Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
I
)
4
5
6
'l
. -3
9
l0
l l
t2
t3
t4
l5
l6
l7
r8
t9
20
2l
22.
23
24
25
26
27
28
--i."_-."
COMPLAINT
l . ldoo:e Looz Io unc
TROPE E DeCaro1is, LLPM.L. TROPE (SB# t32758JtL62O WiJ'shi .re B1vd., SuiLetos Arrgeles, eA 90025Te].eptrone: (310) AO5-1313Facsiai1e; {310) 405-7374
ATTORNEY FOR PI.AINTIFFLarry Bj-tkhead
Irarry Birkhead an individual,
Plaint i f f ,)))))
aq indiwidual,)Asgociates, a)l'aw corporationr)
1 ttrrough 50, I)))))
7L
v.
Debra Opri,Opri 6professionaland DOESinclusive,
Defendants.
Defendant DEBRA OPRi is an attorne.w conducting busiSsg+is--: * l-': o=
Los Angelee, Cai i f ornia , Def enoarrt . Opr: I AsSociafb$i i jb.... j ! v.-:r .= r: .:-
; !L: ; i
.r: '*.-
[t-€€e*been, dD j.ndividuai reeidinc in the City ".! .!g+. F€€
FFFF.; Icount.w of Los AnEeles, state of cal i fornia F F:- l ; f - ' ,4 F r ;=
(ir t--
i5 r:: .-' i{
: ti :r:
,J,LkH.s*(:o.,RrJuNi 0 1 ?00?
w;ffi,.#:o9 gll,r,rollle
CSNTRJAI, DISTRICT
cAsE No. t , i ,720iUCOI{PITAITf,T FOR:
1. BREACIT OF FIDUCTART DIITY2. CON1IERTSTON3. FRII'D4. LEGBL T'NLPRACIICE5. DECI.ANA:TORY RSLIET6. CONSTRUCTI1IE TRUST
For- hie Conrplaint :n this aetion, FITAINTIFF LARRY BIRKT{EAD
al leges che fol lowing:
I Plainti-ff i-s currently, anci at all timee relevant. hepsq$e1i ! . . .d e _i
f? i:- io rr: -::
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
t0
l l
12
13
r4
15
l6
l , '
18
r920
2l
22
23
24
25
26
2'l
28
----"'E--.COMPLAIT.IT
profe.ssional 1aw corporat ion, is a iaw f i rrn doing businees in
Los Anseies and the St,ace of Cal i fornia, and 'duly
incorporated as such in the StaEe af Cal i fornia. At al l
relevant t imes, both Defendant.e tere the attorneye forI
Plalnt i f f .
Plaint i f f is ignorant of the crue.names and capaci t ies of
defendants sued herein as DOES 1 through 59, inclus' ive, and
therefore cues these- defendants by .9uch
f ict i t ious namee.
Plaint i f f wi l l amend this Complaint Eo al lege their t rue
names and capacicies when the aame have been ascertaj .ned.
Plaj-nt i f f is informed an bel ieves, and upon euch information
and bel ief al leges that eactr of Ele f ict i t iously named
defendant.s is responsible in some manner for the damages Lo
Plaint i f f as al leged herein.
FACTUAI, AI.LECAUONS
rn sepEember o, ,offinvorved in a highly
publ j -c ized conEroversy over the paterni ty of a minor chi ld-
In i t ia l ty, Plaint i f f d id noE have an at torney, al though he
receiveo numerous calIs from atLorneys and was made varioue
offers for iegai represencaEion.
Irater 1n September of 2006, Plaint i f f had received a
telephone cal i f rom a reporEer who worked for MSNBC. This
reporter i r r formed PLaint i f f Lhat ehe waE famil iar wiEh arr
aLtorney whc wanted co represent Plaint i . f f in his paterni ty
dispute, ani further ChaE the attorney was wi i l ing tc
f€pres€r i t PiainEif f for f ree
Severai n.lnutes afier the phone conversaLion with the MSNBC
reporEes corlc iudea, Piaint i f f 's phone rang. An individua:
ident i f iecl hersei f =o Plaint i - f f as Debra Opri [hereafter,
l . fdoo.e Looz Io unc
1
2
3
4
5
6
'1
I
9
l0
l1
t2
l3
l4
l5
l6
17
l8
19
20
2l
22
23
24
25
26
?'1
28
e.d
C.OMPLAINT
6.
