Update as of 10-15-2018 -- The case has been dismissed by both parties. As we have agreed to move forward, the dismissed case will remain confidential.
--------
No Insurance Coverage, No Attorney,
No Money to Fight... No Hope?
Early April, 2012 - When Victor Alfieri dismissed his lawsuit against me, I lost my insurance coverage. I was on my own again with no money to hire an attorney to pursue my legal action against Alfieri.
I reached out to my USM (University of Santa Monica) community. One of my classmates referred me to his brother, an excellent young attorney, Hass Sadeghi. I remember the first time I talked to Hass. He listened to me and the facts of my case. His kindness and sincerity were evident, even over the phone. I told him that I did not have much money. He said that we could work something out. He lives and works in San Diego. So he suggested that it would be a good idea to partner up with a colleague of his, David Hakimfar who has offices in downtown Los Angeles and Hollywood.
Attorneys with True Vocation - To Advocate and Fight for their Clients
I met with Hass and David on April 15, 2012. We talked for a few hours. I explained to them that I really wanted to amend my cross-complaint based on omitted facts, new facts/allegations and to add Defamation as a cause of action. I told them that I understood that nobody could guarantee that I would win the case or that I would get any of my money back (from the film production).Dropping my lawsuit at that time would have been the "sensible" thing to do, as I had no money to fund litigation. Doing so felt so wrong to me. I wanted the opportunity to file an amended cross-complaint to tell the truth - my truth. I wanted those facts to be official and public.
Hass and David agreed to work for a reduced rate. I managed to come up with the amount required for the retainer... after cashing my IRA and using my tax return money, of course. I don't regret making that investment. Hass and David provided outstanding representation, service and support. I can honestly say that Hass and David truly understood what my case was about and what I wanted to achieve, or at least, what I wanted to pursue with the litigation.
They agreed to file the amended cross-complaint as I drafted it. And here's the complaint... the very same complaint my previous attorney refused to file.
[Disclaimer - This complaint was filed in July, 2012, before I learned that Alfieri had indeed finished the movie. I recently retracted the allegations of fraud in relation to the production of the film.]
Click below to see the Proposed Amended Cross-Complaint.
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS
ANGELES – CENTRAL DISTRICT
ADRIANA TREVINO, an individual,
Cross-Complainant,
vs.
BONDOLINI PRODUCTIONS, LLC, a California Limited Liability
Company; VICTOR ALFIERI, an individual; and ROES 1 to 10, inclusive,
Cross-Defendants.
|
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
|
[PROPOSED] FIRST AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT
FOR DAMAGES
1.
Fraud in the Inducement; False Promise
2.
Breach of Contract
3.
Breach of the Implied Covenant of Good
Faith and Fair Dealing
4.
Breach of Fiduciary Duty
5.
Constructive Fraud
6.
Conversion
7.
Accounting
8. Defamation
Complaint Filed:
09/21/2011
Judge: Hon. Rita Miller
Dept.: 16
Trial
Date: 10/16/2012
|
Cross-Complainant, Adriana Trevino, as
and for her cross-complaint against cross-defendants, alleges as follows:
GENERAL
ALLEGATIONS
1.
This is the story of a seasoned Hollywood veteran using his
fame, good looks, and charm to take advantage of a newcomer to Los
Angeles. By the end of the story,
that newcomer, cross-complainant, Adriana Trevino, had given everything she
owned to cross-defendant Victor Alfieri and, in exchange, was left with nothing
but empty promises of eternal love and of becoming a successful production
executive and film maker. Alfieri’s arrogance, demeanor and manipulative ways
became evident as soon as the last wire-transfer for “Looking for Clara” was
deposited into Alfieri’s Italian bank account. That was the last time Trevino
heard Alfieri say, “I love you.” At this point Trevino was witness to her first
film ending in destruction as well. Alfieri not only became condescending, rude
and entitled to Trevino, but showed the same behavior to everyone in his
directorial path, including the talent of their first movie, Clark James Gable
(Clark Gable’s grandson), Joel Moody and Nicole Sienna, whom he collectively
called “the Dumb Fuckers.” Alfieri’s liking to be naked and drunk on set, his
sending pictures of his sex toys and privates, his sexual advances to male and
female talent, all the while spending Trevino’s money on Italian strip clubs,
lap dances and call girls, Alfieri’s penchant for categorizing people in the
format of “if he could sleep with them or not,” all of these things and more
came crashing together to cost Trevino her business, her estate, her
reputation, her peace of mind and her livelihood.
