Case 1:17-cv-01566-LJO-JLT Document 1-1 Filed 11/22/17 Page 1 … · 2017-11-27 · James D....

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

James D. Weakley, Esq. Bar No. 082853Brande L. Gustafson, Esq. Bar No. 267130WEAKLEY & ARENDT, LLP1630 East Shaw Avenue, Suite 176Fresno, California 93710Telephone: (559) 221-5256Facsimile: (559) [email protected]@walaw-fresno.com

Attorneys for Defendant, COUNTY OF KERN, et al.

MARK L. NATIONS, COUNTY COUNSELAndrew C. Thomson, CHIEF DEPUTY (SBN 149057)Kern County Administrative Center1115 Truxtun Avenue, Fourth FloorBakersfield, CA 93301Telephone: (661) 868-3800Facsimile: (661) [email protected]

Attorneys for Defendant, COUNTY OF KERN, et al.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BIG O RELIEF, a California Non Profit MutualBenefit Corp, DOO H. YOON, an individual,EUNICE S. YOON, an individual, andALVARO ORDAZ, an individual,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

COUNTY OF KERN, et al.

Defendants.

__________________________________

)))))))))))))))

CASE NO.

[Kern Sup. Ct. Case No. BCV-17-102394]

DECLARATION OF JAMES D.WEAKLEY IN SUPPORT OF NOTICE OFREMOVAL OF ACTION[28 U.S.C.§ 1441(b)]

Complaint Filed: October 12, 2017Trial Date: TBA

Public Entity Exempt from Filing FeesPursuant to Government Code section 6103

I , James D. Weakley, declare as follows:

1. I am an attorney at law, duly licensed to practice before the courts in the State of

California and the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California. I am a partner

in the law firm of Weakley & Arendt, LLP, the attorneys of record for Defendants of Kern–sued herein

as County of Kern, Kern County Board of Supervisors, Kern County Public Works - Code Compliance

Division, Kern County Sheriff’s Department, District Attorney’s Office, County Counsel’s Office,

____________________________Declaration of James D. Weakley in Support of

Notice of Removal of Action

Case 1:17-cv-01566-LJO-JLT Document 1-1 Filed 11/22/17 of 126

mailto:[email protected]



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Kern County Fire Department, Kern County Planning and Natural Resources Department, Kern

County Department of Agriculture and Measurement Standards, and Kern County Public Health

Department–(“County”), Greg Fenton, Mick Gleason, David Couch, Mike Maggard, Zack Scrivner,

Donny Youngblood, Lisa Green, Mark L. Nations, James L. Brannen (erroneously sued as James L.

Brennan), Gurujodha S. Khalsa, Lorelei Oviatt, Glenn Fankhauser, and Al Rojas (“Defendants”).

2. I am one of the attorneys primarily responsible for handling the defense of this litigation

on behalf of the aforementioned defendants. As such, I am thoroughly familiar with the facts and

issues in this matter and, if called upon as a witness, I could and would competently testify to each of

the matters set forth herein.

3. Defendants Lorelei Oviatt and Mark L. Nations, were first served with notice of this

action on October 24, 2017. The remainder of the defendants were served shortly afterward or are in

the process of being served by Plaintiffs. Attached hereto as Exhibit “A” are true and correct copies

of the Summons, Complaint, Plaintiffs’ Demand for Jury Trial, Civil Case Cover Sheet, Notice of

Assignment to Judge for All Purposes and Notice of Order to Show Cause Re: CRC Rule 3.110 and

Notice of Case Management Conference, Superior Court of California, County of Kern Alternative

Dispute Resolution (ADR) Information Packet, and the ADR Stipulation and Order Form.

4. My office, in conjunction with Kern County Counsel, represent all named defendants

in this action, all of whom consent to and join in this matter being removed to the United States

District Court, Eastern District of California.

5. Leticia Perez and Charles F. Collins are identified in the Complaint as defendants. A

review of the Kern County Superior Court Docket for this case revealed that Plaintiffs filed a request

for dismissal without prejudice as to Leticia Perez and Charles F. Collins on November 6, 2017, which

was entered the same day by the Clerk and signed on November 7, 2017. My office obtained a copy

of each of the dismissals entered as to Ms. Perez and Mr. Collins. Attached hereto as Exhibit “B” is

a true and correct copy of the Request for Dismissal without Prejudice entered as to Leticia Perez on

November 6, 2017. Attached hereto as Exhibit “C” is a true and correct copy of the Request for

Dismissal without Prejudice entered as to Charles F. Collins on November 6, 2017.

/ / /


Notice of Removal of Action 2


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true

and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and that this declaration was executed in Fresno,

California on November 22, 2017.

/s/ James D. Weakley____James D. Weakley




Big O Relief, et al. v. County of Kern, et al.

Exhibit A


SUMMONS{crT{ctou JUÐ,c,AL}

NOTICE TO ÐEFENDANT:rAvrso AL ÐEMANÐAÐA):COUNTY OF KFRN, a political subdivision of the State of Califarnia;Additional Parties Atlachment Form is attached.

YOU ARE EEING SUED BY PLAINTIFF:l¿o ssrÁ ÐEMANÐANÐO EL Ð€*{ÁfVAÁffrËJ:SIG O RELIEF, a Califcrnia Non-profit Mutual Benefit Corporation, DOO H.

YOON, an individual, EUNICE S. YOON, an individual, and Alvaro Ordaz, anindividual.

The name and address of the court is: KERN COUNTY(El nombrc y diæcciön de la cañe es):

1415 Truxtun AvenueBakersfield, CA 93301

The nama, address, and telephone number of plaintiffs atlorney, or plaintiff withoul an atlorney, is:

{El nombre, la direcciôn y el númera de telêfana del abagado del demandanle, o deî demandante que na fiene aöogado. esj;Abraham Á,. Labbad, Esq., 1250 Walnut St., Unit 122, Pasadena, CA 91106, {818) 253-1529

DATE:

{Fecha}Clerk, by /s/ Araceli Wahl

Ðepuly{Adjunto)

ELECTRONICALLY FILEÐ1Al2gÍ2A17 10:27 AM

Kern Gounty Superior CourtTerry McNally

By Araceli Wahl, tleputy

NOTICEI You hsve þaen sued. The court may decide against you without your being heard unless you respond withiß 3ü dâys. Read lhe informationbelow.

You have 30 CALENDAR DAYS afler this summoûs and legal papers are served on you to file a written respônse ãt thi$ cöurt and have a copyserved on the plai¡{iff. A letter or phone call wilt not protect you. Your wr¡Ren response mu$t be in proper legal forn if you wanl the court to hear yourcase. There may be a court form that you cafl use for your response. Ysu can lind these court forms and moro information at lhe talifomia Cou¡".s

Online $elf-Help Center {www.eouriinfo.ca.gavlsellhelp}, yrur county law library, or ihe coürthouse neårest you, ll you cannot pay the fling fee, gsk

the court clerk for a fee waive¡ form. lf you do not ile your response on liñe, yÕu may lcse the case by default, and your wages¡ rnoney, ånd propertymay be taken without furlher uarning from the court.

There sre other legal requirernents. You may wañt to call an attorney dght away. lf you do not kûow ân attômey, you rûay wãnt tû câll ân atlorneyreferral service. lf you cânnôt afford ân âttorney, you may be elþible for free legal servicee frorn a nonprofit legal se¡vices ptogram. You can locateihese nonproñt gfoups ât the Califomia Legal Services Web site (www.lawhelpalifamia.aß), the Califatñ¡â Couûs Online Self-Help Cenþr{www.coudinfo.ca.gou/selfhelp}. or by contacting you¡ local court or county bar association. NOTE: The court has a statutory lien for waived feeÊ endcosts on åny ssül€mÊnt or sùitraiion award ol $10.0û0 or more in a civil case. Tle court's lien rnust be paid beiore the æurt ttill disrniss the cåse.gWSAt Lo han deßtandada. Si no respo*de dentta de 30 dlas, la cole puede decidir en su ¿er?trs sin ssc¡rc¡¡ar su ve¡stön Lea la ínførmaciön acantinuac¡ón.- - i"ni iO O¡eS ÐE CÁlFfrrâ¡t?ro desp¿rés de que le antreguen esla crlacrón y papÊtes ,sgates p€ ra prssentar una rÞspueslå por escnlo err eslaærle y hdær que $s €rtregrre una ctpia at deñandante. Una c$ta a ana llanada lelefónice na Ia Wtegen. Su respuesfa por escrito îlena qss êståren formata leçal coneata si desea gue procesen sø caso en la corle. Ës posiåte que haya un fo¡mulario qua usted puada usar pañ su respuesla.Puede enæntrareslos lo¡mulariss de la code y tnás informaciôn en d Çentrc da Ayuda de ,as Cortes de Callfamia $rnrru.sucoile"ca.goYr, en ¡âb¡btbleca de leyes dê su condado o êr ta corle quê lê quêds ¡aés cerca, Si no puede pagar la cwla de prasentadón, plda âl $ød:eldría &'þ coñeque b & w formuluia de exención de paga de cöslss. Si no pr€sen{a so respoesla a fiernpo, puede perder el caæ por lncumplimiento y la corJe l€pdrâ qultar su suedo, dìners y ô¡enes sr¡ mâs adve¡lencia.

llay olrgs requfcrtos lsgalss. Es recomendable que llame a un abogada inrnediataments, Si ¡o go¡oce a un aboga&, puode llamar a un sç¡vlcio derenís¡ún a afugados. Sl no pusde pagar a u1 abogado, €s Bos,ôts que cuøpla con /os requisilos para obtener seruíaios tegalos gratuitos de unpr8rama de sewieios legaløs sln fine6 de f{/cro, Paede enænlrar eslos grupos srn {ines de luca en el sltla *eb de Califanla lagal.Serureq¡lrwur.lawhelpcelifomla.org), en el Centrø d6 Ayudã de tas torfBs ds Çalifat7]jta, fryw,/v.sucode.câ,gov) o poméndose ën cantacto çfll la ærto e e,ælegia de eöogados locatas. ,qyrsoj Par tey, le code tiene derecho a rsclamar laa cuolas y åcs coslos exentos por imryar un graì/8rn¿n soô¡Bcualquiet recuperaeión de $1O,0OO ô más de valar recibídø Ítodianlð un âcuetdt o una concesión dc arb¡lrâle €n ün caso de derecho eivil. Tieno quepagar el gravamen de ta cor{e ânrês de {ue la carta pueda desecltar e/ c8so.

fivúnso del Cåsor: BCV-17-10?334NUMSEñ:

1012012017 TERRy MCNALLysurïrnon5, use P0s-olo).i

(Panpruebadeentregadeesfa citatiónusealformulanbProof of Serviceof Summona, FAS-Aß)).

ISEAL¡

3. n anbehalf al(specify):

under: fl--l cCP 416,10 (corporation)

[--l CCp 419.29 (defunct corporation)

CCP 416.60 (minor)

CC? 416,7A (conservatee)

CCP 41e.90 (authorized personJ

NûTICE TO THE P-RSON SERVED: You are served1. T--l as an individualdefendant.?. T*_l as lhe person sued under the fictilious name of {specl'fyJ.'

CC? 416 "4A (association or partnership)

olher fspecif);4. n by personaldelivery on{dafeJ:

Þreiôlt

SUMMONSform Adoplrd lor tvlsndalû.y Us¿Judiiiål Couor¡l of Cd¡forn¡åSUM-100 lRev. Jrry 1.?009¡

Codâ ol Civi¡ Procedlre $gal?.20, ¡65w.cagrtinto.êa.gov


SHORT TITLE:

- BIG O RELIEF, et al, vs. COUNTY OF KERN, et al. BCV-¡7-t02394

CÀ58 NUMBÊR:

INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE

+ Th¡s form may þe used as an attachment to any summons if space does not permit the listing of al| parties on the summqns.-| lf this attachment is used, insert the followíng statement in the plaintiff or defendant box on the summons: "Additíonal Parties

Attachment form ís attached."

List additional parties (Check only one box. Use a separate page for each type ú parA.):

n Pþintiff [J Defendanl l--l Cross-Complainant [--l Cross-Defendant

GREG FENTON, individually and as Kern County Building Inspector; KERN COUNTY BOARD OFSUPERVISORS, collectively; LETICIA PEREZ" individually and as Kern County Supervisor; MICKGLEASON, individually and as Kem County Supervisor; DAVID CCIUCH, individually and as KernCounty Supcrvisor; MIKE MAGGARD, individually and as Kern County Supervisor; ZACK SCRIVNER,individually and as Kern County Supervisor, KERN COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS - CODE COMPLIANCEDMSION, eollectively; KERN COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, colleetively; DONNYYOLINGBLOOD, individually and as Kern County Sheriff; KERN COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'SOFFICE, collectively; LISA GREEhi, individually and as Kern County District Attorney; KERN COUNTYCOUNSEL'S OFFICE, collectively; MARK L. NATIONS, individually and as Kern County Counsel;JAMES BRENNAN, individually and as Deputy Kern County Counsel; CHARLES F. COLLINS,individually and as Chief Depufy Kern County Counsel; GURUJODHA S. KHALSA, individualþ and as

Chief Deputy County Counsel; KERh¡ COUNTY FiRE DEPARTMENT, collectively; KËRN COUNTYPLANNING AND NATURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, collectively; LORELEI OVIATT,individually and as Director; KERN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF'AGRICUTTURE ANDMEASUREMENT STANDARDS, collectively; GLENN FANKHAUSEI' individually and as

Commissioner; KERN COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT, collectively; AL ROJAS,

individually and as Kern County Code ComplianccDivision Supervisor; and DOES I Through 1000,Inclusive.

2PagÊ 2 at

Form Adopted lof Mâf¡datofy useJrldiciål Council ol Ca¡ifÕmia

SUM-200{A} lRev. Januâry 1.2æ71

A DDITIONAL PARTIES ATTACHMENTAttachment to Summons


rgl€FitoreF t¡o.:

a

71

4t41

OFSTRE€¡ ÀoÈRfs8. I 5uÁ¡t¡ù¡c À40âÊ85: I 5

cftv ÁÃ¡üãeæoÊ,

NAME;

o et of Êt

ELECTRONICALLY FILED

1A4A2A17 10:48 AM

Kern County Super¡or CourtTerry McNally

B¡¡ Vanessa Gofield,

Fè& êoaâÍ {r$r oí¡Y

BCV-17-102394Llmltcd{Amountderñândêd$2Ë.000 qraxceeds ,g

(AmoUntdemanded

çornpbx Case Þotlgnationü Ceunts¡ rl JoindE¡Fitqd wlth tirsl appâãraRcc by dðiendånt

ofRules rulo

JUOCE:

Õ€Ptr

Clvll Pottilo¡

bost çâge;Au¡o

E

{33}

nlototisl {,{8}

Asbestoe {04)

te¡mlnaüontttrìgt, (38)Oülor

cns box below thê mse

0ther

Dolåirer

{Othrrt ?ort

Rãrlrtrt

Ro¡lrJtfn

llnerslÞ and corporåt. gorrüm€,llÈ {¿1)Olher pèl¡ltoñ Irof speot?ad ååeråôJ {43)

Mass tod {4ô)Såcrsiil€r titb¡ilon (2g)Entlrônlt¡sñlâl/Ioxb lod {åO) :

#ßå3i)"trJågi.#,ï¡x6,65g,*

Produd t¡ablrty (2a,tulôdjca¡ måtpmcdoû (a5)Ott¡cr ntFÐ¡vio {a3)

ffiiäiäî"rr b*ìr'€È$ Pradh. {oîOüh$ãt¡o¡ (tt,Fnud {i6} i

tntelþctial propony uË)Ptofes¿lonal regtigôflce (Ag)Olhêr nôn.ptlpD

^/D rorl (35)

lsrt¡.rnõ{22,Untnsursd

F¡¡pa¡AÞ

PrÐpcrryErnhent domaln/tnwrsscondèmnaüon (I4)l¡¡rondut cv{clion l3B}Olhor rcå, propcrry {ãA}

Sfaach d conkad #arranty (06)Rule 3.710 coilrcl¡on6 (09)Ofh€r toltedtons {Og)In$u.ån* cÞr€mge (lg)Oü1ârûantracl {g7}

Fnlqrcerent of Judgr¡s¡¡f I Entorcemad of Judgænt (20)C¡mrÍô.dâl{3t}

Rô3ñe$iat {æ}Drugù {AB)

ås!€l lortelu€ (û¡iP.ôtitioÁ rô: ar!¡tr.6fhD rÍ.ard {ll,lôtìt of rnartdåts {01}.

2.

3. Remodiossought lclisck at! that appty): s.f7lmonerary4, Numbe¡of

in othe¡ countles, stEtes. or ôountries, Õr ¡n a tederât courtSubstant¡sl postjudglTìont judiciãt supervisionb.[ã âûnmonelary;

te¡íÊf c. f?lpunltivo

Cttá-Ð16.)

RÚT

is is nol cÞmplgx undsrrnanagornont:

rule 3.4û0 of thê Cãlíforafa Ruls¡ of Coud. ff the case ls cornp¡ex, merk therfü

excoplional judíoiafLargs number of sopârûtêly repr€sßnted pârtigs d. large number of witnessesb. Extensiræ motion prac{íco raislng difficutt or novel s, Coo¡dinstlon with related sctions pending in one or morcissues that will be líms-consumlng lo ress¡ve

". l--l Slbstånlial amountofdocumenlarye$dence f f]

c0rrfb

5. Thlscsrocausas ofl-l ¡a

aclion (spealfy): IE is nol e class adion suíl€. lf the¡e ar9 any knowrì râlatod cåsés, filê ånd s€rve â notics of Þlaled case.l7

3

)casêsclaims cassbþr tled

rule Fa¡lure3.220.)a Íleto resultmay

mU3tyou serya of rhhs copy cover sheel rllo.t¡tsheet bêwi¡¡ ussd for ståt¡sticål PUTFO9aS

1. ¡a?4clvtl såsÊ COVER S}IEET

CJ, Sî*ldstr r,


INSTRUCTIONS ON HO!l' TÛ CQT$FLETE TFIE COV€R SHËET CM'T1O

To Plalntiffs a¡ld Others Filing Flrst Papers, lf yo-u are,filing â.first paper for example, a complaint) in a civif câse. you müstc9ry{9te qnd file, aiong with yður f¡€t paper, the C¡vi, Cass Covs;SåeBrc¡nta¡nà on pagå l. itr¡s diormatisn will be used io compile*tati$ics

-abou! the types and nrmbers of cases filed. You must complete items ,l through 6 on the sheet. ln item 1, ¡lou musi c¡eck

o.ne þ9I for the casefype that best describes the case. lf the case ¡* ¡ot¡ a general an? a more speo¡fic lype oi"a"e f¡"i"àinlt"* I,gheck lhe more speciflc one,. lf the case has multiple causes of action, check ihe bsx that best índicates ttre primary cause of action.To assist 1qu i1,co-mpleting the sheet, examples of the cases that belong under each case type in item 1 are þrovide-o below. t;;;;sheêt musi be.iled only with your initiaf paper. Failure to file a cover shãet with lhe first papär filed in a civil cãse may sul¡Jct a par¡y,its ccunsel, or both to sancticns under ruìes 2.30 and 3.220 of the ealifornia Rules of Court.-lo Parties ln Rule 3'74t Collectlons Case¡. A "collçclions casei' under rule 3.740 is deflned as an âctian for recovery of moneyowed in a sum stãted to be csrtain ihat is not more than $25,000, exclusive of interesl and attorney's f€es, arising from a tránsadion inwhich propotty, sen¡ices, or money was acquired on credit. A collections case does not include aá actíon,seet<in! the following: iil i"*damages; {2} punítive

-damãgee, (3} recovery of real property, t4) r€çovery of personat properrty, o¡ (5} ã prejudgmerìi wi¡t o¡

attachment The identification o{ a casê as 'a rule 3]4a collec{ons cå6e on ti¡s fo'gn meané *rãt ¡t'wiH bà äxeó*'froä the qenerattime-for-sorvice requ¡rements and case management rules, unless a defendant files a responsive pleading. A ruie 3.740 cofËitionicase will be subjectto the requirements for service and obtaining a judgment in rule 3.740.To Parties ln Cornplex Cases. ln complex cases only, parties must also use he Civil Case Coyer Såeef to designate whether thecase is complex. lf a plaintiff believes the óase is complex under rule 3.4û0 of ihe Califomia Rules of Court, this must ¡e indicated bycompleting the appropria{e boxes in items 1 and 2. lf a plaintiff designates a case âs complex, the cover sheet musl be served with tl,recompla¡nt on all parties to lhe action. A defendant may file and serve no later than the time of its first ãppearanoe a joinder in theplaintlffs designation.,a counter{esignation that the case is not complex, or, if the plaintiff has made no dosìgnation, a de'signation thatthe case is comolex.

CASE TYPES AND ËXÀ¡IIPLESAulo ?o4 Contract Provlslonãlly ço¡np¡ex Clv¡l Lltigatlon {Gal.

Auto {221-Per*onal InjurylProperty Breach of Contrãctlwârrânty (06) Rulss ol tourt Ruùs 3.40f3,40¡)Damage,ìÀtrongful Þeath Bre¿cir of Rentâl/Lèãse Arll¡lrust/Trede Regulation {03)

Un¡nsureiJ MolÕrist (aS) ffl'ra ConFad {not unlawful éetalner Cons{ß¡-ction Ðefgd (1q)cese invofues an ininsurcd orwþngîul eviclion) , çlaims.lnvohrirìg Massïqrt (40)moto¡istcialm subjcg.to Çontrad¡1Àlananty Breach-Seller Scq¡rilles Litigaiion {28}atb¡t atlcin, eheck thts item Flalrrtlf {nof fra ud or n*gtþenee) Ënvl¡onmentavToxic Tort (30)Íñste'adof Auto] Negligsnl8r€ãch of Go¡tract/ lnsurance Coveragé Claims

OtherPliPÞ/Wn{PgraonaltnJuryl ^. S&nanty -. {atísing{rontprovlsÍanallyeanplexProperty Þarnagò&tÍrongtd óåãthl Other Bæadr of Conh.acliwaranty cas6 fyts,lstadååov€J (41)Tori colleclio¡s {ê,9", money owed, open Enlorcsmentof Judgmoat

Asbestos{o4} boo*.accounts) i09) Enforcor¡entsfJudgn¡eit{¿g}Asbê$tgs Piopgrty Damage Collection Cas.e-$elbr Plaìntiff AbÊtracl of Judgm€nt (Out ofAsbestss FeÅonãt tn¡ury/ Olbe¡ P¡omibsory Nole/Cotlecllons county)

nfongfu¡ Oealh - -

,- Case Canlesslon of Jüdgmenl frobproduÊt Liabllly lnat asåsros or lnsuranõlo'veøgè (not provts:tonqtlv :- ;;ö;r;-å]iãb,iü " -

taxwenvitíxiniilàU tlif - cçûrprêx) (18) . sisler state JrdgmenlMedical Malpra*ice (n;) Auto Subrogation Admhlefative.qgency Aì,rsrd

Medfcal Mafp¡acfìce- Other CovBrage tnçl unqâfd taxes)PlrysHãns & Surgeons Other Contract (37) Petitio¡tCedmcâllûn ot Entry of

Õther piofessional Heãfth Care Coû'actual Fraüd Judgment oo Unpaid Taxes

othff pÍffillåIä n"* erofficonlracl Õispule olheéåtforcernent of Judsmðnt

-' Þ*rfr". liuùifity 4e,g., sfip Êmtnenl öomain/lnverse Mlêõel¡anêous cþll coinplalntan¿talt)

"' '- Condemnâtion (14) RfCo (?7)

Inlentibnal AoUity tn¡uryæOnruO Wiongful Ev¡ction t33) Other.Complainl (not specified

1e.g., assaútt, iaidattsnr¡ olher Reat prqperty t€.g., qu¡et tidê) G6) 'ytoYe) ljz)r¡rentìioãa¡ rnflìdioã or wirã poiiásË¡òn äii*"¡ ÞrE;sñy' iliri"JÍ,j8fååi1"o,ll¿"*_Erlotionat Distr€$s Mortgage Fsreclosure åarassme¡¡l)Negrigent rnfliclron of Quiet nt¡ç Mechanics LienEmollonal Dis{ress Other Real properly (not emlnentOlher PvPD/1rlÐ domâiû; landtord/tenant, ar olhe¡ Comme¡cial.Complaint

C ase {no n-no ñ/n o n-co rn p I e x )ilon-PllF8ÍrYD{O{hor}Tort. ,r_¡_.. foreclasure) Other.iv¡t Cornpla¡ntElus¡ßess TortJtjnfair Businèss Unlawful Dåtãlãer

{no*lon/naiz*onplax}*. fra$ce !01) commercial (31) ilisceilânêoue c¡vlt poürtonCivil Rights (e:g.".d¡9üirnination, Resídential {32) pârtnersh¡p anà Corporate

fAlse anest) lrof ciuíl Drugs (3S) (it the case.invotve^s iltaga! Govemance (21)_ -

trara,sðn¡stttJ {0.8} - ,,._,, ¿rugs, cf¡ec,k tâ¡ls item: olbewise, . . otht pe¡16à lnoi slecit?edDefamalion {a.9., slander, libel) reþrt as Çommerciat or Resîdential) ahwd 143\_ tl.q)- Judlclal Revlew õiviiúaìåiâmentFraud (16) Asset Forfeiture (0q .. !vorkpù"* vrJÀÀ""lntellectual Pþpe¡ty (19J Pâtit¡on Re: Arb¡tratlon Awãrd i11) ÈøãféepenAenf ¡¿uftProfessional Neg¡igence {25} Writ of Mandate (02). Abuse

tegal Malpraglce W?lt-Adm¡nisttet¡ve Mandamus EeO¡õn -Contest

Olher Professionâl Mâlprac{ice Writ-l¡landamus on Límited Court{nat nedtcdt or têsat) care r\iauer s leu'| L

Ë:llli:l í:: H:låi F,XiË,"Oihe¡ Non"PllPD-t1ÂlD Tort {35} Wit-Other Umited Cgurt Case CtaiáEmploymsnt Revlew Other Civil petltionWrongfi:l Termination {36) Other Judicial Review (39)Olher Employmenl (15) - -

nãv¡erv ãt Healh ôt¡cer Or¡erNolice of Appeal-Labor


1

2

3

4

5

6

1

B

9

10

1l-

72

1?IJ

I4

15

16

7'l

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

L(rtvrrl-/lrlì t (r¡1 ttttr O RELIEF, ET AL

LAW OFFICES OF ABRAIIAM A. LABBAI)Abraham A. Labbad, Esq. (CA Bar No.: 271349)1 250 Walnut St., Unit 122

Pasadena, CA 91i06Office: {818) 253-1529Fax: (818) 530-9236Specially Äppearing and Limited ScopeAttorneys for Plaintiffs:

BIG O RELIEF, ET AL

BIG O RELIEF, a California Non-profitMutual Benefit Corporation, DOO H. YOON,an individual, EUNICE S. YOON, anindividual, and Alvaro Ordaz, an individual,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

COUNTY OF KERN, apolitical subdivisionof the State of California; GREG FENTON,individually and as Kern County BuildingInspector, KERN COTINTY BOARD OFSUPERVISORS, collectively; LETICIAPEREZ, individually and as Kern CountySupervisor; MICK GLEASON, individuallyand as Kern County Supervisor; DAVIDCOUCH, individually and as Kern CountySupervisor; MIKE MAGGARD, individuallyand as Kern County Supervisor; ZACKSCRI\rNER, individually and as Kern CountySupervisor, KERN COLTNTY PUBLICWORKS _ CODE COMPLIANCEDIVISION, collectively; KERN COUNTYSHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, collectively;DONNY YOLINGBLOOD, individually andas Kern County Sheriff; KERN COUNTYDISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE,collectively; LISA GREEN, individually andas Kern County District Attomey; KERNCOUNTY COTINSEL'S OFFICE,collectively; MARK L. NATIONS,individually and as Kern County Counsel;

ELECTRONICALLY FILED1Al12l2O'17 10 48

Kern County Superior CourtTerry McNally

By Vanessa Cofield,

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORYAND INJTINCTTVE RELIEF ANDDAMAGES FROM RACKETEERING,CONSPIRACY TO ENGAGE IN APATTERN OF RACKETEERINGACTIVITY, AND RELATED CAUSESOF ACTION;

STIPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

corrNTY oF KERN (METROPOLITAN DTVISION)

Case No.: BCV-17-102394)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

1. Acouisition and Maintenance of anInteiest in and Control of an

2RICO Enterprise through a Patternof Racketeering Activity:18 U.S.C$$ 1961(5),1962(c);

3. Conspiracy to Engage in a Patternof Racketeering Activity: 18u.s.c. $$ 1961 (s), r962(d);

4. Assault;5. Battery;6. Negligence;7. Defamation: Libel Per Se and

Slander;8. Fraud/Intentional

Misrepresentation;9. Negligent Misrepresentation;10. lntentional Interference with

Prospective Economic Advantage;1 l. Negfigent Interference with

Prospective Economic Advantage;12. Conversion;13. Declaratory Relief;1 4. Preliminary Injunction.

AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL(18 U.S.C. 1961, et seq.; l8 U.S.C. 1964(Civil RICO Remedies).)

1


2

3

4

5

6

1

B

9

10

11

I2

13

74

1trAJ

16

1'l

t-B

19

20

2L

)t

ZJ

24

1Ë

JAMES BRENNAN, individually and aspeputy Kern County Counsel; CHARLES F.

COLLINS, individually and as Chief DeputyKern County Counsel; GURUJODHA S.

KHALSA, individually and as Chief DeputyCounty Counsel; KERN COUNTY FIREDEPARTMENT, collectively; KERNCOLINTY PLANNING AND NATURALRESOURCES DEPARTMENT, collectively;LORELEI OVIATT, individually and as

Director; KERN COLTNTY DEPARTMENTOF AGRICULTURE ANDMEA SUREMENT STANDARD S,

collectively; GLENN FANKHA USER,individuaily and as Commissioner; KERNCOUNTY PTIBLIC HEALTHDEPARTMENT, coliectively; AL ROJAS,individually and as Kern County CodeCompliance Division Supervisor; and DOES1 Through 1000, Inclusive,

(continued)

Defendants.