Defendant Debra Opri shal l be referred to simply ae
"Opri" l , and Lhat she was cal l ing PlainLi f f at Ehe request
of che MSNBC reporter.
Opri tolo Plaint i f f in this j -nl t ia l teiephone conversat ion
thaL she was a bel iever i rr father 's r lghts, that Opri was
aware that Plaint i f f had very l i rni ted f inancial means, Ehat
Opri wanted to represent Plaintiff, and that Opri would not
-c ha rge -Pil. a i nui f- f - a*y -4s e.s .becau s e*- E lre - pub l i c-. i L-1llr,gqr- .be :
represent.at ion of Plaint i f f would greatLy benef i t Opri 's
legal career
opri also told Piaint i f f thaE he would have her cel l
number, that he would receive personal at.tention. Opri also
told Plaint. i f f that i t was urgent for him to travel to Loe
Angelee irnmediaE,ely, so Ehat hie legal r ights in t .he
paterni ty cispute could be properly proEected througl.
Opr i 's legal representat ion of Plaint i f f .
At the urging of opr i , Plaint i f f cut h is New York t r ip
shorc and f lew Lo Los Angeles to meet with Opri . At the
ini t j "a l meet ing, opr i to ld Plaint i f f that she was a
special ist 1n farni ly iaw, and bhat she had l i t igated
hundrecis of fami ly taw cases.
Opri , over a per io i of two ciaye, presented Plaint i f f wi t l r
warious documents ta si-grr , including several iegal fee
agre€ments. Opri made vari.ous staternente to Plaintif f anO
was abie to eecure his signatures on t ,wo legal fee
agreernenc-€,. the f i ret daced september 29, 2ooe and the
eecono t jateci Sepcember 3C, 20A0. The iegal fee asreemeni
most recent in Eime; -r .e. ; oaced Sepiembe= 30. 20Oe, i -s
attached herecc ani labeiee Exhibi t "4". Subsequent Ec
-_ l -
l . fdoo.e Looz I0 unr
1.
8.
' .d
COl\,{PLAINT
Hdoose eooz Io unc
I
2aJ
4
5
6
1
-_89
l0
l l
t2
l3
t4
l5
t6
t7
1C
September 3O, 2006, Opri obtained Piaint i f f 's s ignature on
a documenC ent lLled "Media Agreement Wieh AssignmenE"
fhereaf te: ref erred to as "Media Agreements" ] , which said
documenE contained a prowision rej-nforcing Ehe abowe-
referenced lega1 fee agreement fche one dated September 30,
2006l - A copy of the Medi.a Agreement is attached hereto as
Exhibi t *E' .
sU!_s_eeHgnF. !o P.]913_ti-ff 'q _rete.1E*ign of ,9pfl, an ingg1y_iew
was arranged to take piace j.n a studio; a1l arranged by
Opri - Piaintr i f f was surpr ised to learn when the interview
.began that he was being ques| ioned via a remote feed.from
New York. The interview was being conducted by ehe same
former MSNBC reporter wtro had introduced PlaintifJ to Oprl
and recommended trhaE he hire her.
Plaint i f f was shocked durinq the interview. when the former
MSNBC reportrer seemed Lo be asking questions whj.ch
contained inforrnat i-on from documents which Plaint i f f knew
were conf ioent ia l . Af ter th€ interview concluded, Pla:nci f f
inquireo of Opri regarding the reporter 's knowledge of this
ccnf ident ial information- Opri informed. Plaint i f f that she
had suppi ied the reporter with conf -<ient i4I informat, ion ae
a "pa), bac{" for the cl ient referra. . Opri also inforrned
Plaint i f f :hat she and the reporter had become good fr iends
ouring Ehe course of the M:chael clacKson criminal trial -
Opri began making a deluge of media appearances, some of
which Opr: macie <iisparagj.ng commenrs regardingL trhe uncner
of Piaint ; f f 's chi lc i . Flaint i f f inseructed Opri not to make
these ciisparaging commenEs :o Ehe rted.iai, and further askeC
-4-
11
I
r9
20
2l
22
23
24
25
26
/ t
28
t2.
i
2
.i
+
5
6
7
8
9
i0
l l
t2
13
l4
t5
16
l7
t8
l9
20
2l
22
23
24
25
26
7'l
28
s'd
COMPL.A.INT
l . f doo.e Lgoz to unc
bhat Opri refrain from making any further publ ic ,
appearancea in connect ion with his paterni ty dispute
without hi-e pr ior consenL. During this Lime perioci , opr i
informed PlainLj. f f :hat she had an agent attempting to
obtaj-n a television show for her. Despite reBeat.ed recluesEs
by Plaint i f f , Opri cont inued to make publ ic appearances and
staEemenLs regarding the paterni ty dispute.
