefore requests that this Court enter an order imposing a Constructive

‘Trust for the benefit of Plaintiff, and require Defendants to place all funds she has received

from Plaintitf.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment against Defendant as set forth below.

ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
(Against All Defendants)

89. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein by reference each and every allegation contained in

the preceding paragraphs as though set forth fully herein.

90. Defendants engaged in the extreme and outrageous conduct herein above alleged with wanton

and reckless disregard of the probability of causing Plaintiff to suffer severe emotional distress.

91. Defendant MOODIE was a friend of Plaintiff's wife who offered to assist in the listing and

repairs necessary for selling Plaintiff's home. Defendants’ failure to complete the project forced

Plaintiff to pay other contractors to finish the necessary work, while Defendants absconded with

-13-
COMPLAINT
PARedenbaugh, Russell\Pldg\Complaint.docx
$93,689.58 of Plaintiff's money for their own use and benefit. Defendants engaged in such conduct

while knowing that Plaintiff was blind, in his seventies, and grieving his wife’s passing. Taking
il

Plaintiff's money and making empty promises to Plaintiff while in this state is extreme and outrageous
We

conduct.

92. As a proximate result of the extreme and outrageous conduct engaged in by Defendants,

Plaintiff suffered humiliation, mental anguish, and extreme emotional and physical distress, all to his

general damage in an amount according to proof at trial.

93, Defendants’ conduct as herein alleged was malicious and oppressive in that it was conduct

carried on by Defendants in a willful and conscious disregard of Plaintiff's rights and subjected him to

cruel and unjust hardship, Plaintiff is therefore entitled to an award of punitive damages against

Defendant.

94. As a direct, foreseeable, and legal result of Defendant’s unlawful acts, Plaintiff has suffered and

continues to suffer severe mental and emotional distress, discomfort, embarrassment and humiliation,

all to Plaintiff's damage in an amount to be proven at trial.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment against Defendant as set forth below.

TWELFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
(Against All Defendants)

95. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein by reference each and every allegation contained in

the preceding paragraphs as though set forth fully herein.

96. Defendant MOODIE was a friend of Plaintiff’s wife, and Defendants were responsible for the

listing and repairs necessary for selling Plaintiff's home after the death of his wife. Defendants owed

Plaintiff a duty of care not to cause his emotional distress.

97. Defendants breached this duty of care by way of their own conduct as alleged herein.

Specifically, Defendants made promises to Plaintiff, and accepted Plaintiff's money, only then to not

perform on those promises, and not to return Plaintiff's money.

98. As a result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff has suffered emotional distress, humiliation, and

embarrassment.

~14-
COMPLAINT
Fo Redenbaugh, Russell\PidgiComplaint.docx
99, Defendant’s conduct has caused, and continues to cause Plaintiff substantial economic losses, as

well as mental anguish, all to his damage in an amount according to proof.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays judgment against Defendant as set forth below.
est

PRAYER FOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES
As additional damages against Defendant, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant, in doing the acts
wa

6 hereinabove alleged, was guilty of malice, oppression and fraud as defined in Civil Code Section

3294(c). As such, Plaintiff should recover, in addition to actual damages, damages to make an example

of and to punish Defendant.

WHEREFORE. Plaintiff pray judgment as follows:

1. That Plaintiff be awarded his full compensatory damages, with interest at the

legal rate;

2. For restitution in the amount of $93,689.58 paid to Defendants;

3. For a Constructive Trust;

4, For an award of money judgment for mental pain and anguish and severe

emotional distress, including special damages, according to proof;

5. For punitive damages;

6. For an order of the court revoking any rights of Defendant MOODIE under

the Power of Attorney agreement;

7. For costs of suit herein incurred;

8. For reasonable attorney fees incurred herein;

9, For such other and further relief as the Court may deems just and proper.

Dated: September 20, 2021 ;
CIRRUS LAW P
fo
BY:
Joshua D’ Brysk—
Wesley Guzman
Attorneys for Plaintiff
RUSSELL G. REDENBAUGH

-15-
COMPLAINT
FRedenbaugh. Russell \Pidg\Complaint.docx
EXHIBITA
STATE OF CALIFORIA §

COUNTY OF ALAMEDA :

UNIFORM STATUTORY POWER OF ATTORNEY

PURSUANT TO California Probate Code Section 4401, all powers conferred upon the agent in
this uniform statutory power of attorney shall also function completely as a durable power of attorney
within all circumstances set forth herein:

I, RUSSELL G. REDENBAUGH (Principal) APPOINT:

DAHLIA M. MOODIE
7770 Pardee Lane
Oakland, CA 94621
(510) 967-4526

as my AGENT (attorney-in-fact) to act for me in any lawful way with respect to any and all real
property transactions pertaining to the sale of the residence located at 6555 Oakwood Drive,
Oakland, CA 94611, parcel no. Parcel no. 48F-7378-101.

_____ (Initials)

This power of attorney is effective immediately and will continue until sale of the residence described
herein is finalized and recorded, or on September 1, 2019, whichever occurs first.

______ (initials)

This power of attorney is not revoked if I become incapacitated.

(initials)

(A) SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:

1. The Agent must obtain the Principal’s verbal concurrence regarding the final selling price
for the residence.

2. The Agent may select and hire a real estate broker or agent.

(B) DURABLE POWER OF ATTORNEY

1. This Uniform Statutory Power of Attorney shall at ail times be legally interpreted and
relied upon as a Durable Power of Attorney (also known herein as a “Power of Attorney”)
for all reasons set forth within the entirety of this document.