TO EACH PARTY AND TO THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD:

1. COMES NOW BIG O RELIEF, a California Nonprofit Mutual Benefit Corporation,

DOO H. YOON, an individual, EUNICE S. YOON, an individual, and ALVARO

ORDAZ, an individual (hereinafter'Plaintiffs'), and for causes of action for civil RICO

violations arising from Defendants' violations of 18 U.S.C. $1961, et seq. - RICO

violations and remedies -- 18 U.S.C. $$ 241 - conspiracy against rights -- and 242 -

deprivation of rights under color of law -- bring this Complaint for declaratory and

injunctive relief and damages.

JURISDICTION

2. This honorable Superior Court has original jurisdiction pursuant to the civil RICO

remedies at 18 U.S.C. T964, and the holdings of the U.S. Supreme Court in Tafflin v.

Levitt, 493 U.S. 455 (1990), and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Lou v

COMPLAINT OT SíC O RELIEF, ET AL

)))))))))))))))))))))))))


1

2

3

4

tr

6

I

9

'7

10

11

I2

13

\4

15

76

t1

1B

19

20

22

24

25

3

Belzberg, 834F.2d730,hn.4 (9th Cir. 1987) (Caiifomia State courts have concurrent

jurisdiction of civil RICO claims).

PARTIES TO THE ACTION

3. That Plaintiff Big O Relief is and at all times mentioned in this Complaint was a

Caiifornia Nonprofit Mutual Benefit Corporation authorized to conduct business in the

County of Kern and the State of Califomia. Big O Relief is an enterprise engaged in and

the activities of which affect or impact the state of California, to wit: a corporation

incorporated under the laws of the State of California.

4. That Plaintiffs Doo H. Yoon and Eunice S. Yoon were and at all times mentioned in this

Complaint were owners of real property located in Kern County, Califomia, that is an

integral part of the Complaint herein.

5. That Plaintiff Alvaro Ordaz was and at all times mentioned in this Complaint was

proprietor of Big O Relief, located in Kem County, Califomia, that is an integral part of

the Complaint herein.

6. That Defendant County of Kern is a political subdivision of the State of California,

business form unknown, operating within Kern County, State of California.

7. That the business entity known as Big O Relief, whose business operation takes place in

Mojave, California, and real property, where the business entity is located, is the subject

of the present Complaint. Both business and real property that are the subject of this

action are located within Kern County, Califomia.

8. That Defendant Greg Fenton, individually, is a citizen of the State of California, and

performs the duties entrusted him as Kern County Building Inspector.

3

COMPLAINT OF BIG O RELIEF, ET AL


1

2

3

Á

5

6

"l

I

9

10

11

I2

t-3

I4

15

16

71

1B

19

20

27

aa

23

24

25

4

9. That Defendant Kern County Board of Supervisors, coliectively, is a political subdivision

of the State of California, business form unknown, operating within Kern County, State

of California.

10. That Defendant Leticia Perez, individually , is a citizen of the State of California and

performs the duties entrusted her as Kern County Supervisor.

t l. That Ðefendant Mick Gleason, individually, is a citizer^ of the State of California and

performs the duties entrusted him as Kern County Supervisor.

12.That Defendant David Couch, individually, is a citizen of the State of California and


13. That Defendant Mike Maggard, individually, is a citizen of the State of California and


14. That Defendant Zack Scrivner, individually, is a citizen of the State of Califomia and


15. That Defendant Kern County Public Works - Code Compliance Division, collectively, is

a political subdivision of the State of Califomia, business form unknown, operating

within Kern County, State of California.

16. That Defendant Kern County Sheriff s Department, collectively, is a political subdivision

of the State of Califomia, business form unknown, operating within Kem County, State

of Califomia.

17. That Defendant Donny Youngblood, individually, is a citizen of the State of Califomia

and performs the duties entrusted him as Kern County Sheriff.

18. That Defendant Kern County District Attorney's Office, collectively, is a political

subdivision of the State of California, business form unknown, operating within Kern

County, State of California.

4

COMPLAINT OF'BIG O RELIEF, ET AL


3

4

5

1

2

6

1

9

10

11

!2

13

T4

15

Ìr)

T1

1B

19

20

27

22

¿3

24

25

5

19. That Defendant Lisa Green, individually, is a citizen of the State of California and

performs the duties entrusted her as Kern County District Attorney.

2A.ThatDefendant Kern County Counsel's Office, coilectively, is a political subdivision of

the State of California, business form unknown, operating within Kern County, State of

California.

2l.ThatDefendant Mark L. Nations, individually, is a citizen of the State of Califomia and

performs the duties entrusted him as and as Kern County Counsel.

22.ThatJames L. Brennan, individually, is a citizenof the State of California and performs

the duties entrusted him as Deputy Kem County Counsel.

23.ThatCharles F. Collins, individually, is a citizen of the State of California and performs

the duties entrusted him as Chief Deputy Kern County Counsel.

24.ThatGurujodha S. Khalsa, individuall¡ is a citizen of the State of California and

performs the duties entrusted him as Chief Deputy Kern County Counsel.

25.That Defendant Kern County Fire Department, collectively, is a political subdivision of

the State of California, business form unknown, operating within Kern County, State of

California.

26.ThatDefendant Kern County Planning and Natural Resources Department, collectively,

is a political subdivision of the State of California, business form unknown, operating

within Kem County, State of California.

2T.ThatDefendant Lorelei Oviatt, individually, is a citizen of the State of California and

performs the duties entrusted her as Director of Kern County Planning and Natural

Resources Department.

tr.,



1

2

3

4

5

6

B

9

'7

10

11fl

T2

1?

t4

15

76

71

1B

19

20

21,

22

23

24

z3

6

2S.ThatDefendant Kern County Department of Agriculture and Measurement Standards,

collectively, is a political subdivision of the State of Caiifomia, business form unknown,

operating within Kern County, State of California.

2g.ThatDefendant Glenn Fankhauser, individually, is a citizen of the State of California and

performs the duties entrusted him as Commissioner of the Kern County Department of

Agriculture and Measurement Standards.

30. That Defendant Kern County Public Health Department, collectively, is a political

subdivision of the State of Califomia, business form unknown, operating within Kern

County, State of California.

31. That Al Rojas, individually, is a citizen of the State of Califomia and performs the duties

entrusted him as Kern Counfy Code Compliance Division Supervisor.

32.Thetrue names and capacities of Defendants DOES 1 through 1000, whether individual,

corporate, associate or otherwise, are unknown to Plaintiffs at the time of filing this

Complaint and Plaintiffs therefore sue said Defendants by such fictitious names and will

seek leave of court to amend this Complaint to show their true names or capacities when

the same have been ascertained. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege,

that each DOE Defendant is in some manner responsible for the events and happenings

herein set forth and proximately caused injury and damages to Plaintifß, as herein

aileged.

33. Defendants, collectively and individually, as persons within the meaning of 18 U.S.C.A.

$1961(3) and as persons employed by and/or associated with said enterprise, conducted

and participated, directly or indirectly, in the conduct of the affairs of said enterprise

through apattem of racketeering activity in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. $i962(c).

6



1

2

3

A

5

6

1

I

9

10

11If

T2

13

1,4

15

t-6

L7

18

19

20

2T

zz

24

25

1

34. At all times mentioned herein, each DOE Defendant was the agent, employee, and

representative of the remaining Defendants and was at all times herein mentioned acting

within the scope of said agency, employment and representation.

35. All Defendants, named or DOE, that exist as political subdivisions of the County of Kern

and State of Califomia, andthat at all relevant times hereto operated under authority of

said political subdivision, are an enterprise engaged in and the activities of which affect

or impact the state of Califomia, to wit: Defendants, and each of them, are required to

execute the laws of the State of California and the County of Kern by way of their

individual positions as representatives of the public in their respective roles.

ALLEGATIONS COMMON AI,T, CAI}SES OF ACTION

36. The ordinances and laws that are herein alleged to have been violated, include but are not

limited to 18 U.S.C. $$ 241, conspiracy against rights, and242, deprivation of rights

under color of law, and arise from additional violations of sections of the Kern County

Ordinance Code, which were to be performed in Kern County, California, and violation

of Califomia Health and Safety Code, $11362.5, among others as cited herein.

37.The 9=pt$gte acts which constitute this pattern of racketeering activity are:

I . Fraud/Intentional Misrepresentation and negligent misrepresentation:

a. Defendants', and each of their, fraudulent conduct involved convincing

the public in Kern County, California, that Defendants' actions toward

Plaintiffs' legal medical marijuana dispensary were lawfuI and necessary

to protect the health and welfare of the citizens of Kern County,

Califomia. (See Exhibit'A'- Press Release by Supervisor Zack

Scrivner.) Specifically , Zack Scrivner, member of the Kern County Board

of Supervisors, issued a statement to the public announcing a:

'7



1

2

3

4

5

6

1

B

9

10

11

T2

13

74

15

16

!'1

1B

19

20

21

22

ZJ

24

25

B

"County crackdown on illegal medical marijuana dispensaries. [and] ThisEnforcement Task Force action commences an initiative to close all illegalmedical marijuana dispensaries that began operation after the May 10, 2016

Moratorium enacted by the Board of Superuisors. This Enforcement TaskForce is a collaborative effort between Kern County Public Works - Code

Compliance Division, Kern County Sheriff Department, District Attorney,County Counsel, Fire Department, Planning and Natural Resources,Department of Agriculture and Measurement Standards, and Public Health."

It should be noted that Supervisor Scrivner's allegations that all medical

marijuana dispensaries that were to be closed were "illegal" is false and

extremely defamatory to Plaintiff Big O Relief.

b. Mr. Scrivner further admitted: "The Enforcement Team seized several

thousand dollars in unsafe edible product of unknown origin, as well as

illegal bath salts."

c. As a direct result of Supervisor Scrivner's press release, on or about

August 24,2017, Kern County Enforcement Task Force agents,

representatives, and officers entered the business of Big O Relief, located

at L6940 State Highway 14, Mojave, California 93501, and forced their

way into Big O Reiief with guns drawn to effectuate the unlawful seizure

of medicinal products and materials belonging to Plaintiffs. During this

"taid" Plaintiffs' employees and representatives were unlawfully and

forcefully placed in handcuffs.

d. As a result of Defendants', and each of their, actions described herein, the

County, by way of Defendant Al Rojas, issued a notice of violation stating

Plaintifß may not operate as a collective or cooperative. The notice (See

Exhibit 'B' - Notice of Violation) states: "An inspection was conducted

on August 24,2017 and it has been determined that the property is in

ICOMPLAINT OF BIG O RELIEF, ET AL


1_

2

3

4

5

6

1

B

9

10

11

IZ

13

1,4

15

t_6

7'l

1B

19

20

21-

22

23

24

.E

9

violation of Kem County Ordinances Code section 5.85, ... more than

twelve marijuana plants are being cuitivated on the property.

e. The actions of Defendants were clearly in error and unlawful. Kern

County Ordinance Code section 5.84 clearly states that "Medical

marijuana cooperative" and "medical marijuana collective" are defined as

set forth in section IV of the California Attorney General Guidelines for

the Security and Non-diversion of Marijuana Grown for Medical Use

issued in August 2008, as they now read or as arnended," which provides

that under section IV of the Califomia Attorney General Guidelines,

medical marijuana patients and primary caregivers may "associate within

the State of California in order collectively or cooperatively to cultivate

marijuana for medical purposes." (H&S ç 11362.77 5 ...) recognizes a

qualified right to collective and cooperative cultivation of medical

marijuana. ($$ 1i362.7 , 11362.77, and 11362.775.) 1...1 If a person is

acting as primary caregiver to more than one patient under section

11362.7(d)(Z),he or she may aggregate the possession and cultivation

limits for each patient. Nonetheless, the County of Kern and its agents,

representatives and employees issued the above-referenced notice of

violation that clearly does not apply. As a result, the County has

maliciously prosecuted this case with apparent animus and goal to

eliminate dispensaries in Kern County.

f. Defendants Scrivner's and Rojas's, and by way of association and

representation ail Defendants', assertions and allegations against Piaintiffs

were in fact false and were made with the intent to deceive the public into

9



1

2

3

4

5

6

B

9

1

10

11

13

I4

15

16

I1

1B

t-9

20

21_

22

aa

24

25

10supporting all Defendants'personal views about the medical marijuana

community and were further made to advance Defendants', and each of

their, personal and political aspirations.

g. Defendants', andeach of their, malicious and fraudulent actions were in

violation of 18 U.S.C. ç241, whereby Defendants, and each of them,

conspired to deprive Plaintiffs' rights to operate a lawful business under

California law, and U.S.C. $242,whereby Defendants intentionally

performed acts against Plaintiffs in order to deprive Plaintiffs of rights and

privileges under color of law

h. It is important to note that, as a result of the zealous, yet egregious, actions

of the Kern County Board of Supervisors and Defendants collectively,

officers employed by the Kern County Sheriff s Office have entered

medical marijuana dispensaries in Kern County, including Big O Relief,

and unlawfully confiscated property belonging to the dispensaries under

color of law. (See Exhibit 6cr-Newspaper article titled: "Former

Kern Co. Sheriffls deputies avoid prison for selling marijuana seized

in drug raids.") The actions of the Kern County Sheriffs Department,

Supervisor Scrivner, and all Defendants, were unlawful and clearly

without probable cause or any legal reason. Said actions placed all lawful

members of the medical marijuana community in fear of law enforcement

agents.

It is further important to note that Kern County Counsel, Mark L. Nations,

has argued that the ruling of the Fifth District Court of Appeals in County

of Kern v. T.C.E.F., loc., was inapplicable to the present matters affecting

10COMPLAINT OF'BIG O RELIEF, ET AL


1

2

3

4

5

6

1

B

9

10

11

72

13

74

t5

16

11

1B

19

20

21

22

¿J

24

25

11medical marijuana dispensaries in Kern County. Mr. Nations stated that

the T.C.E.F. case had nothing to do with medical marijuana issues, but

was only an elections matter. However, according to Kern County

Ordinance Code $ 5.36.020(14) - Declaration of Urgency, the ruling in

T.C.E.F. "has created uncertainty as to how and under what circumstances

the county may regulate current dispensaries and any future dispensaries

and how such local regulation will interact with the new state legislation

and its implementing regulations." In fact, the T.C.E.F. decision had the

effect of reinstating Ordinance G-7849, a medical marijuana ordinance.

Mr. Nations' interpretation of T.C.E.F. being a simple "elections case"

reveals his desire to fraudulently induce the public and those he reports to

of his interpretation of the law as he sees appropriate, without any regard

for the truth and/or actual law in the matter.

2. Defamation: Defendants', and each of them, made/published false defamatory

statements about Plaintiffs operating an "illegal" medical marijuana

dispensary. These false statements were madeþublished to the public via

press release and newspaper article by Defendants with the intent to cause

injury to Plaintiffs' personal and professional reputations, economic stability,

and were intentionally and negligently made to cause physical and economic

injury to Plaintiffs as a result of said actions. Defendants' actions were in

violation of 18 U.S.C. $241, whereby Defendants, and each of them,

conspired to deprive Plaintifß' rights to operate a lawful medical marijuana

dispensary under California law and U.S.C. $242, whereby Defendants

11COMPLÄINT OF'BIG O RELIEF, ET AL


1

2

3

4

5

6

B

9

1

10

11

t2

13

!4

15

76

71

18

19

20

21,

aa

/1

24

25

I2performed acts against Plaintifß in order to deprive Plaintiffs of rights and

privileges under color of law.

3. Assault and Battery: Through their actions Defendants, and each of them,

caused Piaintiffs to not only fear a volitional unauthorized act by

their agents, representatives, or employees, but also to suffer such physical

attack by Defendants. Specifically, Plaintiffs were confronted by law

enforcement off,rcers who had aimed their guns at Plaintiffs to effectuate the

raid that was demanded by the Kern Counfy Board of Supervisors. Plaintiffs

were thereafter placed in handcufß during said raid on Big O Reiief.

Defendants' actions were not authorized by law and were the result of

Defendants County of Kern, their agents, representatives and employees

seeking to gain personal and professional (political) favor from the people of

Kern County.

Again, Defendants' actions were in violation of 18 U.S.C. 524I, whereby

Defendants, and each of them, conspired to deprive Plaintiffs' rights to

operate a lawful business under California law, and U.S.C. $242, whercby

Defendants performed acts against Plaintiffs in order to deprive Plaintiffs of

rights under color of law.

38. Other RICO predicate acts, although appearing to be isolated events, were actually part

the overall conspiracy and pattern of racketeering activity alleged herein, e.g. providing

misinformation to the public, via electronic and/or U.S. Post Office mail, for the personal

gain of Defendants, and each of them, and others involved in local and county politics,

including, but not limited to the dissemination of false information regarding businesses

operating as medical marijuana dispensaries. (See Kern County Ordinance Code, $5'86.)

12



1

2

3

4

5

6

I

9

"7

10

11

13

74

15

16

1,'7

1B

19

20

21

22

24

25

1339. Section 2.01.010 of the Kern County Ordinance Code - Government accountability-

provides:

A. Counfy Officers and Employees. County officers, elected or appointed, and

employees have a duty of loyalty and a duty of care in fulfilling their publictrust in government service. These duties mandate knowledge of and

compliance with federal and state laws and regulations as well as countyordinances and administrative regulations that apply to each officer's and

employee's specific responsibilities. The duty of compliance extends to allcounty operations, including, but not limited to, accounting, purchasing,

contracting, delivery of services, and required reporting.

40. The primary objective of the racketeering enterprise has been to gain poiitical favor,

enhance individual Defendants' reputations in the community for political and personal

gain by inflicting severe and sustained economic and personal (physical and reputational)

hardship upon Plaintiffs, with the intent of impairing, obstructing, preventing and

discouraging Plaintiffs from operating a medical marijuana dispensary - a topic of great

debate among law-abiding citizens of the State of California. Defendants', and each of

their, actions were done despite Big O Relief operating as alegalbusiness within Kern

County, California.

41. Additionally, Defendant Kem County Planning Director Lorelei Oviatt disclosed at a

public Board of Supervisors meeting in August 2017 , that Kern County wanted to rid

Kern County of the existing medical marijuana dispensaries so that businesses from Los

Angeles could establish their business in Kern County. Director Oviatt further disclosed

that allowing such Los Angeles-based business to enter Kem County would save Kern

County money because the specified business has a history of filing nuisance iawsuits

against their competitors and paylng for the removai of existing dispensaries.

Defendants', and each of their, motivations entirely disregard the legality of existing

Kern County businesses and demonstrates the personal and professional disregard of the

citizens and businesses of Kem County.ra



1

2

3

4

t

6

1

B

o

10

11

T2

13

14

15

L6

I1

1B

19

20

LI

22

ZJ

24

25

1442.Defendants accomplished their objectives by administering threats of criminal

prosecution, a slanderous smear campaign against Plaintiffs and other medical marijuana

dispensary businesses legally operating in Kern County, physically assaulting Plaintifß'

employees and agents, and confiscation of unique property from Plaintiffs' business.

43. These acts of racketeering, occurring within two years of one another, constitute a

of racketeering activity within the meaning of 18 U.S.C.A' $ 1961(5)'

44. Plaintiffs were injured in their business and property by reason of this violation of the

laws of California, in that, as a direct and proximate result of Defendants' complained-of

acts, Plaintiffs suffered damages, including loss of property, loss of reputation, closure of

their business, physical and emotional injury from having guns pointed at them and

handcufß placed on their wrists unlawfully, and loss of eamings and profits.

45. As stated, this is a civil action for RICO remedies authorized by the federal statutes at 18

U.S.C. 196I et seq.; for declaratory and injunctive relief; for actual, consequential and

exemplary damages; and for all other relief which the above-referenced Superior Court

deems just and proper under all circumstances which have caused the present Complaint.

(See 18 U.S.C. $$ 196a(a) and (c).)

ORDIN

46. Section 5.86.020 of the Kem County Ordinance Code - Declaration of Urgency, provides

at subsection 10: "On April 5, 2016, the Fifth District Court of Appeal ruled in the case

of Count)¡ of Kern v. T.C.E.F.. Inc., that the Kern County Board of Supervisors acted in

violation of Elections Code 9145 when it repealed Chapter 5.84 of Title 5 of the Kern

County Ordinance Code in 20l2,thus reinstating into law an ordinance chapter and

regulatory scheme that was repealed four (4) years ago." The repeal reinstated the

ordinance to what it was in2009 under Ordinance G-7849.

1_4



a

4

5

1

2

6

1

B

9

10

11

1a

13

74

15

16

71

18

19

20

11

22

z)

24

25

Itr]J

47.Kem County Counsel Mark L. Nations' interpretation of this particular issue. On

September 26,2017 , during a Kern County Board of Supervisors meeting, Mr. Nations

argued that the ruling of the Fifth District Court of Appeals in County of Kern v.

T.C.E.F., Inc., was inapplicable to the present matters affecting medical marijuana

dispensaries in Kern County because T.C.E.F. was merely an "elections matter" case. Mr

Nations stated the T.C.E.F. case had nothing to do with medical marijuana issues. Again,

however, according to Kern County Ordinance Code $ 5.86.020(14) - Declaration of

Urgency, the ruling in T.C.E.F. "has created uncertainty as to how and under what

circumstances the county may regulate current dispensaries and any future dispensaries

and how such local regulation will interact with the new state legislation and its

implementing regulations." In fact, as stated above, the T.C.E.F. decision had the effect

of reinstating Ordinance G-7849, a medical marijuana ordinance. If the T.C.E.F. case was

merely an "elections case" as described by Mr. Nations, then why would the Kern Countl

Ordinance Code treat the Fifth District's decision with such gravity and importance? As

the lead legal counsel for the entire county, especially when providing legal counsel to

the Board of Supervisors, Mr. Nations' flimsy interpretation of relevant case 1aw reveals

his and his department's lack of understanding of the issues; or, alternatively, Mr

Nations' interpretation demonstrates his and his department's desire to fraudulently

induce the public and those he reports to his interpretation of the law as he sees

appropriate, without any regard for the truth and/or actual law in the matter or how those

interpretations negatively impact citizens and business of Kern County

48. Section 5.86.030 provides: "From and after the effective date of Ordinance G-8630, May

I0,2016,no medical marijuana dispensary, other than those in existence and operating

AJ



1

2

3

4

q

6

1

o

o

10

ÌL

T2

13

L4

15

16

71

1B

19

20

2I

ZZ

23

24

ÔE

1_6

on the effective date of this ordinance, is permitted within the unincorporated areas of

Kern County during the period of time this ordinance is effective."

49. California Govemment Code $ 65858 provides:

(e) When an interim ordinance has been adopted, every subsequent ordinance

adopted pursuant to this section, covering the whole or apart of the same property, shallautomatically terminate and be of no further force or effect upon the termination of the

first interim ordinance or any extension of the ordinance as provided in this section.

50. Ordinance No. G-8630 is a subsequent ordinance imposing a moratorium on all "new"

applications for medical marijuana dispensary licenses within Kern County which

purported to take effect beyond the termination of the first (G-7849) ordinance and

second ordinance, or any extension of the (G-8630) ordinance. Therefore, it violates the

plain meaning of section 65858, subdivision (e), and would have been "of no further

force or effect" at the time Plaintiffs began operating Big O Relief in Mojave, California.

51. Nevertheless, Big O Relief was registered with the California Secretary of State's Office

as operating in Califomia as of October 22,2009. (See Exhibit 'Do.) On May 9,2016

Defendant Big O Relief obtained a "seller's Permit" from the Califomia State Board of

Equalization to operate in Mojave, California. (See Exhibit oE'.) Plaintifß have receipts

that show delivery of products from Big O Relief to clients between ApúL26,2016 and

May 6,20i6. (See Exhibit'F'.) In addition, on May 9,2016 Defendants entered a lease

for retail property in Mojave, California. (See Exhibit 'G'.)

52. Onluly 28,2016the County of Kern filed a Complaint for Preliminary and Permanent

Injunction for Violation of Kern County Ordinance Code, $5.86, against Big O Relief,

Doo H. Yoon, and Eunice S. Yoon, and Does 1 through 50, inclusive (Kern County

SuperiorCourt, CaseNo. BCV-16-101782). (SeeExhibit'H'-Complaintof Countyof

Kern and Greg Fenton vs. Big O Relief, et al. for Preliminary and Permanent Injunction)

On Novemb er 22,2016, Big O Relief s |{otion to Quash Service of Summons was



1

2

3

4

5

6

B

Õ

1

10

11

I2

13

1_4

15

16

71

1B

I9

20

21

22

23

24

1q.

L-1

granted. On January 3 , 2017 , County of Kern filed a Proof of Service alleging that Big O

Reliel a Califomia Non-Profit Mutual Benefit Corporation, was personally served on

December 6,2016, with the Summons, Complaint, and Civil Case Cover Sheet in the

above-cited matter. The Court decided that without a response by January 5,2017, Big O

Relief was in default as of January 6,2017.

53. On January 13,2A17, no response forthcoming from Big O Relief, Doo H. Yoon or

Eunice Yoon, the Clerk of Court entered default against Big O Relief, Doo H. Yoon and

Eunice Yoon. The court granted Default Judgment on May 16,2017 against all

defendants in the matter. Big O Relief filed various motions to set aside the default

judgment, all of which were denied, with the Court issuing its ruling denying Big O

Relief s Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment on August 22,2017. Big O Relief has

filed a Motion for Reconsideration of Court's Denial of Motion to Set Aside Default

Judgment, which is scheduled to be heard October 23,2017. The issue of whether Big O

Relief is a valid dispensary, under Kern County Ordinance Code 5.86, has not been

decided on the merits. Therefore, Defendants' actions in the present matter, although

unrelated to Plaintiffs' RICO allegations against Defendants herein, were premature and

in violation of the laws and ordinances cited.

ACTS OF DEFENDANTS THAT RESULTED IN INJURY TO PLAINTIFFS

54. In exercise of authority granted to members of the Kern County Board of Supervisors,

and in furtherance of Civil RICO violations, on August 10,2017 Zack Scrivner,

Supervisor of the Second District for the Kern County Board of Supervisors, issued a

press release announcing a "County crackdown on illegal medicai marijuana

dispensaries." (See Exhibit 'A'.) Mr. Scrivner further asserted that "This Enforcement

Task Force action commences an initiative to close all illegal medical marijuana

l1COMPLAINT OF BIG O RELIEF, ET AL


1

2

3

4

5

6

'7

I

o

10

11

72

IJ

74

15

76

11

1B

19

20

2\

22

23

24

25

18dispensaries that began operation after the May 10, 2016 Moratorium enacted by the

Board of Supervisors. This Enforcement Task Force is a collaborative effort between

Kern County Public Works - Code Compliance Division, Kern County Sheriff

Department, District Attorney, County Counsel, Fire Department, Planning and Natural

Resources, Department of Agriculture and Measurement Standards, and Public Health."

Mr. Scrivner also admitted that "The Enforcement Team seized several thousand dollars

in unsafe edible product of unknown origin, as weil as illegal bath salts."

55. On August 22,2A17, Kem Counfy Enforcement Task Force agents, representatives, and

officers entered the business of Big O Reliet a California Nonprofit Mutual Benefit

Corporation, located at 16940 State Highway 14, Mojave, Califomia 93501, and forced

their way into Big O Reiief with guns drawn to effectuate the unlawful seizure of

medicinal products and materials belonging to Plaintiffs. During this "raid" Plaintiffs'

employees and representatives were placed in handcuffs.

56. As stated, the Kern County Enforcement Task Force agents, representatives and officers

were acting under the color of law and demand of the Kem County Board of Supervisors

and the County of Kern when they entered and disrupted the business operations of Big C

Relief. This disruption was clearly in violation of Kern County Ordinance Code and

California statutes. When the Task Force committed egregious acts upon Plaintiffs --

forcefully putting their firearms in the faces of and handcuffs on Plaintiffs -- the Courts

had not yet determined whether the business known as Big O Relief was a protected

medical marijuana dispensary under Kern County Code and California law.

57. The acts of Defendants and their agents, representatives, and employees was in

furtherance of the RICO predicate acts described above.

18



1

2

3

4

5

6

'1

B

9

10

11

I2

12

74

15

76

71

18

19

20

21-

22

24

25

19FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

(Acquisition and Maintenance of an Interest ín and Control of an Enterprise

Engaged in a Pattern of Racketeering Activity: 18 U.S.C. SS 1961(5), 1962(b).)

58. Plaintiffs now re-allege each and every allegation as set forth above, and hereby

incorporates same by reference, as if all were set forth fully herein.

59. At various times and places partrally enumerated in Plaintiffs' documentary material, all

Defendants did acquire and/or maintain, directly or indirectly, an interest in or control of

a RICO enterprise of individuals who were associated in fact and who did engage in, and

whose activities did affect the lawful operation of Plaintiffs' business venture, all in

violation of l8 U.S.C. $$ 1961(4), (5), (9), and 1962(b).

60. During the lapse of time between enactment of the Kern County Ordinance Code, $5.86,

and the present, all Defendants did cooperate jointly and severally in the commission of

two (2) or more of the RICO predicate acts that are itemized in the RICO laws at 18

U.S.C. $$ 1961(1XA) and @), and did so in vioiation of the RICO law at 18 U.S.C.

1962(b). Specifically, all Defendants conspired to commit fraud upon the people of Kern

County and the State of California by providing false and injurious information that

Defendants were operating an illegal business; all Defendants conspired to publish and

act upon defamatory statements about Plaintifß'business operating unlawfully; and all

Defendants, through their individual and collective acts, conspired to commit assault and

battery upon Plaintiffs by placing firearms in Plaintiffs' faces and placing handcuffs on

Plaintiffs while effectuating the fraudulent and malicious raid on Plaintiffs' legal

business.