11. . .S-evera] .glqn!. t1_s after Plaint i f f 's retent i 'on of Opri ,
Plainci f f was informed by opri thaL irer assoclate Alex wae
going to quit working for her because she could not, affo.rd
Eo pay him and thac she needed money from Plaint i f f . After
several conversat icns, and st i l l wi t tout €ver havi.ng
received any sort . of sEatement. . Plaint i f f t 'endered
$2o,000-00 to Opri for what, Opr i to ld Plaint i f f were
. 'cosEs' assocj-aEed wich the paterniEl ' I i t igat :crr . Flairr t i f f
was cold by opri thar he would not have t ,o pay any more
money
L4 - Af ter the death of Ehe molher [she wi l l be referred to
hereinafter as *as11s' / l of Piaint i f f 's chi lo, funeral
arrangernence wer€ ultimately nrade for Anna to be buried in
the Bahamas. Plaint i f f wanted to ensure that Anna be
afforded ul t imate reepect and <iecorum and specif ical iy
instructed Opri no: to attend Anna' ' funeral .
15. Despi te Flaint i f f 's reguesl , Opr i at tenoed Anna'e funerai
and insistei orr speaking wiLh Plaint j - f f about business
matLers.
_-8
9
l0
l l
l2
l3
t4
15
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
l8
t9
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
r6.
t7
9.d
COMPLAINT
Hdoo rE Looe ro unr
16. Subsequent ly, 'Opri requesE.ed that Plaint i f f s ign papers f or '
a project lhereaft .er referred Eo as the 'project 'J with a
thiro party business ent i t ,y. Based upon information and
bel iet , Plainci f f cont.ends that Plaint . i r f was to receiveI
compensat.ion in connection with the project j-n an amount of
no lese t .han S 1 , 050; 000 - 00 .
t7. Baseci upon informau:-on and bellef , Plainti f f conterids that
at ieast 5855,000.00 in compeneat ion f rom the project was
oepositeC into Opri 's atEorney cl ient t ruat account, and/or
.oLher accounts of Opr i 's .
18. PiainLif f never gave Opri consenE to deposit any of the
rnoneys from the project into her account€, and in facL,
Plaint i f f specif ical ly advised Opri that she was not
authorized to take conErol or Possession of any of the
funds paid by che tbird party business ent i ty in connecEion
with the project. Pl-aintiff inforrned Opri that the funds
wer.e to be given direct ly Lo hin.
19. Despi te P-aint i f f 'e protestat ions and direct ivee, the money
r-nm rh- project . . whlc l r Plaint i f f bel iewes was atr leaetl - v.rr
$855,00o.0.3, was ui t imately routed through Opri 'E agient,
into accounts control led by Opri , including but not
necessari iy 11*iced, to her attorney cl ient t , rust accoutc.
20. Upon learni .ng that his compensat ion from the project haci
been oeposit .ed into Opri 's bank. account, PlainEif f demanded
that. Opri turrr the enEirel,.r- of hj-s money over to him.
Despite his demand, Opri only turned over $20o,000.0o Ec
-6-
1I
2
3
4
5
6
I
I
9
t0
l l
12
1-1
14
l5
l6
t7
l8
r9
20
2l
22
23
24
25
26
2'l
28
21
Plainei f f , and wrongful ly retained possession and concrol
of the balance cf che funds from the project, rrrhich, based
upon information ancl bel iefT Plai .nEif f asserts is at least
$665,0oo.0o.
P:aint i f f had made mulciple demands Lhat Opri t ,urn over to
htm, Che funds anci compensat ion which are the property of
Plaint i f f and which are and have been wrongful ly wiEhheld
by Q>ri- -To -dare,.-opri tg-d =ignglq{-$ain!_iff is- {q-r1and=, .._- .