THE
PARTIES
2.
Cross-complainant, Adriana Trevino (“Trevino”), is an
individual who until recently resided in Minneapolis, where she owns a small
interpreting company and has worked as a certified court interpreter. Trevino relocated to Los Angeles in
2009, and now splits her time between the two cities.
3.
Cross-defendant Victor Alfieri (“Alfieri”) is an individual
who is an unemployed Los Angeles-based soap opera performer, who acted in such
productions as “Days of Our Lives” and “The Bold and the Beautiful.”
4.
Cross-defendant Bondolini Productions, LLC (“Bondolini”) is a
California limited liability company formed by Alfieri in July 2010 and Alfieri
is the managing member of Bondolini.
TREVINO
AND ALFIERI MEET ONLINE
5.
Trevino arrived in Los Angeles in 2009 and was introduced to
Alfieri over the internet by a mutual friend. After “chatting” on-line and talking on the telephone during
that summer, Alfieri invited Trevino to his home. On September 4, 2009, Trevino went to Alfieri’s West
Hollywood home, where they spent time together and had sexual intercourse.
Trevino is Led to Believe that She and
Alfieri are Involved in a Real Relationship; After Repeated Requests and
Promises of Love by Alfieri, Trevino Agrees to Invest Money to Make a Movie and
Build a Production Company Together
6.
Although Trevino
and Alfieri had email and telephone interaction over the next few months, the
two did not meet again until June 2010.
Days prior, Alfieri had explained to Trevino that he was looking for “investors”
in an independent film that he planned to make, and invited Trevino to invest
$5,000.00. Alfieri invited Trevino
to his home to “talk about the script.”
However, when Trevino arrived, Alfieri was wearing only a towel wrapped
around his waist, naked underneath, with coconut oil all over him. The two discussed the script for a few
minutes, at which point Alfieri removed the towel and demanded sex.
7.
From that day, Alfieri and Trevino had daily contact by
telephone, text, email, or in person.
Alfieri and Trevino met regularly at Alfieri’s home, both to discuss
Alfieri’s script and to establish their personal and intimate
relationship. The two always
exchanged flirtatious and sexual texts and “instant messages.” Alfieri always greeted Trevino as “baby,”
with a kiss on the lips and a grab on the buttocks.
8.
In July 2010, Alfieri convinced Trevino to make an initial
investment of $25,000 in his movie “Arturo Bond”, in which Alfieri would
portray a James Bond type character.
At Alfieri’s instruction, Trevino delivered the $25,000 check personally
to Alfieri on July 19, 2010.
9.
By August 2010, Trevino realized that she had developed real
feelings for Alfieri, and explained this to Alfieri in a letter that, among
other things, suggests that they stop having sex in order to protect other
aspects of their relationship.
Despite the letter, however, the sexual relationship continued, and
Trevino actually perceived their emotional connection strengthening as well
based on Alfieri’s continued romancing, affection and daily crooning over
Trevino.
10.
In 2010, Alfieri and Trevino grew even closer, with Trevino,
when in Los Angeles, at Alfieri’s home daily. In September 2010, Alfieri convinced Trevino to make a
second investment. Based on
Alfieri’s love for Trevino and Alfieri’s constant calling Trevino “my angel”,
Trevino wrote a check in the amount of $35,000.
11.
In October 2010, feeling that she was now truly part of
Alfieri’s life, Trevino decided to make Alfieri a legal beneficiary. Trevino explained to Alfieri that she
was doing this so that, in case something happened to her, Alfieri would be
able to achieve his dream of completing his movies.
12.
Alfieri constantly instilled in Trevino the belief that they
were starting to build a production company together. Alfieri shared several scripts with Trevino—“Arturo Bond,” “Looking
for Clara,” “Phoenix,” “The Dreamer,” “Amerika,” and “El Diablo,” among others,
solidifying that there was a future for their production company. On September 30, 2010, Alfieri sent a
text to Trevino “. . . you will be attached to all my dreams and projects.”