61. Plaintiffs further allege that all Defendants did commit two (2) or more of the offenses

itemized above in a manner which they calculated and premeditated intentionally to



1

2

3

4

5

6

1

B

9

10

11

I¿

13

L4

15

16

71

18

19

20

21,

22

23

24

25

20threaten continuity, i.e. a continuing threat of their respective racketeering activities, also

in violation of the RICO law at l8 U.S.C. I962(b), supra.

62. Respondeat superior (principal is liable for agents' misconduct: knowledge of,

participation in, and benefit from a RICO enterprise).

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

(Conduct and Participation in a HÍCO Enterprise through a Pattern of Racketeering Activity:

1B U.S.C- SS 1961(s), Ie62(c).)

63. Plaintiffnow re-alleges each and every allegation as set forth above, and hereby


64. At various times and places partially enumerated in Plaintiff s documentary material, all

Defendants did associate with a RICO enterprise of individuals who were associated in

fact and who engaged in, and whose activities were accomplished by way of telephone,

facsimile transmission, computer dissemination of Plaintiffs' personal and professional

information through the Internet (emails and/or other electronic transmissions) -

instrumentalities of interstate commerce -- and/or use of the public media to spread

vicious and false statements about Plaintiffs and their business activities.

65. Likewise, all Defendants did conduct and/or participate, either directly or indirectly, in

the conduct of the affairs of said RICO enterprise through a pattern of racketeering

activity, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. $$ 1961(4), (5), (9), and 1962(c).

66. Given the above, from enactment of Kern County Ordinance Code $5.86, et aI., to the

present, all Defendants did cooperate jointly and severally in the commission of two (2)

or more of the RICO predicate acts that are itemized in the RICO laws at 18 U.S.C. $$

1961(1XA) and (B), and did so in violation of the RICO law at 18 U.S.C. I962(c).

20COMPLAINT OF BIG O RELIEF, ET AL


1

2

3

4

E

6

"l

9

10

11

1,2

13

t4

15

16

t7

t_B

19

20

,1

22

23

24

atr

2I67. Plaintiffs further allege that all Defendants did commit two (2) or more of the offenses

itemized above in a man¡er which they calculated and premeditated intentionally to

threaten continuity, i.e. a continuing threat of their respective racketeering activities, also

in violation of the RICO law at 18 U.S.C. 1962(c) supra.

68. Pursuant to 84 Stat. 947 , Sec. 904, Oct. 15, 1970, the RICO laws itemized above are to be

liberally construed by this honorable Court.

69. Respondeat superior. (Supra.)

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

(Conspiracy to Engage in a Pattern of Racketeering Activity: 18 U.S.C. SS 1961(5), 1962(d).)



TL Atvarious times and places as described herein and partially enumerated in Plaintiffs'

documentary material, all Defendants did conspire to acquire and maintain an interest in ¿

RICO enterprise engaged in a pattern of racketeering activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C.

$$ 1e62(b) and (d).

72. Atvarious times and places as described herein and partially enumerated in Plaintiffs'

documentary material, all Defendants did also conspire to conduct and participate in said

RICO enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity, in violation of i8 U.S.C. $$

1962(c) and (d). See also 18 U.S.C. $$ i961(4), (5) and (9).

73. During the lapse of time between enactment of the Kern County Ordinance Code, $5.86,

and the present, all Defendants did cooperate jointly and severally in the commission of

two (2) or more of the predicate acts that are itemized at i8 U.S.C. $$ 1961(1)(A) and

(B), in violation of l8 U.S.C. 1962(d).



1

2

3

4

5

6

1

I

9

10

11

12

-LJ

I4

15

16

I7

1B

19

20

ZL

22

z3

24

25

2274. Plaintiffs further allege thaf alI Defendants did commit two (2) or more of the offenses

itemized above in a manner which they calculated and premeditated intentionally to

threaten continuity, i.e. a continuing threat of their respective racketeering activities, as

enumerated above, also in violation of l8 U.S.C. 1962(d).

75. Pursuant to 84 Stat. 947 , Sec.9A4, Oct. 15, 1970, the RICO laws itemized above are to be

liberally construed by this honorable Court.

76. Respondeat superior. (Supra.)

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(,4ssault)



78. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that each of the DOE Defendants

is, in some manner, responsible for the events and happenings herein set forth and

proximately caused injury and damages to Plaintiffs as herein alleged.

79. At all times mentioned herein, each of the Defendants was the agent, servant, and/or

employee of each of the other Defendants and was at all times herein mentioned acting

within the scope of said agency andlor employment.

80. Doe Defendants who are agents, representatives or employees of Kern County Sheriffls

Department -- individually-identified Deputies are herein identified as Doe Defendants

and will be specifically identified when said names become available to Plaintiffs -- made

verbal threats and physical actions that placed Plaintiffs in the reasonable apprehension o.

being shot and/or physically injured by guns that were aimed at Plaintiffs when

Defendants unlawfuliy entered and "raided" Big O Relief on August 22,2017.



1

2

3

4

5

6

1

o

9

10

11

I2

l-3

74

15

16

L'7

1B

19

20

27

22

z3

24

25

238i. As a further result of the Doe Defendants' actions, Plaintiffs were placed under the

reasonable apprehension ofbeing hit, punched, slapped, struck, kicked, and/or pushed by

said Doe Defendants when they placed Plaintiffs in handcuffs in order to effectuate the

unlawful raid on Big O Relief.

82. In doing the acts as alleged above, Defendants intended to cause or to place Plaintifß in

the reasonable apprehension (fear) of repeated harmful and offensive contacts with

Plaintiffs' persons.

83. At no time did Plaintiffs consent to any of the acts of the Doe Defendants as alleged

above.

84. As a result of said Doe Defendants', and each of their, acts alleged above, Plaintiffs were

in fact placed in great apprehension of a harmful and offensive contact.

85. Defendants, and each of them individually and collectively, would benefit from the

removal of Big O Relief from Kern County by making false and fraudulent allegations

that Big O Relief was an illegal establishment and that Defendants, and each of them, had

caused Plaintiffs' removal.

86. As a further proximate result of the above-stated acts of Defendants, Plaintiffs were

prevented from attending to their usual occupation as a medical marijuana dispensary and

thereby lost earnings to Plaintiffs' damage.

87. The aforementioned-conduct of Defendants was willful and malicious and was intended

to oppress and scare Plaintifß and to benefit Defendants, and each of them, personally

and politically. Plaintiffs are therefore entitled to an award of punitive damages.



1

2

3

4

5

6

1

B

9

10

11

L2

l_3

14

15

76

11

1B

19

20

21,

22

z5

24

1Ê

24FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Battery)





proximately caused injury and damages to Plaintiffs as herein alleged.

90. At all times mentioned herein, each of the Defendants was the agent, servant, and/or


within the scope of said agency and/or employment.

91. Immediately after being piaced in great apprehension of a harmful and offensive contact

with their persons, Defendants placed Plaintiffs in handcuffs, causing extensive physical

and emotional injury to Plaintiff.

92.Indoing the acts as alleged above, Defendants acted with the intent to make a contact

with Plaintiffs' persons.

93. At no time did Plaintiff consent to any of the acts of Defendants alleged above.

94. As a proximate result of the acts of Defendants as alleged herein, Plaintifß were hurt and

injured in their health, strength, and activity, sustaining injury to their persons, all of

which have caused, and continue to cause, Plaintiffs great mental, physical, and nervous

pain and suffering.

95. As a further proximate result of the acts of Defendants, Plaintiffs were prevented from

attending to their usual occupation as a medical marijuana dispensary and thereby lost

eamings to Plaintiffs' damage.

24COMPLAINT OF'BIG O R.ELIEF, ET AL


2

3

1

4

tr

6

9

1

B

10

11

L2

1)1J

t4

15

16

1B

19

20

21

22

23

24

2596. The aforementioned-conduct of Defendants was willful and malicious and was intended

to oppress and cause injury to Plaintiffs and to benefit Defendants, and each of them

personally and politically. Plaintiffs are therefore entitled to an award of punitive

damages.

W(Negligence)





proximately caused injury and damages to Plaintifß as herein alleged.

99. At all times mentioned herein, each of the Defendants was the agent, sewant, andlor


within the scope of said agency and./or employment.

100. Defendants, and each of them, were Kern County Officers and/or employees and

pursuant to section 2.0i.010 - Govemment accountability - of the Kern County

Ordinance Code. Defendants, and each of them, as elected or appointed County officers

and employees, have a duty of loyalty and a duty of care in fulfilling their public trust in

government service. These duties mandate knowledge of and compliance with federal

and state laws and regulations as well as county ordinances and administrative

regulations that apply to each officer's and employee's specific responsibilities. The duty

of compliance extends to all county operations, including, but not limited to, accounting,

purchasing, contracting, delivery of services, and required reporting.

.C¿J

COMPLAINT OF BIG O R.ELIEF, ET.AL


1

2

3

4

trJ

6

1

B

ô

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

I1

1B

l-9

20

2I

22

ZJ

24

25

26101. At all relevant times herein mentioned, Defendants, and each of them, undertook

the obligations and duties bestowed upon them as elected/appointed/employed agents of

the County of Kern. Defendants, and each of them, undertook an obligation to follow the

laws of the State of California, including the laws of the County of Kern, at all times

relevant hereto. Defendants, and each of them, were held in a position of trust by the

citizens of Kem County and Plaintifß. As such, Defendants, and each of them, owed a

duty of trust and care to the people of Kern County to uphold the laws of the State of

California and, more specifically, the laws that some of the Defendants herein enacted in

the course and scope of their respective positions.

T02. Defendants breached the duties of loyalty and care that was owed to Plaintiffs and

clients of Plaintiffs'business by ignoring the lawful application of K.C.O.C., $5.86 to

Plaintiffs. Defendants' publication of defamatory statements about Plaintifß for their

own personal and political gain furthered the breach of duties owed to Plaintiffs.

Defendants further breached the duties owed to Plaintiffs when Defendants permitted

and/or acted to "raid" Plaintiffs' business on August 22,2017, without any legal,

probable or otherwise, cause to do so.

103. Defendants conspired to and/or permitted false, malicious and defamatory

statements about Plaintiffs operating an "illegal" medical marijuana dispensary.

Defendants, and each of them, are responsible for the publication of the false/defamatory

statements that were published to the general public with the intent of causing Plaintifß

economic and personal injury while promoting each Defendants' personal and political

clout in Kern County. Further, Defendants, and each of them, conspired to commit

assault and battery upon Plaintiffs for the purpose of gaining personal and professional

standing in Kern County.



1

2

3

4

tr

6

oo

9

'1

10

11

72

13

74

15

16

I7

l-B

19

20

2L

22

24

25

21104. Defendants' unlawful actions, that amounted to a breach of their duties that were

owed to all people of Kern County and the State of California, including Plaintiffs, began

on or about August 10,2017 and continued until the date of filing Plaintiffs' Complaint

herein. Again, Defendants published a press release that informed the general public that

Plaintiffs' business, Big O Relief, was an "illegal" medical marijuana dispensary and that

the Kern County Board of Supervisors were going to close Plaintiffs' business.

105. The tnrth of the matter was that, at the time of Defendants' above-cited

publication and reiated acts, Big O Relief was operating legally in Kern County under the

laws of the State of California and the Kern County Ordinance Code. By their

misconduct and breach of any duty owed to the people of Kern County, Defendants

committed violations of California law, including but not limited to, California Health

and Safety Code, $11362.5, and Kern County Ordinance Code, $ 5.86, et al.

106. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants, and each

of them, negligently, carelessly, wantonly, recklessly and unlawfully raided Big O Relief

on or about August 22,2017, and failed to protect Plaintiffs from any such acts, thereby

resulting in injuries and damages to Plaintiffs.

107. Plaintiffs are informed and believe that Defendants, County of Kern, Kern

Sheriffls Department, Kern County Board of Supervisors, Kern County Code

Enforcement Department and all other Defendants, who will be specifically identified

once discovery is conducted in the matter, who participated or furthered the false and

malicious defamatory statements about Plaintiffs that were published in a local

newspaper. Said Defendants knew or reasonably should have known the published

defamatory statements about Plaintiffs by the author of said statements, Defendant Zack

Scrivner, were false and would cause injury to Plaintiffs without legal reason for doing



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

B

9

10

11

72

13

a4

15

t6

71

1B

19

20

2t

aa

a1

24

z3

2Bso. Said acts of Defendants, and each of them, thereby proximately caused the injuries

and damages described below.

108. These acts of the Defendants, and each of them, showed a complete and total

disregard for the standards required ofpublic officials, agents, representatives, and/or

employees of the County of Kern. Defendants', and each of their, above-cited acts,

caused Plaintiffs irreparable reputational and financial harm and denied Plaintiffs' rights

provided by the citizens of the State of Califomia under California Health and Safety

Code, $i 1362.5, and section 5.86, et al., of the Kern County Ordinance Code.

109. As a direct, legal and proximate result of the negligence of Defendants, and each

of them, as aforesaid, Plaintiffs have sustained severe, serious, and permanent injuries to

their personal and professional lives, all to their damage in a sum to be shown according

to proof and within the jurisdiction of the Superior Court.

SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Defamation: Libel Per Se and Slander)

I 10. Plaintiffs now re-allege each and every allegation as set forth above, and hereby


11 1. Plaintiffs are informed and believe and thereon allege that Defendants have

published or re-published false and defamatory statements regarding Plaintiffs and that

Defendants, and each of them, knew or should have known that such statements were

false, were about Plaintiffs, and were likely to cause significant harm to Plaintiffs at the

time they were made.

Il2. In one instance of libelous statements by Defendants, collectively through

association and individually as to Zackscrivner, a press release was published by the

Kern County Board of Supervisors on or about August 10,2017. The press release

2B



5

6

1

2

3

4

1

10

B

9

11

72

13

14

15

76

L7

1B

1ô

20

2!

22

24

z3

29specifically identified Big O Relief as an "illegal" medical marijuana dispensary

operating in Mojave, California. The press release advised readers of the release that the

actions of the Board of Supervisors was lawfül under section 5.86 of the Kern County

Ordinance Code. As provided above, the legality of Big O Reliefs operation has not been

decided on the merits by a court of law. The information provided in the Board of

Supervisors' press release was then re-published in a local newspaper to citizens of Kem

County. (See Exhibit'I'- Newspaper Articles regarding "Unlawful" medical

marijuana dispensaries, including Big O Retief.)

I i3. The allegations made by Supervisor Zack Scrivner and the Kern County Board of

Supervisors was libel per se because it clearly and unequivocally identified Plaintiff Big

O Relief, made statements about Big O Relief that said Big O Relief was an'oillegal'o

business (which has not been determined by a court of law), thereby causing people who

would normally do business at Big O Relief for their lawful medical needs to not do so

for fear of prosecution.

I14. In another instance of defamatory action taken by Defendants against Plaintiffs,

Defendant Kern County Planning Director Lorelei Oviatt clearly stated "there are no

legal dispensaries in Kern County because we [Kem County] have never permitted any

medical marijuana dispensary to operate in Kern Counfy." Ms. Oviatt's statement ignores

the fact that the State of Caiifornia permits medical marijuana dispensaries to operate in

California. A failure on the part of Kern County to grant an operator's permit for a lawful

business does not make that business unlawful.

I 15. Such statements by Director Oviatt at a public hearing of the Kern Cotrnty Board

of Supervisors is slanderous to Plaintifß because, when coupled with the press release

issued by Zack Scrivner and the Board of Supervisors that specifically named Plaintiff

-29COMPLAINT OT'BIG O RELIEF, ET AL


1

2

3

4

tr

6

'7

8

9

10

11

1_2

13

14

15

16

I'7

1B

19

20

27

22

24

25

30Big O Reiief as an "illegal" medical marijuana dispensary, people who heard the false

allegations of Ms. Oviatt would believe that Big O Relief was not a lawful business and

therefore avoid doing business with Big O Relief.

116. Director Oviatt identified the purpose of removing Big O Reiief from Kern

County when she stated that Kern County planned to allow similar medical marijuana

dispensaries that presently operate in Los Angeles, California, to reiocate to Kern

County. Statements made by Ms. Oviatt identify Defendants' and each of their, intent in

allowing the Los Angeles-based dispensaries to relocate to Kern County was because saic

dispensary had a history of causing other dispensaries to close by filing their own

nuisance actions against their competitors. According to Ms. Oviatt, the County would

save money by not having to pay for the legal actions to seek court approval to close the

dispensaries themselves. Given the statements of Director Oviatt, it is clear that

Defendants are willing to intentionally injure lawful Kern County businesses in order to

gain political and personal favor from the citizens of Kern County by suggesting that

they, Defendants, saved the County of Kern some money.

717. All of the above statements were made with malice and intent to injure Plaintiffs'

business and business reputation. Defendants have repeatedly made false and injurious

statements about Plaintiffs. In the above-cited instances of false and defamatory

information being disseminated to the public by Defendants the information published

was intended to injure Plaintiffs.

118. Pursuant to the laws of the State of California and the Kern County Ordinance

Code, Big O Relief was in existence and operating prior to the Moratorium that was

enacted on May 10,2016. (See K.C.O.C., $5.86.) Therefore, Plaintifß were not operatin¡

"illegally," at any time referenced herein.



1

2

5

6

'7

B

3

4

9

1-2

10

11

74

15

16

11

1B

19

20

27

22

24

atrZJ

31119. Doe and other Defendants, whose identities have not yet been specifically

identified, relied on the information given them by the Board of Supervisors, and other

named Defendants, that Plaintiffs were operating illegally and took action to stop

Plaintiffs' alleged unlawful activities. Specifically, said Defendants raided Big O Relief

on August 22,2A17, with guns drawn and the application of handcuffs to Plaintiffs, their

agents, representatives and employees. Plaintiffs will seek leave of Court to amend the

Complaint once the names of the Doe Defendants herein-mentioned are known.

120. As a result of such libelous and slanderous defamatory statements, Plaintiffs have

thereby suffered injury and damage to their personal and professional reputations and to

their persons in an amount to conform to proof at trial, but in no event less than the

jurisdictional minirrum of this Court.

12I. Because the defamatory statements were made with malice and intent to injure,

Plaintiffs are entitled to exemplary and punitive damages in a sum appropriate to punish

such Defendants.

EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Fraud/Int entíonal Mis repr es entation)

122. Plaintifß now re-allege each and every allegation as set forth above, and hereby


I23. On or about August I0,2017 and Septemb er 2,2017 , Defendants Kem County

Board of Supervisors and, specifically and individually, Zack Scrivner, Mick Gleason,

Leticia Perez,David Couch, Mike Maggard made the following representations to the

public via a press release that was re-published in a local newspaper:



1

2

3

4

5

6

1

ô

10

11

72

t-l

!4

15

I6

I1

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

za

32a. That the County of Kern was raiding all medical marijuana dispensaries that are

operating illegally in the County of Kern, which included Defendants' business, Big

O Relief;

b. That the actions taken against Big O Reiief and other medical marijuana

dispensaries was authorized pursuant to Kern County Ordinance Code section 5.86;

c. That Big O Relief was an illegai medical marijuana dispensary.

The representations made by said Defendants were in fact false. The true facts124.

were:

a. That Big O Relief had been in existence and operation prior to the enactment of

the Moratorium date of May'10,2016;

b. That Big O Relief was not operating illegally when it was physically raided by

Defendants' agents, representatives, and employees on August 22,2017;

c. That Defendants knew or had reason to know that Big O Relief was operating

legally, pursuant to California and Kern County laws;

c. That Defendants were targeting all medical marijuana dispensaries that were not

on a list compiled by Defendants. Defendants intentionally and/or negligently failed

to investigate the legality of their statements and actions regarding Big O Relief and

Plaintiffs and regarding the legality of the raids that were conducted on medical

marijuana dispensaries operating in Kern County, including Big O Relief.

d. That, had Defendants properly investigated the truth or falsity of Big O Relief s

status as a legal medical marijuana dispensary they would have discovered that it was

in fact in existence and operating prior to the May 10, 2016 Moratorium, supra.

e. That the above-cited press release, newspaper articles, subsequent raid on Big O

Reliel and statements made by Planning Director Oviatt provided support for certain



1

2

3

4

5

6

'7

B

9

10

11

72

13

I4

15

16

L'7

1B

19

20

21

z¿

23

24

atr

a2Defendants' political interests and ambitions by allegedly "protecting the citizens" of

Kem County from "illegal" medical marijuana dispensaries.

L25. When the above-identif,red Defendants, and each of them, made or caused these

representations to be published to the public and authorizedthe uniawful raid on Big O

Relief, they knew the statements about Big O Relief and Plaintiffs to be false and made

these representations with the intention to deceive and defraud the public at large and to

induce the public to act against Plaintiffs' personal and professional interests and to

believe Defendants' representations to fuither Defendants' personal and professional

þolitical) interests.

126. Reliance by the public in general on the above-identified Defendants'

representations was justified because Defendants held elected positions of trust and

authority in Kern County.

ï27. Further, no matter how much evidence was presented to Defendants, and each of

them collectively and individually, they refused to acknowledge the fact that Plaintiffs

were operating legally at the time Defendants made their false statements.

L28. As a proximate result of the fraudulent conduct of said Defendants, Big O Relief

was unlawfully raided by law enforcement officials, thereby causing great and

injury to Plaintiffs' financial, emotional, reputational, and personal security.

l2g. As a proximate result thereof, Plaintiffs have been damaged in an amount to be

proven attrial, but not less than the jurisdictional iimit of this Court.

i30. The aforementioned conduct was an intentional misrepresentation, deceit and/or

concealment of material facts known to Defendants, with the intention on the part of

Defendants of gaining personal and professional (political) favor from the constituents of

their respective public offices by thereby depriving Plaintiffs of property, legal rights or

22

COMPLAINT OF BIG O RELIEFO ET AL


1

2

3

4

5

6

B

9

't

10

11

72

13

74

15

76

1'7

1B

19

20

21,

22

23

24

25

leeallv. Dursuant to Califomia and Kêfn County laws;COMPLAINT OF'BIG O RELÍEF, ETAL

34otherwise causing injury, was despicable conduct that subjected Plaintiffs to cruel and

unjust hardship in conscious disregard of Plaintiffs' rights, so as to justify an award of

exemplary and punitive damages.

. NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(N egl igent Mis r ep r es ent a t ion)

13l. Plaintiffs now re-allege each and every allegation as set forth above, and hereby


I32. As cited above, Defendants, and each of them collectively and by way of

association/respondeat superior, made the following representations to the public via a

press release that was re-published in a local newspaper:

133

a. That the County of Kern was raiding all medical marijuana dispensaries that are

operating illegally in the County of Kern, which included Defendants' business, Big

O Relief;

b. That the actions taken against Big O Relief and other medical marijuana

dispensaries was authorized pursuant to Kern County Ordinance Code section 5.86;

c. That Big O Relief was an illegal medical marijuana dispensary.

The representations made by said Defendants were in fact false. The true facts

were:

a. That Big O Relief had been in existence and operation prior to the enactment of

the Moratorium date of May 10,2016;

b. That Big O Relief was not operating illegally when it was physically raided by

Defendants' agents, representatives, and empioyees on August 22,2017;

c. That Defendants knew or had reason to know that Big O Relief was operating


3

4

5

6

1

2

'1

10

Õ

9

11

1-2

l_J

74

15

76

t'l

LB

19

20

27

a')

23

24

{

25

35c. That Defendants were targeting all medical marijuana dispensaries that were not

on a list compiied by Defendants. Defendants intentionally andlor negligently failed

to investigate the legaiity of the raids on medical marijuana dispensaries operating in

Kern County, including Big O Relief.

d. That, had Defendants properly investigated the truth or falsity of Big O Relief s

status as a legal medical marijuana dispensary they would have discovered that it was

in fact in existence and operating prior to the May 10, 2016 Moratorium that

Defendants maliciously relied-upon when they issued the above-mentioned press

release and authorized the ensuing raid on Plaintiffs' business.

e. That the above-cited press releases and subsequent raid on Big O Relief provided

support for Kern County Board of Supervisors members' political interests and

ambitions by protecting the citizens of Kern County from "illegal" medical marijuana

dispensaries.

I34. When Defendants, and each of them, made or caused these representations to be

published to the public and authorized the unlawful raid on Big O Relief, they knew or

should have known them to be false and allowed these statements which resulted in

deceitful and fraudulent representations to the public atlarge, thereby resulting in the

inducement of the public to act in reliance on Defendants' representations so that

Plaintiffs' business would be closed.

135. Reliance by the public in general on Defendants' representations was justified

because Defendants held positions of hust and authority in Kern County.

136. Further, no matter how much evidence was presented to Defendants, they refused

to acknowledge the fact that Plaintiffs were operating legaily at the time Defendants

made their false statements about Plaintiffs.



1

2

J

4

É

6

1

B

9

T2

t0

11

i_3

t4

15

16

II

1B

19

20

2L

))

23

24

25

36137. As a proximate result of the fraudulent conduct of Defendants, Big O Relief was

unlawfully raided by law enforcement officials, thereby causing gteat and irreparabie

injury to Plaintiffs' financial, emotional, reputational, and personal security.

138. As a proximate result thereof, Plaintiffs have been damaged in an amount to be

proven attnal, but not less than the jurisdictional limit of this court.

139. The aforementioned-conduct was a negligent misrepresentation, deceit and/or

concealment of material facts known to Defendants, for the purpose or result of gaining

political favor from the constituents of their positions by thereby depriving Plaintiffs of

property,legal rights or otherwise causing injury, was despicable conduct that subjected

Plaintiffs to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of Plaintifß' rights, so as to

justify an award of exemplary and punitive damages.

TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Intentíonal Int erferenc e with Pro sp ective E c onomic Advantage)

140. Plaintifß now re-allege each and every allegation as set forth above, and hereby


I41. Defendants targeted Big O Reiief in order to stop patients/clients from

frequenting Plaintiffs' medical marijuana dispensary, thereby causing Plaintifß great

financial injury and damage to Plaintiffs' reputations in the community and to interfere

with business relationships that Defendants, and each of them, knew or should have

known that Plaintiffs had with existing and prospective clients.

142. Defendants knew, or had reason to know, that informing the citizens of Kern

County that Big O Relief was an "illegal" medical marijuana dispensary would directly

interfere with any existing and/or prospective economic advantages Big O Relief had or

would have with existing and potential medicai marijuana patients/clients.

CoMPLAINT oF Biå o RELIEF, ET AL


1

2

3

4

trJ

6

1

B

9

10

11

1_2

t-3

1-4

15

16

11

1B

19

20

27

zz

z-)

24

25

31143 . As a proximate result of the fraudulent/egtegious conduct of Defendants,

Plaintiffs have suffered great and irreparable financial injury. As a proximate result

thereof, Plaintiffs have been damaged in an amount to be proven attrial, but not iess than

the jurisdictional limit of this eourt.

144. The aforementioned-conduct was an intentional misrepresentation, deceit and/or

concealment, with the intention on the part of Defendants of denying Plaintiffs financial

gain by thereby depriving Plaintiffs of property, legal rights or otherwise, causing injury,

and was despicable conduct that subjected Plaintiffs to cruel and unjust hardship and

conscious disregard of Plaintiffs' rights, so as to justiff an award of exemplary and

punitive damages.

USE OF

(Negligent Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage)

ï45. Plaintiffs now re-ailege each and every allegation as set forth above, and hereby


146. Defendants, and each of them, as elected public officials and agents and

representatives of the County of Kern, owed a duty to Plaintifß to uphold the laws of the

State of California and the County of Kern in order to promote the safety, growth, and

prosperity of the citizens of the State of Caiifornia and the County of Kern.

147. On or about August 10,2017 and september 2,20L7, Defendants made

statements that the County of Kem was raiding all medical marijuana dispensaries that

are operating illegally in the County of Kern. Defendants included Big O Reliet which

was operating in Mojave, California, as one of the medical marijuana dispensaries that

were operating "illegally," and that the actions taken against Big O Relief and other



1

2

3

4

5

6

1

B

9

10

11

I2

13

I4

15

16

I1

1B

19

20

21_

a.)

23

24

20medical marijuana dispensaries was authorized pursuant to Kern County Ordinance Code

section 5.86.

I48. Defendants knew that Big O Relief was operating and in existence in Mojave,

California, at the time the Moratorium was enacted, supra.

149. Defendants targeted Big O Relief in order to stop patients/clients from

frequenting the medical marij uana dispensary.

150. Defendants knew, or had reason to know, that informing the citizens of Kern

County that Big O Relief w"as an "illegal" medical marijuana dispensary would directly

interfere with any existing clientele Big O Relief had or would have with existing and

potential medical marij uana patients/c lients.

151. Defendants breached the duty owed to Plaintifß when Defendants ignored

Califomia law and the Kern County Ordinance Code by intentionally attacking, as

described above, Plaintiffs' business operations, reputation, and financial stability.

152. As a proximate result of the fraudulent conduct of Defendants, and each of them,

Plaintiffs suffered great and irreparable fînancial injury. As a proximate result thereof,

Plaintiffs have been damaged in an amount to be proven atúal, but not less than the

jurisdictional limit of this Court.

153. The aforementioned-conduct of Defendants, and each of them, was an intentional

misrepresentation, deceit and/or concealment, with the intention on the part of

Defendants of denying Plaintiffs financial gain by thereby depriving Plaintiffs of

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

subjected to cruel and unjust hardship and conscious disregard of Plaintifß' dghts, so as

to justiff an award of exemplary and punitive damages.



1

2

a

4

5

6

't

I

9

10

11

a2

13

14

t-5

fo

1_'7

1B

19

20

a1

ZZ

ZJ

24

25

?oSE OF

(Conversion)

I54. Plaintiffs now re-allege each and every allegation as set forth above, and hereby


155. Plaintiffs are, and at all times relevant herein were, the owners/proprietors of or

entitied to immediately possess the property normally associated with operating Big O

Reliel a medical marijuana dispensary.

i56. Defendants wrongfully interfered with Plaintiffs'interests in the above-described

property by undertaking the following acts: On or about August 22,2017, Defendants

wrongfully took possession and control of products and merchandise legally belonging to

Plaintiffs.