After Opri. refuse<i to Eurn over the money which belonged to
Plaint i f f and which Opri was brrongful ly withholding,
Plaint i - f f terminated Oprl ae his atLorney. Opri was
cerminated by Plaint i f f pr ior to DIrIA tests being ordered'by
the Bahamian court in conneccion l l i th the pat.erni ty
di .spute. Opri , in an efforf to cast her forrner cl ient in a
bad publ ic l ight, falsely iaformed che media that she hac
terminated the at torney cl ient re lat ionship wi th plaint . i f f .
In further derogatsion of her f iduciary obl igat ions Lo
PLaint i f f , Opri publ ic ly made false statemente to the media
thaE. she had ended the professionai relat ionehip wit l i
Plaint i f f -because
he had engaqeo in unet.hi .cal conduct.
Based upon informarion and bel ief , Plainci f f contends that
Opri , wiEhout hie consent or advance krrowledge started a
"sav€ Ehe Dannielynn Fund." lhereafter referred to as the
"fund"l , u 'hrerebf Opri sol ic i ted funds and donat ione from
the publ ic to pay fcr PiainEif f 'e legai b i I1s.
Once Plairr t j - f f iearneci of the existerrce cf the funi , he
zz.
2s.
24
COMPLAINT
l . ldoo:e tooz to unr
1
aL
.'
4
5
6
t
-.8..
9
l0
11
t2
l3
14
15
t6'
t'1
l8
r920
21
22.
23
24
25
26
27
28
instrucLe<i opri. Eo shut the fund down and not to eolicit or
accept donat ions fcr Plaint . i f f 'e legal fees
29. Basecl upon informacj.on and bel ief , Plaint, j . f f a l leges Ehat
oprj- ,coliected
moneye on behalf of the fund, and that
numerous checks were made payable to the order of
Plaint i f f .
26. plainciff never endorsed any checks made payable as' a
r-e.su] E. _qf Qpr;r:_g-_qf fo_r! i3 escabligl+lg__llg fund. Bag__eg_
upon inEormation and bel ief , Plaint i f f a l legee that, Opri ,
without the consent of Plaint i f f , received money as the
result of her publ ic eol ic l lat ion, that some of the checks
were made payable to Plaint i f f , and thaL al l said checks
were encicrsed by opri and deposited into bank accounts
conErol led. by Opri . Based upon informaE,ion and bel ief ,
d any of Etre
aforeeaj.d checks, Lhat any said endorsements which concain
or bear tne purported eignature of Plai-rrtiff , were forged
by Opri or her agents.
27. After Plaint i f f returned from the Bahamae, he received a
package via Federal Express, which eontained a LL2 page
bi l l ing statement f rom Opri , which indicated that Plaint j f f
owed Opri $620,492.84 for legal services rendered, and
ciemanciing pa)menE from Flarntiff .
g'd
COMPLATNT
Ltdoo:e eooT-To unc
o
10
l l
t2
l3
t4
15
l6
t7
l8
r9
20
2t
22
23
24
25
26
2'1
28
6-d
COMPLAIN?
l . fd lo.e Looe to unc
I
2
J
4
5
6
7
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTIONFOR
BREACE OF FIDUCIARY DTITY
(Ag.ainst all Def endantsl
28. Plaint i f f hereby incoqporates by reference each and every
al legat ion se! forth in Paragraphs 1 t .hrough Zl as i f ful1y
set forth hereirr
29. When Opri was retdineci by Plaintiff , and furthermore wherl
op:ci rece.ived r.he $885,000.-00--i-r-r furrds--.due a-s. egllp_Q.!s.e_!.1_o_q
ro Plaint i f f as a result of the project. and then when opri
deposj-ted those funds j-nt.o her client trust account and/or
other accounEs, she was and she became a f iduciary of
Plaint i f f in connect ion with those funds and in connect ibn
with her iegal represent,atlon of Plainciff . l lhen t.he funds
were deposited inco opri 's Trust Account and/or oE,her
accouncs they were the properEy of Plaint i f f . When she
accepted E.he uni laceral ly and sel f - inpoeed reeponeibi l icy
of holding the $885,00o.00 for the benef i t of Plaint i f f ,
Opri accepted and assumed the role of a f iduciary act, ing
for the benef i t of and to protect. th€ f inancial incereste
of Plain- ' i f f . when opri ref used to turn Ehe funds over to
Plaint i f f at his reguesE and cieman<i. OprS- further breached
her f iduciary obl igat. ions to Plaint i f f . The above-
referenced funcis were notr part of ar,y settlement j.n
connect ion wi th opr i 'e lega1 representat ion of Plaint i f f ,
and thus s-ne had no iegai right to retain any port5-on of
said funde ir i her attornev cl ienE trusE account.
