Preview
e @ sede
eee
Michael J. Blumenfeld, SBN 65239
—_—
MICHAEL BLUMENFELD “3
A Professional Corporation om ry pct ren,
One Kaiser Plaza ; e
The Ordway Building § L45>, ALAMEDA COUNTY
WY
Suite 1675 ‘ FE PAIN Tippy “x,
Oakland, CA 94612 AID HAY 19-0005
HR
Telephone (510) 465-0555 CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
WDA
Facsimile (510) 465-8093 SUMMONS Igsunn A: 2. hs Bittle
DB
Attorneys for
Believer’s Christian Church, Inc.
aT
OA
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
oO
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
et
©
BELIEVERS CHRISTIAN CaseNo. RBGO5 2138 4.8
-—
—
CHURCH, a California Corporation ne
COMPLAINT FOR FRAUD,
b
ry
Plaintiff, “CONVERSION, BREACH OF
FIDUCIARY DUTIES,
WW
vs. DECLARATORY RELIEF, IDENTITY
ee
THEFT, WRONGFUL DISHONOR,
SB
NICK NKETIAH, a.k.a. KWADWO INTERPLEADER, INJUNCTIVE
NKETIAH, an Individual; ESTHER. RELIEF, ACCOUNTING AND
WN
KORANTENG an Individual; BANK OF PUNITIVE DAMAGES
AMERICA CORPORATION, a
HD
corporation; and DOES 1 - 100, Inclusive, -
SI
a
Defendants. /
1o6)
—
Plaintiff, Believer’s Christian Church, Inc., a California Non Profit Religious
oe
©
Corporation , (“Plaintiff”), hereby complains against Defendants and each of them as
RO
So
hereinafter set forth:
NO
—
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
No
NO
1. At all times herein alleged and at present, Plaintiff was and now is duly
NO
Oo
organized and duly empowered to act under the laws of the State of California as a Non-
bo
a
Profit Religious Corporation pursuant to California Corporations Code Sections 9110 et.
i)
Nn
seq. Plaintiff duly and properly incorporated under the laws of the State of California as a
a
N
non-profit religious corporation on or about November 24, 1999. Since incorporation, and at
~—l
N
present, Plaintiff has been and is a corporation in good standing, organized and acting under
oo
N
the laws of the State of California. At all times herein alleged, Plaintiff has existed and
COMPLAINT . PAGE 1
operated as a church, and was and now is principally located within this judicial district, in
re
the City of Oakland, County of Alameda, State of California. Plaintiffis duly authorized
NO
and empowered to file this action under the laws of the State of California and pursuant to its
WD
charter.
BR
2. Plaintiff is informed and believes and on that ground alleges, that at all times
A
herein relevant, Defendant Nick Nketiah, a.k.a. Kwadwo Nketiah (hereinafter “Nketiah’”),
DB
was and now is a resident of this judicial district. At all times herein relevant, until on or
SN
about December 19, 2004, Nketiah was as an officer and director of Plaintiff corporation.
OA
At all relevant times herein, Defendant Nketiah occupied the office of Secretary for Plaintiff -
o
corporation. At all times herein relevant, Defendant Nketiah occupied a fiduciary
CO
ee
relationship of trust and confidence with respect to Plaintiff. At all times herein alleged,
KY
ea ee
Plaintiff reasonably relied upon and trusted Defendant Nketiah to act as a fiduciary of and
NH
trustee for Plaintiff.
WY
ee
3. Plaintiff is informed and believes and on that ground alleges, that at all times
BR
herein relevant, Esther Koranteng (““Koranteng”), was and now is a resident of this judicial
DN
district. At all times herein relevant, Koranteng served Plaintiff as an officer. At all times
herein relevant, Defendant Koranteng occupied a fiduciary relationship of trust and
ND
Ow
confidence with respect to Plaintiff. At all times herein alleged, Plaintiff reasonably relied
WH
upon and trusted Defendant Koranteng to act as a fiduciary of and trustee for Plaintiff.
Oo
4. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant sued herein as Defendant
DOD
DR
Bank of America Corporation, is a Delaware corporation which is a legal entity in good
YK
DD
standing and duly registered to do business in the State of California, (hereinafter the “Bank
NY
of America’). Defendant Bank of America operates a retail bank branch in this judicial
WO
DO
district located at 300 Lakeside Drive, Oakland, California 94612.
BP
KN
5. At all times herein relevant, Plaintiff did its banking through Defendant Bank
UH
VN
of America and Plaintiff has deposited and now has on deposit with Defendant Bank of
ODO
NO
America certain funds in the approximate amount of $130,000. Said funds were deposited at
SNS
NO
Defendant Bank of America in the following accounts: Business Checking Account No
oOo
NO
02517-01430; Business Interest Maximize Account No 02512-01428; and Investment CD
COMPLAINT PAGE 2
Account Nos 02518-05227 and 02518-05321, collectively referred to herein as the (“Bank of
—
America Accounts”).
WN
6. Plaintiff lacks sufficient information and belief to allege the true names and
capacities of Defendants sued herein as Defendants Does 1 through 100, inclusive, and on
RF
that ground, Plaintiff sues said Defendants by such fictitious names. When the true names
WNW
and capacities of said fictitiously named Defendants are ascertained, Plaintiff shall amend
ND
this Complaint accordingly.
7. At all times herein alleged, each of the Defendants herein, whether named or
Oo
unnamed, was and is legally responsible to Plaintiff for all damages and other relief for
0
which Plaintiff requests this Court to enter judgment in its favor in this action. At all times
OC
herein alleged, each of the Defendants, whether named or unnamed, was the agent, servant,
ee
KF
employee, joint venturer, partner and or co-conspirator of each of the other defendants
Be
WN
herein, whether named or unnamed. At all times herein alleged, each of the Defendants
Be
herein was acting within the true and full course and scope of such agency and employment.
ewe
BR
Each of the Defendants herein, whether named or unnamed, is legally responsible to Plaintiff
ew
WH
for all of Plaintiffs injuries, damages and other relief as prayed for in this complaint.
DA
Be
8. On or about December 19, 2004, by a duly authorized act and resolution of
ID
Bee
the Board of Directors and governing board of Plaintiff corporation, Defendant Nketiah was
Oo
removed as the Secretary of Plaintiff corporation. At the.same time, Defendant Nketiah was
Be
©
removed as a member of the Board of Directors and as having any authority to act on behalf
GS
KN
of Plaintiff corporation.
FH
HB
9. On or about December 28, 2004, by a duly authorized act and resolution of
NY
NH
the Board of Directors and governing board of Plaintiff corporation, Plaintiff provided
NY
W
Defendant Bank of America with written instructions and a resolution of Plaintiff
BP
NH
corporation removing Defendant Nketiah from the Bank of America signature cards with
WA
YH
respect to the Bank of America Accounts. At said time, Plaintiff properly informed
NY
YH
Defendant Bank of America in writing that Defendant Nketiah was no longer permitted to
NN
sign checks, make withdrawals or otherwise act for Plaintiff with respect to the Bank of
Co
America Accounts. At said time, Plaintiff corporation provided Defendant Bank of America
COMPLAINT PAGE 3
with new signature cards which provided Defendant Bank of America with specific written
instructions and resolutions specifying and limiting the following persons as signatories with
NH
power to withdraw funds and sign checks on the Bank of America Accounts: Peter K.
WD
Gyamfi, Kofi Adarkwah, Samuel Bus-Kwofie, and Madam Elisabeth A. Appiah.
BP
10. Inor about January of 2005, despite being properly and duly removed by
Dn
Plaintiff as alleged above, Defendant Nketiah falsely, wrongfully and fraudulently
represented to Defendant Bank of America that he was in fact still duly authorized to act on
HN
behalf of Plaintiff corporation; that the documents presented to the Bank of America by
A
Plaintiff were false; that he was the only individual representative of Plaintiff corporation
oOo
who was authorized to withdraw money from the bank; and he demanded that Defendant
OC
Bank of America release and pay to him and or to his order all of the approximate $130,000
KH
eee
which was on deposit in the Bank of America Accounts.
NH
ee
11. Atthe time that Defendant Nketiah made said representations to Defendant
WO
Bank of America, Defendant Nketiah knew that said representations were false, that Plaintiff
FP
eee
had certain monetary obligations and bills to pay and that Plaintiff corporation was in
DN
contract to purchase a building to serve as the future location of the Plaintiff church. At the
Re
time that Defendant Nketiah made said representations to Defendant Bank of America,
AD
Rm
Defendant Nketiah knew and or should have known that said representations would damage
BH
KNORR
Plaintiff and deprive Plaintiff of its property and prevent Plaintiff from being able to
OD
exercise its legal rights.