Uniform Statutory Power of Attorney for Dahlia Moodie, Page 1 of 4
2. Any provision of this document which is challenged by a third party as ineffective shall not
affect the remaining provisions herein; all remaining provisions shall remain in full force
and effect, within all governing periods of this document.

1. Only ONE ORIGINAL of this Uniform Statutory Power of Attorney has been executed.
The Agent specified in this instrument is authorized to make photocopies of this instrument
and any attached documents (such as certificates of incapacity, attached as necessary) as
frequently and in such quantities as the Agent deems appropriate. Each photocopy shall
have the same force and effect as the original, and all parties dealing with the Agent herein
are authorized to rely fully on any such photocopy showing the Principal’s signature
thereon.

2. A copy of a Uniform Statutory Form Power of Attorney, setting forth specifically within, a
Durable Power of Attorney, shall be certified in accordance with California Probate Code
Section 4307; and shall have the same force and effect as the original, so long as the
attached certification is effectuated by 1), an authorized notary public in California; 2) an
attorney authorized to practice law in California; and 3) an official of the state or of a
political subdivision who is authorized to make such certification, who states that the
certifying person has examined the original Uniform Statutory Form Power of Attorney
and that the copy is a true and correct copy of the original Uniform Statutory Form Power
of Attorney. CA Probate Code Section 4307(c); see CA Govt. Code Section 8205 (a) (2)
and (4).

(BD) ADDITIONAL POWERS APPLICABLE HEREIN:

NONE.

(E) EXERCISE OF POWER OF ATTORNEY WHERE MORE THAN ONE AGENT IS
DESIGNATED

I have designated more than one agent, whose duties are described in a separate instrument, and
do not overlap, with regard to the duties described herein.

INITIAL: _

| agree that any third party who receives a copy of this document may act under it according to the
specific provisions set forth in the Special Instructions section herein, above. A third party may seek
identification. Revocation of this Power of Attorney is not effective as to a third party until the third
party has actual knowledge of the revocation. I agree to indemnify the third party for any claims that
arise against the third party because of reliance on this Power of Attorney.

Signed on , 2018 at Oakland, Alameda County, California.

RUSSELL G. REDENBAUGH, PRINCIPAL

Uniform Statutory Power of Attorney for Dahlia Moodie, Page 2 af 4
BY ACCEPTING OR ACTING UNDER THE APPOINTMENT, THE AGENT (ATTORNEY-IN-
FACT) ASSUMES THE FIDUCIARY AND OTHER LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES OF AN AGENT
UNDER THIS UNIFORM STATUTORY FORM POWER OF ATTORNEY.

Uniform Statutory Power of Attorney for Dahlia Moodie, Page 3 of 4
STATE OF CALIFORIA )
)
COUNTY OF )

On , 2013, before me , Notary Public
[name and title of officer], personally appeared

who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in
his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her signature(s) on the instrument the person(s),
or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

(certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

[Signature of Officer]

[Officer's Seal]

Uniform Statutory Power of Attorney for Dahlia Moodie, Page 4 of 4
EXHIBIT B
Date: March 26, 2019
WO. cH ue

Bill to: Russell Redenbaugh Job: General repairs - preparation for real
6555 Oakwood Drive esatate sale

Service Location: Oakland CA Email Address: rgredenbaugh@kairos-inc.com

Contact Persan: Russel) Redenbaugh Customer Phone: (215)205-1926

Deseription Status Paid To Vendors] Paid To Vendors thru Pending
see thru 3/26/19 a/6/43
Termite and Roof Repairs Complete $ 4,918.00
Painting - Interior Main Hse & Appt Complete $ 13,200.00
Painting - Exterior Panels/Railings/Banisters Complete S 4,800.00

Kitchen Wail Repair & Floor Board Paint Rpr Complete $ 750,00 | $ 4,320.00

Plumbing Repairs/All baths/Ejec Pump Replacement Complete $ 5,447.58

Labor Electrical Repairs - Code Required Complete $ 7,470.00
Electrical Fixtures/Recep/Switch Upgrades Complete $ 2,670.00
Exterior Lighting Repairs & Replacement Complete $ 690.00
Floor Répair/Retinish - Ail Hardwood - Additional repairs
subfloor water damage Kitchen in Progress | $ 730.00
Floor Repair/Refinsh - All Hardwood $ 5,640.00

New Hardwood Floor installation

Case Info

Case No.

(Subscribe to View)

Document Filed Date

September 21, 2021

Case Filing Date

September 21, 2021

County

Parties

Colette F Stone Att
Colette F Stone Attorney
Dahlia Moodie Def
Dahlia Moodie Defendant
Future Power Corporation Def
Future Power Corporation Defendant
Joshua D Brysk Att
Joshua D Brysk Attorney
Joshua D Brysk, Attorney
Kristen Hayes Kuse Attorneys for Defendants
Kristen Hayes Kuse Attorney
Russell Redenbaugh Plain
Russell Redenbaugh Plaintiff
Shaun William Joyce Att
Shaun William Joyce Attorney
Wesley Guzmán Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Joshua Bradus Attorneys for Plaintiffs

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Complaint,Petition: Redenbaugh VS Moodie

Preview

Related Topics

Case Info

Parties