-9-
;
I
2aJ
4
5
6
7
- -- 8'9
l0
1l
t2
t3
. t4t5
l6
t7
l8 '
l9
20
,?|
22
23
24
25
26
2i
28
ord
COMPLAI'NT
HdIO:e eooz Io unc
30. Opri breached her f iduciary duty to Plaint i f f each and
every Eime she failed to abide by his instrucEione
regarOing the OispcsiLion of t .he above-referenced
$885, OO0.00.
3L. As a direct and prcxlmate result of the breach of f iduciary
duLy al leged herein, Plaint i f f has suffered and conEinues
to suffer <iamage, in an amount to be proven at Erial but
bel-ieved -ro -be- at, -l-ea.st'-.-Ehe-s-un--ef six hundred sitg.-ll._f. it€_-_
thousanci doi lars($665,000) in addi t ion to the damagee
Plaint i f f ha-" suffered a's the reeult of the lose of use
cf these funde
32. Opri rnade comments to the media in connection with her
represent,at ion of Pl-aint i f f which contained conf, i f lent ial
information imparted by Plaint i f f to opri which waE
disserninaced to E,he publ ic wichouE the consent of
Plaint i f f and direct ly contrary to hi8 direct ivea to Opri .
33. opr i had a ciesire to promote her career and earning
potential by obtaining pr:JrJ-ici.ty in connection wittr her
1ega1 represenEat ion of Plaint i f f in hie paternj- ty dispuEe.
opri placed he:r owrr career deeires and needs ae a priority
over the neeoe, interests and deeires of her own cl ient;
i .e- ; the Plaint i - f f herein, by obtaini .ng publ ic i ty for
, hergelf and Plaint:- f f in direct contrravent ion to the
d:rect ives gr iven to Opri by Plaint i f i
34. opri incurred expenses anci chargeci these expe:rsee tc.
PialnEif f , wi thout hie consent; saic i expenEes including
I
2
3
4
5
6
I
8
9
10
1l
l2
l3
l4
l5
l6
t7
r8
l9
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2i
28
t t 'd
COMPLAIn{T
?q
dlnners fo= fr iends and asbociates of opr i which cost
thousands cf dol iars, t ravel expenses. entertainment
expenses for opr i , her fr iends and family, and other
expenses, all 1n an amount co be proven at the time of
tria1. Ti:ese expenses were for the personal aggrand.i.zement
of Opri , and were not incurred with the consent of, or for
Lhe benef i t of Plaint i f f .
At a i l Eimes descr ibed herej .n, <iefendants acted rr i th
mal ice, oppression and fraud. with the intenc to injure
Plaint i f f and deprive Plaint i f f of property which he is
otrherwise ent i t le i , thereby ent i t l ing Plaint, i f f t 'o an ar.rard
of punitive and exernplary dannages
Plaint.iff further seeks prejudgrnent interest on all auma
due anci owing tro Plaint i f f f rom defendants from the oate
of ioes through the daEe of judgment, and post- judgment
int ,ereet- u l t i l paid-
SECO}{D- CAUSE OF ACIIONFOR
CONVERSIO'f,f
(Against a.Il Defendante)
Plaint i f f incorporaces the al legat ions in paragraphs 1
chrough 36. herein as i f fu l iy set for th herein
VJherr Opri received the S885,0o0 funds due as compensat ior:
cc PIa' int i f f in connect ion wi th the project , and
oeposited t .hose fundE inco the cl ient t rust aecount, and./or
other accounts, she wag, anci continueci to b€ a fiduciarlt of
Flaintif f in conneccion with tshose funcis. .When
the f uncis
were oepoei-ced intc the Clieni Trus-- Account and/or othe'
acc'currts t.hey vJere anc t:enrained the sole and exclusrve
p!:operty of i Flaint i f i
- i ; -
HdIOte LOOZ IO unr
31
38.