157. While Defendants were in the possession of the converted goods, they aitered,

damaged and/or destroyed the items at issue.

158. Defendants conspired with other Defendants to convert the above-mentioned

property, so that the activities of one are attributable to all.

159. As a result of Defendants' acts of conversion, Plaintiffs have been damaged in the

sum or sums to be proven attnal, including all compensatory damages. Further,

Defendants are further entitled to compensation for the time and money expended in

pursuit of the property.

160. In doing the acts herein alleged, Defendants acted with oppression, fraud, malice,

and in conscious disregard of the rights of Plaintifß, and Plaintiffs are therefore entitled

to punitive damages according to proof at the time of trial.



1

2

3

4

B

9

5

6

1

10

11

I2

.LJ

14

15

I6

tt

18

19

20

ô1LI

L¿

23

24

25

40THIRTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Declaratory Reliefl



162. Big O Relief was in existence and operating prior to the effective date of the May

10,2016 Moratorium as provided in Kern County Ordinance Code, $5.86. The above-

cited documents and information indicate that Big O Relief was "in existence" and

"operating" prior to the May 10, 20i6 Moratorium and thus should not have been raided

under color of 1aw fKern County Ordinance Code, $5.86).

163. Further, Big O Relief was raided under color of law by Defendants prior to any

determination by a court of competent jurisdiction that Big O Relief was actually an

"illegal" medical marijuana dispensary.

164. An actual controversy has arisen and now exists between Plaintiffs and

Defendants because the County of Kern, through actions taken by members of the Board

of Supervisors and agents, representatives, and employees of the County of Kern (all

remaining Defendants), demonstrate their refusal to accept the fact that Big O Relief was

in fact in existence and operating prior to the May 10, 2016 cut-off date as imposed by

Rule 5.86 of the Kem County Ordinance Code.

165. A judicial declaration is necessary and appropriate at this time in order that

Plaintiffs may ascertain the rights and duties afforded them under the laws of the State of

California and the Kern County Ordinance Code.



1

2

3

4

5

6

1

I

9

10

11

IL

13

T4

15

16

I'7

10

19

20

aa

23

24

25

4LFOURTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(P r el im inary Inj unc t io n)

166. Plaintiffs now re-allege each and every aliegation as set forth above, and hereby


167. Plaintiffs are informed and thereupon beiieve Defendants will take fuither steps to

close Plaintiffs' legal business and take possession of the unique products, books,

income, and fumishings within the medical marijuana dispensary known as Big O Relief.

168. The Defendants' and each of their, wrongful conduct, unless and until enjoined

and restrained by order of this Court, will cause great and irreparable injury to Plaintiffs

by continuous slanderous/defamatory publications and by unlawfully confiscating

products and merchandize created by Plaintiffs and thereby denying Plaintiffs the benefit

of rightful and lawful ownership interest in said items and business.

169. As a proximate result of the Defendants', and each of their, continued wrongful

conduct, the full amount of damage is not now known to Plaintifß, and Plaintifß will

amend this Complaint to state this amount when it becomes known or upon proof of

damages.

\ilHEREFORE, pursuant to the statutes at 18 U.S.C. I96a@) and (c), Plaintiffs pray for

judgment against Defendants and DOES I through 1000, each of them as follows:

FOR THE FOLLOWING CAUSES OF ACTION

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION and Maintenance of an Interest in and Control of

an Enterprße Engaged in a Pattern of RacketeeringActivity:18 U.S.C. SS I96l(5), 1962(b)):

1. That this Court liberaliy construe the RICO laws and thereby find that all Defendants,

both jointly and severally, have acquired, maintained, and acted upon, both directly and

indirectly, an interest in and./or control of a RICO enterprise of persons and of other individuals

4tCOMPLAINT OF'BIG O RELIEF, ET AL


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

B

9

l_0

11

72

13

1-4

15

16

]-'l

1B

19

20

27

22

23

24

ôÊ¿J

who were associated in fact, all of whom engaged in, and whose activities did affect, the lawful42

operation of Plaintiffs'business venture in violation of i8 U.S.C. 1962(b).

2. That ail Defendants and all their directors, offrcers, employees, agents, servants and all

other persons in active concert or in participation with them, be enjoined temporarily during

pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from acquiring or maintaining, whether

directly or indirectly, any interest in or control of any RICO enterprise of persons, or of other

individuals associated in fact, who are engaged in, or whose activities do affect the lawful

operation of Plaintiffs' business venture.

3. That all Defendants and all of their directors, ofÍicers, employees, agents, servants and

all other persons in active concert or in participation with them, be enjoined temporarily during

pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from committing any more predicate acts in

furtherance of the RICO enterprise alleged in this Complaint.

4.Thatall Defendants be required to account for all gains, profits, and advantages

derived from their several acts of racketeering activity in violation of 18 U.S.C.1962(b) and,

from all other violation(s) of applicable State and federal law(s).

5. That judgment be entered for Plaintiffs and against all Defendants for Plaintiffs' actual

damages, and for any gains, profits, or advantages attributable to all violations of 18 U.S.C.

1962(b), according to the best available proof.

6. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiffs treble (triple) damages, under authority of 18

U.S.C. 1964(c), for any gains, profits, or advantages attributable to all violations of 18 U.S.C.

T962(b), according to the best available proof.

7.That all Defendants pay to Plaintifß all damages sustained by Plaintifß in

consequence of Defendants' several violations of 18 U.S.C. 1962(b), according to the best

available proof.



1

2

3

4

5

6

1

B

9

10

11

12

13

T4

15

16

T1

1B

1ô

20

27

22

23

24

25

8. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiffs his costs of the iawsuit incurred herein including,43

but not limited to, all necessary research, all non-judicial enforcement and all reasonable

counsel's fees, at a minimum of $250.00 per hour worked.

9. That ail damages caused by all Defendants, and all gains, profits, and advantages

derived by all Defendants, from their severai acts of racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C.

1962(b) and from ali other violation(s) of applicable State and federal law(s), be deemed to be

held in constructive trust, for the benefit of Piaintiffs, their heirs and assigns.

10. That Plaintiffs have such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper,

under the circumstances of this action.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION: (Conduct and Participation in a HICO Enterprise through a

Pattern of RacketeeringActivity:18 U.S.C. SS 1961(5), 1962(c)):

1. That this Court liberally construe the RICO laws and thereby find that all Defendants

have associated with a RICO enterprise of persons and of other individuals who were

associated in fact, all of whom did engage in, and whose activities did affect, the iawful

operation of Plaintiffs' business venture in violation of the RICO law at 18 U.S.C.

t962(c).


have conducted and/or participated, directly or indirectly, in the affairs of said RICO

enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of the zuCO laws at 18

U.S.C. $$ 1961(5) ("pattern" defined) and 1962(c) supra.

3. That all Defendants and all of their directors, officers, employees, agents, servants and all

other persons in active concert or in participation with them, be enjoined temporarily

during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from associating with any



1

2

3

4

5

6

1

B

9

10

11

a2

13

L4

15

I6

71

tofo

1ô

20

21

22

¿J

24

ôÉl.-t

44RICO enterprise of persons, or of other individuals associated infact, who do engage in,

or whose activities do affect, the lawfui operation of Plaintiffs' business venfure.



during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from conducting or

participating, either directly or indirectly, in the conduct of the affairs of any RICO

enterprise through a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of the zuCO laws at 18

U.S.C. $$ 1961(5) and.l962(c), supra.



during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from committing any more

predicate acts in furtherance of the RICO enterprise alleged in COUNT TWO, supra.

6. That all Defendants be required to account for all gains, profits, and advantages derived

from their several acts of racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C.1962(c), supra, and from

all other violation(s) of applicable State and federal law(s).

7. That judgment be entered for Plaintiff and against all Defendants for Plaintifls actual

damages, and for any gains, profits, or advantages attributable to all violations of 18

U.S.C. 1962(c), supra, according to the best available proof.

8. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiff treble (triple) damages, under autholity of 18 U.S.C.

1964(c), for any gains, profits, or advantages attributable to all violations of 18 U.S.C.

1962(c), supra, according to the best available proof.

9. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiff all damages sustained by Plaintiff in consequence of

Defendants' several violations of i8 U.S.C. T962(c), supra, according to the best

available proof.



1

2

3

4

5

6

't

B

o

10

11

72

13

74

15

16

L1

1B

19

20

21

22

24

.E

4510. That all Defendants pay to Plaintifß costs of the lawsuit incurred herein including, but

not limited to, all necessary research, all non-judicial enforcement and all reasonable

counsei's fees, at a minimum of $250.00 per hour worked (Plaintiff s standard

professionalrate at start ofthis action).

1i. That all damages caused by all Defendants, and all gains, profits, and advantages derived

by all Defendants, from their several acts of racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C.

1962(c), supra, and from all other violation(s) of applicable State and federal law(s), be

deemed to be held in constructive trust, for the benefit of Plaintiffs, their heirs and

asstgns.


under the full range of relevant circumstances which have occasioned the instant action.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION: (Conspiracy to Engage in a Pqttern of Racketeering Activity:

18 U.S.C. SS 1961(s), re62(d)):


have conspired to acquire and maintain an interest in, and/or conspired to acquire and

maintain control of, a RICO enterprise engaged in a pattem of racketeering activity in

violation of I 8 U.S.C. $ $ 1 96 1 (5), 1962{b) and (d), supra.


have conspired to conduct and participate in said RICO enterprise through a pattem of

racketeering activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. $$ 1961(5), L962(c) and (d), supra.

3. That all Defendants and all their directors, officers, employees, agents, servants and all


during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from conspiring to acquire or



1

2

3

4

5

6

1

9

10

11

1_2

IJ

14

15

16

71

1B

19

20

27

22

23

24

uq

46maintain an interest in, or control of, any RICO enterprise that engages in a pattern of

racketeering activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. $$ 1961(5), 1962(b) and (d), supra.

4. That ail Defendants and all their directors, officers, employees, agents, servants and all


during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from conspiring to conduct,

participate in, or benefit in any manner from any zuCO enterprise tbrough a pattern of

racketeering activity in violation of 18 U.S.C. $$ 1961(5),1962(c) and (d), supra.

5. That all Defendants and all their directors, officers, employees, agents, servants and all


during pendency of this action, and permanently thereafter, from committing any more

predicate acts in furtherance of the RICO enterprise alleged in COUNT THREE supra.

6. That ail Defendants be required to account for all gains, profits, and advantages derived

from their several acts of racketeering in violation of l8 U.S.C. 1962(d), supra, and from

all other violation(s) of applicable State and federal law(s).

7. That judgment be entered for Plaintiff and against all Defendants for Plaintiffs' actual

damages, and for any gains, profits, or advantages attributable to all violations of 18

U.S.C. I962(d), supra, according to the best available proof.

8. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiffs treble (triple) damages, under authority of 18 U.S.C.

T964(c), for any gains, profits, or advantages attributable to all violations of 18 U.S.C.

1962(d), supra, according to the best available proof.

9. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiffs all damages sustained by Plaintiffs in consequence

of Defendants' several violations of 18 U.S.C. 1962(d), supra, according to the best

available proof.

46COMPLAINT OF'BIG O R.ELIEF, ET AL


1

2

3

4

5

6

1

9

1"2

10

11

l-3

t4

15

I6

T1

1B

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

10. That ail Defendants pay to Plaintiffs costs of the lawsuit incurred herein including, but41

not limited to, all necessary research, all non-judicial enforcement, and all reasonable

counsel's fees, at a minimum of $250.00 per hour worked (Plaintiffls attorney's standard

professionalrute at start of this action).

11. That all damages caused by all Defendants, and all gains, profits, and advantages derived

by all Defendants, from their several acts of racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C.

1962(d), supra, and from all other violation(s) of applicable State and federal law(s), be

deemed to be held in constructive trust, for the benefit of Plaintiffs, their heirs and

assigns.

T2. That Plaintiffs have such other and fu*her relief as this Court deems just and proper,

under the fulIrange of relevant circumstances which have occasioned the instant action.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Assault):

1. That this Court liberally construe the RICO laws and thereby find that all Defendants,


indirectly, an interest in and/or control of a RICO enterprise of persons and of other

individuals who were associated in fact, all of whom engaged in, and whose activities

were in furtherance of Defendants' assault upon Plaintifß

2. That all Defendants, individually and as parties to a conspiracy, pay to Plaintiffs all

damages sustained by Plaintiffs in consequence of Defendants', individually and as

parties to a conspiracy, several acts of assault - including Defendants' unlawful and

unwarranted acts of aiming firearms at Plaintiffs and placing Plaintifß in handcuffs -supra, according to the best available proof. This prayer includes a demand for attorney's

fees and costs of suit. California Code of Civil Procedure $1021 allows for the recovery

of attomey's fees where provided forby statuts. Penal Code $1202.4 authorízes a victim

4'7



1

2

3

4

5

6

1

B

ô

10

11

!¿

13

74

15

16

77

18

19

20

27

zz

z3

24

25

4Bof a crime to receive "actual and reasonable attomey's fees and other costs of collection"

of restitution.

3. That Plaintiffs have such other and firrther relief as this Court deems just and proper,

under the fulI range of relevant circumstances which have occasioned the instant action.

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Battery):

l. That this Court liberally construe the RICO laws and thereby find that all Defendants,


indirectly, an interest in and,/or control of a RICO enterprise of persons and of other


were in furtherance of Defendants' battery upon Plaintiffs.

2. That all Defendants, individually and as parties to a conspiracy) pay to Plaintiffs all

damages sustained by Plaintifß in consequence of Defendants', individually and as

parties to a conspiracy, several acts of battery - including Defendants unlawful and

unwarranted acts of aiming firearms at Plaintiffs and placing Plaintiffs in handcuffs -supra, according to the best available proof. This prayer includes a demand for attomey's

fees and costs of suit. California Code of Civil Procedure $ 1021 allows for the recovery

of attorney's fees where provided for by statute. Penal Code $1202.4 authorizes a victim

of a crime to receive "actual and reasonable attorney's fees and other costs of collection"

of restitution.


under the fullrange of relevant circumstances which have occasioned the instant action.

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION (ltlegligence):


both jointly and severally, have acquired, maint¿ined, and acted upon, both directly and

48COMPLA.INT OF'BIG O RELIEF, ET AL


1

2

a

4

5

6

'7

9

10

11

72

13

L4

15

16

II

1B

19

20

2I

22

23

24

z5

49indirectly, an interest in andlor control of a RICO enterprise of persons and of other


were in furtherance of Defendants' negligent actions.

2. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiffs all damages sustained by Plaintiffs in consequence

of Defendants' several negligent actions, supra, according to the best available proof,

pursuant to California Civil Code, $3333 - Compensatory Damages.

3. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiffs all damages resulting in Emotional Distress (Erlich

v. Menezes, 2I Cal. 4th 543,87 Cal. Rptr. 2d 886, 98i P.2d 978 (1999) (Recovery is

available if emotional distress arises out of defendant's breach of some other legal duty

and is proximately caused by breach of that independent duty; even then, with rare

exceptions, that breach of duty must threaten physical injury, not simply damage to

property or financial interests.) Here, Defendants' breach of their duties to adhere to the

laws of the State of California and of Kern County, supra, resulted in emotional distress

of Plaintiffs, and each of them, by Plaintiffs having guns pointed at their faces and

handcuffs placed on their arms in addition to the property damage Defendants inflicted

on Plaintiffs.



SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Libel/Slander):





were in furtherance of Defendants' libelous and slanderous statements upon Plaintiffs



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

B

9

10

11

I2

13

74

15

1_6

I'7

1B

19

20

aa

z5

24

25

2. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiffs compensatory damages sustained by Plaintiffs in50

consequence of Defendants' libelous actions, supra, according to the best available proof,

pursuant to California Civil Code, $$ a8a(aXa) and3333 - Compensatory Damages.

3. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiffs special damages sustained by Plaintiffs in

consequence of Defendants' libelous actions, supra, according to the best available

proof, pursuant to California Civil Code, $$ a8a( )@) - Special Damages.

4. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiffs punitive damages for Defendants', and each of

their, egregious acts, supra, including Defendants' libeious actions, supra, pursuant to

California Civil Code, $$ a8a(a)(c), (d), and3294 - Punitive Damages.

5. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiffs nominal damages for Defendants', and each of

their, egregious acts, supra, including Defendants' libelous actions, supra. (Hearne v. De

Youns, 132CaI.357,360,64P.576 (1901);Tritonlns.Underwriters.Inc.v.National

Chiropractic Ins. Co. ,232 CaI. App.2d 829,833, 43 Cal. Rptr. 504, 506 (1965).)


under the fulIrange of relevant circumstances which have occasioned the instant action.

EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION (F r aud/In t en ti o n a I Mís r ep r e s ent a t i o n):

i. That this Court liberally construe the RICO laws and thereby find that all Defendants,




were in furtherance of Defendants' commission of fraud/intentional misrepresentation.

2. That all Defendants pay to Plaintiffs damages for Defendants', and each of their,

egregious acts, supra, including "for any damage which he thereby suffers." CAL. CIV.

coDE $1709.

3. Compensatory Damages (Cal. Civ. Code $$1709, 1333; Salahutdin v. Valley of

California.lnc.,24 CaL App.4th 555,567-68,29 Cal. Rptr.2d 463 (1994); see Alliance

Morteage Co. v. Rothwell, i0 Cal. 4th 1226,l24A-41,44 Cal. Rptr. 2d 352 (1995)



1

2

3

4

5

6

1

9

10

11

t2

13

t4

15

16

I1

1B

19

20

21_

)J

23

24

ôtr¿J

51(quoting Kenlv v. Ukegawa, 16 CaL App. 4th 49, 53, 19 Cal. Rph. 2d 77I (1993)

(includes out-oÊpocket and benefit of the bargain darrages)).

4. ConsequentialDamages (S1qutJ-Turne.y,22Cal.3d718,725,l5A Cal. Rptr.637

(1978) (Civil Code $3343 does not require plaintiff to show "out-oÊpocket" loss to be

entitled to consequential or additional damages of the type prescribed by the statute)).

5. Emotional Distress Damages (O'ttara v. Westem Swe ,75 Cal. App. 3d

798,804-06,142 Cal. Rptr. 487 (1977)).

6. Injunctive Relief (Cal. Civ. Code $$1709, 1710 (injured plaintiff entitied to recover for

any and all detriment proximately caused by the misrepresentation)).

7. Prejudgment Interest on Damages (Cal. Civ. Code $3288; Alliance Mortgage Company

v. Rothwell, 10 Cal. 4th1226,1241,44 Cal. Rptr. 2d352 (1995) (quoting Nordahl v

Department of Real Estate, 48 Cal. App. 3d 657,665, I2l Cal. Rptr. 794 (1975) fiury

has discretion to award prejudgment interest on plaintiff s loss from the time plaintiff

parted with the money or property on the basis of the defendant's fraud)); see also Smith

v. Rickards, 149 CaL App. 2d 648,654,308 P.2d 758 (1957).

8. Punitive Damages (Cal. Civ. Code $3294(a) (punitive damages may be recovered where

fraud is proven by "clear and convincing" evidence)). Punitive damages are not limited

to affirmative misrepresentations. Intentional concealment of material fact provides an

evidentiary basis upon which punitive damages may be awarded. Cal. Civ. Code

$32e4(bx3).



NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Neglígent Misrepresentation):


both jointly and severally, have acquired, maintained, and acted upon? both directly and

indirectly, an interest in and./or control of a RICO enterprise of persons and of other


were in furtherance of Defendants' negligent misrepresentation.

2. Compensatory Damages (Cal. Civ. Code $3343; Branch v. HomeFed Bank, 6 Cal. App.

4th 7e3,7e8, 8 Cal. RgtrJdl82 çf åfrJIå o R-EL'EF, Er AL


1

2

3

4

5

6

1

B

9

10

11

12

12rJ

r4

15

16

r'7

10fo

19

20

27

22

t?

24

1tr

3. That Plaintiffs have such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper,52

under the fulI range of relevant circumstances which have occasioned the instant action.

TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Intentional Interference with Prospective Economic

Advantage):

l. That this Court liberally construe the RICO laws and thereby find that all Defendants,




did affect the lawful operation of Plaintifß' business by intentionally interfering with

existing and prospective economic advantages belonging to Plaintiffs.

2. Injunction (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code $526; Uptown Enters. v. Strand, 195 CaL App.2d 45,

51, 15 Cal. Rptr. 486 (1961).

3. Economic Loss (Cal. Civ. Code $3333 (includes lost profits and expenses incurred and

all detriment proximately caused); Elsbach v. Mulligan, 58 Cal. App. 2d 354,366-67,

136P.2d651 (1943) (also includes any damage to business reputation); Duff v.

Enqelbers, 237 Cal. App. 2d 505,508, 47 Cal. Rptr. 114 (1965).

4. Punitive Damages (Cal. Civ. Code $3294).



ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Negligent Intederencewith Prospectíve Economíc

Advantage):





did affect, the lawful operation of Plaintiffs' business thereby negligently interfering

with existing and prospective economic advantages belonging to Piaintiffs

2. Economic Damages, Including Lost Profits (Ott v. Alfa-LavalAgric.. tnc., 31 Cal. App.

4th 1439,1448,1450,37 CaL Rprr. 790, 796,798 (1995); Baldwin v. Marina cit),

Props..Inc.,7e cat. oca^?$"rf,rxÉrf ;ffis**flJt,lq6À414,4rs (ie78);J'Aire corp.


1

2

3

4

5

6

1

B

9

10

11

72

13

1"4

15

16

L1

1B

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

v. Gregory, 24 CaL.3d799,806, 808, 157 CaI. Rptr. 407 (1979) (economic damages53

may be recovered despite the absence of physical injury or properfy damage)).

3. Damages for Physical Injury or Injury to Personal or Real Property (Ott v. Alfa-Lavai

Aeric.. Inc., 31 Cal. App. 4th 1439, 1450,37 CaL Rptr. 790, 798 (1995); Cal. Civ. Proc.

Code $3333).

4. lnjunctive Relief (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code $526).



TWELVTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Conversion):

L That this Court liberally construe the RICO laws and thereby find that all Defendants,


indirectly, an interest in and/or controi of a RICO enterprise of persons and of other


did affect, the lawful operation of Plaintifß' business thereby intentionally interfering

with property and income belonging to Plaintifß so as to justify damages.

2. As a result of Defendants' acts of conversion, Plaintiffs have been damaged in the sum

or sums to be proven at trial, including all compensatory damages. (Cal. Civ. Code

$3336) In re Brian S., 130 Cal. App. 3d 523,53A,181 Cal. Rptr. 778 (1982) citing

Mvers v. Stephens ,233 Cal. App. 2d 104, 1 16,43 Cal. Rptr. 420 (1965). Under Cal.

Civ. Code $3336, the appropriate measure of damages is f,rst the value of the property at

the time of the conversion, plus interest.

Alternatively, Plaintiffs are entitled to damages and repossession of the converted

property and will seek its election of remedies at trial.

3. Plaintiffs are further entitled to repossession of the converted property (Cal. Civ. Code

$$3380, 3379; Cal. Civ. Pro. Code $$627, 667) Alistate Leasing Corp. v. Smith, 238

Cal. App. 2d 128,132,47 Cal. Rptr. 636 (i965) (remedies include specific recovery of

property or its present value, plus damages for retention; alternatively, plaintiff may seek

Cal. Civ. Code $3336 damages).

4. As a result of Defendants' acts of conversion, Plaintiffs hereby pray for compensation

for the time and moneð elfenff$+"æUfÊ',."[gl",fË?B{Ji


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

I

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

L7

1B

19

20

2t

22

23

24

¿5

5 . As a result of Defendants' acts of conversion, Plaintiffs hereby pray for punitive and54

exemplary damages. (In re Brian S., 130 Cal. App. 3d 523,530,181 Cal. Rptr. 778

(1e82)).

6. As a result of Defendants' acts of conversion, Plaintifß hereby pray for Emotional

Distress damages (Gonzales v. Personai Storage. Inc., 56 Cal. App. 4th 464,475 - 479,

65 Cal. Rptr. 2d 473 (1997) (if conversion of property is legal cause of harm to

plaintiff s feelings, damages may be allowable for the harm, as when defendant

intentionally deprives plaintiff of essential household furniture, which humiliates

plaintiff, a result that defendant should haverealized would follow).

7 . As a result of Defendants' acts of conversion, Plaintiffs hereby pray for Injunctive Relief

(Cal. Code Civ. Pro. $$525 et seq.). Preliminary injunction generally not proper method

to obtain possession of personal property. (Yqqrhigg_v. Gfgene, I39 Cal. App. 3d 989,

997-998,189 Cal.Rptr. 132 (1983). However, injunction is proper method to prevent

dissipation of wrongfully obtained res. Heckmann v. Ahmanson, 168 Cal.App.3d 119,

136,214 Cal. Rptr. 177 Q985).

8. That Plaintifß have such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper,


THIRTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Declararory Reliefl:

1. Plaintifß hereby request a judiciai declaration at this time in order that Plaintifß may

ascertain the rights and duties afforded them under the laws of the State of California and

the Kern County Ordinance Code.

FOURTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Preliminary Injunction):

1. Plaintiffs hereby pray that Defendants', and each of their, wrongful conduct, be enjoined

and restrained by order of this Court to prevent great and irreparable injury to Plaintiffs

by continuous libelous/defamatory publications and by the unlawful conversion of

Plaintiffs' products and merchandize.



1

2

3

4

5

6

1

B

9

10

11

t2

13

1-4

15

l- c)

71

1B

\9

20

2L

¿L

z-)

24

55

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: October Il,2Al7 LA\il OFFICES OF ABRAHAM A. LABBAD

ABRAHAM A. LABBAD,Limited Scope Attorney for PlaintiffsBig O Reliet Doo H. Yoon, Eunice Yoon, andAlvaro Ordaz



1

2

3

4

5

6

7

E

I

L2

I i,

11

14

AETJ

16

1_'l

to

l.v

¿v

LL

22

23

LÀIV OTFICES OF ABRÅHAM A. L,{88,4.ÐAbr¿harn Ä" Labbad, Esq. {CA Bar No": 27lî,4g)1?50 V/alnut Sr., Unit lZzPasadena, CA 91 106Office: (818) 253-1529Fax: {818} 53t-9236Specially Âppearing ard Limifecl ScopeAttorncys for Plaintiffs:

B¡C O RELIËF, ËTAL

BIG O RËIIEF, a California Non-profitMutual Benefit Corporation, DOO H. YOON,an individual, EUNICË S. YOON, anindividual, and.Alvaro Ordaz, an individual,

Plaiatift's,

vs.

CûLTNTY OF KERN, apolirical subdivisionof the State of California; GREG FENTON,individually and as Kem County Buildinglnspector, KÐRN COUNTY BOARD OFSUPERVISORS, collectively; LETICIAPERE-Z, individually and as Kern CountySupervisor; MICK GLEASON, individuallyand as Kem County Supervisor; DAVIDCOUCFI, individually and as Kem CountySupewisor; MIKE MACGARD, individuallyand a¡ Kern County Supervisor; ZACKSCRIIfNER, individually and as Kem CountySupervisor, KEtuN COUNTY PUBLICWORKS _ CODE COMPLIANCEDIVISION, collectively; KERN COUNTYSIIER"IFF' S DÐPARTMENT, collectively;DONNY YOUNGBLOOD, individually andas Kem Corurty Sheriff; KERN COUNTYDISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFiCE,collectively; LISA GREEN, individually andas Kem County District Attorney; KERNCOLTNTY COUNSEL'S OFFICE,collectively; MARK L. NATIONS,individually and as Kern County Counsel;It/


10112t201710:48 AM

Kern County Superior Court

Terry McNallyBy Vanessa Cofield, Deput

SUPERIOR COURT OT'THE STATE ÛF CÁ.I.IFORNI.4'

CûUNTY OF KERN {METROPOLTTAN DTVTSTON)

)))j))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

Case No.: BCV-174A2394

A'I-TACHMENTS TO COMPLAINTFOR DECLARATORY ANDTNJUNCTryE RELIEF AND DAMAGESFROM RACKETEERING,CONSP1RACY TO ENTA.GE iN APATTERN OF RACKETEERING.A.C]]VITY, AND RËLATED C^A.USESOF ACTTON

J.

2\

ATTACHMENT OF EXHIBITS TO COMPLAINT OF BIG O RELTEF., ET AL

ry


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

I

I

'1 ^

21

1t

L3

t4

1f,LJ

16

1?

1A

19

an

2\

¿¿

23

24

aÉ

JAMES BRENNAN, individuaily and aspeputy Kem L-'ounty Corursel; CHAR.LES F.COLLINS, índividually and as Chief DeputyKern Cou¡rty Counsel; GURUIOIHA S"

KI-IALSA, individually and as Chief DeputyCounty Counsel; KËRN COLTNTY FìREDEPARTMENT, collectively; KERNCOLNTY PLANNTNG AND NATURALRËSOURCES DEPARTMENT, collecriveiy;LORELËI OVIATT, individually and asDirector; KERN COUNTY DEPARTMENTOF AGRiCULTURE ANDMËASUREMENT STANDARDS,ccllectively ; CLENN FANKHAUSER,individually and as Conrmissioner; KERNCOIINTY PUBLIC HE¿\LTHÐEP¡,.RTh{ENT, collectively; AL ROJAS,individually and as Kern CouÍy CodeCompliance Ðivision Supervisor; and DOES1 Through l0û0, Inclusive,

(continued)

Defenda¡ts.

TO EACH DEFENÐANT IN THË ABOVE-REFEREì{CED MATTER, AND TO THËIR

ATTORNEY OF RECORD: PLAINTIFFS HEREBY A.TTACI{ THÐ FOLLOWING

EXHIBITS TÛ THEIR COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY ANÐ INJUNCTruN RELIEF

ANÐ DAMAGES FROM RACKETEERING, CONSPIRACY TO ENGAGE IN A FATTERì\I

OF RACKË]EERING IIC.|IVITY, AND RELATED CAUSE$ OF ACTION, that is fîIed

herewith.