This was one of hundreds.
Alfieri Convinces Trevino to Sell Her
Home and Give Him the Proceeds.
Alfieri Starts to Exhibit Inappropriate Behavior.
13.
Early in 2011, Alfieri stated to Trevino that he wanted to
keep their relationship secret from his friends; however, Alfieri openly stated
to Trevino’s friends that they had an intimate relationship and Trevino was his
girlfriend.
14.
Alfieri became extremely bold in his requests. In February 2011, Alfieri told Trevino
that he now needed $90,000 in order to produce the movie and said that Trevino
was his “only hope”. With his
daily, sometimes hourly, texts, emails, calls -sometimes up to 10 times a day -
crying, begging and pleading with Trevino to save him. Trevino sold her condominium, and to
give the proceeds from the sale to Alfieri as a further investment with his
assurance of immediate success and a return of all former investments.
15.
A “Production Financing Agreement” was presented to Trevino in
March 2011 by Alfieri’s attorney, Joshua Fine, attempting to memorialize the
terms promised by Alfieri. Trevino
was not represented by independent counsel. Joshua Fine offered to do her contract with his client,
Alfieri, but did not present a conflict waiver or conflict of interest letter
from Alfieri or himself. The “Production Financing Agreement” was executed on
March 20, 2011. (The agreement was
notarized, conveniently, by Joshua Fine’s girlfriend, Lauren.) The Agreement
memorialized Trevino’s investment, giving Trevino Executive Producer credit on
the movie and the right to “back-end” profit participation. Based on Alfieri’s emotional and
financial instability, Trevino was given certain administrative rights,
including the right to access Bondolini’s financial records, so she could
monitor whether her money was being spent appropriately.
16.
Trevino also signed a “bookkeeper” agreement with Bondolini.
Trevino invested over 300 hours performing duties under this agreement for
which she has not yet received payment.
17.
Trevino began to learn about Alfieri’s malicious fraud after
executing the Agreement. Trevino
learned that she was now, in fact, the ONLY investor in this production.
There had been two other investors. Rachel Kennedy, the first investor, withdrew her investment
in February 2011, later claiming that Alfieri had initiated a sexual
relationship with her, and manipulated and “used” her to get her money. The second investor, Sergio D’Amato, a
friend of Alfieri, withdrew his investment even before Trevino signed the
Production Financing Agreement.
Indeed, Alfieri convinced Trevino to ear-mark $14,000 of her investment
payable immediately to Alfieri, so he could use the money to pay
off personal debts.
18.
In March 2011, during the production’s first introductory
meeting with Trevino and actors Clark J. Gable and Joel Moody, Alfieri pulled
down his pants and, half-naked, gave Trevino and the two young actors a group
hug while jumping up and down with excitement, his pants wrapped around his
ankles.
19.
During production meetings Trevino, Clark J. Gable and Joel
Moody would be directed by Alfieri with such degrading orders and repeated
comments like “part of the work you will have to do is suck my cock”. This was said repeatedly on the set and
over dinners as if they were normal conversational subjects.
20.
During a meeting with Editor Christine Kelley, attorney Joshua Fine, Alfieri’s Manager Marco Cuadros, and Trevino,
it was discussed whom to choose as the leading actress. Alfieri repeatedly announced the top
three actresses only in terms of whom Alfieri “would like to fuck,” because
he’s the “director”: “No 1 – She’s
a good actress, but I would never like to fuck her – so I will not choose her.
No 2 - I could not direct her because all I want to do is fuck her. So we
should choose No 3, Nicole Sienna, because I don’t want to fuck her, I want to
protect her”.
21.
Nicole Sienna was selected as the leading actress. However,
far from attempting to protect her, Alfieri demanded Ms. Sienna have sex with
him as part of her role as the lead actress. Alfieri made his affections for Ms. Sienna well known to
everyone on the production, crew, talent and representatives of talent when in
the United States.
22.