,"
I
2
J
5
6
7
E
g
10
l l
t2
l3
14
l5
r6
l7
18
l9
20
2l
22
z)
24
2s
26
2?
28
zt 'd
COMPLAIN?
ltdlosE Looe, lo unc
39. Defendant intentionaliy and r,rrongfully failed to pay the
sum of $eeS,OoO Eo Plaint i f f at the t ime of h is demande or
at any t ime Lhereafter, despice Plainci f f 'e repeateo
demand for payment. 9{hen Opri wae instructed by
Plaint, i f f tc remit said funds to PJaint i f f . , she breached
her f iduciary dut ies owed to Plaint i f f by fai l ing to renit
sai 'd funds to PlainEif f . opr i had no }egal r ight to retain
possesei,or-r of these funds as they,..vrere the t,axable
cornpensaticrr of Plaintiff from the third party business
enLity and not parE of any lega1 disput.e settlemenE which
rnight t rheoret ical ly be eubject to any sorE of l ien.
Defendant 's wrongful refueal Eo pay the sum of $ggS.rO0O to
Plaint i f f on each cf these occasions const i . t ,uE,ee ar l
un:-awfu] convereion of Plaint i f f 'e properEy
As a direct ano proximate result of the wrongfui conversion
al leged herein, Plaint i f f is ent ie led t .o recover the'value
of che property at , the t ime of the conversion, or.9885,OO0
plus interest Ehereon from the datse of the convefsion unt.il
such sum is recovereci .
As a oirect and proximate resutrt of the wrongful conwersion
al legred hereirr , Plaint i f f is ent i t leC Eo recover a fa:r
compensat,:.on for Ehe time and rnoney properly expended in
pursuit of the prop€rcy.
Defeniant 's rnot ive. intent and purpose in refusing tc
transfer the funds tc Plaj-ntiff wherr tirey became due ani
v; ing was wrongfuj , t i lereby juet i fy ing an award of exempiar
anct punitrv€ oamages agarnst Opri .
40.
4!
42
.*J.
lz
I
2
)
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0
l1
t2
l3
l4
l5
r6r7!8
l9
20
2l
22
ZJ
24
25
26
27
?8
eI 'd
49.
COI\,IPLAIN:
l . td lo:€ eooz Io unc
45.
44.
47.
THIRD CAUSE OF AqfION8:RAI'D
(AGAINST DEFEI{D}}{T OPRI}
Praint i f f incorpora:es the al legat ions in paragraphs :
through 43 herein as i f ful ly eeE forth trerein.
V{hen tr Iainci f f f i reL rnet with Opri in September of 2006,
Opri informed Plaint i f f that she wae a special ist in
Cal i fOrnia family }aw. thaE she haC l i t igated hundreds of
fami ly Law casee, and Ehat she would represent pl l int i f f 'e
1egal intereste in hie paterni ty dispute free of charge for
legai serwices-
Plaint i f f bel ieved theee repreeentat ione of Opri and her
qual i f icaEions Co be Erue at t ,he t ime he heard them from-
Opri
Opri made Ehese statements tso Plaint i f f wi tsh the inten-u
that he would rely upon the accuracy of the EcatemenEs, and
Lhat Plaint i f f 's bej ief in these statements aB tsrue, woul<i
cause Plaint i f f to recain Ehe legai servicee of Opr i .
Plaint i f f in fact bel ieved tbe stacements of opr i to b€
crue !rrher.. she stated them to him, and in relj-ance upon the
accuracl ' of t .hese s:atements regarding Opri 's e>c.pert ise,
Piaint i f f retained OprJ. bo be his attorney to assiet hjm in
connect icn wi th hie patern: ty dispute. Plaint i f f , 's re l lance
uporr the statements made by Opri was reasonable. Based upon
tnese and cbher representat iorr , Plainci f f a iso executed' the
abowe-ref erenced Media Aoreemeni .