Respeetfully submitted,

Dated: October 11,2017 LAMFFICES OF ABRAH.dM A. LABBAD

ABRAHA.M A. LABBAD,Limited Scope Attorney for PlaintiffsBig O Reiief, Doo H. Yoon, Eunice Yoon, and

Alrpro Ordaz

,{TTÀCHMENT OF ËXHIBITS TO COMPLÁINT OF BIG O RELIEF, ET AL

i))i)))))))))))))))))))))


Êxhibit n


9t312ü17

AUCUST 10, Z0t7fOR IMMÊDIATE RETEÂsE

Press Rele¿se iorn Supervisor Zack $crivner - Maijuana Dispensaries - Mojave Desert Nev,¡s : News

Z¡rt:x St;tilVN i:11

PRE55 ßELEASË

COUNTY CRACKDOWÍ\¡ ON ITLEGAL MEDICAL MARIJUANA DISPEf.¡SARIES

A l(ern County Enfercement Îa¡k Forceconrr¡encetl âct¡ûn todåy to anforce the €oontlt'5 rnor¡ttorh¡rn

ûn thrce lllegal medical marljuana dlrpensaríer ¡* tàê c¡r¡munity of Rosamond. The tñret dlsp:nsrr'les. Green

Mlfe Collective at 2611 Oiañsnd Street, H{hway ßellef Medic¡l at ?929 Slerra Hlghwãy añd 5 Gi¿m¿ Stap at

2949 Sierra Highway. were ôp€råtìag ille¿ally-

Tå{¡ tnforcbm€nt Tãsl Foree action cor¡mañras an l*itl¿tlve to clo¡e all illega} medlcal marfluana

drspemari* that bagan operatton ¡fur the May 10, 1016 Moratorium o¡t¿cttd by üte BQard of Supervlgofs'

fhe Ênforcem€nt Tesk Forcq is a collabor¡tlve effort between Kern County Publlc Warlse - Côde

Cornpliance tlvisiorr, Kefl Cou.rty Sberiffs Departme*t. D¡slr¡cl Attorn€y¡ County Counrcl, Fíre Ðepartrnent,

P¡rnning arld Natural ftsto$rces, ÐeFðrtmer¡t of A8riculture and Measurer$ênt Stsnd¡rds. ¡nd Fubltc Health'

The Ê¡forcement Têam rei¿ed sever¡l thou¡and dsllars ir¡ unsafe edlble praduct of unknown odgin. alivrll ¡: tllegal blth salts. ln ôddat¡oo, ¡everal fiotlcûs of violation were lssued.

Medkal marijuana dlrpensaries fbat opêrate withost regard for roning" lire. butlding and health codes

endanger c¡rrnmunlties. llfegal dispensaries often create a cllmate of law{e¡sne¡¡ and have defimeo¡alimpacts on <ommunitfes with increasod ïr¡stances ol robberíes, shootings, and even one kldnapptng and

tort$rÈ €i'sc connected with a dlspensery ln 2O15"

"Thû âcliofìs laken tqday send a Strong mesgage to lhts€ operating illegal dispens¡rles thnt th?ir dôyj

¡n l(em County er€ nuûìbered," s¡ld Zack Scrivner, Second Dist.ict Supervlsar, who accompanlad the

Enfsrcement T¡sh Êorce roday.

åäu

suþ€ßvrsoR zAct( scetvNtftÇONTACT: Àt ßOrAS, COOE CO¡/IPLIANCE SUPTRVISOR t66f l 862"8654

htip:/Á*wvr'.desertnews.com/newslpdt-b71ca4e2'7e1f'J1e7'8ad0.cb3d'l e5ebeed.htmlEXHIBIT

'4 Pag. 1

3t4


Exhlblt B


7rþ.r.çlttn4/j,t',ataÚt

&Et.trÒl FË: Pæt ¡¡Zð;|l Oßaoñ 6

rNRdtî.ÍÚt?'le'g¡¿Gt¡rÊafitl'€

,iKERN COUNTY CODE COMRLIANCE DIVISION

A Fartnership to Promote Health and Safety, anO to þr*ain Gommunity Standards

NOTICË OF VIOLATI,9N'' 1" -

KEFfìf CO¿r,V?-fç o Ð E caM P Lr ArúcE Ðt vtstoÂ¡P U B Ll ç I,YORKS Ð E P ARTIü E N TCRÁ'Ê IÌII. POPE, P.8., ÐIRECTOR

åo;t¡rrsrnÃno¡, a Ágcot ¡rrr¡rGðPERâ NÕâ'S & N N NTEN AN C EAU'LD"''G ß DEYFTOP'$ENT

TREËTBAKERSFIELD, CA

LIST

EXHIBIT Ê Page 1 ol 4Scanned by CamScanner

RE: 1ô9å0-t-iighwav 14. Moiave APN: ?3â:t60-25ÂDDRË3S

TO OWNER åNÞ RESPONSISLE PARTIES LISTED OI'¡ ATT

wo# ppri6

Acccrding to the records mainlained by the Kern ÇountY Assassor's lrou are the cunent

o\À/ner and/or have been detennined to be a responsible party for lhe located al the

above location. As suçh, it is your resPonslbllþOrdinance Çode. Ân

to maintain this propertY free from anY

violations of the Kern CountY inspeclion has been conducied on August

2A17, ând it has been detennined that the ProperlY is ln violation sf Ksm County

Õdinance Code ChaPter 5.85, br Cultivation of Medical Marijuana . in tf¡at twelve

{1 ?} rnedlcal rnarijuana Planls are being cultivated on the pteperly,

%æ'?fi{3

PLEASE îAKE FURTHER NOTTCE that failure to comply wilh this Notiæ of violation may

resurt in the issuance "rãn

order of abatement, or other action or proceeding pursuant to the

;ä;ï;;tv or¿¡nance Co¿s. Addiilonally, th.g pst of implernonling an order of abatement

will became your p"r*nãiãlt6"tion.and/ór will be assessed against the property' Further'

any abatement oxpensã ¡*út"d by lhe County can be foreclosed upoa or made a lax lien to

be collected as a p'd;rty t"i. voi r,"o" the dght lo abate the aforementioned violation in

accordance with rhis Notice of vioration at your own e¡pense within five (5) caþndar dap of

the daþ on this not¡*.'gårrr ã"y ãrviolrtion is deemed s separate and distinct violation.


qNstice ofDate:Pagn 2

NOTIGË I$ HERËBYEoard of Supervisors in

Code ard aæ nst taking adeguatereærde.d wilh

prohiÞit f¡e sala lhe sublectbnt¡ght inåo compllance cosþ have

Csde Compllánce Dhtlsion

Aüaúnerit¡¡: t'¡oüñcafon ljst€FlAR¡sC:lAlìl{OV.doq

lssuance of this Notlce, pefiâlty shall

oa p€ß¡ons ls whom was issued shall

to the tountY. shalt not tollpenalties. A haarhgretuming it to *re

tlF V¡OLATlgtrt, if afrar the

of &e Keffi

E:XH|BIT :B Page 2 at 4Scanned by CamScanner

that you have awlth the srdinance

hearing before thea hearlng ie not


Õ

lrlolice of Heari*gDate: _ .

-

Page 3

NqT,FlCÂTIOfl LlsT

tlro f 58775

''1. Doo Yoorv and

'17,û2"Fliqkinger Couñ , -

RE: 1$940 Hiahwev'14- lt¡Loígve

APN:235-Ûâ0-2J

ËXHlBlT B Page 3 of 4Scanned b.r CamScanner


OÛMPLETION ÕF. THls FORM ls VÕLüNTARY. If you elect not to provide therequested information,..please sþn this brm where incicated befow. Any financíalinfonnation provided wilibe tonriãurø in the assessment of an administraüle penaþshauld the nuisance describ"¡ t $; Noüce of Violalion not be abated in lhe timeprovided- RETURN THls FoRtu ¡urr¡Èo¡ÅTEly ro ï-tE ENFoRctNG oFFtcER.

Natice of HearingDate:Page 4

NAIT4E:

Nsme and address oJ cunent employer:

Your annusl incorne last year:

Your cunent rnonthly income:

Åddress{es} of any raal propedy owned byyou:

Make, rnodel and year of each motor vehiclE or¡rned by you:

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that theinformation I have provided regarding myfinancialconditíon is {rue and correct.

Daled

S¡gnature of Declarant

ELË0T|ON NoT TO PROVIDE FINANCI,{L INFOR},IATION

I elect NOT to provide myfinancíal information.

EXHIBIT ß Page 4 aî 4Scanned by CamScanner'

Dated:Sþnature


Exhlbit C


ct3t2t17 Fsrmer Xern Co, Sheriffs deputies avoid prison lor selling rûarijuanâ geized in drug råíds - !A Times

Former Kern Co. Sheríffs deputíes ayoid prisonfor selling marìiuana seized in drug raids

Logân Âugurt and ûerlck Panney Ëntêrsd guilty pleae to cons$ring 1o distributs marijuana in 2O14.

ByVeranica Rodra

AIJGUST 8, ?01?.2:.t5 PM

wo fc¡rrner Kern County Sheriffs deputies avoided prison tirne Monday for stealirag and selling

mar$uana that was seized during drug busts.

lngan.Àugust and Derrick Peaney were sentenced Monday to th¡ee years' probation fcr the charge of

conspirac¡ to dist¡ibute and possess with the intent to distribute mar$uana, according to the U.S. attorney

of6ce in Fresno.

August,,a 3o-year-old Bakerstìeid resident, was also ordered to ssve 1,5oo hours of community service and

farfeit $16,5oo earned in the traffi.cking operation, t'ederal authorities said.

penney, a 34-year-old Star, Idaho, resident, must serye e5o bours in communþ service and sulrender $l,eoo,

?,ti lrrf-:FKS fCR ONi-1 $?ì.abo¡ i),.¡v :'i!¡,:¡rr1l. ljiì sÉ.vË ¡.¡û!v )

.'the offense.

EXHIBIT ( Page 'l of 3hltp:/r!vwìn lålimes,cornlloc¿lXanowlla+ne-ln-kemdeputies-sentenced-drug-bust-2t17t808-story'hlml 113


gl3/2017 Forme¡ Kerr Co. Sheritrs deputies avoid prìson lor selling mar:ijuana seized in drug raids - L-{ lmes

.,The defenrlåilts in this case eaused a signifieant breaeh Õf the public's trust when they ccmmitted these

üim€s,,, U.S, Atty. phillip A. Tall.¡ert said in a statement. "Not 0nly dirl they betray the ct¡mmunity they werc

.swo{n tc sen e, but also their fellaw, hard.-working ofñcels rvhc protect the Kern County community every day."

The for:mer deputies 1{erË accussd of rvorking n'ith former Bakerxfield police detective Pat¡ick Mara and otfrers

to steal marär¡ana from the Kern Counly Shedffs Ofñce storage unit, according federal court dqrcunents- The

plat transpirecl bet**een June acr4 and October 2014, accalding to the doeunrents.

Federal agthorities said the grûup pìanned to sell the car¡nabis, which hadbeen previously seized by police

during drug operations on private and priblic properties.

August u,as assigpcd tc thc sircriffs Majcr Vcnåor Narcotics Unit and participated in drug busts- Penncy rfas

member of the sheriffs Gang Suppression Seetion-Investigations Unit.

Both deputies had department-iscued access cards, r.vhich they used to enter the storage unit, aecording to the

U.S. atttrrney's office" Once inside, they tossed the marijuana plantsand buds into trash.b¡8s, federal

authorities said. Aftcr stcaling the marijuaaa fro¡r the storage unit, they had it trirnmed, so it could hc sold'

August then hanðed the eight pounds of maiijtaaa to a csnfidential informant who sold it for him, fedelai

autborities said-

Àugust shared his eanúngs u,ith penney, each receiving about $t,zoo, according to federal prosecutors- August

also gave a portion of the proceeds to Mâra, who is abor* to begin a âve-year federal prison sentence in a

separâte case, autlrorities said. Mara, â $-year Bakersfield poiice vet€ran, admitted to stealing

rnethamphelamine from drug dealers du rin g traffi'c sttps'

Federal authorities said Aïgust took tire marijuana from drug busts on 10 separate occasions and gave his

inforna¡rt about z5 pound.s of calnabis. Âfter the rnarijuana was sold, lre receiveå thousands of dollars'

accorðing to federal proseeutors-

In February aor6, the deputies,rloluntarilyrisited FBI ofñces in Bakersfi'eld and confessed to stealing the

rnarijuana, according to federal court docsments'

They pleaded Suilty in May for their roles in the trafâckiug operation.

That same month, August recorded a vid.eo messag€ entitleô "I arn sorry!" during which he apologized ta Kern

cou'ty residenls, law enforeement officials and "an1,body I had ever worked with that wears the badge that I

disgraced."

seated with his *,ife, August talked directly to the câmera during the nearly 7-minute YouTube video, saying

Satan was "playing games" with him'

EXHIBIT {. Page 2 of 3htþlrlvww.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-kern-deput¡6s-senleûced-drug-buet-Z017Û8O&story'html


9/3i2017 Former Kern Co, Ehe¡iffs depulies avoid Br¡son for selling marijuana seized in drug raids 'LÂ'ilmes

',I rnade a horrible decision," he said. "It lsâs ncbody else's fault" Nobody influeneed rne to dc it' i made that

deeisian based an Satan piaying games ¡çith n:e and making me fecl like I was prideful and unabie to gß tc>

famil¡' memhers for help."

Before M*nday's sentencing, August's elase friends, relatives and folmer sorvorkers submitted letters to the

e$urt, pleading for lenieney in the sentencing process.

rn one letter, Kera Count¡,Sheriffs Ðeputy llarren,Wonderly described worki:rg elcsely with Arrgust and

Penney sa SWÀT and narcotics teams.

..I do *ot judge peopie by mistakes they have made, I have never liveô that vr.ay and I rfas neîer trained that

rva¡' Wonderly wrcte. "Mistakcs hy Lcgan and. Dcrr;iek do r¡r¡t dcfinc thcm and *'i11 ncr-er cûmparc to thc

amazing achievements they have accomplished in their lir''es,''

August's attomey, Dar,id Tar:es, said his client does not plaa to x'ork ln law enforccraent again' '{ugust is

running a private personal training business aåd has been organiziag fundraising events for local charities,

Torrc.q said.

,,It was sbyious to the sÕurt that Mr. Äugust was genui::eþ remcrseful for the acts he committed and the taint

he brougbt upon fellow law enfcrcement offi.cers," Torres said. "Nevertheless, ftheiudge] gave tbis yCIung mân

an cxtracrdiiary opportunity to givc baek to his comrnunity by performing 1,5cû hours of co¡amunity scrrdce"'

u er o¡tíco'.t'oc å a @ la tirn es. com

T\'r¡ittcr: YeronicaRochalå

{IPÐIITES:

2:45 p,m.: This article was updated. with colnments t}cm åugust's attorney.

?Tr¡s artrcle was oríginaily published cl rl"'lo o.m"

Copyright Õ ?0 ì7, Los Angeles Tmes

This article ls related to: Drug Trafficking, Law Ënforcenrent

EXHIBIT C Page 3 of 3html

httpJlwÈwrr.latimes,com/local/lanoøla.rne-ln-kerñ-depüt¡er-sentenced-dru9'bust'2017080&story'3ß


Exhlblt o


Brsi¡cs¡ Seâreh - Busil¡ess li¡titiss - grrsir¡rss programe

http :l/Ìtcplcr,sos. ca.gori

iratrptl:.J.*/r( htar,.

srcretary qt Ståt€ þî¡in tÂtebslte

au(lr¡osi E¡utt!e (B€)

Onlln4 Sravkes- E-Fllc St¡tcmrnt¡ ¡f

¡ntarmèt¡ôñ fâtçolÞoÊtioñe

- B$rlõèi¡ g6arah. Proceislng Tlm66- Dl¡closure Se¡rch

¡,lBln Pù3€

servlc! OpSont

llrrnc Avalflblllry

Fr¡ñ5¡ Sañp¡€¡ & FeÉ,Stãtðft ehtr ol lnforr¡r{on(rn nu¡l/uenn ¡ðl fcports)

flllrrg T{p:

¡nfÕrnrtléar fi.eqr¡st¡{rerllfltåtres, coplat &rt.tus repqrtS)

5srvlce of pr*aÊr.9

FÀQg

Cantact Intqnnrt¡onRcrãìr¡tôs

: Bççldc¡¡ Rêsôgrcr¡- T¡x lnform¡tlo¡r- stùl1¡ng Ã g¡¡slnsrg

ËrstonÌer Alertt- Bur¡nc¡s Idcntlty Thcft- MlDlórdlng Bustns''

.5o¡lclt.$onr

gucl¡es$ Ptogta¡¡s Hoaãry & Âuthe¡Hca$on¿ El€c$o¡¡€

Business Ent¡ty Detail

Sãtå ls uBdðtcd to the Cð¡iforniã Euslness Search on Wednesdãy ànd Saturdèyrncmings, Racults r€ßêct v?ork pfoccsse{, tJlrÊugh Frldåy. September 23, 2016. pleåse

Sfer.to P;ocesslng Tlmos for ths rec¡lved Oaies of ãllngs cu¡rently þeing processed,Tbe data provlded ls not a compl:tc or ce¡tllled recoJ ef ¿n enflty.

Ent¡ty Nõ$c!

Engty Nr¡mbar¡

Datc Fllcdl

statua:

J{,rlsdlcgon:

Áddress;

Ent¡ty Clty, SÈât€, ztÞt

Agent for Scrvlce ofProcs''t

Addres¡¡

Âg:ht C¡ty, S-tat6, Zlp¡

Frleãcy strtßmrnt I Fr.! Dæmûnt ãård.ñCÕpyrlght Q ¿O16 €òttomtô Sécrêtåry !l St¿t!

gIG O ßELI€q A CAUFORNIA NO,T-PROFIT },IUTUALBË}¡EFTT CORÈOÈATION

c3113239

1Ò/22l20Oe

ACTIVE

CÂL¡FORNfA

4654 EAVES È 241

P¡,LMDALE C¿ 93552

tEGÅt¿ôOH,COlvt, tNC.

10¡ N 6RAND 8LI,D llTH FL

GLEHAALE CA 912O3

" ¡ndtcåtes.the loform¿dEn ¡s nat co¡rtåined tn th€ Cåilfomta Secret¡ry of St¡te,sdãtåbsre,

' ¡f thè stðtu' 0r the corpôratron k 'sunenderr- ttre ågâot for ¡ervrce ðf pr0ce35 ¡sautornatrcarry rcvoked. please rcfer to ca[fomrà Gorpcraüons code sscdon ¿114lor lnfqm¿üon rêlr$ng to ¡grvtcs upon co¡?orãüon3. th¡t have surrcndered.I For tnformltron on droc*Jng or rcservrng I name, refer to. Namô ¡""u"urüv.. For lßfomåtlon on orderlng .€Êlflcðtes;coplcà oi docsmantc lndlôr starus r€portsor þ faquest ù more extenslve sesrch, rsf€r to Informriþn R€qucata.. ror help with searchlng ðn erit¡ty nüme, refer to Siarch Tlp¡,

' For descrlptlons of the võrl'us lTerds and s¡¡lus types, refer !o Fleld D,escrrpïoneand Ststu¡ Deflnl{sns,

Hodify search N€lv sè5rch prr¡t€r Frlendry B¡ck to soarcl¡ Rcs'rts

loll qn$Z$t6l:û3 IIM


lii, 3,.1 l'3?3q

FILEÞtn tlre 0lfce o{ lhD Secßtary of Stats

ol lhe $sle ot calitumla

ffr B ? ilEsf

I

;

ånTlcr,ß$ tr ffconffrn¿Tïor.¡

' FIGoKr,ßr,.å, Crliforaia l{ul.prcft Mutual }e¡e*t Corponfüi

3p ry.: of thc oorprrraticiu is BIG 0 RELIAtr, À C¡lijfomir Non-protit MutnalSënefi( Ccr¡nratíou.

IIA.TTþ corpontion is a nonproât Mrrtr¡rt stnelit corporrtitn orgarizd q¡Àar tbcNaþpofit lvfutr¡at Beneãt Ccrgoration Lsw. The pu,qpora s'f tbis cor¡:ora{ior il toenþge in any lasr&l act or æriviry, oüre,r thaa qtdit r¡ni* bssìlre,$s, &¡ qùic.tr aco$oration rnåy bc oAanizcd urder sr¡ch lau¡.B.Tþ specific ?urposc oftþis.no'xporatíotr is to facilitate herüal<vr aatç¡alreaicdies þrcluOuically ill'.þatrou¡nCanbets who arc Csfiemia resl.dcnte withtilil, ^ilDS, chrOnic paie, c,Ërqûic spasticity, glaucom4 artfuitis, crncerr mifainc,r-*tng tl6¿rsüe, ånd¡çf sr¡cb otlcr ccnditions &r u,hicb licensed msdicå¡

pþþicians måy fEcomsçüd itueh heiþal or äatt¡¡si ¡øediss pur,s¡anf pCalifo¡nia I¿w.

mñq *t a¡d add¡ess h fhÊ.Súte of Califomig of this corporation's initiel

"wht for scrvicc of

pr,o{ess is:JOSEORDAZ i

4659 E. AVE S. PMB# 241

p.{1.¡,fD,4LE, CA 93552

ÐåtÞdr l4u, î x


Exhibit E


CAIJFÛÊNIA STA'TE BOART ûF EOUALIZAT]TN

SELLER'S PERMTT

ÁÕOouf¡Mår&s

| 5/g/zot6 sR ûrB 102-g25lt6

BIG O RTLIET8t6 0 RtLlEr r cå!tFrR*tå t¡o}¡rRûF169åÕ srrrr HtcHlrÀT t! srt t(,{0JÂ1t€, Cå 9350t-la:g

ILJn$ |:stf ¡¡tfrrq--'ç.¡t1rRt¡¡¡Tî{¡t&:r5tIîIrf"Ë îp ËilareEñl}ts{rsú{Essof sfj ¡ rtt&Tå¡{ceF pÉ:n$oa{Atf,mEFfyÀt lHE ¡AO\ã LOC^Î'Õ¡.Itl€ FÉñ,$

'5 v¡¡-O ea*y

^r ì¡€ ABOr/E ¡OOæ-

nls tEñ¡r F V¡¡JO t¡¡ll- g¡al(EÐ gR cÂtsE¡-ÊÐ ¡rû ts taõf l¡ArËrEnAg.¡. f .tþrJ s€tr ìrgtft 6{Js$c5sm ¡JmF ûrr o¡ Â p¡¡ïræ?. r¡c']ry us on vos æ(t.o g€¡ÊsFoirg&.€ FaR âr¡5g Â¡D rrsÊ T¡ù€sorltoBv ¡lt r€t oPËÊAtmtr l}f 8$tt6,For grcæral tax q¡¡os$onc. plç¡:r cell our Custom.r $ervlce tcnþr at 1-8OO*,1{Xþ?tlö ftTyfl t}.

Forlrtformaton on your riglrtq cortætthâTarçe¡ore'tlgrhtsAdvac¡tc offæ at'l-888rlll-2?98 oilt-91t-g&2?Sg.

tlOË-142-R5€V. 16{11-lrt} :

I

NAT'ff TO PEAMrïEÍIYataerq*úto'¿Ery*Wød Std¡e l*s llg¡tryfue ü ôôalrof )ð..t¿ratBsg tà& Ê¡nrl docarDl åfory you to ûat Þnrlsé'"

t\þt 1*lryrt¡p.súãss

Drsplly cðñsptê{ro{r9&y ÄT þrJÅËÊ ûF unIü|E:lt roi üic! tttlrEÞ

Â rtëìsåf¡E To oüß HEtìt pERHtT l{otÐEñ

Àa a rdbr, to$ Ì¡rrç rlgûrb rrd nçorrtUrula rrr br ütc Slcû rrrd lñü Trr( t r. h .rd.r þendoavor grtd to ba$ar u.âdâr€tand lh¡ lru, u¡¡ offcrürc folloukç raworc of halp

' Visíting ou ¡¡ebs te dt ¡t¡rt¡w-bae;ôalpy. \ôshing a field olice' Àttending a Basic Sales and Use Tær Law clsss ofTered at one of q¡r fidd sf€€ã. Serding yotr questions tn wriling to âûy one ot or"r offi¡æs. tallir¡g owloü-faÊ Custo..is Ss\r¡cêCerrts at 1-80û-400-7115 fTY:711)

yor¡ ln yçtr

Al I ¡clltr, you havc üÉ right þ bct¡s rrs¡l¡ cprËlIc¡tar for morcNrandlee ttr¡t yo,t¡ inlend to rceetl. You al*o trevc ürerarponCb[ityolnotml¡¡¡dngr.ra¡c a.ritflert¡gìfllrll¡ lh¡ ¡¡l¡otrxlr lrnporodupoat|l robller, ..

. You havsthêrigtrttosækrrirnbürsernêntofthetarrfasmyourc¡¡sto.rner i i' You are respÕnsibla for ñ[ng and paylng yorr eahs a¡'¡d uss tÐ( rst¡¡rls tin¡dy t:

' Yo{J have the rþhl to bs trêatêd in a fak and aquitaUe rnanrr€r by the €mdoylês cf the Cânfo#ria Stde IEoard o{ &¡alization (BOË}

I. Youfsresponslblelorfollowingther€gulstionssdlorthbythe8ôE I '

As a sdlã, you ¡!r€ €xp€cted to mainlais th€ nörñial books and reconts cf a fruds¡t buslnessprsoc- You am r€quirsd 10

maintain tiæ*e boaks ard reæds for no less tlwr four yearg a¡rd rnke thdn â\t3¡lâUê lof inspåclíon by a BOE rêpr€sgüatfusrrhen requested. YûJ are also el(pæt€d lo ño$ry us if you re bying, sdling, addrrg a locatþn, or dsconlinuing ¡rrour büsinæs,adcling or úop¡ing s partns, offcer, or rrember, or ufnn you üB noving any or all d you business locations. lf it becomænec€5s¿ry 10 swr€ndÊr this peflnitt yorJ shorrlcl of*y do so by ma¡nr€ it lo a BOE ofÍce, or giving it to a BOE represedativs.

ll yorr rtorJb lil€ to knõÂ, more abotf youf rights as a tðçryer, or il you ara unable to f€solve âô issus wilh thâ 8OE, p¡€asêcsñtact the Taxpayers' Rþhts Ârlvocate offrce for lrelp Ð ealling loll-free. 1¿88324€7S8 or 1-916-324-2798' Iheir tâxnurnb€r Ís 1-S16-323-3319- t '

Ploa¡o poet ltrle pcrmlt at t}lc ad(hoee for wtrlc*r Rry¡r l¡sr¡cct and ¡t ¡ nàrcn v¡i¡¡þ to ysr¡r cuetorÍert' i

C.AL¡FONMA STATE BOAFID OF TQUALIZATION

Sål€s and Us? Ta¡< Dgøtmsrrl


Exhibit F


ORDERËD

L/ I

SHIFPED

'cuslot¡En onDER No. $010 nY

S/rSprf cu l'$

( \ (4SOLDTO

/t1uJw€ t14TI]Y, SîATE,

AODRESS

'ç**+arc\ .59{(7

PRIBT

7

t)

F,CI.8.

UNIT

DArI*1

t¡gcñ(J

v)Þ{

(JÞ'

0)

fú()(/)

ro

ll!

ÀTL

236230

1 l6


am0'R[llffllHlBffi$llEIT

|, fotn ¿. î/r* ê"r¡ t7 P*t ,Ç,,'t/{ c

F'LOT&IEF,: CAS lTsa CONSTGI*MENT

CONCE}iITF,.{TE: COlVSTGI\TME}TT-

EÐIBLES : C*'SH- COIT$IGNMEIíT-

TOPICåJ,S :Cå.SH- CONSIGNMENT-

FÂTTEl{TSIG þ*au

PHO}I:N# { {l* qfï-t?rt

OFFICE u8E olstY

OFT'ICEÏü:<vFV

)-z^t6

J-7-/á

EXHIBIT F Page 2 aî 5Scanned by CamScanner

--**-


üUSTOMTR'S ORÛER NÛ.

'{-- { {

11 I (__/'NA[/18.I

AüÛRE*1

ü4L{I ll*I-'t J, ¿/11 ttttT

srryïTþj q,uüCITY,

MÜSË."x' ON.ÀCCTC.O,D,

AM0tIÍì¡TQUAN I}ESCRIPTION

\-^r'.T

2

3 tv

4

¡5

tIIt6

7

IB

o

10

11

¡¡

I12

RTæIVED BY

wv'-'*'F{çFilqrç'

fr\,',,.t) [-., i,ì' J ',1"!.

) t:,,,/ì " ,) j iI

i¡Iòç

!iIfia"å

5tir

7

t4tl¿,4

'F

Ii"t-¡¡:

ËÊe's'-ãËñt.äcl

EK

$,ã

RENÛË 01'1t

EXHIB|TFPage3of

:'.1s,.ils:i!î!a3

o?so KEEP THIS SLIP FOR REFE

Scanned by CarnScanner


i

tI¡

I¡1

fI

t

t-

¡.