DOD
12. Ator about the same time as Defendant Nketiah made the representations as
KFK&
RO
stated in the foregoing paragraph, Plaintiff presented certain checks in the normal course of
NY
PO
business to the Bank of America to be paid out of the Bank of America Accounts.
WO
KH
Defendant Bank of America failed and refused to honor said checks and demand for
BP
HP
payment, all to Plaintiff’s damage. Despite repeated demands made by Plaintiff to
nH
PO
Defendant Bank of America, said defendant has failed and continues to fail and refuse to
NH
NY
honor Plaintiff's demands and has refused to release to Plaintiff its funds on deposit in said
Sa
NO
Bank of America Accounts.
oO
BO
13. On or about March 24, 2005, Plaintiff requested the Bank of America to
COMPLAINT . PAGE 4
interplead Plaintiffs funds and not to allow said funds to be paid to any third party.
He
Attached hereto as Exhibit “A” is a true and correct copy of counsel for Plaintiff's letter to
Defendant Bank of America which enclosed certain resolutions of the members and directors
W
of Plaintiff corporation and which requested Defendant to interplead the funds at issue.
BP
14. To date, Defendant Bank of America has not responded to the letter which is
MH
attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and Plaintiff is quite concerned that Defendant bank has or
SDH
will disburse the funds at issue to third parties or otherwise dissipate, transfer and or —
improperly pay said funds, all to Plaintiff's irreparable damage. Plaintiff is a religious
CO
corporation. It is not engaged in business. The funds at issue were donated by the members
Oo
of Plaintiff corporation as tithes or gifts to Plaintiff corporation. If said funds were
CO
eet
wrongfully released, paid, or transferred to Defendants, and or to any third party, Plaintiff
KF
and its members would be irreparably damaged.
PO
15. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant Nketiah, Defendant
WO
Dm
Koranteng and others sued herein as Does 1 through 50, have falsely, wrongfully and
FP
fraudulently asserted and continue to wrongfully assert false claims to the funds on deposit
HA
at the Bank of America Accounts. As a direct, proximate and foreseeable result of said
DH
wrongful conduct, Plaintiffhas been damaged all accordingly to proof at trial herein.
AIT
16. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant Nketiah, Defendant
DW
Koranteng and others sued herein as Does 1 through 100, have falsely, wrongfully and
DO
fraudulently asserted and continue to wrongfully assert that they constitute the membership
CO
of a church which said defendants have falsely, wrongfully and fraudulently named
FF
KN
“Believers Christian Church”, the same name as Plaintiff. By calling themselves and
NO
DN
referring to themselves as “Believers Christian Church”, said defendants have wrongfully
WO
NYY
misappropriated and converted Plaintiffs identity and name for the purpose of obtaining
DBP
HN
Plaintiff's property, funds and other things of value, all to Plaintiff's damage according to
WwW
VN
proof at trial herein.
DBD
BDO
17. Defendant Nketiah, Defendant Koranteng and others sued herein as Does 1
SY
NO
through 100, continue to wrongfully and fraudulently use Plaintiffs name and identity for
oOo
NO
their own advantage. Such wrongful use has created great confusion and has damaged
COMPLAINT PAGE 5
Plaintiff. However, if such wrongful use is continued or otherwise permitted, then Plaintiff
shall be irreparably damaged. Accordingly, Plaintiff requests this Court to immediately
NHN
enjoin and to enj oin during the pendency of this action, defendants’ continued use of
WY
Plaintiff's name and identity; to restrain Defendants from asserting an interest of any kind in
FB
the funds on deposit in the Bank of America Accounts; and to protect the status quo by
HW
requiring Bank of America to interplead the funds into this Court.
HD
HN
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
Oo
FRAUD
Oo
18. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if fully set forth each and every
CO
one of its allegations as contained in the foregoing paragraphs.
et
KF
19. On and after December 19, 2004 to the present, Defendant Nketiah falsely
HO
represented to the Bank of America and continues to falsely represent to Defendant Bank of
WO
America that he was and is a duly authorized officer and director of Plaintiff corporation and
BP
that he has requisite and proper authority to act on behalf of Plaintiff. These
UH
representations of fact were and are false. The true facts are that on December 19, 2004
mw
HD
Defendant Nketiah was duly and properly removed from all office and as a director of
ND
Plaintiff corporation by a vote of the Board of Directors and governing board of Plaintiff
CO
RR
corporation. Defendant Nketiah knew that said representations of fact were false and
OO
ROR
fraudulent when he made them. He made said representations with the intent to deceive;
DCO
with the intent to harm Plaintiff; and with the intent to obtain personal gain.
KH
NO
20. Plaintiff is informed and believes that after being removed as an officer and
NYO
NY
director of Plaintiff corporation, Defendant Nketiah went to the Bank of America and
PO
WO
demanded that Defendant Bank of America release to him all of Plaintiff's funds on deposit
BP
NO
at said bank, including the money in the Bank of America Accounts. Plaintiff is informed
On
NO
and believes that at this time Defendant Nketiah falsely represented to defendant bank that
ODO
NO
he and he alone was empowered to act on behalf of Plaintiff corporation and that the
SNS
NO
defendant bank should ignore any further instructions given to it by Plaintiff corporation
ao
BO
unless such instructions came from. him.
21. Despite receiving written instructions and resolutions to the contrary,
‘COMPLAINT PAGE 6
Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant Bank of America relied upon the false and
NHK
fraudulent representations of said defendant and as a result thereof it then failed and refused
to honor Plaintiffs checks and other demands that Plaintiff's funds on deposit be paid to
WYO
Plaintiff and or to its order, all in violation of the law.
FSF
22. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant Koranteng ratified
A
Defendant Nketiah’s said fraudulent acts.
DH
23. Asa direct and proximate result of Defendants’ fraud and deception, Plaintiff
SN
has been damaged all accounting to proof of trial herein.
Oo
24. The actions of Defendants as herein alleged were intentional, willful and
oOo
malicious and were calculated by Defendants to harm Plaintiff. Defendants knew and or
OC
should have known that their false and fraudulent representations would harm Plaintiff and
KF
ie
deprive Plaintiff of its legal rights. As a result of the willful and malicious conduct of
YP
Defendants and Defendants’ conduct in conscious disregard of the damage such conduct
WY
would naturally cause to Plaintiff, Plaintiff requests this Court to enter judgment awarding it
BP
punitive and exemplary damages against Defendants in addition to all other damages and
A
other relief Plaintiff shall be entitled to pursuant to its claims herein. Plaintiff requests this
DH
court to enter a judgement against Defendants which includes an award in Plaintiff's favor of
HS
Rw
punitive and exemplary damages in a sum of not less than 1 million dollars, all accounting to
CO
proof at trial herein.
CO
Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgement against Defendant’s and each of them is
Oo
KH
hereinafter set forth.
—&
KD
NY
KN
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
WwW
KH
CONVERSION
BR
KN
25. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if fully set forth each and every
OO
PO
one of its allegations as contained in the foregoing paragraphs. |
DO
NB
26. As the Secretary of Plaintiff corporation, Defendant Nketiah was entrusted
SA
PO
from time to time with the books and records of the corporation, its corporate minute book,
oOo
BO
and other personal property. Defendant held such records as the trustee and fiduciary of
Plaintiff. In or about December of 2004, Plaintiff terminated Defendant Nketiah as an
COMPLAINT PAGE 7
officer and director of Plaintiff corporation. At that time, Plaintiff, through its Board of
Directors, requested and demanded of Defendant Nketiah that he return to Plaintiff all of
HPO
Plaintiff's documents, minute books, corporate records, bank records, papers and other
WO
Plaintiff property with which he was entrusted during his office. Despite repeated demands,
FF
Defendant Nketiah failed and refused to return such property to Plaintiff, all to Plaintiff’s
A
damage. To date, Defendant Nketiah and Defendants sued herein as Does 1 through 50
DH
continue to retain and exercise wrongful dominion and control over Plaintiffs said property
NN
all to Plaintiff's damage according to proof of trial herein.
Oo
27. Asadirect and proximate result of Defendants’ conversion as herein alleged,
o
Plaintiff has been damaged all according to proof of trial herein.
