JZK v. Virginia Coverdale, et al. - No. 12-2-02241-8; Motion to Amend and Notice of Appearance
BRECKAN C.L.SCOTT, ATTORNEY & COUNSELOR OF LAW, PLLC
PDF documents JZK v. Virginia Coverdale, et al. - No. 12-2-02241-8;Dfts Amended Answer and Counterclaims
5.1 Defamation. JZK, Inc., and its agent JZ Knight, have made false statements regarding Virginia Coverdale. At all relevant times hereto, such statements were unprivileged and published to persons other than Virginia Coverdale. These statements include, but are not limited to, the statement during the February 2012 live stream event, and/or similar event, that Ms. Coverdale was a “whore.” JZK, Inc.’s defamatory conduct continues via posted material regarding Ms. Coverdale on its website(s), and/or websites of its agent, JZ Knight. In making the relevant statements herein, the Counter-Defendant JZK, Inc./RSE was negligent, reckless, malicious, and/or acted intentionally. As a result of the defamation, Ms. Coverdale has been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial;
5.2 Defamation, per se. Ms. Coverdale incorporates herein the allegations contained in paragraphs 1.1-5.3 of this Amended Answer and Counterclaims. The statements made by or on behalf of the Counter-Defendant were and are false, were unprivileged communications, and were published to persons other than Ms. Coverdale. In making the defamatory
statements, Counter-Defendant JZK, Inc. and its agent JZ Knight were negligent, reckless, malicious, and/or acted intentionally. The statements exposed Ms. Coverdale to hatred, contempt, ridicule or obloquy, and deprive her of the benefit of public confident or social intercourse or pursuit of gainful employment. As a result of the defamation, Ms. Coverdale has been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial.
5.4 False Light. Coverdale incorporates herein all previously made allegations in this Amended Answer and Amended Counterclaims. The statements made by the counter defendants and/or on behalf of the counter defendants about Coverdale were and are false and placed Coverdale in a false light. The false light created by the false statements was and is highly offensive to Coverdale and would be highly offensive to a reasonable person.
The counter defendants knew of or recklessly disregarded the falsity of the publications and the false light in which Coverdale would be placed. As a result of the false light, Coverdale has been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial.
5.5 Outrage Coverdale incorporates herein all previously made allegations in this Amended Answer and Amended Counterclaims. The counter defendants have engaged in extreme and outrageous conduct. Their conduct has been intentional or reckless and has caused emotional distress. Coverdale has suffered severe emotional distress as an actual result of such conduct. Because of the outrage, Coverdale has been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial.
5.6 Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Coverdale incorporates herein all previous allegations in this pleading. The counter defendants have engaged in extreme and outrageous conduct. Their conduct has been intentional or reckless and has caused emotional distress. Coverdale has suffered severe emotional distress as an actual result of such conduct.
Because of the infliction of emotional distress, Coverdale has been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial.
5.7 Violation of the Consumer Protection Act Coverdale incorporates herein all previous allegations in this pleading. JZK, Inc. uses deceptive and unfair business practices, including relevant marketing, advertising, and program materials. The deception of such material is based, in part, on making specific false factual assertions, or vital material omissions, about itself, its members, the results potential members should reasonably expect to obtain, in what specific activities members are expected to participate in progressive stages of membership, the scientific validity of the material promulgated by the organization, and various other deceptive statements and/or deceptive material omissions. JZK, Inc.’s business practices, including contracts and nondisclosure agreements, are unfair and deceptive acts. The nature and content of the contracts and nondisclosure agreements, especially given the coercive environment at JZK, Inc./RSE, make them unfair and deceptive. Counter¬Defendant JZK, Inc.’s actions and inactions are unfair and deceptive acts or practices in violation of RCW 19.86 et seq. Even a loss of use of money or property that is casually related to an unfair or deceptive act or practice is sufficient to sustain a claim under the Consumer Protection Act. Griffin v. Allstate Ins. Co., 108 Wn. App. 133, 29 P.3d 777 (2001). JZK, Inc./RSE’s previous and ongoing acts or practices have the capacity to deceive, and do deceive, a substantial portion of the public and affect the public interest as a matter of law. Ms. Coverdale has suffered damages as a result of this Counter-Defendant’s unfair and deceptive practices and is entitled to compensation for all resulting damages.
5.8 Misrepresentation and Fraud Coverdale incorporates herein all previous allegations in this pleading. Counter Defendant JZK, Inc., itself and through its agent, JZ Knight,
engage in a pattern and practice of misrepresentation and fraudulent assertions in connection with its profit-seeking ventures. All relevant representations were material in Ms. Coverdale’s entering into any alleged contractual relationship with the Counter Defendant, and/or in her involvement/participation with the organization in any manner. The Counter¬Defendant made one or more representations of an existing fact; such representations were material; the representation(s) were false; Counter-Defendant JZK, Inc. and/or its agent knew it was false and intended it to be acted upon by Counter-Plaintiff Coverdale. Ms. Coverdale did not know such representations were false, had a right to rely, and did so rely, upon the truth of the representation and such reliance caused Ms. Coverdale damages to be determined at trial. The fraudulent misrepresentations include, but are not limited to, misrepresenting the validity of scientific studies purporting to substantiate RSE’s claimed abilities; making contradictory statements in advertising versus less public forums to induce membership; misrepresenting the nature of the organization and its expectations; misrepresenting the credentials of the organization’s staff; making statements regarding the scientific nature of the school as using the “latest discoveries in neuroscience and quantum physics,” as well as other misrepresentations regarding the nature of the school; and misrepresenting the identity of individuals responsible for publications, material, and other products/events.
5.9 PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Counter-Plaintiff Virginia Coverdale respectfully requests the following relief from Counter-Defendant JZK, Inc./RSE:
II. That Plaintiff JZK, Inc./RSE takes nothing in the Complaint, and that it be dismissed with prejudice;
That Defendant/Counter Plaintiff Virginia Coverdale should be allowed her
attorney’s fees, costs and expenses incurred herein to the fullest extent allowed by law,
5.10 That Defendant/Counter Plaintiff Virginia Coverdale should be granted general and special damages as proven at trial, including interest on all liquidated damages;
5.11 Damages for violations of the Consumer Protection Act, RCW 19.86. et seq., including damages without limitation, treble damages, attorney fees and costs, including expert witness and litigation fees, in an amount to be proven at trial, and damages as allowed by RCW 4.24.500, et seq.
5.12 Such other relief as the Court deems proper.
DATED this 15th day of April, 2013.
BRECKAN C.L.SCOTT, ATTORNEY & COUNSELOR OF LAW, PLLC
Dfts Amended Answer and Counterclaims.PDF Download link - DivShare
Motion to Amend. PDF Download link - DivShare
Declaration of Breckan Scott in Support o. PDF Download link - DivShare