Basec upcr.r inf orrnat iorr and be: ie i . Praint l f f a l leges Ehac
:he state:Trenie ned= tc hini ol t Opri rega:-ding her
guai: f rcar lotrs ano expe:: l ise wer€ iaise when rnacie, E:- la;
opri knew the sta;€mentrs to be faise, and that Opri r,acie
46
44.
t3-
t
2
3
4
5
6
I
8'9
l0
l l
l2
l3
l4
l5
l6
17
r8 '19
2(l
21
/1
z_1
t+
25
26a1
?8
t t 'd
CC]\,TPLAIN:
l . fdzo.e Looz Io unc
50
the . st,atemenis with the intent to i.nduce plaint.if f intc
retaining opri ro be hi-o atsEorn€y.
As a direct. anci proximace result of the false atatements
made. by Cpri. to Plainti f f as described herein, plaintl f f
retained t ,he legal eervieeg of Opr i . Opr i '6 mot ive, intent
and purpcse in making the aforeeaid stabements to plair i t i f f
were acts of malice, oppression ani, fraud wich the intent
Lo injure FlainEiff , thereby entiLl ir.g Plainti f f to an
ar"td of punitive and exemplary damagee.
FOI'RTS CAUSB OF ACTIONAECAI. }IAI.PRACITCE
(AS tO AIIL DEEETDANTS)
Plaint.iff incorporatres the allegaticns in paragratrrtre 1
through 50 herein as i f ful ly set forth herein.
During portsions of calendar years 2006 and 2OO7, Opri .
provided }egal serrr ices to Plaint i f f in connecLion with his
paterniElr dispute and in conneet ion with othe= nattera.
Opri made appearances in connection wich Ehe matter which
vJere noE neceesary, she made court appearanees in fonrms
which had no jur isdict iorr over che subject matter of the
paterni t-v dlspute, and @ri fai led to t imely invest igaie
anci pursue the paternit.y matter J-n the proper
jurisdictional- forurn. Opri also ma<ie public appearancee and
publ ic sca:ements which frustratec ano protraeted the
ul t imare resoluEion of Plaint i f f 's paternl ty dispute.
lhe servicee rende=ed by Opri were below Ehe scanaard cf
care irr the community, anc as the resuit of the raanner in
which the services we: 'e renderec. Opri expendec subeLant iai
t ime ani e.xpense ' : rr connect icrr ur i t i : Fiaint i - f f 's 5raterni ty
tiispute whj-ch was nol neceesaL\f :
As a i : roxi inate reeuit . of Opri 's conducl, P- l-ainElf f suffereo
- i4
>2.
51
53
54
t r r .
I
2
3
4
.5
6
-t
--. --"-- ' ----- -,.8
9
l0
l l
t2
I3
t4
l5
l6
t7
l8
l9
20
2l
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
st 'd
COil{PLAINT
l . ldzo:e 4ooz Io unc
delay in the resolut lon of ehe paEerniEy dispute. and
Plainti f f incurrec sr:bstantial fees and costs which were
not necessary. Opr i 's conduct caused Plaint i f f to euffer
f inancial loss in an amount Eo be det.ermined.accordinq to
proof at Ehe t ime of t,r ial-.
FTnlH CAUSE OF ACTTON. DECLA$ATORY RELIEP
(AS lO. ALL*DEEENDBI.ITS)
56. 1
s7.
58.
Plainciff incorporatee the al legatione in paragraphs
t.hough 55 herein as i f ful1y set forth herein.
An actuai controversy existe aE to tshe proper dominion,
conerol, posaession and ownership righte of certain funds
in the approxlmaLe amount of at least $565,00O.00; which
saici funds are currenEly in Ehe poseession ano/or control
of Opr i . Plainci f f aeserts that Opr i has no r ight Eo retain
possessior. or control over any of t,hese funds and Opri
contenEe thac she has the r ight Eo retain these funds in
her t rust account.
Baseci upon information anci bel ief , Flaint i f f a l leges thac
said $665,000.00 is current. iy on deposi t 1n'Opri . ,a atstsorney
ci ient t rust account. Plaint i f f desires a judic ia l
decerminat ion wi th regarde Eo the respect ive part ies '
r ighte of poesessiorr over these funds current ly in Opri 's
c l ient t rust accounE.