CUSTÛMER'S ÛRDTR NT"?¿ 7- 16

¡,\ l"t t; r{-NAMËtt

l{t{¿d tft'*

, *t-Ui_._îf,ü 7smrË IPãrtlt.

t.CI.0CASH

r(\

THARGË ON.ATCT. MCISE. NETD

t quAN. DESCFIPTIOI\¡ AM0UNT -1 / /'z lt .t2

I

3T.-r 4- I

IIa

t

4

5I

¡I

Þ

7

IB

IIIIII

10

11

12

ffi'¿.,r:rl; ,i ?t

:l

J

It

I

i,

,tt

ItJ

.'II

í't

,I;I.tI.I

II!ô¡i

T,Íå;1

.l$

f'.t

$t

ItIl:I

;!'i'l

å,Tffo,'u,uo KEEP Tllls SLIP FOR REFEEHISËn r päåL 4 ot:bScanned by CamScanner


j' \

il- t'

f

ii,)!.t

r{}{,

Itt

En's ûRüit{ N0.TUSTÛM

I þ-{-NAI\48

n \ADÛRESS

{a :/lf

[ÅsH c.ü.Û CTIARGE ACüT RETD PAID

8UAN. ÐESCR¡PTION AMtlUlì¡T'l

2

3

4L

5

ñ

7

I

g

10

11

12

_tRECEIVËD BY

REFERENCE OI-11

EXHIBIT F Page 5 of 5Scanned bY CamScanner

T-4ø24914e25A KEEP THIS SLIP FOR


Exhibit G


$ årtrjffî{t.'**îs*Flå.l1ff***rhe {For oierrre rfy} Ir¡¡9. :ûrð , ,,.

rú

z TERI: Tho b,m bagÍt m (d81e)gtt"C,aläf'-?-Y ' fçcrrnqremü*UarÊ.¡iX À l-c¡¡o:s¡<t¡ldtrfrùBtoüì(.tós)ñ;'-;;;' ì,*,' ffiî,-ì â ffi*f;ffi?E$Hb" k""'ddõ p'.',cí,ã'åiffiIr'''ó,i* er oo".Gì.¿! ' È r¡qrt¡æ¡rqü¡c gu

-t¡r r l;rlÚ¡b;nt, fÄ"y. A.. e¡ry .q ¡Thf ü,c Eúq ùy Olùtg rün rdcú ro th. r,Û¡ú dO. ffift ;Ëiü*e¡al.*"mry5"lå,;-'r¿*.3, ãlrtEREtfT: -

t. PigPÊfrTy: l¡¡dord ¡¡tÈ to Ts¡anr

À

8$TûsltËûtqn t¡n¡¡0'Eûar¡d

ú

prnol$rÊcÉr colrftgt*rg

rstùb ñËr*frdtilþr{a

Þhpt!Þ.rly t¡d fryulqrËû dorc¡ù¡rl*

goprny-3æ

d¡f oafr..nËott h

I!!ìì

aC- füE

¡t. REtf?:À8.

$þ oü!*

AarmerqncdÞ *anr¡rsrsSodtygrb¿ü TñTftdbep¡ddàO.dût!

irCþe tra¡dbdCffiüûÉ.rtf *, læñrfkär.ütd cd¡tûrnc*t

õa Tã¡*b t-do.d rã<br ür Urtt d tå

t¡nddrfÊW*t )t

--)O 2{X5, C¡&ni¡ å-flú sf ftÊALTOßSt h(l.CL REt4SaE l2tü (F^O€ 1 ar r)

ìrãn rl'fioüÉær$tdt}Gil"

r¡:r¡ü 1 i9' ,, r

f þdtu-'

n

t sEClntTYOEPCrr¡^ffi1ffi' ;trffiffi9. Al * rry flhr oftr. ¡æ¡ny ø+c rnt b! r.E4 Ð rnc!--a.y, b. ttt q¡¡ Ttr-1l rÊå h pc¡s¡r¡ocea rr¡or tlFF dtJ *;-'í; Ëgl r"r¿ c'l;.dråËdü¡r.y ';;.d *. ä;3iñ#ñffiiFumsffiftæ #Hffisætt/ dÇd b'¡d ú¡t¡c üstcùi rsrr ags ¡ rrg u,. ilc i-tt ¿ænûft s a"n J--r,rru. no&c ¡.flvr¡c ærsÛl -JYü*|

æ rf¡¡ * t ir¿s¿ á;;å;-rl orrt prrhr. t-rùd d,d. [t trrrtr -rarú gl kila¡s d -v Errr d+d'-d';;Ã,f,E b ¡ lToFõ ; m-; Íy ürûhs o-..-;l"*mffifftlÐrvt t !'r l¡rùrtl qir er ,+on lr aãr dlpd ¡;-b dÉ ñli t-, É ür¡ç;;ñ; d ü. ãry d.poít !hdoducüon d .'rdd nrr. **-¡e n¡ri¿ i¡st,ãõ¡ dir o¡ r-ruoo -dË F#nc. t{o hEd rl ùc pqt m s¡tr,*p jCriË üir¡¿ by tqa qûs¡o.

^r-S.L=l=

fhrc¡ t*ra.rn{?t¡ *ard{,¡..f*, au

EXHIBIT 3 Page I oJ 7


PÎsmbec 5¡4TT ,¿, *. CA?, PÀ?IÊI{TII:

tfu 5w 9.20ç

-

À R.rÊ FrÛlr orüg/:tot6 T{lH. 96tüm$ t

OfrS- S6qrþÕepoû¡......

C. 0ü¡ðn ,nÂünElr/trrg€fEFCdt9ry

?rlrt¡-gtJE

LOOA-Aô ¡I _ J?,ooû.oo ¡

PAYI'EilTRECEIVÊÞ NALA¡ICE OUE

2-M,ü

Ð{JË DATE

twuixn6

Ð[ltÛr?p'la -

¡Í3

¡

I*¡

a(m^oo t 50ô-0at¡, Otrst:

å.

t.

ttt

fi.

t?-

¡Ë. Tstal. ..3 ¡ I ,¡.Joo.do

,bilhd

¡rtlbdfd hr& ñtdddrlrdcû:ru $.xlt-crðcCrÐoþ Tl¡f¡rp-Tcth.tm¡Õ Èwrbdçdm{3. TEltå}troPrRÂÍlle ExpalsEg: T¿ndt ìrtrbpry br{ rrrrü slhr¡rhrarr¡.d brrrrT¿ PROFERTTOFENANTß EPE¡SE!À

AüT¡¡ANÊlrf¡ec

ORË. 14{hFr¡ot rF?qr..t5.

ta

l-yrdorÚsl¡Èú( r( _)

CL REvlSEÞ 1¿ñâ{PAGE Z ot6}

Tã¡rû.15{

ffiERCt¡L LErõ€ ÅaRËEE aT {CL p^CE 2 OF S}9t!úËrtì æ)r¡!L¡f rUl'Û Ð.rtt 4 f.¡-, radtnaæt ËËû*F

f7. Iåþ¡fExâilcÈÀ T¡rrrto¡ BC ar..r.+ Lrrdor{} fl prffioily nffi.tr ffi¡c !drrúrs.h*,* * stor*{. d.ûtf p¡,otùg fiËrstlbm4f ¡ry.tdrryglE'lldoùrdùqt'tçtrtb¡rtd¿-te*ût.tt'lrúqdhttrgr¡4trrrt*-Lb,ffii

!5c Pnnåo¡, t-andold ¡rry oq*aq frq g¡t¡m u¡cfi n*ú,-Ë ad õtú r"r*r H. Lr¡dorút ¡-rrB. ':-grdqd Oß t tU ct¡c¡å T¡rl) CtJnä; tr. ,Ða. br¡dtrr trror r¡¡. drmon ùE rÉ

(t

¡tOX,f.

EXHIBIT O Page 2 ol7


Pt*c

EXHIBIT G Page 3 oj 7


Pronúctc9t0s1Âr€ftÉñr9Âytl.tjrðrËrcnrlË.û{33sû? --- _ Dút'¡yt 2û?¡ " __ -tù" TEI¡AllCt gfAÏËElll {E8TOPÊ| CgllãCâtS Tsru¡* tâd rútrt¡ a¡d rs¡m r bræt ¡ad.r¡ãr: (.ðp9cf e¡m}, dr¡ì,r¡d !o

Tanmt by Lrldorú r L¡do.ú. ¡g.r*. -rü& 3 deÐ ûr l¡ rrð¡r. ïrc brgy {¡t¡arcrt crd l¡oa¡*ec'tf -üb áen"ê,tirtt L ,rr,.üod

tnd h tltruc' s h ¡lkot r ¡rroû¡d..rd * *¡e ¡¡ocó¡a¡. nri u aornglt tlúr t¡ roq¡Índ 0) rrJ b. *øn frrr*¡a*u*¿çnrf üdüe btstcl tu LÙr¡ rd omct, ¡drnry òc r# upcrbyr FospecürDt¡r*rüpr¡åæc attd (It nrry bôbtùd byr-ûúdú É a tüillrH br¡¡dr düb æür" Tær # pr€Daó, æ¡b, oå o*l* b tadårú ¡v t$ar,u"l-ååo.i"rrfiffú rl.b. h.ad h csúOorrca) rær¡¡ùù q¡lCd by ¡ pl¡Ocdua ¡*lb¡ q bri¡q.

tl" l¡llDroiot TRAIEFE T.¡sn acf6 üd nr. 8!¡Êrr d L¡úsü¡ ll¡* ûa bo àsúti¡d I Lodord tnrbr ü* ¡r¡or¡e¡¿L¡ndatl Út bc nlceoed of rry fúror *lgdút b Trtri ngrû! b ertt Oopolt orry f âê ritrfy dÐql C ¡*rnc¿ ¡ fãn çsr¡{ù la¡ûfrf' * f Úr aorty d.po* 3 rcù¡âfy ffind b-ü¡a ffiltr. ¡d *t itr ¡fi¡Oorn r$¿¡riú oæer¡oñt L*br, h ¡:ba¡a<!d any *¡füaloùft b Tülrrt tFsr t"r¡rlmtt U¡*r.

3¡. SltBORüfAIþl* Tll¡ ry¡rnef tr bä ütorffi Þ C rdt¡ Lrr rld, C |..¡¡dc¡f¡ optht fr læ tt any lrd rt ôd ol ùr¡d or tbdlttÒ{.e9ÌÈ..q¡..tÛypaædçonthrredpmprdyolrùlôürffiúr.rp.rtt¡dbüf dEËÍÉgt$esrlr¡ltnprn{rc¡.ri6bJrilollct rn¡e¡b¡¡g¡o¡ddqË'lld..lrÌrrt¡rãdffir.tfffis¡å3b'ûúhndtïd.adof¡n'drnodgûg.ütf!.tþdlrrx¡cif¡¡dftqlxlro{Tts*lð¡f ¡ç¡tp¡rdorof ür¡ffi¡flfidùsÕrù.df TÍr*LtdhffiürdúÈ¡one t î.ù¡* pilr üE Rût r¡d *ru Ít prtñ¡ tdtu gormrs d üå ryrrrd. rfu tf r¡rc.frlrûb dü|lte bøþdfll¡¡rû!!tbûs. f srysst¡gFqtl*t, rgnrúlrydæÈulrvttrbqncnrrf ile.lh rælrypdoßp.þrþtb Iq¡of ¡üprlþgr!dædof ùnd,*gra¡Élc,rtdgfËübt rñþTd!É*, f¡¡¡¡fc¡rxtd-brd¡oa¡¡dphrú¡nrrutÊp.dðd ottn¡¡{.or $Ðlíd læ, c ütc d¡h dr¡êorûr$

3t" TË}¡AXT REPnË!ËfffÁñOf* CREü[: ¡¡¡¡ çs¡t¡ tt¡¡1 ¡| sfrgñ.! h T¡¡ril f¡¡¡ö do¡{'{*3 rú rg¡5¡ 4g[cdon ra ærere.TÍlñt rñdàû t.t¡{otd ñd l¡õlq(r) Þ dú¡ Tülstr arü(& rlprl X 3r oa rlt¡¡fürm üd pülodcdy û¡trg |.rgt¡}, h coillc&n rfrtâ¡trûttd' moücddÈ a-1årwil*düÞ rg¡!ürrnL l¡odord rry crd ** rijxnct {Ð t¡*¡¡ oco¡pnf:¡rA¡ra

-rnon*efpo¿ *g" "!S æcr{slç ü gl d rç !rr, wø d¡oÊn¡.r¡ tE ¡*¡r¡úta h Tãr¡a; Tf{cdrñ t 3è À;.gcÉy. "-di ü-r ¡aiioü¡¡ s¡Tx|ûflruoslt ¡nryÈo¡ålstdþrtreüæorftgtmcy. trTril**l¡rpry Ror{rraornpltrürrnyoütorrilg¡don {todar'n8¡¡!qï¿![

!¡t"Cgl$llilrgflctÉæl.¡:fËÞr€cE8ttf,lTrlTlñåRtlE: L¡rdodri¡bclhdl]sPrrcltæ gfr*,ogtrnrno:beonrçÉd byaC;fãedAs¡ Spocbl¡t f sô, t-üdtorû ffi hd thc k¡rha t¡+ * Ettæ ¡rt Oar ¡*nìñ* iû ñ¡ a *pÞa.';fiùr6{taüd¡cc¡¡rùryrhxl¡r!¡ grrrrntb Chf Corlc Bcen S.Sil -35. Dß¡FLtlE REgOUtnoil¡

À

a

rpllsOttEFeTcarf gdL*rdcd.enôlonü&drbilrp'¡rcd*r¡¡lxoùû¡gücbdr&ola¡r,trtrådc}¡¡abúriFotsm td ¡lrç {f. d.b 3r.'t í5dúoñ û rtHolr. !dú b. ir r¡*¡.r rærdr ¡n¡ t¡ f¡r rlgrr ãr *f¡ r

'x¡ar*¡* oiBñ¡l¡lt Atrt ddÛl ùy rltrq b¡ü Êær¡¡¡ b prË** b lll.r¡úr q sffion fl tü ilrt h *¿có ¡¡¡llg Ca¡nX iuú- O Ae

ìalfxtaf*.' 'l{oïlcÉBY¡}¡¡nÂ¡-ü{Gt}lT}tE8pÅcE8H-Oüyot AnEÀcREEilerO}r¡ìrEAttrffiputEÂRrilxG'OUroF IHE IATTEnS ncuÐED D¡ TIE îmfix*Íþl¡ OF ÐËPttfEr FROìrlSoN DFCÞÊD sy ]€ttnllARHlRltNOil AS PRÍTVÍI'ED BY CÂIFORI.üA LAW AT¡D YOT' ARE Eì'nlG UP AT{Y RGHÎEI YOU MGHTFossESS þ IIAYE TllE Dû8FUIE LÍñGATED D{ A COIJRT OR.f,nYfF|AL BY nüruf're N THE 3PACEBã¡rr Yoü åRE Gil$tc UP YOt R &rDElÂL nrerffS TO OFqOyERv Ât{D AppEÂt, InILEES Tt{o€ERI€HIS åNE SPECF¡CAI.LT I}¡CLI.,DED Fl THE'ARSTRAIIüI OF D¡$¡U'TB' PRüfiSilO}'" F YOr' RËFUSETU SUST'I TIO ARStrRATIOil åFÍER AGRËEFIG TO TT¡S Prcìñf,OII YIOI' IAY BE ffiI.88 TOåRBTTNÂIE UUT¡TR THÊ AI'THOüTY OF THE CàLFORIGT CODE * CIVü. PROCEDT'RE. YOI'RACREflEIIT T(¡ THE ÂRBTTRÂÍIOII PNS'F¡OT{ ¡8 I'OLUTÎ^RY.':ît€ HAI,S READ

^ltD t XDERSTTÂilO TltË FOREGOü|G ål{Ð âcRÊE TO St SUI IxSpUTGl¡ ARrSüi¡c(x,T OF THÊ NArTE:RS

¡Å,R¡ilTRâTrllLTII{CLUDED ITI THE'AÍEITRÀTIO" OF DISPUTEg PRg\IISþÌ¡ TO IEU¡TRAL

¡

t

t

:

I

,

1

I

Ii¡

tI

:

I.:

ì

¡

!

l1

1

l

'

I

:

IiI

''

t

t

Ii

\t¡¡dortt¡ùdüafll )f I Tüttrftlndd.i 17* v

^fì.låtããCL REl,lgeÞ lzls {PAoE a of 8}

æRCTAL LEASË AêREEXT tCL pAOSt OF 8l, : Prfrrúr¡*tnr¡¡*a¡û tE¡OFht-h.¿ft-1tütEafr r¡f-¡r *grÍLo

Ldorütft Trdl*t

EXHIBITGPage 4ol7


Pþmbss

36, lbóÞ b *H¡ üi¡ ñs Tar¡år{- mdtü&ryryËr( ¡ûüyrlttörorydr.rff. ilgfþB ilo&æ ntõy Þroñred by r¡d. lbrrftnþ ø curlerat üro ñhrfrg dd.Es¡ * iocdon, ü d rU oü€r locdbo rå..r¡r..fy OeAgrnæ*TanüÉ 3t6¡

sr¡rF f

¡bücËbdqnd dhråæ upontñe{tlf} 5 Oa},¡ú.r trt*Þ noüc.ûrrrd't3s. ¡VA¡Ylft Ih. *¡lì,eroaqry brldt d3û. fHOÐilFlCAïOta¡ TorËt # fx¡r¡rü,f, ã*ûd rd ho¡.|âb¡ng a* d?on¡tl rc of h Þ¡r¡¡tc¡r

¡ol b*corÉl¡sd ¡s a aqürånlsrús tqn Cl d*or, C*r¡q fet.ofr ¡dorr,ôr,l¡ ãrd aüofnô,,roù

?Crf d f'¡3 süE b.trd¡ c ¡ ¡dyar d æy srå¡rq¡¡ni brsa*r_lr¡drd{0. gtxERTæ^¡tô

JolxÎ AXD I|OMUJâL OBuGATþfl8: Lpcftr¡ngror d d oàfEûloß of -¡ ¡rsd m(H

'lhç blq¡iñg ATrÂCHED ?l.¡.ll.irqkrùút¡ '!

l¡oqpr¡rd h lta¡.¡rrrrÊ

{t.

4ìL

{r.

¡¡t

l¡nóo.rrsbidrb( l( __)Ct AËY¡EE¡, rzrfã (pÀSE g of ôl

corEÊclAl. t-E^sEAcñ.EflEtl1{CL p/[GE5 OF 0]; hH*,&rúùr:ã.r¡¡ t¡tgrhfH.Fr*,tHúaüEä É4*ñ

-ÐT€nar¡t"tnöåb t t -U:-lt

ìoË,tÈ.

iI

lI

¡

¡

L

I

:

1

:

EXHIBIT G Page 5 of 7


Prenbæ:

T3nånt

Ddalhyg,åû?t , __

h

h

gdâ c*.- ãp31ffi.

*st8¡â . cå zlp g.nt3t

&

Âd*¡æ ß.t..Ãcry ¿r?ff#â .g{y( " . srat. cå ãp s3ûr'

Teneat

{Prir* r5¡rË)

El q¡ånÂlrTEe b sËtcardðQ-d-Ûç æ¡lb¡r drÛas AgrËirsf by ¡nt la¡n L-rry l.ld r{d ¡s 'f,'rü*

qHiñ, rsc¡i*.!fïñ¡ó b t'*.ù? !d',d!d;¡.-Ë1ffi;¡fuhb4 dÉ¡æb¡î;*",'qedr.,ffi ffi*f,æs¡dãtr¡. úa,r.y-ø-ãa.,ãtkrdrr, drdTürt erdüf¡^gr¡-rÈrf b*.Eaq

qsq¡brqrrfåùfar¡

l,¡a¡ðord rgr.- ùo rü ü¡. tr¡arCk an tt¡ç ¡boc. b.!ta rr., èorr¡¡üor¡,l¡¡ldad

4d{rerü

ck

clv stflLsrdsr*

By

Åddr!.ù

{ilníor fÈ ¡¡¡nuti)ÀFncyrÚliùlJi|r!csúr:ld il¡nðordsdTrr¡t

c¡þrd&ts¡dod h tlrqrlnrrðf?rürp.rvb tp¡l¡qr¡rf fun

#¡ b¡d¡ç¡rtnæ

Ræ{E¡ht¡r

ryêe6r$lf¿nÃEl g¡-st:Rgrrtc

Á¡ûqstT¡¡+ìsre

.âod €* B¡drsr {Usûrg Fhra}

F¡x

Ca{BRE Lir I Oíagtãr ._Câ¡BÊËtb.t BAæ5t12 a€!âOq/Otærû .

û¡AREUc.lCaAREUc.* De¡â

* s¡ül_W_Telcpturc Fcx g.nd

brhdÞy fb

ffinr LEAEE AGnEE-r{t {cL PÂCE S f)F s}edt!ff¡-br:bar* iæro*-tÕ'bd F_.r. tsq_rðû, Efl¡¡¡I' &OL{¡È

EXHIBIT 6 Page 6 of 7


CÁ.LIFORNIå.Â s soc l åT roN AflDÊilflumQF n.B Jl tTûRS{Þ {c¡.R.For!¡t^¡r,bvh¡drzt$ l{o. I

a¡d

flRatitlarüal LeaseSiro üa 8u¡ar a dght

id âsDOif YAOß¿ l*r¡ed b aa

The Sægolrç bms and cor¡dflior¡r aÞ heaüy ag¡od b, and tre urdedgned ad.''rnbdgr recdpt ûf s cogy of &b do.,¡ms",tDate

Dale8u!€rrTðÉnt

n+rrnena*SrGOREt_'EF, t¡tc.

Sd¡rtr¡dodÐ9wr{. yoottr

Sçlb¡rlar¡do¡d

*r*rdþ_-b_

or¡lÛr2Ûl¿firñ"-â¡en<lRËtrLTOñslhÈt"Hfuú.o¡44ïftf i¡ug.Ëlhetlr6¡rst¡ú¡rdrr¡¡rrúrç¡rr¡cüoacron¡brm r¡v*.roí r¡rd. ùt rt Èqt -".;;qdt ;_n -, hc.ú¡¡ar.,..rog!tr¡rd brrir.Er'rs F(nl HArs B€Eil.rppnc¡ià w nc ¡tau¡cn .,Ã

^ssooñúr{ oF Ërrrdõ;öin}r¡o *a;æalr^ro, F rå¡¡E As ro r}€ IEG^L v^LÞtryo8 ÅÕct.,R^cr oF r¡{Y PRc¡'lsþr¡ o{ ¡¡rr s*cinö;l^xgtgtor¿ r ne¡¿-esi'Âri'äolrËn ¡s î€ Fgndó¡-i*À¡Þ ro Ar'rsÉ or¿ iÉAL €trÅîEïRÁ¡{8åSÍOH¡.5rq.¡DESRËr¡6¡ÀLærrxrnrri:e,'ööih¡ri}rræ¡.repRoFg}gñrAL

ü.ËË*ËËË.F_æ iffi¡.Ëu".,**ffi^i#rt¡o e¡¡t.rùo þ b Csdr t Ehb.S e,rrroruc-rrtrñDlan r i RËÂL ESTATE HJSTESs'sERucEs. ¡}c,&J.#Ëf;,iffiffiåp*tDI RË\¿SED tznã lFÅcE { oF r}

ttto,t Ìt^Ltrra'rlËdttla fünttrfir ¡¡c9rl¡¡rr,IdtrrrgPlr.I

EXlllBlT G Page 7 at 7


Exhibit H


CÛUÎ{TY

I

fsd

ðQ

FILËDg'p€ÈCR COt RI or g^. Cc'tfir! O¡

I

2

3

4

5

6

(

II

co JUL t8 ?010

COUNSELÍEßRY MC+{ALLY

ilonct of At5l6taMttlÏ Allo BY

tt --DÀUL8.I NBÞ**.'llrrril¡ O¿'.' - ân- t'1

,rñEq'3ð 4.¡"1

Åtbrncyr lor Pl¡lotiff¡ !xo¡4r..d t L- - --sæ C¡C nuh t'7t0 El, t .t

SUPERIORCOURT OTTHE STATE OF CALIFC}RNIA

INÂITD FORTEE COUNTY OF KË'R.I{,METROTOLITÂN DTVISION

CASE NO. Bfl-T& t0 1l

THERBSÀÀ

8uûdbgOûicirt

v,

couNsEL (SBN 107344)TJNTY COUNSEL (SBN 2793Á7)

1û

1'l

12

J3

11

tõ

16

17

'tt

1g

20

21

72

23

24

25

26

27

28

COITNTY Of KERN, r potlllc¡l¡!Þdffio¡ of tlG S¡r óf Crufoilir,GruG'fE¡fHlN' ¡¡ Kcr¡ Cou¡ty

r¡dÂNÛ

Plrl¡tlff 5-E6

[Fttiag fcc ercæptioo for ¡wcrancnl cttitypm.rnl lo C¡orc¡¡ucut Codc ! 6f031BTC O RELIET, A CAIJFORNTA NON.

PROTITMIET'AL BENE$TCOn¡OnffrONl IXIO ã" YOON;hdË & Y(X)l{; r¡d IX)ES I tàrougù50' hctndvcr

Tbo County of Ktro, a polhicat suMivision of ùc Suæ of Califomis, ed 0*EG

IENTON, rs Kon Counry Buildiug Ûflicial (eolhcrively,'Plaiotiff') altege as follows:

INTRODUCTTON

This ¡ction ir brougbt br thc ptrposc of cqioining" abating, and provc*iq a

pr&lic luisaacc occrming st 16940 Hwy 14, Mojavq Califi¡rnia {the "Pmpcrty} $¡5uûú tr}

Kco Cormty Hir¡a¡¡cs Codc flKCOC') seetion 5.86.

e. Phi¡tifÍ i¡ informcd rcd bclicvc ¡nd thcroon allcgc that tþ dcfcodr¡¡s umat

bclow a¡o rnd et rll tiracs nentior¡ôd htrcÍn were uring or knowingty 9ümittiag thc Popcrty for

E hng lrëd¡c¿l nruijuann gvsil¡blc to u¡d/or dissibuting mcdic¡l marijrnna 10 grin¡ry

ccs¡çgirærs, qualified paticnts. or pcrsons with ncdical authori¿atioo or idcstiñc¿tion ca¡ds.

lnjunction. Àb¡t¡¡n¡nt, sd Ciyil PcEilês-l -

I

Conp¡Áint for f'¡ollnfuury ud Pormùrct!

Scanned by CamScannerEXHIBIT H Page 'l of I


10

tt12

î3'14

t5

1ð

17

18

tg

2A

21

n2?

21

28

28

27

28

Scanned by CamscannerEXHfBIT H Page 2 oî 8

Such actions shall bc rcferrod tn in this eompleint as oparatíng ¡ 'Mcdical Marijuana

Ðispcosaqr."

3" Plai¡tif County of Kcra flCounty") ¡s ¡¡rd ¡1 ¡ll done.¡ rncatio¡*d þ¡eia r¡¡¡e e

politioal subdivis¡on of rhe Sut! of Califonia, and rhc public ¡gcnsy chtrg€d with rcaponribility

for cnforcing thc provirionr of tho KCOC in o¡d¡r tû prcmotü ¡!d pçotcel the public lætlth,

s¡fct/, and l¡elfbrc of rhs rcsider¡l¡ of thc Corurty.

4, Plainriff Grcg Fcnþa is lbc Kcrn Couaty Dt¡cstor of thc Engioccring, Survcying'

ånd Pcrsit $crvice¡ Ðc,p¡¡rmcoe, who ha¡ bccr dclcgntcd by the Kern Counly Bo¿rd of

$rpcrvisors fsoafda þ bc ltrc ltuf¡ Count¡r Bui¡d¡tg OfEsiEl fguiHíog Offi{iat"}. {KCOC $$

215.{12û and ¡ 9.04.û96.1

5" P¡d¡¡rÍf?b lnfotmod a1d bsücarr th¡t De&¡de¡r Big O Rclld e C¡lili¡mis Non*

ftoüt I\óû¡r¡ gcnÊ$t Corponrion fp¡rycara¡y"}, iå srd !t ¡ll timos ¡nonÉoncd l¡crcin rr83, s

oorporrdou or otbcr bu¡bcs¡ c¡dty atoing b¡si¡ps¡ ir tüc Courty ¡s a Mcdíeal I'lrrijuau

Ðlrycns¡ry ¡t tha P¡qpcrq¡

6" Pl¡lndlf is infûrs¡cd and botiercs ihât ¿!frtrdütt Doo No, I fÐ¡¡ryta¡ary

Ow¡d1. i¡ o''l at s¡t ttnår mcntio¡rcd lçæin wrg ¡¡r indfukù¡¡l doing huiocas ín *ro Cormty rs

¡c ü¡rncr alrd opcrsbr of¡ Mdict¡ Msijt¡¡¡u D¡spcosrry at tbc Ptopc¡ty.

?. plaintitf b tnformcd ¡¡d bdigvËs tb¡t Dcfo¡&¡ts Dot H. Yooa æd Eur¡icc S.

Yoo¡. arc. õd at ¡¡l tüncs maßlioood hcroiu uærcn tbc oqncrs of record of tbc hopcrty

{collcctívcl¡ úrc ¡'Plopcrry Oürncd:}.

g. Pf¡i¡*¡trfu inbrn¡d ¡nd bolicvct tb* Ðispcnrry and Diçcnsary Owrrcr tÊasa4

aod¡t ¡ll times íElrorpd hgrdn htwlðsd' thc Propcrty from ProprfyOw¡ræ.

9. plaintiË is ignora¡rt of thc ¡nrc n¡mcs ¡nd cqoritios of dcf.ûdt¡t Þocs t-50. &d

¡r¡gt thcúB defcrd¡¡t¡ by ñcfitiour ¡¡l¡tcs Pur$tsnt io Codß of Civil Proccdure ccction 4?{. Ëtcb

a¡c& dcfeoda¡t is nryûüiblc in some sunncr for coudr¡ti¡g us¡rttairins or dircctly or

iudüectly pornitting the t¡stsr¡di¡l activíty oomphincd of hcrein. Wbcn tho tn¡c ümcs q¡d

crycit¡cs ofss¡d dclkda¡rs h¡vc bccn ¿sc€dsined, Plsint¡trwill asl lcavc of tbe court to amcnd

lhlr eomplaint and to la¡ert in lieu of nrcü fistit¡ous n¡rnc¡ ùe true n¡¡ri¿s and cqpecltíes of any

Cortplrirt fc Protioirnry rod Pcrrnøroot hjmcdoa-.{blancnÇ-Z-

¡nd Civil Pps¡ltlcs

1

2

3

4

5

0

7

Ig


1

7

3

4

5

I7

II

10

11

12

13

1d

r5

1g

t7't8

1g

2A

21

22

23

24

26

28

27

28

Scanned by CamScannetr

-l-

EXHIBIT H Page 3 of 8

lictitiously namsl d¿fendonts.