Alfieri, evincing seemingly bisexual tendencies, would state
obscene comments to male and female actors, such as one stated to lead actor
Joel Moody that while shooting in Italy Moody would be residing in Alfieri’s
bed with Alfieri. Alfieri and
Moody had only known each other for a few weeks.
23.
In late March 2011, a confrontation occurs at Alfieri’s West
Hollywood apartment. Alfieri’s
attorney Joshua Fine and Trevino meet with Alfieri and express concern that his
behavior is inappropriate, disrespectful, immoral, unethical and would hold the
group liable for sexual harassment claims. Joshua Fine states “I’ve witnessed at least 50 incidents for
which you, (Alfieri), could be sued.” Not only was there concern with Alfieri’s
personal team, but representatives of talent engaged to work on film, as actors
began to threaten lawsuits due to violations of California State Labor
Laws.
24.
Clark J. Gable’s manager, Roxane Davis, expressed numerous
concerns on the way Alfieri was handling the actor and pre-production of the
film. In an email, Ms. Davis states – “From a litigation standpoint I think we
know in this indie world what boundaries are being crossed. It is my job
as a manager to protect my client from people like you... if you’re going to
direct all your films like this then you should go back to acting and daytime
soaps.” Davis goes on to documenting and targeting Alfieri’s representatives to
quote the responsibility Alfieri has under the laws in the State of California.
Alfieri becomes furious, going on to attack Davis and attempting to
sabotage the production even further when Davis threatens to pull Clark J.
Gable off the production.
On-Set in Italy, Trevino Arrives to
Learn that Alfieri’s Behavior Had Been Belligerent and Aggressive, Risking the
Lives of Cast and Crew in Relation to Safety Precautions. A Serial
Exhibitionist, Alfieri Had Been Sexually Harassing Actors and Was Jeopardizing
the Success of the Production.
25.
Following her final investment and the execution of the
Production Financing Agreement, Alfieri had Trevino become more involved in the
production. Among Trevino’s contractual duties, Alfieri demanded that Trevino
manage the production’s finances, purchase wardrobe, props, and other
equipment, and make all necessary travel arrangements for cast and crew to and
from Calcata, Italy.
26.
The cast and crew traveled to Italy in April 2011.
27.
Anticipating Trevino’s arrival in Italy, Alfieri again
demanded that Trevino keep their relationship “secret.” However, Alfieri made
sure to arrange Trevino’s sleeping quarters to be located where Alfieri could
easily sneak in during the night without being noticed so Trevino “could ride”
Alfieri all night.
28.
A week prior to going to Italy, Trevino received a desperate
email from Alfieri complaining about Clark J. Gable being ill and refusing to
leave his room. Alfieri’s email
stated: “Clark’s going to eat the
same shit tonight or tomorrow, I don’t like wasting food money, time and be a
fucking babysitter for this asshole.” This was only one out of many incidents
that would result in aggressive physical altercations between Clark J. Gable
and Alfieri.
29.
Based on information and belief, when Trevino did arrive
on-set, she was witness to a number of the following illegal issues:
a.
Alfieri would constantly make sexual comments to actors (male
and female). “Maybe if you suck my cock, you will improve your performance.” “You
want me to come and hold you?” “You want me to come cuddle with you?” “Part of
your work is to suck my cock.” “The Director always sleeps with the lead actress.
I’m the Director. I’m Victor Alfieri.
I was in Angels and Demons.”
b.
Alfieri would harass, sexually and belligerently, actors and
crew while filming. During one of
the recorded takes of a scene Alfieri directed Joel Moody to touch Clark J.
Gable’s penis. Yelling, Alfieri said, “Touch his cock! Rub his ass!” Alfieri would call the
scene take, 1) “Desperately Looking for an Ass,” 2) “The Revenge of the Fucking
Melons,” 3) “The Revenge of the Fuckers”
4) “The Revenge of the Dicks.”
c.
Actors began to fear for their safety and wellbeing. Sienna, the film’s aspiring actress,
begged Trevino to make Alfieri stop sexually harassing her, showing Trevino a
multi-tier page-after-page record of Alfieri’s sexual advances and comments
which, after Trevino investigated, were corroborated by all on-set.
d.