Piaint i f f desiree a judicial deterrnirrat ion regarding r*nc
should ha."re current ano imnediate possession and. cont:.ol
ower the aforementioned funos which are currently on
oepcsit in Opri 's at torr iej c l ient t , rust account. , eepecial} .y
:r : l ighi cf the fact Lhat chese funos'const i tut .e the
caxabie income cf Flairr t i f f i r i connect ion with compensa- '1on1<
59
I
)
3
4
5
6
7
Otr
t.o which he .was entiLled purauant Co a busj-ness agreement
and wae not part cf any sett lement of any l i t igation.
P,aineiff desiree a judicial determination regarding who
has or'rnershi.p rights to Ehe aforementioned funds currentlv
on deposic in Opri 's atEorney cl ient truet accounL-
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTTON FOACONSIRUCTII/E TRUST
. __{J|s:+to .}&L_$GEE}IDANIS)
Plaintiff incorporatses herein by referencg each and every
al legat ion conLained in paragraphe L-6o herein.
62. Opri carne inEo poeseesion of at leaat $885,ooo.Oo of '
compensation which wae and ie t,he properEy of Plaintiff ..
p la int j . f f bel levee that cf Lhose funds, at leaet $665"000.00
remain Ehe actorney cl ienE.trust account of Opri , or poseibly
in ot.her accounts control led by Opri , and/or diverteo by Op:r i .
63. A construcEive trust should be imposed and an order inade
trbat any interest 'which any of Lt le Defendants, have in any
bank account owneci, operated and/or contrroll.ed by them, is
held in t rust for the benef i t , of Piaint i f f . and thac
Defendants are reetrained and enjoined. Erom sel.1inE,
trapsferring, encumbering or disposing of s.aid funds
WSEREFORE, PI,ATNTIFF pRAfS rcR JUD@{ENT rN HIS I.AVOR A}tD
AGATNST DEFETITDANA-< DEBRA OPRT Al{D OPRI S ASSOCIETtsS AS FOIJ,OTfS:
oN TEE FTRST, SECOI{D AlrD THfRD CAUSES .OF }-CTIOI{:
General darnages in a sum t,c. be prowerr at trial but ab 'i easc.
$885,0O0,O0 and or the value of the properLy at the t ime -of
Che eonversiorr.
Punitive and exempiar)' ciamages ir, a sum to be proven at
t r ia i .
Fre-judgrment lnleresr from the dace of breach etrrough
COMPLAINT
519
l0
1r
t2
l3'
L4
l5
l6
l7
l8
l9
20
2l
22.
23
24
25
26
27
28
-16-
unr9I 'd r . tdzo:e eoou ro
Ll 'd
COMPLAINT
Hdeo:e 4ooz IO unr
i
2
3
4
5
6
7
judgmentr
4- Po5t-judgment int.erest from che date of judgrment unti l paid
ln fu l i .
5. Losses sustained as the reeul t of not belng able to ut i l ize '
wrongful ly retained fundsj
6. Recision of Ehe Media Agreement,.
7. Recis ion of a l l 1ega1.fee agreements;
G--A-€€ ris E ru ets i ve ts.rs:-to he-- impoee d- jn-fa:rsr___oJ P1-ailijffr_._
9. Costs of Suie; and
10. Such oE.her and furLher rel ief as
proper
9
t0
l l
t2
13
l4
I5
l6
l7
l8
l9
20
2l
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
this Court deems just and I
ON TIIE
.r. Dj.sgorgement of any
Defendant, '
FOIJRTE CAUSE OF ACfIO
I
'2aJ
4
5
6
11
-3
9
r0
1t
t2
t3
14.
l5
16
t7L
I8"
19
20
2l
22
z)
2125
2611L'
28
ard
COMPLAINT
Ltdeo:e eooz 10 unc
of the funds whi.ch are tire subject of disput.e and which are
current ly located in Defendant 's aLtorney cl ient t ruet dccounE.
over to Plaint i f f .
ON THE STXTH CAUSE OF AqIION(
l-. For an order thal all funds reeulting f rom or in connect j-on
with the $885,O00.oo held by Opri , are held in conetruct ive
brusr f or the benef i- i of Plaint i . f f .
2. Fer such.ather reJ.1e-f -4e this Cggr!_-,q_eemF jpS_t_ and--pIeperl_
DATED: June i , 2OO7
Attorneys for PLAIIi1!IFFLarry BirkheaQ
- 18 -