10. Dispcosrry, Ðbpcnrary Orrncr, lnd I'ropery Ûwrrr qle hsrçtnr¡ collcctivcly

rcËrrcd to ir¡ thi! Cornplaínt es "Þ¿f!ñdsntl.'

lï. Plslndtris infc¡mçd ¡¡d baticvcs, åodbsid lhcrc¿n allegcs ¡ha¡ al ¡ll timcs

hcrcin mcutioæd, cæh De&od¡nt wa¡, ¡fld nou; ir, the ageoq cmplo¡æa endlor æprorcntarivc of

rbc rcoaiolug Dcferúaatr, sr¡d ræh of ûram, ¡r¡d wes acling within lÌ¡c cor¡rsc urd scopc of thx

egcucy witl rcopcct óo all m¡[ca¡ allcgcd hcai¡.

aRlEr IÛsToF.Y or çCIIrNrr MEDTCAL M RIJU^Nê OFqITYÂ¡LCñi

12. On lvl¡rctr 31, 2009, ¡he Bor¡d of Supcrvisors for tbc Cosrry of Kcr¡l (thc

'8oa¡f? e¡lctÊd Ordir¡¡rcc No. t-7t49 f2009 {Hinrncs') undcr KCOC scstio¡ 5.84' Tbc

208 ediønoc ptovidod:

{a} "t n¡d¡cs¡ ¡naijrno coopcrrdw or collca$w ruy not bc

túþd withi¡ o¡¡ thousad (1,000) *¡Ê of a lobool tËn$üd¡ilm ü! Fl¡ürt cn¡rtsè o a dirycosrry.!¿ fbà 919!'st PTqftyI¡ao of tÉ poiq¡tl of ¡ ¡obool qr ar r'ld!ù ¡ labool ir opcraæd'

tb) A ;cå¡c"i nariilarø mofctsdvÊ or collccdvs ôåll bc

úi¡æd rs ¡ p*soroy for ¡ontg F¡rPoEcr'(cl -Mcå¡cal B¡i¡itt¡{¡s Coopcrdw tùtd f'{t{$ Muduanað;t¡êcüvc" ü! d!âFod ts r¡l fttür l¡ ¡ladoq fV sf ¡bc CrliftmhIrttûnly o0r0râl oulddbÉ fbr lhs stqlityand Nondivcrsioro ofU¡ritu¡,i¡ Orcw¡ ôrM¡dlc¡l Usc lsn¡cd l¡ Atryt$t' 20Ot, us they

mw ¡e¡d oras oc¡¡d¡¿{d} åny pcnon rv}¡o úolatcs rny pmviaion in lbir sætion is

¡¡uùltY of a mtrdcncuor.

{KCOC $ 5.&{.olo {200e).)

lg. Following the c¡¡claæ¡ of rlre 2009 frlnanca" tbê Bo¡¡d coactcd ftl¡¡¡¡cc

litq. t gTg¡ {t¡c.,Ðirpoeisary ðln'}. 1Ae Þir,pcnsary B¡¡ agrcod¿d Ch¡Écr 3.8{ to Prûhibi¡ t}¡c

oporrfíor¡ of rry rnodicet muijruna dspørøy ia all uoturporafod ¡¡t¡s of thc Curnty. Thc

Di¡psr,r¡ry B¡n was sct to t¡lce cf€$ in 30 days. A proEst peütioo t¡¡os fltod with thc Kcra

Cor¡¡ry Á.rditor{ostroilsr.Coünty Clcrlc Ttc pctition supcrdcd rbe Ðiryaaary Ban by

opcolion of t¡w, md rcquiFd the Bor¡d ¡o ehhcr æpcel ttæ DÍrperuary Ba¡ o¡ placc it on tha

bsllot for tlra voter¡ of ttn county lo sppFov€, on Fcbruary 2l' 2012, in æsponæ to rhc prottst

Corçldnt br PrclirnùorY and Pc¡o¡¡¡old lqiundio¡t Ab¡ha¡oot ¡nd Clvll Pc¡tâlth5


t7

1e

1g

2A

21

z2

23

24

2:5

2ð

27

28

pctition, ùc 8oa¡d plnccd al ûrdinnncc {"Mcasurc ü') on ùc Junc 5, 20lU hallot fi¡r lhc vot€rs

of tln Cotmty to appmvc, u¿hictr wr¡uld havc rcqulrrd Mcdical Marijuane Dispcnsariar to bc

Ioc¿ted in lin¡its¡l dl¡uiots wlrhin rl¡c County" ûn ljob¡uary 28,2At2, alsc ia æsporuc to dæ

¡xtoicst ptition, tlrc Ðoard cnåctÊd Ordina¡cc Ns. O-8257 f'Rcpcal ffiinarcc'J. Thc R4cú¡

fuin¿nco rcpcalcd Cbap{er 5.M of Titlc 5 of rhc KCOC io its aatircty. Tlre Rcpcal fujn¡¡æc

look sffect on M¡rch 30, 2012, lcaving no grovirion i¡ tbc KOOC ¡llowing Medicâ¡ Martjuana

Diupcrrsarics in any zonc d¡srrict.

t4" Ou,{ugrst 29,2A12, ¡ ï¡wsuit nn¡s filcd i¡ the Kcm County Supcrior Coun whictt

tlþged Measurc G wss i¡vålid on seversl grourds, inchding noo-complianct "rith

th¡ C¡libmi¡

Ênvlronmconl Qrnlity Âêr ftEQl[,} by lhc County. On Febnrary ¡4" 2gtd the Kcrn County

Sugciior Corut ruled thar Mcgsu1 O ryas iarnlid a¡ld ¡nust be sct rsid¿ bacausc úc Cousty did

not comply wütb CEQA príor æ rbc Bo¡¡d placing tlrc o¡dioar¡cc on thc f¡¡¡c t,20l2 bs¡lot for

üc votcr 10 ldogt, Ibst dodsíûn uras upheld by tbe Fifth Dis¡ict Cotri of Appeal-

l5- On dpril 5, 201t, ùc Fífttt lli*rict Coul of Appcsl ålst ü!td, in th¿ m¡¡t¡cr of

tounty *f f(crn í" al. v, T.C-E.F" cl. al.. tb¡t lbc Rçcat Ordin¡rcs viol¡tcd tbc ElcctÍon¡ Codo,

Bccauscof this, tbË Fiftt Disrriot Court of r\ppcal beld th¡t tbc 2009 Ordi¡¡anco war irlñ¡¡l fbrcs

andcft¡t

16. On Mry 10, 20¡6, th€ Bos¡d of Supervisors ÞsÊd ftin¡¡¡c¿ No. G{63t, which

rddod Chapb 5.86 to tÌ¡p KCOC a¡d iütposcd a ooralorium on lho cs¡¡bli¡hmcnt of nçw

Msd¡cd llorí¡juana Ðisporr*rios in rhc County {thc oMoratoriurn"}. h¡rsuant to lhc Moratoriun,

'bo Madicr¡ MrÊijr¡¡nÂ Ði¡ponsr¡(ics) othor tlrm rño¡c in ocristÊncr and opcrating s¡ thc

cfÈg¡ívo "lorc of this ordin¡ncc ir porruiüed within rho uni¡roorpo¡sfiÊd ¡rcas of Xcrn Cor.u¡y

dur¡aS û¡ë pÊriod of ti¡nc tbis Erdirisfic¿ i¡ ia eüecl" The Moratorium nas $il?¡¡dôd on Jt¡¡c 2l ,

2016 for ta¡ no¡th¡ rnd 15 days, pùrsn lt lo Oovernmcnt Code s¿cdon 65858{a}

DSFTAÍD}ÅI{IS' OPERÂT¡ON Otr. Á MADICÁ,L MÂR¡JUANA DISPE¡{SÂRY

l?. Orr tr{ny t8n 2016, Plsirúiff inspcctcd t}rc Propeny and for¡¡d t¡¡ar tsneü

ímprovearurts were being undcrtakcn, but thu the Pmpcrty wa:l not opcrating as ¡ Medic¿l

MoriJuana Dispcnsary at thal tirnc. ?lointilf rt;.inrpctcd thc hopctty on Jr¡rc 22, 2016 a¡d

Coopbint for Prctlninrry r¡d Po¡¡usont lnjunoti¡¡, Âb¡lonqil, udClvil !bül$ê3

EXHIBTT H Page 4 of I

1

2

3

4

5

ô

7

II

10

11

12

tg

14

t5

{g

Scanned by Cam5canner


1

2

3

4

È

I7

II

1ü

11

,2

t3

14

't5

fe't7

18

fg

?s

¿1

22

23

21

28

26

n28

Scanned bY CamScanner

.5-

EXH|BIT H Page 5 of I

found DefsndgntË eng¡gsl ia tlrc operarion of ¡ Mctlical Marijuana Ditpcnrary at tåc Propony.

Dcñndmts' Mcdtcs¡ lvfuijrum Oiçcruary rrrs not in rycralioo until afl¡r May 18, 2O16.

FIRSTCAUSE O8 ACÎION

vfol,rïf IOH pr oRITIN¡IIiCR OO.Dr gßCTIOll 5.Eó

18. Plniadfrhcrcþ iocotporfcs by rafe¡sæ¡ rengr|pÈ¡ l-3o of thi¡ corrgteiru ard

nsfcs fum palt of ihÍ¡ First Car¡sc of Á¡tioo, ¡s if ñtlly rct forü¡ tx¡cir-

19. This First C¿r¡sc olÂctíon sc¿k¡ i4tuncriw allcf a¡rd rbrrc¡¡e¡rt for vloladons of

KC$C æctior J.t6.

2û, Plddiff ir info¡rrrd r¡rd bcticvc¡ ¡nd thc¡æ¡ rlìcgor thal hd¡¡ttt sc r¡é ¿

¡lt tinca d€6!ûrþd h¡rcin brvc urcd or bavs lüowi¡ryly pÉtsfËd ús r¡sc of lho Ptopcrty for a

Mad¡cal Marijtno¡ g¡O*"tO.

21, Ðcû¡r¡ú¡nto' spsrst¡or¡ sf a lvl¡dical lvfs¡iju¡n¡ OlspÉolsy g rbc hP€fty ¡8 in

vÍslÈlio¡ sf KCOC ¡oqti,on J,36, I(COC ¡c€dsu 5.E6 providts úrr no I'lcdic!¡ ldt¡üt'"nr

gitpcrs¡¡d€s túÊr üås tbût i¿ lfisenpr ¡¡d ofcúd¡S p¡¡oc þ ô[¡y lt, 2016 uc ¡Gfiritæd

r,vilùÍa ths r¡¡incorpors&d år€8t of Køn Cotnty.

?J. Ðtfeod¡¡r!' ltÞd¡cd tyta¡iJ¡¡¡¡¡ Dirpoosrry is loortcd l¡ itç odr.ç,qnrrl¡d ¡¡c¡

of Kcrn Cos¡ty a¡d did aot *dn ofod¡g unËl añrr tvfty lt' ã,¡ó'

?t. Þcftad¡¡ts' viol¡tioot of KCOC ccctioa 5Jf con¡tiU¡ a Pr¡blic Í¡¡iænpa Pr¡ tË¡

î,hict¡ b rubjocr !o injuootion. Pr¡¡g¡a¡rt to KCOC scclroa 8.{4.030, Irubtic nuis¡osc" it dc6red

!o inclrdc "sny !¡¡c...of proprf...which ir unrrfc, t4¡w¡ot¡l to tàg bflkh raicty¡ rrrô rrcür¡e

of ttc pobltc.,... Pr¡¡s¡a¡r ro I(COC e?ct¡oß å.86, ù. Boo¡d of Supccri¡on ful¡¡cd t¡d

rltowfog any nrrv rnodicd mu{uu dlæca¡ri¡c ùo loü¡b *Íthla ths rntncorpontod arc¡¡ of

fåc Cogay or 4larring eoy cxisirrg ¿¡sgc¡tsa¡i€s ¡o ru'lo€dË i! ihs Cot¡o{f, pcndiag Kcrn

Côuaty's rtudy of thc potantial impart of sush &ci$riÊ5, "þ!cs Ê tur6ìt rnd hutd¡¡t¿

tlr¡rt ùs tùc publlc'r hcrlth, ¡rfcty, ¡ld rvcll¡ra" Thus, víola{ion of KCOC æctis* 5.86 i¡ ¡

?r¡bl¡s ¡uist¡cc¡ pu¡lruarrt to KCOC æc1ion 8.44.030. {Ân rct or conditiqr ls$¡ùrively

dlslsfcd io bc ¿ public rnris¡rcs i¡ "l nuisüncc pcr æ againrt whioh a¡r idtÑ arsy iss¡s

wlüloüt ¡ll¡g¡do¡ or Foof of i$çpô¡Bblc iljür¡r'"' {clry oÍMotttc¡Et v' cærnshbnba {2013) 215

bc Prollaiarry tnd Pc¡rno¡r Iüjr¡nclioo.^htcn¡rt

urd Cfvi¡ ltÍ¡ltltl


1

¿.

3

4

5

6

7

Is

10

11

12

13

t4

15

l817

18

't9

?t2'|

22

23

24

?5

2E

27

?ß

Scanned by CamScannerEXHIBIT H Page 6 of I

Cal.App.4th t{}ÓE, t086.}

3{- KCOC clctirou t9,114,080 and i9.l¡d.090 psrmit thc County to icsk injunctive

¡tlievc ¡nd aba¡emo¡t for aoy p¡epcrty bcing rrscd in violuion of thc provisisn¡ of KCOC l¡f¡Ê

19. KCÕC ¡cction 19.04.8?9 dcñnc* "violglion' lo rncan *rny conditior¡ dccl¡rcd

by.".ordinancc by Kcrn County lo be ¡ nul¡a¡rcc,.. (or) aay eondition dangcrous to humrn life'

snssfc, sr deüínm¡¡l to rbc publtc bcal& or ssfrty.' KCOC glor 19.04.507 doñscs the lsrra

"nuilt¡tcq' ùo ocar¡ ray coodition degla¡e¿ þ oraiaanoo ro be dg¡irneasl to the þublic hcalth

or sg¡ety-" BacsusÕ KCOC sêctioa 5.86 declee$ the operation of ner,¡ Medicst Mui¡t'u¡"

Ðispcncade+ to bc an immodlæ ih¡rsr iõ llr publía's hcattb rafcty, a¡d rp¡clå¡c, it is â

'Tr¡lstnc€- +¡ulcr KCOC rc€tiûn l9.O{J0?, ¡¡d r 'licl¡Sot' Fl¡s¡sot !o KCOC ¡oc*ioo

19.0d.S79, Such violadon¡ rrt nrbjccr m inJruction rrd ¡bffic¡t u¡¡dgr KCOC ott¡ptcr t9.l 14.

25. P¡a¡¡¡¡ítrir r¡so psrm¡ttod to scÊk o cojoi¡ ¡nd abots this Fblic cuisarlcÊ pursull bCivi¡ Coda æ.Êion 34?9 crrcç.

26. Clvil &¡caion 34?9rttls is p¡rî:

'{nythiqg {ålch lr iqfuiu¡ lo lËlü¡' im¡t¡din$ bu not limit¡d to,

tbo ¡llq¡l ¡nls of s¡lrdlod albcranccg or lr hdcccat or oifcn¡ivato tbe scosc¡ or rn obctntctlon to tb¡ ûce u¡c of pcoprty, so æ ¿o

idüûrc with thl aonfi¡t¡bl¡ cqþyu!ût of liÈ or goperty...is a¡¡¡l¡aocc.

21. Civil Coda scotioo 3¡18Û st¡t¡¡:

å ¡nrblic nuisanc€ ls æ wtrich aff€ots at thc s&me ti¡ns rtr €ntkecor{r'lr¡Dity or lslghboúood, or tûy coo¡idsrsblE nr¡mbcr ofpssofis, elthough t!Ê ctßmt of tbc annoyaocc or dsn¡rgc innictcdupm lndivtduab msY tc unú$ut

?ß, Cþ¡l Codo sôdos 3{91 pmvidos ûat "fal civil ¡cdod'or {albatemæt'uo

appropriarc'Tcoedic¡ agaÍrxl a publlc t¡¡¡icttlcê."

29. Unkss Ðcfcndants ¡¡c rcstrå¡Dcd ud cojoincd by ordcr of rhc corst, rhcy rvill

conti¡uc io rxrhu¡ñ¡lly usû th! Prof¡crty ¡s â Mcdic¡l il,lar[iuana Diçcnsary ìn violation of

KCOC scctioa 5.S6, å¡d úr6tr will co¡tinr¡o lo dlow, pernit, urd cocourage üris public auisancc

oD thÊ PÞPcrtY.

Co.¡gl¡hl ûx Prrtllrnlnrry md Pom¡¡ra¡l lqiurrtioú'-tb¡tËnê¡l' ¡ûd Clv¡l Pð¡lt¡.r


f011

12

1S

14

t5

to

17

18

19

28

2'a29

a26

28

27

28

Scanned by CamScâilner

7-

EXHIBIT H Page 7 of I

1

2

3

{!I7

I9

Pß.å,YEF

Wbcrcforc, Pl"¡n¡itÈ Prly ar follows:

'ìF,TFRMTNATON OF T'UBT,IC NUIUI\NCE

¡. Tlt¡t r publlc o¡¡brns€ bc found to exis¡ rt lbc Propcrty ,ó¡r to Dcfcodetrs'

vfr¡l¡¡io¡ of K@C ¡ccdo i.t6.

INJI.'I*CÍTYB REUE}'

?. Th¡t úc cor¡t i¡sr¡e prcliminary ud pannaneot iqjrnctloË ia ¡cco¡d¡¡ca witb

KCOÛ roctio¡¡ 19.¡t4.08S ¿ad Civil Codc ¡crtion 3491, cqioioing Ðcfcoda¡ts, inc¡udi¡t ¡}rir

rgto& ffiçÊ¡¡, ;arplopcq ropnc raiag o¡ tboir bct¡!¡f, s¡d ¡sy t$cclrrgrt l,r ixor*' bc&r,

$ri8¡1, ¡ad fi¡trrc tcaræl fr!ûr ruing or porminhg {to ¡¡¡c cf ùe nropsty' or my otåø propctty

h ec uniæorpontod ¡¡ra¡ of lùc Cormty, for thc opcrdu of a Modlc¡l lt{ltiiuana Di4cosary

ñr er long es e oonorium oo Mcdio¡I Mrrii¡a¡r Di¡pcns¡rics k ¡t e&ct t¡Ddcr I€OC eætio¡

5.86.

3, 1b¿¡ Dcå¡d¡nt ftopcrty O*¡cr ¡¡d åay ruocc¡¡ocr i¡ i¡tsrcst, hoþ arsigru bc

púolúbitGd ûd !do¡¡!d fp¡¡ r¡otil¡¡. løiag o¡ orb¿:rrpi¡c ecm¡¡rdq r¡f Modkal Marijrnra

Otæco¡¡ry.to ocetryy o¡ æu¡¡t¡ oË lh? F¡opctrf for rs lorg ¡¡ ¡ mo¡¡lorir¡r¡ o¡ l¡{cdical

lrfuijuaae Ðlsgcrreriog ís ¡n cfféct undê¡ KCOC æotion J.tó.

4. Ttrd ryon crvidæc arta¡o¡ia¡¡g Ðceod¡¡t¡' ñtluro ùo conpty *ith r¡æh

o¡dcr¡, ûs Court rrltll hvy 0rc in tbs s¡ou¡¡t sf ore tborsed rbttr¡ {31,000} fûr a*t¡ ¡¡d

crrory ofÊosc prrs¡a¡t lq C{xJc of Civil Ptoccdu¡,t scstioü l2l8'

/rqATSMBNT

J. Tht the Co¡¡¡t irsrrc ¡¡rl¡ q¡dcrt tt t¡Ê lp?rwri¡l4 in ¡scorda¡oc wûh KCOC

tcarior t9.l14.090 ¡¡rd Civil Codo lcclion 349!to abatc tk ptblic anisoæ oa tho Propøty.

f, lbú lbc coüí Õrdcre Dofhd¡¡tu to t¡\c thc folloving acúon with nspcct to tbc

hoprty, for rs lo¡g !r Ê lroril¡rium on Mcdic¡l Ma{iuena O¡+cnorior i¡ in cfioct u¡dcr

KCOC ¡cotioo 5.86:

tlttlt

Civil Pe¡¡hh¡øqtrUt U AoUatrry ¡nd Pan¡¡¡rûtl ltúu¡cllot' AbtttÍ¡ctll" ud


r9

20

21

u2!u26

n27

28

1

z

3

{5

ô

rI3

10

A. Rmvt dl signrgc &on 1¡!ç groec¡iy advøtiriry s llcdíc¡I M¡riiu¡¡t¡

Dbectrsrry.

B" Do lu aÉr¡adso lr uty m¡""r. inchrdiag on tbõ lntâteq lbc a<icalcc of

e Modioal Marijuoa Dhpcnsarl of oy lcird rt ttro Propcrty.

C. Âdf¡sc lny poræ¡ wltc antlrs thc Proporq¡ Û¡t tàc Medtcs¡ ¡rleriittana

Þú¡pæ{¡fy trcloç!ó.

D. llo rd @r üty rcconnc¡dai¡r q otlrr doûEcdtt¡¡on rt[ùdid[g

&! d¡ssihrlioo of os[i¡¡¡¡¡.

E. Ða ¡d op.$üc ø pcrørit aa¡,o[s to opcrù r Mcdiarl ùf¡úíjsúr

u+ar¡¡ry rodcr poucss offor, ¡cll 3iw rway, orolhrrrlse dirribr*o narijuana

*om lhc&opcrty.

Afi'moNÁLABrJqr

7, ?brrgoüsty ir g!ú¡êd rrrlhoùüs¡d furth¡rnli¡f, ¡ncbdi¡g oo€tt¡¡d d!ô:!rys

fto¡¡¡ åhcCos¡t dæ¡Jrst ød pt€Fr.

aaatny$zarc ïIE&EoA ÐOUNTYCOU}¡sEL

for Cumtyof Kro"caal

nwz2a.Ðac

Ita2

{3

t1

,5

t817

t8

ooæl¡ht ñr ¡tlltñilltï ud Fc¡a¡cnt Ulungdon' Aþlsa¡at ll'dcldlhohþr

Scanned by CarnScanner

&

EXHIBIT H Page I of I


Exhibit I


The Loop Newspaper - Tehachapi's Online

Community News & EntertainrTrent Guide

Kcrn CoUnty s€rvss wârrãnts on three morÊ

shops in Eastern Kern

From our Supervisor By ãqck ScrivqgrKem Cogaiy SuPervisor

A Kem County En{orcement Task Force commeneed action today to enfo¡ræ the coun$'s rnoratcrium

on fhree iilegal rnedical marijuana ai*pu*ariei in the communities of Mojave and Rcga:mond' The

rhree dispensaries, Big 0 Reiief at legqO"H¡lï;;y 14,:nd an associaled grow site at t69t6 Highway

i4, Lights Out Wellnis*'locut"¿ at 1?39 popi* Súeet, $ogamond, and American Organiss Club at

ifii io"uut Street in Rosanro¡rd, were operaling illegaliy.

This Enfarcernent Task Force action conxuences an initiative to close all iliegal medical marijuana

dispensaries that began op*r"tiuo un"t ** fuluy f O, 2016 Moratoriurs enactcd by the Board af

Supervisors.

The Enforcernent Task Force is a collaborative effort between Kern Counfy Public warks - code

compliance Dirision, K"* co*ty srt*ti¡tt o.rp*t**nt, District Attomey, counry counsel' Fire

Deparlment, Planning and Natural Resoürces, Department of Agriculture and Measurement

Standards, and Public Heaith-

The Ðnforcement Tearn seized several pounds of edible products being ssld without a permit' and

,"ru"¿ notices of uiolation for building, fre, and other code violations'

\ 7 Are You-new.,,. -- lflle have FREEGifts &

tc theTehachaPi area?

a Smalltown Welcome for Youl

Cûtt @ gâ I -8 29'81 88Oive Us ûWelcomingService


Medical rnarijuana dispensaiies that operate without regard for zoniag, fire, buildingt-and h!a{h code¡

endanger communitieJ. tttegat dispeniaries often create a clin¡ats of lawlessness and have detrimcntal

impacã on com1¡ülities wi;h increased instances of robberies, sho'otings, and even nne kidlrapping

and torture tase connected with a dispensary in 2015'

',1 applaud the actions taken today by our Ën-f,orcement Tearp in Eastïn Kern against these iliegai

**¡uunu dispensaries,l' said Z4çk Sc¡iYner, Second Ðistrict Supervisor, w!9¡foarheaded the

,orrrty'u en{bicement ef,forts. "A1t ,lt.g-tãiipensaries in Eastern Kem should be an notice that our

Elrforcement Team will visit fhem soon-"

Ccnncct r#ith Us

The Loap Newspaper

206 S, Green St¡eet

Tehachapi, CA 93561

Plx (661) 822-8188Ern ail :. inf o'@thelo opnev/spaper' csm

Õ 20i 7 Hilltop Publishe¡s

Powe¡ed by ROÅR Online Publicntion $$ffw¡re from Lisns Ligh! Corporation

Õ Capyright ?017

Re¡de¡ed 09 I A9 ft0 11 0 I :22


The Loop F{ewspaper - Tehachapi's OnlineCommunity New-s & Entertainment Guide

i\:ìllle have

Are you new to tl¡e TehachaPi area?

FßEE Gifts & a Smalltown llVelcome for you!Welcomina

Service - Gbs Us û Cûlt e Êâ l-822-8t 88

Counfy crackdogn on illegal medical marijuanadispensaries

From our SupervisorBy Zack SeJivnerKern Csufify Supervisor

A Kern County Enfarcement TaskSorce cornmenced action on Aug. 10 to enforc-e the county's

ma¡âtorium o' tirru*iitug"i medical ma¡ijuana dispensaries in the community of Þryg+4. The three

dispensaries, Green Mile Coilective at zSl¡ Oiu*ot ¿ Street Highwa¡ Retíef Medical at2929 Sierra

Highway and 5 Grâmz stcp at2g4g,Sierra Highway, were operating illegally'

Tåis Ënforcement Task Farce action cornmences an initiative to close all illegal medical marijuana

Ä;;;i* tfr"r t"e; "peration

aft,er the May 10, 2016 Moratorium enacted by the Board of

Superuisors.

The Eufbrcernent Task Fo.rce is a collaborative effo* between Kern county Public works - code

ComplianceDivision, Kem County Sheriffs Ðepartment, District Attomey, County Counsel' Fire

n*påt rr"nt, Planning and Natural-Resources, Dèpartment of Agriculture and Measurement

Standards, and hrblic l{eâlth.

The Enfo¡cement Team seized several thousand dollars in unsaft edible product of unknown origin,

as well as illegal bath salts. In addition, sevetal notices of violatian were issued'

Medical marijuana dispensaries that operate without regard for zoning, fire, building' and heaith codes

endanger commusities. îllegal cispe*r*ie;oft"" "rrutJu

climate of lawlessness and have detriment¿l


irnpaêts on çomrnunities with inereased instances of robberies, shootings, and even one kidnapping

and tarture caÉe sonnected with a dispensary in 20i 5.

"The actions taken today send a strong message to those operating illegai dispensaries that their days

in Kern County a¡e numbeted,l' said Zaqk Ss-*y&r, Second Ðistrict Supervisor, who acccn:panied the

Enfcrcement Task Force today.

Connect ïYith Us

The Loop Nerrspaper

206 S, Gree¡ StreetTehachapi, CÁ,93561Ph: {661} 822-8188Email : info@theloopnewspa?e!.corr

Õ 2017 Hiltlop Fublishers

Powered by RG,{R OqtiFe lublic¡tion Softw$e from Lions Light Coqporation

O Copyright 20i7


SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIACOUNTY OF KERNBAKERSFIELD COURT

1415 TRUXTUN AVENUEBAKERSFIELD CA sggol

FOR COURT USE ONLY

F¡leoSuprnroR Counr or CalrFoRNrA

Cou¡¡ry or KERI.¡

OcroaeR 13,2A17

TEnny McNnllv, C¡-ERr

Bv Va*tt-s,s¿' HiA^d. DepuryPLAINTIFF/PETITIONER:ALVARO ORDAZBIG O RELIEF, A CALIFORNIA NON-PROFIT MUTUAL

BENEFIT CORPORÄTIONDOO H YOON

DEF'ENDANT/RE S POI\DENT :KERN COTJNTY DEPARTMENT OF AGRICTILTT]RE AND

MEAST]REMENT STANDARDS, COLLECTTVELYKERN COUNTY PLANNING AND NATURAL RESOURCES

DEPARTMENT, COLLECTTVELYKERN COTJNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT, COLLECTIVELY

CASENUMBER:

BCV-L7-102394

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT TO JUDGE F'OR ALL PURPOSES ANDNOTICE OF ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE CRC RULE 3.110 AND

NOTICE OF' CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

By order of the presiding judge, the above entitled case is assigned to the Honorable Stephen D. Schuett for all purposes. Itwill be managed on the direct calenda¡ program in Bakersfield Department 10 until its conclusion. Peremptory challenges, ifany, must be made within the times set out in CCP $170.6. Please include the initials SDS after the case number on all firturepleadings filed in this case.

TO PLAINTIFF AND PLAINTIFF''S COUNSEL:You are ordered to appear on January 25,2t18 in Bakersfield Department 10 at 8:30 AM in the above entitled court togive any legal reason why sanctions shall not be imposed for failure to serve the complaint on all named defendants and fileproof(s) of service with the court within sixty (60) days after the filing of the complaint pursuant to California Rules ofCourt, Rule 3.110. All appearances are mandatory, unless the court receives the required proof(s) of service five (5) courtdays prior to the hearing date, and then no appearance is necessary.