CO
28. The actions of Defendants as herein alleged were intentional, willful and
KF
malicious and were calculated by Defendants to harm Plaintiff. Defendants knew and or
PO
eee
should have known that their said actions would harm Plaintiff and deprive Plaintiff of its
WD
legal rights. As a result of the willful and malicious conduct of Defendants and Defendants’
BP
conduct in conscious disregard of the damage such conduct would naturally cause to
WH
Plaintiff, Plaintiff requests this Court to enter judgment awarding it punitive and exemplary
DH
damages against Defendants in addition to all other damages and other relief Plaintiff shall
be entitled to pursuant to its claims herein. Plaintiff requests this court to enter a judgement
FH
against Defendants which includes an award in Plaintiff's favor of punitive and exemplary
CO
damages in a sum of not less than 1 million dollars, all accounting to proof at trial herein.
CO
DDR
Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgement against Defendant and each of them is
FKF§
hereinafter set forth.
NY
NY
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
WD)
NHN
BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTIES
FP
NY
29. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if fully set forth each and every
WN
NY
one the allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs.
DH
HO
30. At all times herein alleged, Defendants Nketiah and Koranteng occupied a
SN
NM
fiduciary relationship of trust and confidence with resprect to Plaintiff. At all times herein
oO
NO
alleged, Plaintiff reasonably relied upon and trusted said Defendants to act as Plaintiffs
COMPLAINT PAGE 8
fiduciaries and trustees.
31. Defendants Nketiah and Koranteng breached their fiduciary duties and
NO
responsibilities owing to Plaintiff by, among other things, maintaining and asserting
W
dominion and control over Plaintiff's funds on deposit at Defendant Bank of America;
BRP
converting Plaintiff's properties and records as herein alleged; by converting and wrongfully
NW
misappropriating Plaintiff's name; and by converting and misappropriating Plaintiffs
HN
identity as “Believer’s Christian Church.”
SI
32. As adirect and proximate result of Defendants’ breaches of fiduciary duty,
DA
Plaintiff has been damaged all according to proof at trial herein.
So
33. The actions of Defendants as herein alleged were intentional, willful and
OC
eet
malicious and were calculated by Defendants to harm Plaintiff. Defendants knew and or
KF
ee
should have known that their said actions would harm Plaintiff and deprive Plaintiff of its
HPO
legal rights. As a result of the willful and malicious conduct of Defendants and Defendants’
WD
conduct in conscious disregard of the damage such conduct would naturally cause to
BR
a
Plaintiff, Plaintiff requests this Court to enter judgment awarding it punitive and exemplary
WH
damages against Defendants in addition to all other damages and other relief Plaintiff shall
HD
be entitled to pursuant to its claims herein. Plaintiff requests this court to enter a judgement
NDT
against Defendants which includes an award in Plaintiffs favor of punitive and exemplary
DH
damages in a sum of not less than 1 million dollars, all accounting to proof at trial herein.
ODO
Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgement against Defendant and each of them as
CO
NR
hereinafter set forth.
KX
DR
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
PDO
NO
CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD
WO
BD
34. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if fully set forth each and every
FP
KN
one of its allegations contained in the fore going paragraphs.
BK
A
. 35. The actions of Defendant Nketiah and Koranteng as alleged in the foregoing
OW
bt
constitute Constructive Fraud as the same is defined in California Civil Code Section 1573.
SN
NO
36. As adirect and proximate result of Defendants’ and each of their constructive
OO
NO
fraud, Plaintiff has been damaged all according to proof at trial herein.
37. The actions of Defendants as herein alleged were intentional, willful and
COMPLAINT PAGE 9
malicious and were calculated by Defendants to harm Plaintiff. Defendants knew and or
should have known that their said actions would harm Plaintiff and deprive Plaintiff of its
NHN
legal rights. As a result of the willful and malicious conduct of Defendants and Defendants’
W
conduct in conscious disregard of the damage such conduct would naturally cause to
BP
Plaintiff, Plaintiff requests this Court to enter judgment awarding it punitive and exemplary
HW
damages against Defendants in addition to all other damages and other relief Plaintiff shall
DB
be entitled to pursuant to its claims herein. Plaintiff requests this court to enter a judgement
NS
against Defendants which includes an award in Plaintiffs favor of punitive and exemplary
Oa
damages in a sum of not less than 1 million dollars, all accounting to proof at trial herein.
oOo
Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgement against Defendant and each of them as
OC
ee
hereinafter set forth.
KF
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
NO
INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE WITH CONTRACTUAL
ee
RELATIONS AND PROSPECTIVE ADVANTAGE
WO
BP
Ry
38. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if fully set forth each and every
A
one of its allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs.
DB
39. Defendants Nketiah, Koranteng and Does | through 50, inclusive, knew and
mH
Rom
or should have known that at all relevant times herein Plaintiff was in contract to purchase
OO
certain real estate as the future home of Plaintiff church.
OBO
RB
40. Defendants knew and or should have known that their actions as hereinabove
ODO
Kd
alleged, including their actions in asserting ownership and control over Plaintiff's funds at
Fe
HN
the Defendant bank would likely interfere with Plaintiff and prevent Plaintiff from
NYO
PPO
performing its then existing contract to purchase said real estate.
WH
KR
Al. Defendants knew or should have known that their wrongful actions as
BR
KN
alleged herein would interfere with Plaintiff's activities as a church; would interfere with
On
NH
Plaintiff's fund raising activities; and would interfere with Plaintiff's relations with its
DB
PO
members. Defendants’ actions constitute intentional interference with existing contractual
YN
NYO
and prospective economic advantage, all to Plaintiff's damage. .
Oo
NO
42. As adirect and proximate result of Defendants’ and each of their interference
with existing contractual relations and their wrongful interference with Plaintiff's
COMPLAINT PAGE 10
prospective economic advantage, Plaintiff has been damaged, all according to proof at trial
herein.
WH
43. The actions of Defendants as herein alleged were intentional, willful and
WO
malicious and were calculated by Defendants to harm Plaintiff. Defendants knew and or *
BP
should have known that their said actions would harm Plaintiff and deprive Plaintiff of its
DH
legal rights. As a result of the willful and malicious conduct of Defendants and Defendants’
DBD
conduct in conscious disregard of the damage such conduct would naturally cause to
YN
Plaintiff, Plaintiff requests this Court to enter judgment awarding it punitive and exemplary
Oo
damages against Defendants in addition to all other damages and other relief Plaintiff shall
Oo
be entitled to pursuant to its claims herein. Plaintiff requests this court to enter a judgement
CO
ee
against Defendants which includes an award in Plaintiffs favor of punitive and exemplary
KF
a
damages in a sum of not less than 1 million dollars, all accounting to proof at trial herein.
NH
Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgement against Defendant and each of them is
WY
hereinafter set forth.
BR
ee
WH
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
DB
IDENTITY THEFT
TI
44. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if fully set forth each and every
Rm
DH
one of its allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs.
YO
BR
45. Defendant Nketiah, Koranteng and Defendants sued herein as Does 1 through
DOD
DR
100 inclusive, wrongfully misappropriated and converted the identity and name of Plaintiff
K-Y&
PO
corporation for the purpose of gaining custody and control of Plaintiffs funds, property and
NO
PD
other things of value.
WO
KD
46. Plaintiff asserts that the actions of Defendants as alleged in the foregoing
FPF
HN
constitute Identity Theft as the same is defined in California Civil Code Section 1798.92, et
UW
VN
seq.
DWN
PPO
47. As adirect and proximate result of Defendants’ and each of their
SN
NO
misappropriation of Plaintiff's identity, Plaintiff has been damaged, all according to proof at
oo
Bo
trial herein.
48. The actions of Defendants as herein alleged were intentional, willful and
COMPLAINT PAGE 11
malicious and were calculated by Defendants to harm Plaintiff. Defendants knew and or
should have known that their said actions would harm Plaintiff and deprive Plaintiff of its
HNO
legal rights. As a result of the willful and malicious conduct of Defendants and Defendants’
WY
conduct in conscious disregard of the damage such conduct would naturally cause to
Se
Plaintiff, Plaintiff requests this Court to enter judgment awarding it punitive and exemplary
OH
damages against Defendants in addition to all other damages and other relief Plaintiff shall
DBD
be entitled to pursuant to its claims herein. Plaintiff requests this court to enter a judgement
NN
against Defendants which includes an award in Plaintiffs favor of punitive and exemplary
eH
damages in a sum of not less than 1 million dollars, all accounting to proof at trial herein.
Co
49. Asaresult of Defendants’ said actions in misappropriating Plaintiffs identity
OC
eet
as alleged herein, Plaintiff is entitled to attorney’s fees and costs of suit, all according to
KF
ee
proof of trial herein and in accordance with statute.