TO EACH PARTY AND THEIR RESPECTTVE ATTORNEY(S) OF RECORD:This case is set for Case Management Conference, by the Honorable Stephen D. Schuett on Äpril 10, 2018at 8:15 AM in Bakersfïeld Department l0 ofthe above entitled court. Case management statements are to be filed atleast fifteen 115) davs prior to the conference in with Califomia Rules of Court- Rules 3.720 - 3.730. Allpa¡ties shall comply with California Rules of Court. Rules 3.720 - 3.730.

NOTICE TO PLAINTIF'F''S COUNSELIMPORTANT: You are required to serve this Notice of Assignment and Notice of Order to Show Cause Date andNotice of Case Management Conference l)ate with the Summonso Complaint [Local Rute 3.7(a)lo AlternativeDispute Resolution (ADR) Information Packet, and ADR Stipulation and Order Form ( California Rules of CourfRuIe 3.221).

NOTICE TO CROSS COMPLAINANT'S COT.]NSELIMPORTANT: If you are bringing a cross complaint against new parties, you arer likewise, required to serve thisNotice of Assignment pursuant to California Rules of Courtn Rule 3.110 and Notice of Order to Show Cause dateand Notice of Case Management Conference date on the new cross defendants.

Notice of Assignment/Notice of O¡der to Show Cause Re CRC 3.1l0/Notice of Case Manageinent Conference

Page 1 of4


Date: October !3,2017

TERRY MCNALLYCLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

Vo*t e.t'sa,

Vanessa Cofield, Deputy ClerkBy:

Notice of Assignment/Notice of O¡de¡ to Show Cause Re CRC 3.1lO/l{otice of Case Ma¡ragernent Conference

Page? of4


The Clerk of the Superior Court's office has rsceived a civil cornplaint from you for filing. Pursuanl to the Trial CourlDelay Reduction Act, your case has been assigned to the Honorable Stephen D. Schuett as monitoring judge.

Judge Stephen D. Schuett has instituted a direct calendaring system for all cases assigned to himlher as the monitoringjudge.

All law and motion, case management and trial setting conferences, ex parte matters and trials will be scheduled before

hin/her in Bakersfield Department 10. This will involve all cases in which the clerk has assigned the initials SDS to the

complaint at the tirne of filing. Counsel is expected to make the initials of the monitoring judge a part of the case numberon all pleadings and papers.

Judge Stephen D. Schuett expects that all law and motion hearings to be heard by him/her be set within five (5) days offhe earliest date that they may be heard, given mail notice of hearing. Law and motion matters must be reserved bYgsing to the website address http:/lkerncgurtlink.com for the Kern Courtlink Online Reservation Svstem. Thewebsite is available at anv time. You mav calendar motions as scheduled below. Ex-parte mafters require pre-clearance.

At the time of filing the complaint, plaintiffs counsel will be given a Notice of Case Management Conference which sets a

conference approximately one hundred sighry (180) days after filing of the complaint. This notice must be served with the

summons and complaint on all defendants. Defendants must serve the notice on all crossdefendants named. The notice mustalso be served on interveners and lien claimants.

Telephonic appearances for case management conferences and law and motion hearings are available through Court Call.

The toll free telephone lumber for Court Call is (888) 88-COURT. Proper procedu¡es must be complied with under

Califomia Rules of Court. Rule 3.670. Arrangements to make appearances through Court Call must be made at least five (5)

court days prior to the hearing date.

Another judge will hear settlement conferences in cases assigned to Judge Stephen D. Schuett. However, those cases that do

not settle will be set for trial before him/her.

To confirm any hearing on calendar, for general questions regarding cases assigned to Judge Stephen D. Schuett or to pre-

clear an ex-parte hearing, contact the Direct Calendaring Clerk at 661-868-5404. To check on tentative rulings from Judge

Chapin or Judge Clark, go to the court's website address "http/www.kern.courts.ca.gov/", after 4:00 pm, and click ontentative rulings. Judge Lampe does Ug¡Loffertentative rulings.

Notice of Assignmert/Notice of Order to Sbow Cause Re CRC 3.1I0/Notice of Case Management Co¡ference

Page 3 of4


SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIACOUNTY OF KERN

SPECIAL RULES RELATING TO CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCES

At least fifteen (15) days prior to the case management conference, each party shall prepare, file and serve on each other party

a case management conference report providing the Court with the following information:

1. The "at-issue" status of the case including any new parties that may be contemplated;

Z. A brief statement of the tSrpe of case and the general facts or contentions;3. A description of the discovery done to date and that contemplated to be done;4. Estimated time for trial and whether a jury is demanded;5. Whether or not the case is entitled to priority in trial setting and if so, the legal authority thereof;6. An evaluation of the case for alternative dispute resolution, including arbitration fiudicial or binding), mediation or

private j udge handling;7 . If a person injury action, a description of the i4juries sustained by each plaintiff and the elements of claimed damage;

8. A statement of any settlement negotiations undertaken thus far;9. The name of the attorney primary responsible for the case on behalf of the party filing the report.

More than one party may join in the filing of a single report.

The case management conference shall be attended by the attorney primarily responsible for the case on behalf of each part¡z

or a member of his or her firm or counsel formally associated in the case. The attorney attending shall be thoroughlyfamiliar with the case, and be able to engage in meaningful discussions with court and counsel, and to enter into agreements

on behalf of his or her client on the following subjects:

1. The "at-issue" status of the case including the dismissal of the unnamed doe defendants or cross-defendants byagreement of all parties;

2. Discovery conducted and remaining to be done;3. Amenability of the case to alternative dispute resolution including, but no limited to, arbitration fiudicial or binding),

mediation, and private judge handling.4. Delineation of issues including stipulation of facts not in substantial controversy;5. Settlement prospects;6. Setting the matter for trial, pre-trial conferences, settlement conference or further case management conference;

7 . Any other matters relevant to the processing of the case to a final resolution.

Any violation of these rules shall result in the imposition of substantial sanctions which may include monetary, issue,

termination, or other appropriate sanctions.

Notice of Assignment/Notice of Order to Show Cause Re CRC 3.1 10/Notice of Case Management Conference

Page 4 of 4


1

2

3

4

5

6

1

9

10

11

I2

13

74

15

16

T7

10lo

19

20

.>1

22

23

24

25

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL FOR RICO COMPLAINT OF BIG O RELIEF', ET AL

LA\ry OFFICES OF ABRAHAM A. LABBADAbraham A. Labbad, Esq. (CA Bar No.: 27 1349)1 250 Walnut St., Unit 122

Pasadena, CA 91106Office: (818) 253-1529Fax: (818) 530-9236Specially Appearing and Limited ScopeAttorneys for Plaintiffs:

BiG O RELIEF, ET AL

BIG O RELIEF, a California Non-profitMutual Benefit Corporation, DOO H. YOON,an individual, EUNICE S. YOON, an

individual, and Alvaro Ordaz, an individual,Plaintiffs,

COUNTY OF KERN, a political subdivisionof the State of Caiifomia; GREG FENTON,individually and as Kern County BuildingInspector, KERN COTINTY BOARD OFSUPERVISORS, collectively; LETICIAPEREZ, individually and as Kern CountySupervisor; MICK GLEASON, individuallyand as Kern County Supervisor; DAVIDCOUCH, individually and as Kern CountySupervisor; MIKE MAGGARD, individuallyand as Kern County Supervisor; ZACKSCRI\rNER, individually and as Kern CountySupervisor, KERN COUNTY PUBLICWORKS _ CODE COMPLIANCEDIVISION, collectively; KERN COLTNTYSHERIFF' S DEPARTMENT, collectively;DONNY YOTINGBLOOD, individually and

as Kern County Sheriff; KERN COUNTYDISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE,collectively; LISA GREEN, individually and

as Kern County District Attomey; KERNCOLTNTY COLINSEL'S OFFICE,collectively; MARK L. NATIONS,individually and as Kern County Counsel;

ELECTRONICALLY FILED1At1212017 10:48 AM

Kern County Superior GourtTerry McNally

By Vanessa Cofield, Deputy

Case No.: BCv-17 -102394

PLAINTIFFS' DEMAND FOR ruRYTRIAL (relating to the followingComplaint):

COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORYAND INJUNCTWE RELIEF ANDDAMAGES FROM RACKETEERING,CONSPIRACY TO ENGAGE IN APATTERN OF RACKETEERINGACTIVITY, AND RELATED CLAIMS;AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

(c.c.P., $592.)

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

couNTY oF KERN (METROPOLITAN DIViSION)

VS

))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

1


1

2

3

4

5

6

1

B

9

10

11

I2

13

I4

15

16

I'7

LB

19

20

21,

LZ

24

25

JAMES BRENNAN, individually and as

peputy Kern Counfy Counsel; CHARLES F.

COLLINS, individually and as Chief DeputyKern County Counsel; GURUJODHA S.

KHALSA, individually and as Chief DeputyCounty Counsel; KERN COLINTY FIREDEPARTMENT, collectively; KERNCOLINTY PLANNING AND NATURALRESOURCES DEPARTMENT, collectively;LORELEI OVIATT, individualiy and as

Director; KERN COUNTY DEPARTMENTOF AGRICULTURE ANDMEASUREMENT STANDARDS,collectively; GLENN FANKT{AUSER,individually and as Commissioner; KERNCOT'NTY PUBLIC HEALTHDEPARTMENT, collectively; AL ROJAS,individually and as Kern County CodeCompliance Division Supervisor; and DOES1 Through 1000, Inclusive,

(continued)

Defendants.

TO EACH PARTY AND TO THEIR COI-INSEL OF RECORD:

1. Plaintiffs in the present matter hereby give NOTICE of their DEMAND FOR JURY

TRIAL in the above-referenced action, pursuant to Califomia Code of Civil Procedure,

$s92.

Respectfuily submitted,

Dated: October ll,20l7 tAW OFFICES OF ABRAIIAM A. LABBAD

ABRAHAM A. LABBAD,Limited Scope Attorney for PlaintifßBig O Reliet Doo H. Yoon, Eunice Yoon, and

Alvaro Ordaz

2

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL FOR RICO COMPLAINT OF'BIG O RELTEF, ET AL

)))))))))))))))))))))))))


SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF KERNALTERNATIVË DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR)

INFORMATION PACKET

Kern County Superior Court encourages, and under certain circumstances, may require parties to tryADR before trial. Courts have also found ADR to be beneficial when used early in the case process'

The courts, community organizations and private providers offer a variety of ADR processes to helppeople resolve disputes without a trial. Below is information about the potential advantages and

disadvantages of ADR, the most common types of ADR, and how to find a local arbitrator, mediatoror neutral evaluator. You may find more information about these ADR processes atwww. cou rts. ca. gov/p rog ram s/ad r.

Possible ntaoes and Di es of ADRADR may have a variety of advantages or disadvantages over a trial depending on the type of ADRprocess used as well as the particular type of case involved.

Possible ES: Saves time; saves money; gives the parties more control over thedispute resolution process and outcome; helps to preserve and/or improve party relationships

Possible Disadvantaqes: May add additional time and costs to the litigation if ADR does not

resolve the dispute; procedures such as discovery, jury trial, appeals, and other legal protections may

be limited or unavailable.

Most Common Tvoes of ADRMediation: A neutral person or "

constructive manner so the parties canoutcome, but helps the parties to do souseful where ongoing relationships are

mediator" helps the parties communicate in an effective andtry to resolve their dispute. The mediator does not decide the. Mediation is generally confidential and may be particularlyinvolved, such as between family members, neighbors,

employers/employees or business partners.

Settlement Conferences: A judge or another neutral person assigned by the couñ helps theparties to understand tfre iirengths and weaknesses of their case and to discuss settlement. Thejudge or settlement conference neutral does not make a decision in the case but helps the parties tonegotiate a settlement. Settlement conferences may be particularly helpfulwhen the parties have

very different views about the likely outcome of a trial in their case.

Neutral Evaluation: The parties briefly and informally present their facts and arguments to aneutral peison who is often an expert in the subject matter of the dispute. The neutral does not

decide the outcome of the dispute, but helps the parties to do so by providing them with a non-bindingopinion about the strengihs, weaknesses and likely outcome of their case. Depending on the neutral

evaluation process, and with the parties' consent, the neutral may then help the parties try to

negotiate a settlement. Neutral evaluation may be appropriate when the parties desire a neutral'sopinion about how the case might be resolved at trial; and, if the primary dispute is about the amountoi damages or technical issues, the parties would like a neutral expert to resolve those disputes.

Information Packet per CRC Rule 3'221 - Last Modified 112612017


Arbitration: The parties present evidence and arguments to a neutral person or "arbitrator"

who then decides the outcome of the dispute. Arbitration is less forrnal than a trial, and the rules ofevidence are generally more relaxed. lf the parties agree to binding arbitration, they waive their rightto a jury trial and agree to accept the arbitrator's decision. With nanbinding arbitration, any party mayreject the arbitrator's decision and request a trial. Arbitration may be appropriate when the partieswant another person to decide the outcome of their dispute but would like to avoid the formality, timeand expense of a trial, or desire an expert in the subject matter of their dispute to make a decision.

Local Gourt ADR ProqramsThe Superior Court, County of Kern offers two types of ADR: Arbitration in cases in which theamount in controversy as to each plaintiff is $50,000 or less; and DRPA mediation services on theday of the hearing, settlement conference or trial.

Arbitration: The Superior Couri of California, County of Kern does use Arbitrators in civil caseswhere the amount in controversy as to each individual plaintiff is $50,000 or less. The Couft mayorder the parties to Arbitration or the parties may agree to Arbitration any time before the first casemanagement conference statement is filed.See Local Rule 3.14 at mn¡w.kern.courts.ca.qov/local rules of cout1.

Dispute Resolution Program Act (DRPA): The Superior Court of California, County of Kern alsooffers mediation services in small claims and unlawful detainer, civil harassment, family law andprobate matters. The Court has contracted with the Better Business Bureau (BBB) under the DisputeResolution Programs Act (DRPA) to provide these mediation services. For more information aboutBBB Mediation Services contact www.mediationservicesbvbbb'orq.

AÐR Coordinator:Although complaints about arbitrators and mediators are rare, the Superior Court of California,County of Kern does provide a complaint procedure in our Local Rules, Rule 3.14.7. lf you have a

complaint or a concern with any of this Court's ADR programs, or simply have a question about ADR,please contact the ADR Administrator at [email protected] or 661-868-5433.

Resources:California Department of Consumer Affairs: www.dca.ca.qovlconsu merlmediation ouidesJ udicial Branch Gal iforn ia Gourts - ADR: www.courts.ca.qov/selfhep-adrAD R Sti p u I ation Form : www. kern.cou rts. ca.qovll i n ks/4/fi le

Information Packet per CRC Rule 3.221 - Last Modified 112612017


ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT AfiORNEY

NAME:

FIRM NAME:

ADDRESS:

clry:

E MAIL ADDRESS (Opflbna¡):

ATTORNEY FOR (Narne):

STATÉ BAR NO,:

STATE:

TELEPHONÉ NO,:

FAx NO. (Opfr'oraD:

ZIP CODE:

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF KERN

STREEf AÐDRESS:

MAILING ADDRESS:

CITYAND ZIP CODE:

BRANCH NAME:

FORCOURT USEONLY

PLAINTIFF:

DEFENDANT:

CASE NUMBER:

ADR STIPULAT¡ON AND ORDER FORM

1. Pursuant to California Rule of Court 3.22I(a)$), the parties and their attorneys stipulate that all claims in

this action willbe submitted to the following alternative dispute resolution (ADR) process:

a. fl Private Mediation.

b. f] Neutral Evaluation.

c. E einding Arbitration.

d. fl Referee/Special Master.

e. f] Settlement Conference with Private Neutral.

f. I Non-binding Judicial Arbitration pursuant to CCP$1141.10 et seq., and applicable Rules of Court.

g. n Discovery will remain open until 30 days before trial.

h. fl other:

2. It is also stipulated that:

a. (name of individual neutral, not organization)

has consented to and will serve as

b (neutral function/process) and that the session will take place on

(enter a FIRM date) and that all persons necessary to effect a settlementc. onand having full authority to resolve the dispute will appear at such session.

KC ADR-101 (Mandatory) Rev.07/2014

ADR STIPULATION AND ORDER FORMPage I of2


CASE NUMBER:PLAINTIFF:

DEFENDANT:

3. Date

à. On behalf of Plaintiff/s

(TYPE ORPRINTNAME) (SIGNATURE OF PLAINTIFF OR ATTORNEY)

(TYPE OR PRINT NAME)

f Continu ed on Attachment 3a (formMc-025).

b. On behalf of DefendanVs

(TYPE OR PRINT NAME)

('TYPE OR PRINT NAME)

I Continued on Attachment 3ø (form MC-025).

4. ORDER:

(SIGNATURE OF PLAINTIFF OR ATTORNEY)



20_a.t _a. X the ADR process is to be completed by

-,20-.

b. fI fne Case Management Conference currently set fora.m./p.m. in Department

-:i. fl Remains on calendar.

ii. n Is herebyvacated.

c. I Mediation Status Review.

d. n Case Status Review re:

e.f]FinalCaseManagementConferenceissetfor-'20-ata.m./p.m'inDepartment

f. I Judicial Arbitration Order Review Hearing will be set by notice upon assigrunent ofarbitrator.

IT SO ORDERED.

Date:_ruDICIAL OFFICER

KC ADR-101 (Mandatory) Rev. 07 12014

ADR STIPULATION AND ORDER FORMPage2 oî2



Exhibit B


STATE BA« NO: 271349ATTORNEY OR PARTY MTHOUT ATTORNEY.-

name: ABRAHAM A. LABBADFIRM name: law OFFtCE OF ABRAHAM A. UBBADstreet ADDRESS: 1250 WALNUT ST.. UNIT 122ci^: PASADENA 3TATE:CA EIPCOOE: 91106TEIEPKONENO.: (818)253-1529 P.OCNO.: (818) 530-9236B-MAo, ADDRESS: [email protected] FOR {Name). 8IG O RELIEF, 9 CattfomlB Non-profit Mutual Benefit Corporation,SlJ&ltblAO f^niirrr nr r ■ i n i ■ L 1SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF KERNSTREETA0DRE88: 1415 TRUXTUN AVENUEMAIUNOAOORESS: 1415 TRUXTUN AVENUEciTYANDaPcooE: BAKERSFIELD 93301

»^nchname: metropolitan DIVISION

Plaintiff/Petitioner: BIG O RELIEF, elalDefendant/Respondent; COUNTY OF KERN, at al

REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL

CIV-110

FOR COUHT use ONLY

ELECTRONICALLY FILED i

11/6/2017 8:00 AM

Kern County Superior Cou;rt

Terry McNally jBy Araceli Wahl, Depujy

CASE NUMBER:

BCV-17-102394

A conformed copy will not ba returned by the clerk unleas a method of return is provided with the document.

StlomljcaT^Ruyea of CwymlelTTMand 3.77^^^ of action In a daes1. TO THE Cl^RK: Please dismiss this action as fellows

a- (1) □ With prejudice (2) Q Without prejudiceb. (1) □ Complaint (2) Petition

(3) cm Cross-complaint filed by (name):(^) I I Cross-complaint filed by (name):

L_J Entire action of all parties and ail causes of action(8) 1X1 Other (specify).- Dismiss action as to LETICIA PEREZ, indlvWoally.2. (Complete In^ cases except family law cases.)

The court did Xl bid not waive court fees and costs for a party liclerk. If court fees and costs were waived, the declaretion on the back ofthi

Dale: November 2,2017ABRAHAM A. LABBAD. ESQ.(TYPEORPRINTNAMEOf XI AHORNEY (_] PARTYWTTHOUTATTORNEY)

on (date)'.on (date)'.

may be obtained ̂ m the

parties only of spedfled eaus«s pf «ctfon cnJy,or a sppclfiGd cn>»9<oiRpl8lnis only, so atalp and idenfi^ the paities. ofaction, or croas<onip!aints to ba dtsntlssed.

irrfomscomple

3- TO THE CLERK: Consent to the above dismissal is hereby given.'Date:

- L(TVPEORPRINTNAMeOF P j aTTORNEy" T!T party WITKOUTATTGHNEV)~ c^-oon^Int - or Roaponse (Family Law) soeUng ofrirmativQf«fef- ia Oft rao. the attorney for crosa-complatnant (rospondant) must siQntW» consent tf required by Code of Civil Prooedtrro eocOon 581 (0 Of (Qa

_ _ (SKSNATURg)Attorney or party yWjtxkit attorney for;j-*.J Pteintlff/Petilioner j I Defendant/Respondenti I Cross Complainant

(To be completed by clerk)4. 12^ Dismissal entered as requested on (date): 11/06/20175 iZD Dismissal entered on /cfsfe;: as to only/name;:®' I Dismissal not entered as requested for the following reasons (specify)'.

(StONATURE)Attorney or party without attorney for1—] Plaintiff/Pellboner I I Defendant/RespondentL I Cross Complainant

7. a. (O Attorney or party without attorney nouned on/dafe;: 11/7/2017b. CD Attorney or party without attorney not notified. Filing party failed to provide

cm 3 copy to be conformed I I means to return conformed copyDate: 11/7/2017 Clerk, byFem Adoptad forMand«to(y UmJudicial Counel of CaUorNoav-lio puv. Jen, 1, soiaj REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL

/s/ Araceli Wahl nflnmyPas* loft

CodaofCNa Pracodw*, 1581 *1 aaq.; Oov. Codo,§ 68837(e): Cat. RuIm ei Court, lulo 3.1390

i»Mw.court*.ea.gov


PlalnttfryPetilloner BIG O RELIEF, et alDefendant/Respondent; COUNTY OF KERN, et af

CASE number;

BCV-17-102394

RECOVERY OF WAIVED COURT FEES AND COSTS

r'® S10.000 or n<or« Incourt has a Llutoiv awirallon award, madlatlon seltlamanl. or other means, theeatisllad. «4!?. S§ 68«7o '"®'' """I »«" l»

I Declaration Concerning Waived Court Fees1. Ttie court waived court fees and costs in this action for (name):Z The person named in item 1 is (check one below):

®' I—I "0* fscovering anything of value by this action,b- □ recovering less than $10,000 In value by this action.

, «»™1n8 510.000 or more In value by this action. (Itllemlclseheek0d.mm3mu^beoomplele(l.)3. □ A« court fees and court costs that were waived In this action have been paid to the court (check one): y,.I declare under penalty of perlury under the laws of the State of CaBfomla that the Information above Is tme and correctDate:

I kh . I

CIV.110

No

(TYP£ORP«MrNA*COF Q ATTORNEV Q PARTYMAWNOOECURAT.ON)(SIGNATURE)

CtV-1 to (Rev. January 1.201^ REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL Pa8«3e(2



Exhibit C


Ctv.110STATeaARNa 271349

ATTORNEY OR PARTY wnHOUT ATTORNEV;

NAME: ABRAHAM A. LABBAD

firm NAME LAW OFFICE OF ABRAHAM A. LABBADSTREETADOReea 1250 WALNUT ST.. UNIT 122

oty: PASADENA STATE: OA sPccosgitOBtelepmoneno.: (818) 253<1529 faxno.: (818) 530>9236E^wn. ADDRESS: [email protected] FOR BIG 0 RELIEF, a California Non-profit Mutual Benefit Con)ora«on.SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF KERNSTREET ADDRESS: 1415 TRUXTUN AVENUEmajung ADDRESS: 1415 TRUXTUN AVENUECITY AND ZIP code: BAKERSFIELO 93301

SRANCKMAUE: METROPOLITAN DIVISION

PlalntlR/Petitlonen BIG O RELIEF, et al

Defendant/Respondent: COUNTY OF KERN, et al

REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL

FOR COVRT USE ONLY


11/6/2017 8:00 AM

Kern County Superior Court

Terry McNally

By Aracell Wahl, Deputy

CASE NUMBER:

BCV-17-102334

A conformed copy will not be returned by the clerk unless a method of return is provided with the document

derivative action or a class action or of any party or cause of action In a classaction. (Cal. Rules of Court, rules 3.760 and 3.770.)TO THE CLERK: Please dismiss this action as follows: ~~ ~a- {<) □□ With prejudice (2) Without prejudiceb- (1) [ZD Complaint (2) □□ Petition

(3) I i Cross-complaint filed by/name); on (date):(4) I I Cross-compiaint filed by (name): on (date):(5) i I Entire action of all parties and all causes of action(6) [T] Other (specify):* Dismiss action as to CHARLES F. COLUN^ripd/diSSaily.

2. (Comfdete In ail cases except fymifylaw cases.) 'The court [ZD did I ■« 1 did not waive court fees and costs for a party/fn thl/dhsef^ informatjtclerk. If court fees and costs were waived, the declaration on the back of this fotpf must Je completed).

Date: November 2,2017ABRAHAM A. LABBAD. ESQ.(TYPE OR PRINT NAKg OP [ | ATTORNEY j PARTY WITHOUT ATTCRNEYl //^ (SIGNATUR

I may be obtained ̂ om^he

*if disntlssBi requostpd i& of spedSed paRlss only of specified causes of action only,or of specified oross-complaints only, so stole and IdentIV the perfles. causes ofactioa or cross-complBlnts to be dismissed.

.Attorney or partU wit

3. TO THE CLERK: Consent to the above dismissal Is hereby given.Date:

i(TYPE OR PRINT NAME OP □ ATT0RNg7~'P™^ PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY)"Ha cross-complatnt - or Response (Family Law) aeeking sfflrmativarelief- Is on file, the attorney for cro8s<oo(nplaln8nt (respondent) must signmis consent If requirsd by Ckide of Civil Procedure section 601 0) or (J).

E)

[attorney fori * 1 Piaintiff/PetR^er | j Defendant/RespondentI I Cross Complainant

(SiOKATURE)

Attorney or party without attorney for:L- 1 Plaintiff/Petitioner I I Defendant/Respondent1 I Cross Complainant

(To be completed by dork)4. IX 1 Dismissal entered as requested on (date):^ 1 /06/20175 I I Dismissal entered on (date): as to only/name;:6. I I Dismissal not entered as requested for the following reasons (specify):

'7. a. [AJ Attorney or party without altomey notified on fdafe^'l 1 /7/2017b. I I Attorney or party without attorney not notified. Filing party tolled to provide

I 1 a copy to be conformed I I means to return conformed c<^yDale: 11/7/2017 Clerk, by /s/ Araceli Wahl Deputy PagalofsFonn Adopted for Mandslaiy UmAiddolCoiBwaofCMirtKMaQV>110{R«v.Jtft. 1.2013)

REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL Cola of CNil Procedun. i S81 St Gov. Com.% 6S837(e); ON. Rutet d Court, nilo 3.1300

Mn«Mr.OO<«<f.cs.pov

-L


CIV-110Plaintiff/Petitioner; BIG 0 RELIEF, etal

Defendant/Respondent: COUNTY OF KERN, et alCASSNUMSER:

BCV-17-102394

COURTS RECOVERY OF WAIVED COURT FEES AND COSTSIf a party whose court fees and costs were Initially waived has recovered or will recover $10,000 or more Invalue by way of settlement, compromise, arbitration award, mediation settlement, or other means, thecourt has a statutory lien on that recovery. The court may refuse to dismiss the case until the lien issatisfied. (Gov. Code. § 68637.)

I Declaration Concerning Waived Court Fees1. The court waived court fees and costs in this action for (name):

2. The person named in item 1 is (check one below):

0- 1 I not recovering anything of value by this action.I I recovering less ttian $10,000 In value by this action.t 1 I'ocovering $10,000 or more In value by this action. (If Item 2c Is checked, item 3 must be completed.)

1—I A" fees and court costs that were waived in this action have been paid to the court (check one): Ves

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Callfomia that the Information above Is true and correct.

Date;

No

rrVPE on PRtNT NAME OP □ ATTORNEY | 1 PARTY MAXIMO DECLARATION) (SieNATURE)

OV'ltO [R«'. Januaiy 1,2013) REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL Pag>2ara


1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

PROOF OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am employed in the County of Fresno, State ofCalifornia, over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within action; my business address is1630 East Shaw Avenue, Suite 176, Fresno, California 93710.

On the date set forth below, I placed in a sealed envelope and served a true copy of the within

DECLARATION OF JAMES D. WEAKLEY IN SUPPORT OF NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF ACTION

addressed as follows:

Abraham A. Labbad1250 Walnut Street, Unit 122Pasadena, CA 91106Phone: (818) 253-1529Fax: (818) 530-9236E-Mail: [email protected]

Attorneys for Plaintiffs BIG O RELIEF, DOO H. YOON,EUNICE S. YOON, and ALVARO ORDAZ

: BY MAIL I am readily familiar with the business practice at my place of business forcollection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. Correspondence so collected and processed is deposited in the ordinary course of business.

I caused each envelope, with postage fully prepaid, to be placed in the United States mail, atFresno, California.

9 BY HAND I hand delivered each envelope to the office listed above.

9 BY FACSIMILE I served the above-mentioned document from Facsimile Machine No.:(559) 221-5262 to the interested parties at the facsimile numbers listed above.

9 BY FEDERAL EXPRESS I am readily familiar with the business practice at my place ofbusiness for collection and processing of correspondence for overnight delivery with Federal Express.Such correspondence will be deposited with a facility regularly maintained by Federal Express forreceipt on the same day in the ordinary course of business.

I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this court at whosedirection the service was made. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true andcorrect, and that this proof of service was executed at Fresno, California, on November 22, 2017.

/s/ Prisma Valencia Prisma Valencia





Case 1:17-cv-01566-LJO-JLT Document 1-1 Filed 11/22/17 Page 1 … · 2017-11-27 · James D....

Documents

Transcript of Case 1:17-cv-01566-LJO-JLT Document 1-1 Filed 11/22/17 Page 1 … · 2017-11-27 · James D....