HBO
50. As aresult of Defendant’s said actions in misappropriating Plaintiff’ s
WY
a
identity as alleged herein, Plaintiff is entitled to such other and further penalties as are
FP
provided in said identity theft statutory scheme alleged in California Civil Code Section
Dn
1798.92, et. seq. and pursuant to relevant Federal anti-identity theft legislation.
Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgement against Defendant and each of them as
IN
NOR
hereinafter set forth.
WOW
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
Oo
DECLARATORY RELIEF
COS
51. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if fully set forth each and every
YF
YD
one of its allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs.
NO
NY
52. An actual controversy now exists by and between Plaintiff and Defendants
WO
NY
Nketiah, Koranteng and Defendants sued herein as Does 1 through 100 inclusive. Plaintiff
BP
NHN
contends that it is the only rightful entity which has the right to use the name Believers
UO
NY
Christian Church and it is the only rightful owner of the funds on deposit at Defendant Bank
DO
NO
of America and in the Bank of America accounts. Plaintiff contends that Defendants have
NO
NN
no legal right to appropriate the name, identity and property of Plaintiff. Plaintiff further
oO
NO
contends that Defendants have no legal right to hold itself out to the public as the Believers
COMPLAINT PAGE 12
Christian Church which was incorporated in the State of California on November 24, 1999,
bearing corporate number C2077441. Plaintiff contends that it properly removed Defendant
YH
Nketiah as an officer and director of Plaintiff corporation. Plaintiff contends that the
YW
actions of Defendant Nketiah in asserting an ownership interest in the Bank of America
PP
Accounts as alleged herein are wrongful. Plaintiff further contends that its governing board
Hn
and Board of Directors have been duly elected and constitute the duly authorized Board of
DH
Directors/Governing Board of Plaintiff corporation.
SD
53. Declaratory relief is necessary in this case to eliminate a multiplicity of legal
Oo
actions and it is necessary in order to resolve the competing claims and contentions of the
eo
parties.
54. Accordingly, Plaintiff requests that the Court enter a judgment against
ee
Defendants which includes certain declarations of the rights of the parties as follows:
a. That Plaintiffis the only entity which has the right to use the name Believers
ee
Christian Church;
Re
b. That Plaintiff is the only rightful owner of the funds on deposit at Defendant
Re
Bank of America and in the Bank of America Accounts;
c. That Defendants have no legal right to use the name, identity and property of
RR
Plaintiff. |
d. That Defendants have no legal right to hold themselves out to the public as the
KNOB
“Believers Christian Church” which was incorporated in the State of California on
November 24, 1999, bearing corporate number C2077441;
NY
e. That Defendant Nketiah was properly and duly removed as an officer and
HN
director of Plaintiff corporation;
NHN
f. That Defendant Nketiah’s assertions that he or anyone he represents is the rightful
HN
owner of the Bank of America Accounts as alleged herein are wrongful; and
PO
g. That Plaintiff's governing board and Board of Directors have been duly elected
NB
and constitute the duly authorized Board of Directors/Governing Board of Plaintiff
wpe
corporation.
Oo
Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgement against Defendant and each of them as
COMPLAINT _ PAGE 13
hereinafter set forth.
Fe
EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
YH
WRONGFUL DISHONOR
WY
55. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if fully set forth each and every
BP
one of its allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs.
A
56. On or about December 28", 2004, Plaintiff presented various checks and
HD
other demands for payment to its bank, Defandant Bank of America, Plaintiff request
NA
Defendant Bank of America to pay at Plaintiffs order certain funds from the Bank of
Aa
America Accounts. All of Plaintiff's checks, demands, and requests for payment and or
So
withdrawal of funds from said accounts were denied and dishonored by Defendant Bank of
SO
America, proximately and legally causing damage to Plaintiff.
el
FP
57. Atall times herein alleged, Plaintiff's said checks and other demands for
i
NH
payment were in conformance with all signature cards and resolutions on record at
ei
Defendant Bank of America. At all relevant times, all resolutions and signature cards which
Bw
ia
were in the possession of Defendant Bank of America concerning Plaintiff, authorized and
ia
DAA
directed to defendant to pay funds in accordance with Plaintiff's checks and demands as
ia
presented to the bank as alleged in the foregoing. Notwithstanding the fact that said checks
AKXA
and demands were duly executed by individuals that had authority, Defendant Bank of
ww
America intentionally disregarded said checks and demands, all to Plaintiff's damage herein.
©
58. Asa direct and proximate result of Defendant Bank of America’s wrongful
RR
S
dishonor of Plaintiff's checks and other demands for payment as alleged herein, Plaintiff has
DO
|&
been damaged, all according to proof of trial herein.
NS
DR
Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgement against Defendant and each of them is
oO
DO
hereinafter set forth.
B
KH
NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION
INTERPLEADER
NH
A
NO
59. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if fully set forth each and every
WA
NY
one of its. allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs.
Oo
Oo
60. Pursuant to California Civil Procedure Code Section 386 et. seq., Plaintiff
requests this Court to require Defendant Bank of America to immediately interplead into this
COMPLAINT PAGE 14
Court all funds in the Bank of America Accounts and all other funds which it has on deposit
in the name of Plaintiff and or in the name of Believers Christian Church. Plaintiff requests
NH
that said funds be held by this Court until further order of this Court.
W
61. As alleged in the foregoing, Plaintiff requested and demanded that Defendant
BR
Bank of America interplead all such funds into Court and Defendant Bank of America has
OA
failed and refused to do so, necessitating the filing and prosecution of this action. Pursuant to
DBD
California Code of Civil Procedure Section 386.6, Plaintiff requests this Court to award it all
NN
attorneys fees and costs which Plaintiff has incurred in bringing this action and that all such
wo
costs and attorneys fees be awarded to Plaintiff be paid by Defendants and each of them
o
herein.
OC
Wherefore, Plaintiffprays for judgement against Defendant and each of them is
fF
hereinafter set forth
YP
TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
W
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
BP
62. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if fully set forth each and every
HBA
one of its allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs.
63. Plaintiff requests this Court to issue and enter all requisite and necessary
st
Temporary Restraining Orders, Preliminary Injunctions, and Permanent Injunctions for the
fH
purpose of protecting the status quo in this proceeding, preventing irreparable damage, and
ODO
protecting all funds and property at issue in this case.
DOD
64. | Without the injunctive relief prayed for herein, Plaintiff will be irreparably
KH
damaged. Injunction is further necessary to prevent the transfer and/or other dissipation of
NY
the Bank of America Accounts and all other funds which Defendants Nketiah, Koranteng and
WO
Defendants Does | through 100 presently possess in the name of Believers Christian Church.
BP
65. Accordingly, Plaintiff requests this Court to issue all requisite and necessary
A
Temporary Restraining Orders, Preliminary Injunctions, and Permanent Injunctions as
HD
follows:
A
a. That Defendants and each of them are restrained and prevented from using,
Oo
paying, assigning, transferring, and or hypothecating all funds in the name of Plaintiff, all
funds in the name of Believers Christian Church, all funds held on deposit in the name of
COMPLAINT PAGE 15
Believers Christian Church, all funds on deposit at Defendant Bank of America and in the
Bank of America Accounts;
NHN
b. That Defendant Bank of America immediately transfer and interplead to the
WO
Clerk of this Court all funds in the name of Plaintiff, all funds in the name of Believers
BP
Christian Church, all funds held on deposit in the name of Believers Christian Church, all
WH
funds on deposit at Defendant Bank of America and in the Bank of America Accounts so that
DBD
NAN
said funds shall be held until further order of this Court;
c. That Defendants and each of them shall immediately turn over to Plaintiff all of
OA
Plaintiffs property held by Defendants, including, but not limited to all corporate records,
o
minute books, bank records, canceled checks, bank statements, membership records,
ee
CO
financial records, and all other documents in their possession concerning or in any way
KF
ee
related to Believers Christian Church.
YP
ee
Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgement against Defendant and each of them is
WO
hereinafter set forth.
FBP
ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
me
DBA
ACCOUNTING
66. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if in fully set forth each and every
st
one of its allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs.
wa
67. After being duly and properly removed as an Officer and Director of Plaintiff
YO
corporation, as alleged in the foregoing, Defendant Nketiah, and Defendants Koranteng and
Rw
OD
‘Does 1 through 50, appropriated, converted and or took various records, financial records,
KH
KN
corporate records, the corporate minute book, and other property owned by Plaintiff
NY
KN
corporation. Plaintiff is informed and believes that on or about December 24, 2004,
WY
HN
Defendants started a new church using the name of Believers Christian Church, the same
BR
KN
name as Plaintiff church. Defendants have wrongfully insinuated and represented to the
YO
A
public and others that the new church they started was in fact Plaintiff corporation.
DN
WN
Defendants simply ignored and disregarded the duly constituted acts of Plaintiff and declared
SN
NO
themselves to be Plaintiff corporation and Defendants have carried on operations as if they
oOo
NO
“were” Plaintiff corporation, all to Plaintiff's damage.
68. Plaintiff is informed and believes and on that ground alleges that Defendants
COMPLAINT PAGE 16
have kept and collected money which is the rightful property of Plaintiff and are now in
ke
procession of property rightfully owned by Plaintiff corporation.
NO
69. Plaintiff requests this Court to enter all requisite orders and judgments
WY
requiring Defendants to provide to Plaintiff a true, full and complete accounting with respect
HR
to each and all of its financial activities and transactions since on or about December 19,
A
2004.
ADHD
70. Plaintiff further requests this Court to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and
against Defendants in an amount equal to all sums which are found owing to Plaintiff as a
Bom
result of said accounting and to enter such other and further orders-as are just and proper as a
Oo
result of said accounting.
ee
OO
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Def
Preview
e @ sede eee Michael J. Blumenfeld, SBN 65239 —_— MICHAEL BLUMENFELD “3 A Professional Corporation om ry pct ren, One Kaiser Plaza ; e The Ordway Building § L45>, ALAMEDA COUNTY WY Suite 1675 ‘ FE PAIN Tippy “x, Oakland, CA 94612 AID HAY 19-0005 HR Telephone (510) 465-0555 CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT WDA Facsimile (510) 465-8093 SUMMONS Igsunn A: 2. hs Bittle DB Attorneys for Believer’s Christian Church, Inc. aT OA SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA oO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA et © BELIEVERS CHRISTIAN CaseNo. RBGO5 2138 4.8 -— — CHURCH, a California Corporation ne COMPLAINT FOR FRAUD, b ry Plaintiff, “CONVERSION, BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTIES, WW vs. DECLARATORY RELIEF, IDENTITY ee THEFT, WRONGFUL DISHONOR, SB NICK NKETIAH, a.k.a. KWADWO INTERPLEADER, INJUNCTIVE NKETIAH, an Individual; ESTHER. RELIEF, ACCOUNTING AND WN KORANTENG an Individual; BANK OF PUNITIVE DAMAGES AMERICA CORPORATION, a HD corporation; and DOES 1 - 100, Inclusive, - SI a Defendants. / 1o6) — Plaintiff, Believer’s Christian Church, Inc., a California Non Profit Religious oe © Corporation , (“Plaintiff”), hereby complains against Defendants and each of them as RO So hereinafter set forth: NO — GENERAL ALLEGATIONS No NO 1. At all times herein alleged and at present, Plaintiff was and now is duly NO Oo organized and duly empowered to act under the laws of the State of California as a Non- bo a Profit Religious Corporation pursuant to California Corporations Code Sections 9110 et. i) Nn seq. Plaintiff duly and properly incorporated under the laws of the State of California as a a N non-profit religious corporation on or about November 24, 1999. Since incorporation, and at ~—l N present, Plaintiff has been and is a corporation in good standing, organized and acting under oo N the laws of the State of California. At all times herein alleged, Plaintiff has existed and COMPLAINT . PAGE 1 operated as a church, and was and now is principally located within this judicial district, in re the City of Oakland, County of Alameda, State of California. Plaintiffis duly authorized NO and empowered to file this action under the laws of the State of California and pursuant to its WD charter. BR 2. Plaintiff is informed and believes and on that ground alleges, that at all times A herein relevant, Defendant Nick Nketiah, a.k.a. Kwadwo Nketiah (hereinafter “Nketiah’”), DB was and now is a resident of this judicial district. At all times herein relevant, until on or SN about December 19, 2004, Nketiah was as an officer and director of Plaintiff corporation. OA At all relevant times herein, Defendant Nketiah occupied the office of Secretary for Plaintiff - o corporation. At all times herein relevant, Defendant Nketiah occupied a fiduciary CO ee relationship of trust and confidence with respect to Plaintiff. At all times herein alleged, KY ea ee Plaintiff reasonably relied upon and trusted Defendant Nketiah to act as a fiduciary of and NH trustee for Plaintiff. WY ee 3. Plaintiff is informed and believes and on that ground alleges, that at all times BR herein relevant, Esther Koranteng (““Koranteng”), was and now is a resident of this judicial DN district. At all times herein relevant, Koranteng served Plaintiff as an officer. At all times herein relevant, Defendant Koranteng occupied a fiduciary relationship of trust and ND Ow confidence with respect to Plaintiff. At all times herein alleged, Plaintiff reasonably relied WH upon and trusted Defendant Koranteng to act as a fiduciary of and trustee for Plaintiff. Oo 4. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant sued herein as Defendant DOD DR Bank of America Corporation, is a Delaware corporation which is a legal entity in good YK DD standing and duly registered to do business in the State of California, (hereinafter the “Bank NY of America’). Defendant Bank of America operates a retail bank branch in this judicial WO DO district located at 300 Lakeside Drive, Oakland, California 94612. BP KN 5. At all times herein relevant, Plaintiff did its banking through Defendant Bank UH VN of America and Plaintiff has deposited and now has on deposit with Defendant Bank of ODO NO America certain funds in the approximate amount of $130,000. Said funds were deposited at SNS NO Defendant Bank of America in the following accounts: Business Checking Account No oOo NO 02517-01430; Business Interest Maximize Account No 02512-01428; and Investment CD COMPLAINT PAGE 2 Account Nos 02518-05227 and 02518-05321, collectively referred to herein as the (“Bank of — America Accounts”). WN 6. Plaintiff lacks sufficient information and belief to allege the true names and capacities of Defendants sued herein as Defendants Does 1 through 100, inclusive, and on RF that ground, Plaintiff sues said Defendants by such fictitious names. When the true names WNW and capacities of said fictitiously named Defendants are ascertained, Plaintiff shall amend ND this Complaint accordingly. 7. At all times herein alleged, each of the Defendants herein, whether named or Oo unnamed, was and is legally responsible to Plaintiff for all damages and other relief for 0 which Plaintiff requests this Court to enter judgment in its favor in this action. At all times OC herein alleged, each of the Defendants, whether named or unnamed, was the agent, servant, ee KF employee, joint venturer, partner and or co-conspirator of each of the other defendants Be WN herein, whether named or unnamed. At all times herein alleged, each of the Defendants Be herein was acting within the true and full course and scope of such agency and employment. ewe BR Each of the Defendants herein, whether named or unnamed, is legally responsible to Plaintiff ew WH for all of Plaintiffs injuries, damages and other relief as prayed for in this complaint. DA Be 8. On or about December 19, 2004, by a duly authorized act and resolution of ID Bee the Board of Directors and governing board of Plaintiff corporation, Defendant Nketiah was Oo removed as the Secretary of Plaintiff corporation. At the.same time, Defendant Nketiah was Be © removed as a member of the Board of Directors and as having any authority to act on behalf GS KN of Plaintiff corporation. FH HB 9. On or about December 28, 2004, by a duly authorized act and resolution of NY NH the Board of Directors and governing board of Plaintiff corporation, Plaintiff provided NY W Defendant Bank of America with written instructions and a resolution of Plaintiff BP NH corporation removing Defendant Nketiah from the Bank of America signature cards with WA YH respect to the Bank of America Accounts. At said time, Plaintiff properly informed NY YH Defendant Bank of America in writing that Defendant Nketiah was no longer permitted to NN sign checks, make withdrawals or otherwise act for Plaintiff with respect to the Bank of Co America Accounts. At said time, Plaintiff corporation provided Defendant Bank of America COMPLAINT PAGE 3 with new signature cards which provided Defendant Bank of America with specific written instructions and resolutions specifying and limiting the following persons as signatories with NH power to withdraw funds and sign checks on the Bank of America Accounts: Peter K. WD Gyamfi, Kofi Adarkwah, Samuel Bus-Kwofie, and Madam Elisabeth A. Appiah. BP 10. Inor about January of 2005, despite being properly and duly removed by Dn Plaintiff as alleged above, Defendant Nketiah falsely, wrongfully and fraudulently represented to Defendant Bank of America that he was in fact still duly authorized to act on HN behalf of Plaintiff corporation; that the documents presented to the Bank of America by A Plaintiff were false; that he was the only individual representative of Plaintiff corporation oOo who was authorized to withdraw money from the bank; and he demanded that Defendant OC Bank of America release and pay to him and or to his order all of the approximate $130,000 KH eee which was on deposit in the Bank of America Accounts. NH ee 11. Atthe time that Defendant Nketiah made said representations to Defendant WO Bank of America, Defendant Nketiah knew that said representations were false, that Plaintiff FP eee had certain monetary obligations and bills to pay and that Plaintiff corporation was in DN contract to purchase a building to serve as the future location of the Plaintiff church. At the Re time that Defendant Nketiah made said representations to Defendant Bank of America, AD Rm Defendant Nketiah knew and or should have known that said representations would damage BH KNORR Plaintiff and deprive Plaintiff of its property and prevent Plaintiff from being able to OD exercise its legal rights. DOD 12. Ator about the same time as Defendant Nketiah made the representations as KFK& RO stated in the foregoing paragraph, Plaintiff presented certain checks in the normal course of NY PO business to the Bank of America to be paid out of the Bank of America Accounts. WO KH Defendant Bank of America failed and refused to honor said checks and demand for BP HP payment, all to Plaintiff’s damage. Despite repeated demands made by Plaintiff to nH PO Defendant Bank of America, said defendant has failed and continues to fail and refuse to NH NY honor Plaintiff's demands and has refused to release to Plaintiff its funds on deposit in said Sa NO Bank of America Accounts. oO BO 13. On or about March 24, 2005, Plaintiff requested the Bank of America to COMPLAINT . PAGE 4 interplead Plaintiffs funds and not to allow said funds to be paid to any third party. He Attached hereto as Exhibit “A” is a true and correct copy of counsel for Plaintiff's letter to Defendant Bank of America which enclosed certain resolutions of the members and directors W of Plaintiff corporation and which requested Defendant to interplead the funds at issue. BP 14. To date, Defendant Bank of America has not responded to the letter which is MH attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and Plaintiff is quite concerned that Defendant bank has or SDH will disburse the funds at issue to third parties or otherwise dissipate, transfer and or — improperly pay said funds, all to Plaintiff's irreparable damage. Plaintiff is a religious CO corporation. It is not engaged in business. The funds at issue were donated by the members Oo of Plaintiff corporation as tithes or gifts to Plaintiff corporation. If said funds were CO eet wrongfully released, paid, or transferred to Defendants, and or to any third party, Plaintiff KF and its members would be irreparably damaged. PO 15. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant Nketiah, Defendant WO Dm Koranteng and others sued herein as Does 1 through 50, have falsely, wrongfully and FP fraudulently asserted and continue to wrongfully assert false claims to the funds on deposit HA at the Bank of America Accounts. As a direct, proximate and foreseeable result of said DH wrongful conduct, Plaintiffhas been damaged all accordingly to proof at trial herein. AIT 16. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant Nketiah, Defendant DW Koranteng and others sued herein as Does 1 through 100, have falsely, wrongfully and DO fraudulently asserted and continue to wrongfully assert that they constitute the membership CO of a church which said defendants have falsely, wrongfully and fraudulently named FF KN “Believers Christian Church”, the same name as Plaintiff. By calling themselves and NO DN referring to themselves as “Believers Christian Church”, said defendants have wrongfully WO NYY misappropriated and converted Plaintiffs identity and name for the purpose of obtaining DBP HN Plaintiff's property, funds and other things of value, all to Plaintiff's damage according to WwW VN proof at trial herein. DBD BDO 17. Defendant Nketiah, Defendant Koranteng and others sued herein as Does 1 SY NO through 100, continue to wrongfully and fraudulently use Plaintiffs name and identity for oOo NO their own advantage. Such wrongful use has created great confusion and has damaged COMPLAINT PAGE 5 Plaintiff. However, if such wrongful use is continued or otherwise permitted, then Plaintiff shall be irreparably damaged. Accordingly, Plaintiff requests this Court to immediately NHN enjoin and to enj oin during the pendency of this action, defendants’ continued use of WY Plaintiff's name and identity; to restrain Defendants from asserting an interest of any kind in FB the funds on deposit in the Bank of America Accounts; and to protect the status quo by HW requiring Bank of America to interplead the funds into this Court. HD HN FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION Oo FRAUD Oo 18. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if fully set forth each and every CO one of its allegations as contained in the foregoing paragraphs. et KF 19. On and after December 19, 2004 to the present, Defendant Nketiah falsely HO represented to the Bank of America and continues to falsely represent to Defendant Bank of WO America that he was and is a duly authorized officer and director of Plaintiff corporation and BP that he has requisite and proper authority to act on behalf of Plaintiff. These UH representations of fact were and are false. The true facts are that on December 19, 2004 mw HD Defendant Nketiah was duly and properly removed from all office and as a director of ND Plaintiff corporation by a vote of the Board of Directors and governing board of Plaintiff CO RR corporation. Defendant Nketiah knew that said representations of fact were false and OO ROR fraudulent when he made them. He made said representations with the intent to deceive; DCO with the intent to harm Plaintiff; and with the intent to obtain personal gain. KH NO 20. Plaintiff is informed and believes that after being removed as an officer and NYO NY director of Plaintiff corporation, Defendant Nketiah went to the Bank of America and PO WO demanded that Defendant Bank of America release to him all of Plaintiff's funds on deposit BP NO at said bank, including the money in the Bank of America Accounts. Plaintiff is informed On NO and believes that at this time Defendant Nketiah falsely represented to defendant bank that ODO NO he and he alone was empowered to act on behalf of Plaintiff corporation and that the SNS NO defendant bank should ignore any further instructions given to it by Plaintiff corporation ao BO unless such instructions came from. him. 21. Despite receiving written instructions and resolutions to the contrary, ‘COMPLAINT PAGE 6 Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant Bank of America relied upon the false and NHK fraudulent representations of said defendant and as a result thereof it then failed and refused to honor Plaintiffs checks and other demands that Plaintiff's funds on deposit be paid to WYO Plaintiff and or to its order, all in violation of the law. FSF 22. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant Koranteng ratified A Defendant Nketiah’s said fraudulent acts. DH 23. Asa direct and proximate result of Defendants’ fraud and deception, Plaintiff SN has been damaged all accounting to proof of trial herein. Oo 24. The actions of Defendants as herein alleged were intentional, willful and oOo malicious and were calculated by Defendants to harm Plaintiff. Defendants knew and or OC should have known that their false and fraudulent representations would harm Plaintiff and KF ie deprive Plaintiff of its legal rights. As a result of the willful and malicious conduct of YP Defendants and Defendants’ conduct in conscious disregard of the damage such conduct WY would naturally cause to Plaintiff, Plaintiff requests this Court to enter judgment awarding it BP punitive and exemplary damages against Defendants in addition to all other damages and A other relief Plaintiff shall be entitled to pursuant to its claims herein. Plaintiff requests this DH court to enter a judgement against Defendants which includes an award in Plaintiff's favor of HS Rw punitive and exemplary damages in a sum of not less than 1 million dollars, all accounting to CO proof at trial herein. CO Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgement against Defendant’s and each of them is Oo KH hereinafter set forth. —& KD NY KN SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION WwW KH CONVERSION BR KN 25. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if fully set forth each and every OO PO one of its allegations as contained in the foregoing paragraphs. | DO NB 26. As the Secretary of Plaintiff corporation, Defendant Nketiah was entrusted SA PO from time to time with the books and records of the corporation, its corporate minute book, oOo BO and other personal property. Defendant held such records as the trustee and fiduciary of Plaintiff. In or about December of 2004, Plaintiff terminated Defendant Nketiah as an COMPLAINT PAGE 7 officer and director of Plaintiff corporation. At that time, Plaintiff, through its Board of Directors, requested and demanded of Defendant Nketiah that he return to Plaintiff all of HPO Plaintiff's documents, minute books, corporate records, bank records, papers and other WO Plaintiff property with which he was entrusted during his office. Despite repeated demands, FF Defendant Nketiah failed and refused to return such property to Plaintiff, all to Plaintiff’s A damage. To date, Defendant Nketiah and Defendants sued herein as Does 1 through 50 DH continue to retain and exercise wrongful dominion and control over Plaintiffs said property NN all to Plaintiff's damage according to proof of trial herein. Oo 27. Asadirect and proximate result of Defendants’ conversion as herein alleged, o Plaintiff has been damaged all according to proof of trial herein. CO 28. The actions of Defendants as herein alleged were intentional, willful and KF malicious and were calculated by Defendants to harm Plaintiff. Defendants knew and or PO eee should have known that their said actions would harm Plaintiff and deprive Plaintiff of its WD legal rights. As a result of the willful and malicious conduct of Defendants and Defendants’ BP conduct in conscious disregard of the damage such conduct would naturally cause to WH Plaintiff, Plaintiff requests this Court to enter judgment awarding it punitive and exemplary DH damages against Defendants in addition to all other damages and other relief Plaintiff shall be entitled to pursuant to its claims herein. Plaintiff requests this court to enter a judgement FH against Defendants which includes an award in Plaintiff's favor of punitive and exemplary CO damages in a sum of not less than 1 million dollars, all accounting to proof at trial herein. CO DDR Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgement against Defendant and each of them is FKF§ hereinafter set forth. NY NY THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION WD) NHN BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTIES FP NY 29. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if fully set forth each and every WN NY one the allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs. DH HO 30. At all times herein alleged, Defendants Nketiah and Koranteng occupied a SN NM fiduciary relationship of trust and confidence with resprect to Plaintiff. At all times herein oO NO alleged, Plaintiff reasonably relied upon and trusted said Defendants to act as Plaintiffs COMPLAINT PAGE 8 fiduciaries and trustees. 31. Defendants Nketiah and Koranteng breached their fiduciary duties and NO responsibilities owing to Plaintiff by, among other things, maintaining and asserting W dominion and control over Plaintiff's funds on deposit at Defendant Bank of America; BRP converting Plaintiff's properties and records as herein alleged; by converting and wrongfully NW misappropriating Plaintiff's name; and by converting and misappropriating Plaintiffs HN identity as “Believer’s Christian Church.” SI 32. As adirect and proximate result of Defendants’ breaches of fiduciary duty, DA Plaintiff has been damaged all according to proof at trial herein. So 33. The actions of Defendants as herein alleged were intentional, willful and OC eet malicious and were calculated by Defendants to harm Plaintiff. Defendants knew and or KF ee should have known that their said actions would harm Plaintiff and deprive Plaintiff of its HPO legal rights. As a result of the willful and malicious conduct of Defendants and Defendants’ WD conduct in conscious disregard of the damage such conduct would naturally cause to BR a Plaintiff, Plaintiff requests this Court to enter judgment awarding it punitive and exemplary WH damages against Defendants in addition to all other damages and other relief Plaintiff shall HD be entitled to pursuant to its claims herein. Plaintiff requests this court to enter a judgement NDT against Defendants which includes an award in Plaintiffs favor of punitive and exemplary DH damages in a sum of not less than 1 million dollars, all accounting to proof at trial herein. ODO Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgement against Defendant and each of them as CO NR hereinafter set forth. KX DR FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION PDO NO CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD WO BD 34. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if fully set forth each and every FP KN one of its allegations contained in the fore going paragraphs. BK A . 35. The actions of Defendant Nketiah and Koranteng as alleged in the foregoing OW bt constitute Constructive Fraud as the same is defined in California Civil Code Section 1573. SN NO 36. As adirect and proximate result of Defendants’ and each of their constructive OO NO fraud, Plaintiff has been damaged all according to proof at trial herein. 37. The actions of Defendants as herein alleged were intentional, willful and COMPLAINT PAGE 9 malicious and were calculated by Defendants to harm Plaintiff. Defendants knew and or should have known that their said actions would harm Plaintiff and deprive Plaintiff of its NHN legal rights. As a result of the willful and malicious conduct of Defendants and Defendants’ W conduct in conscious disregard of the damage such conduct would naturally cause to BP Plaintiff, Plaintiff requests this Court to enter judgment awarding it punitive and exemplary HW damages against Defendants in addition to all other damages and other relief Plaintiff shall DB be entitled to pursuant to its claims herein. Plaintiff requests this court to enter a judgement NS against Defendants which includes an award in Plaintiffs favor of punitive and exemplary Oa damages in a sum of not less than 1 million dollars, all accounting to proof at trial herein. oOo Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgement against Defendant and each of them as OC ee hereinafter set forth. KF FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION NO INTENTIONAL INTERFERENCE WITH CONTRACTUAL ee RELATIONS AND PROSPECTIVE ADVANTAGE WO BP Ry 38. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if fully set forth each and every A one of its allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs. DB 39. Defendants Nketiah, Koranteng and Does | through 50, inclusive, knew and mH Rom or should have known that at all relevant times herein Plaintiff was in contract to purchase OO certain real estate as the future home of Plaintiff church. OBO RB 40. Defendants knew and or should have known that their actions as hereinabove ODO Kd alleged, including their actions in asserting ownership and control over Plaintiff's funds at Fe HN the Defendant bank would likely interfere with Plaintiff and prevent Plaintiff from NYO PPO performing its then existing contract to purchase said real estate. WH KR Al. Defendants knew or should have known that their wrongful actions as BR KN alleged herein would interfere with Plaintiff's activities as a church; would interfere with On NH Plaintiff's fund raising activities; and would interfere with Plaintiff's relations with its DB PO members. Defendants’ actions constitute intentional interference with existing contractual YN NYO and prospective economic advantage, all to Plaintiff's damage. . Oo NO 42. As adirect and proximate result of Defendants’ and each of their interference with existing contractual relations and their wrongful interference with Plaintiff's COMPLAINT PAGE 10 prospective economic advantage, Plaintiff has been damaged, all according to proof at trial herein. WH 43. The actions of Defendants as herein alleged were intentional, willful and WO malicious and were calculated by Defendants to harm Plaintiff. Defendants knew and or * BP should have known that their said actions would harm Plaintiff and deprive Plaintiff of its DH legal rights. As a result of the willful and malicious conduct of Defendants and Defendants’ DBD conduct in conscious disregard of the damage such conduct would naturally cause to YN Plaintiff, Plaintiff requests this Court to enter judgment awarding it punitive and exemplary Oo damages against Defendants in addition to all other damages and other relief Plaintiff shall Oo be entitled to pursuant to its claims herein. Plaintiff requests this court to enter a judgement CO ee against Defendants which includes an award in Plaintiffs favor of punitive and exemplary KF a damages in a sum of not less than 1 million dollars, all accounting to proof at trial herein. NH Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgement against Defendant and each of them is WY hereinafter set forth. BR ee WH SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION DB IDENTITY THEFT TI 44. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if fully set forth each and every Rm DH one of its allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs. YO BR 45. Defendant Nketiah, Koranteng and Defendants sued herein as Does 1 through DOD DR 100 inclusive, wrongfully misappropriated and converted the identity and name of Plaintiff K-Y& PO corporation for the purpose of gaining custody and control of Plaintiffs funds, property and NO PD other things of value. WO KD 46. Plaintiff asserts that the actions of Defendants as alleged in the foregoing FPF HN constitute Identity Theft as the same is defined in California Civil Code Section 1798.92, et UW VN seq. DWN PPO 47. As adirect and proximate result of Defendants’ and each of their SN NO misappropriation of Plaintiff's identity, Plaintiff has been damaged, all according to proof at oo Bo trial herein. 48. The actions of Defendants as herein alleged were intentional, willful and COMPLAINT PAGE 11 malicious and were calculated by Defendants to harm Plaintiff. Defendants knew and or should have known that their said actions would harm Plaintiff and deprive Plaintiff of its HNO legal rights. As a result of the willful and malicious conduct of Defendants and Defendants’ WY conduct in conscious disregard of the damage such conduct would naturally cause to Se Plaintiff, Plaintiff requests this Court to enter judgment awarding it punitive and exemplary OH damages against Defendants in addition to all other damages and other relief Plaintiff shall DBD be entitled to pursuant to its claims herein. Plaintiff requests this court to enter a judgement NN against Defendants which includes an award in Plaintiffs favor of punitive and exemplary eH damages in a sum of not less than 1 million dollars, all accounting to proof at trial herein. Co 49. Asaresult of Defendants’ said actions in misappropriating Plaintiffs identity OC eet as alleged herein, Plaintiff is entitled to attorney’s fees and costs of suit, all according to KF ee proof of trial herein and in accordance with statute. HBO 50. As aresult of Defendant’s said actions in misappropriating Plaintiff’ s WY a identity as alleged herein, Plaintiff is entitled to such other and further penalties as are FP provided in said identity theft statutory scheme alleged in California Civil Code Section Dn 1798.92, et. seq. and pursuant to relevant Federal anti-identity theft legislation. Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgement against Defendant and each of them as IN NOR hereinafter set forth. WOW SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION Oo DECLARATORY RELIEF COS 51. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if fully set forth each and every YF YD one of its allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs. NO NY 52. An actual controversy now exists by and between Plaintiff and Defendants WO NY Nketiah, Koranteng and Defendants sued herein as Does 1 through 100 inclusive. Plaintiff BP NHN contends that it is the only rightful entity which has the right to use the name Believers UO NY Christian Church and it is the only rightful owner of the funds on deposit at Defendant Bank DO NO of America and in the Bank of America accounts. Plaintiff contends that Defendants have NO NN no legal right to appropriate the name, identity and property of Plaintiff. Plaintiff further oO NO contends that Defendants have no legal right to hold itself out to the public as the Believers COMPLAINT PAGE 12 Christian Church which was incorporated in the State of California on November 24, 1999, bearing corporate number C2077441. Plaintiff contends that it properly removed Defendant YH Nketiah as an officer and director of Plaintiff corporation. Plaintiff contends that the YW actions of Defendant Nketiah in asserting an ownership interest in the Bank of America PP Accounts as alleged herein are wrongful. Plaintiff further contends that its governing board Hn and Board of Directors have been duly elected and constitute the duly authorized Board of DH Directors/Governing Board of Plaintiff corporation. SD 53. Declaratory relief is necessary in this case to eliminate a multiplicity of legal Oo actions and it is necessary in order to resolve the competing claims and contentions of the eo parties. 54. Accordingly, Plaintiff requests that the Court enter a judgment against ee Defendants which includes certain declarations of the rights of the parties as follows: a. That Plaintiffis the only entity which has the right to use the name Believers ee Christian Church; Re b. That Plaintiff is the only rightful owner of the funds on deposit at Defendant Re Bank of America and in the Bank of America Accounts; c. That Defendants have no legal right to use the name, identity and property of RR Plaintiff. | d. That Defendants have no legal right to hold themselves out to the public as the KNOB “Believers Christian Church” which was incorporated in the State of California on November 24, 1999, bearing corporate number C2077441; NY e. That Defendant Nketiah was properly and duly removed as an officer and HN director of Plaintiff corporation; NHN f. That Defendant Nketiah’s assertions that he or anyone he represents is the rightful HN owner of the Bank of America Accounts as alleged herein are wrongful; and PO g. That Plaintiff's governing board and Board of Directors have been duly elected NB and constitute the duly authorized Board of Directors/Governing Board of Plaintiff wpe corporation. Oo Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgement against Defendant and each of them as COMPLAINT _ PAGE 13 hereinafter set forth. Fe EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION YH WRONGFUL DISHONOR WY 55. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if fully set forth each and every BP one of its allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs. A 56. On or about December 28", 2004, Plaintiff presented various checks and HD other demands for payment to its bank, Defandant Bank of America, Plaintiff request NA Defendant Bank of America to pay at Plaintiffs order certain funds from the Bank of Aa America Accounts. All of Plaintiff's checks, demands, and requests for payment and or So withdrawal of funds from said accounts were denied and dishonored by Defendant Bank of SO America, proximately and legally causing damage to Plaintiff. el FP 57. Atall times herein alleged, Plaintiff's said checks and other demands for i NH payment were in conformance with all signature cards and resolutions on record at ei Defendant Bank of America. At all relevant times, all resolutions and signature cards which Bw ia were in the possession of Defendant Bank of America concerning Plaintiff, authorized and ia DAA directed to defendant to pay funds in accordance with Plaintiff's checks and demands as ia presented to the bank as alleged in the foregoing. Notwithstanding the fact that said checks AKXA and demands were duly executed by individuals that had authority, Defendant Bank of ww America intentionally disregarded said checks and demands, all to Plaintiff's damage herein. © 58. Asa direct and proximate result of Defendant Bank of America’s wrongful RR S dishonor of Plaintiff's checks and other demands for payment as alleged herein, Plaintiff has DO |& been damaged, all according to proof of trial herein. NS DR Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgement against Defendant and each of them is oO DO hereinafter set forth. B KH NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION INTERPLEADER NH A NO 59. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if fully set forth each and every WA NY one of its. allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs. Oo Oo 60. Pursuant to California Civil Procedure Code Section 386 et. seq., Plaintiff requests this Court to require Defendant Bank of America to immediately interplead into this COMPLAINT PAGE 14 Court all funds in the Bank of America Accounts and all other funds which it has on deposit in the name of Plaintiff and or in the name of Believers Christian Church. Plaintiff requests NH that said funds be held by this Court until further order of this Court. W 61. As alleged in the foregoing, Plaintiff requested and demanded that Defendant BR Bank of America interplead all such funds into Court and Defendant Bank of America has OA failed and refused to do so, necessitating the filing and prosecution of this action. Pursuant to DBD California Code of Civil Procedure Section 386.6, Plaintiff requests this Court to award it all NN attorneys fees and costs which Plaintiff has incurred in bringing this action and that all such wo costs and attorneys fees be awarded to Plaintiff be paid by Defendants and each of them o herein. OC Wherefore, Plaintiffprays for judgement against Defendant and each of them is fF hereinafter set forth YP TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION W INJUNCTIVE RELIEF BP 62. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if fully set forth each and every HBA one of its allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs. 63. Plaintiff requests this Court to issue and enter all requisite and necessary st Temporary Restraining Orders, Preliminary Injunctions, and Permanent Injunctions for the fH purpose of protecting the status quo in this proceeding, preventing irreparable damage, and ODO protecting all funds and property at issue in this case. DOD 64. | Without the injunctive relief prayed for herein, Plaintiff will be irreparably KH damaged. Injunction is further necessary to prevent the transfer and/or other dissipation of NY the Bank of America Accounts and all other funds which Defendants Nketiah, Koranteng and WO Defendants Does | through 100 presently possess in the name of Believers Christian Church. BP 65. Accordingly, Plaintiff requests this Court to issue all requisite and necessary A Temporary Restraining Orders, Preliminary Injunctions, and Permanent Injunctions as HD follows: A a. That Defendants and each of them are restrained and prevented from using, Oo paying, assigning, transferring, and or hypothecating all funds in the name of Plaintiff, all funds in the name of Believers Christian Church, all funds held on deposit in the name of COMPLAINT PAGE 15 Believers Christian Church, all funds on deposit at Defendant Bank of America and in the Bank of America Accounts; NHN b. That Defendant Bank of America immediately transfer and interplead to the WO Clerk of this Court all funds in the name of Plaintiff, all funds in the name of Believers BP Christian Church, all funds held on deposit in the name of Believers Christian Church, all WH funds on deposit at Defendant Bank of America and in the Bank of America Accounts so that DBD NAN said funds shall be held until further order of this Court; c. That Defendants and each of them shall immediately turn over to Plaintiff all of OA Plaintiffs property held by Defendants, including, but not limited to all corporate records, o minute books, bank records, canceled checks, bank statements, membership records, ee CO financial records, and all other documents in their possession concerning or in any way KF ee related to Believers Christian Church. YP ee Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for judgement against Defendant and each of them is WO hereinafter set forth. FBP ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION me DBA ACCOUNTING 66. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference as if in fully set forth each and every st one of its allegations contained in the foregoing paragraphs. wa 67. After being duly and properly removed as an Officer and Director of Plaintiff YO corporation, as alleged in the foregoing, Defendant Nketiah, and Defendants Koranteng and Rw OD ‘Does 1 through 50, appropriated, converted and or took various records, financial records, KH KN corporate records, the corporate minute book, and other property owned by Plaintiff NY KN corporation. Plaintiff is informed and believes that on or about December 24, 2004, WY HN Defendants started a new church using the name of Believers Christian Church, the same BR KN name as Plaintiff church. Defendants have wrongfully insinuated and represented to the YO A public and others that the new church they started was in fact Plaintiff corporation. DN WN Defendants simply ignored and disregarded the duly constituted acts of Plaintiff and declared SN NO themselves to be Plaintiff corporation and Defendants have carried on operations as if they oOo NO “were” Plaintiff corporation, all to Plaintiff's damage. 68. Plaintiff is informed and believes and on that ground alleges that Defendants COMPLAINT PAGE 16 have kept and collected money which is the rightful property of Plaintiff and are now in ke procession of property rightfully owned by Plaintiff corporation. NO 69. Plaintiff requests this Court to enter all requisite orders and judgments WY requiring Defendants to provide to Plaintiff a true, full and complete accounting with respect HR to each and all of its financial activities and transactions since on or about December 19, A 2004. ADHD 70. Plaintiff further requests this Court to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendants in an amount equal to all sums which are found owing to Plaintiff as a Bom result of said accounting and to enter such other and further orders-as are just and proper as a Oo result of said accounting. ee OO WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Def