Joel Moody was terrified of Alfieri’s behavior. Joel Moody
stated to Trevino that he believed Alfieri had gone insane and could kill him.
e.
Other Executives began to witness Alfieri’s
exhibitionist tendencies.
Christine Kelley and Clark J. Gable witnessed Alfieri strip
down and conduct what was to be a civil production meeting completely nude.
f.
Alfieri had alienated the production’s data manager, Lorenzo
DiNola, who agreed to stay on with the production only on the condition that he
would not have to deal directly with Alfieri.
g.
Alfieri clashed with the movie’s Chief Editor,
Christine Kelley. Alfieri was so abusive to her that she was prepared to leave
the production entirely. Trevino
ultimately intervened and desperately convinced Ms. Kelley to stay apologizing
once again for Alfieri’s arrogant behavior of entitlement.
h.
Ms. Kelley made allegations to Alfieri about being
sexually assaulted by XXXXXXX while she was sleeping. Alfieri, as Director of “Looking For
Clara” ignored this allegation and refused to address it. Instead he responded crudely: “at least
you are getting some!”
i.
Crew members complained to Trevino that Alfieri’s behavior had
made the working conditions so unbearable that they wanted to walk out. Trevino’s efforts included, but were
not limited to, understanding the issues and becoming a confidante for those
agreeing to stay. Crew members
stated they were staying on because a walk–out would have jeopardized her
investment.
j.
Trevino also later learned that, previous to her arrival
on-set, Alfieri told the cast and crew that he was not and had never been
romantically involved with Trevino, that Trevino was “obsessed” with him, and
that he wanted to “get away from her.” This was another lie concocted by
Alfieri to turn the production against her. Alfieri’s hope was that she would leave Italy and walk away
after giving him her entire life savings and property.
k.
Trevino also learned that Alfieri withheld full payment from
members of the cast and crew, breaching their employment contracts. Trevino, again, offered what little
monies she had left to make it right.
30.
On the basis of information and belief, Alfieri was abusive
and put the lives of cast and crew in danger by engaging in the following acts:
a.
Trevino, along with cast and crew, witnessed Alfieri
repeatedly throwing a 15-inch butcher/carving knife at cast and crew while
screaming “CUT.”
b.
Alfieri discriminated against and was abusive to the American
actors, Nicole Sienna, Clark Gable, and Joel Moody. Alfieri’s name for them became “dumb fuckers!” among others.
There were complaints from Executives, Representatives and crew to
Alfieri. Alfieri ignored and
dismissed all complaints.
c.
Clark J. Gable overdosed on Lemoncello, an Italian liqueur
with extremely high alcohol content.
Alfieri forced Gable to drink the entire bottle while filming a
scene. The following day Gable
complained of anal bleeding, diarrhea, vomiting, dehydration, shakes, illness
and pain. Alfieri, when requested
to do so, refused to provide medical attention to Gable in this state. An altercation happened between Alfieri
and Trevino when Trevino demanded Gable be rushed to the hospital as he could
die. Alfieri “did not want to
spend the money”. Trevino, again, paid the hospital bill and
prescriptions. Alfieri never
addresses this issue again.
d.
Trevino was the only individual allowed to discuss the
production with Sienna after Alfieri prohibited Sienna from leaving the set on
her days off. Alfieri banned all communication with actors and crew with Ms.
Sienna because she refused to have sex with him. Witnesses conclude that Alfieri made Ms. Sienna’s life
miserable. Alfieri’s continued
anger towards Ms. Sienna included, but was not limited to, screaming at her,
forcing her to stay in her bedroom and treating her like a prisoner. This was Ms. Sienna’s first time in a
Medieval Village in a remote area of Italy. Alfieri threatened to cut all Sienna’s
scenes and fly her back to the United States immediately if she did not do as
he said. Ms. Sienna called her mother in the United States to come rescue
her. Her mother arrived shortly
after.
e.
Alfieri abusively violated multiple California Labor Laws and
held crew and talent beyond a 10-hour work-day with no pay. On one occasion, during the “torture”
scenes, Alfieri made cast and crew work 15 continuous hours. Alfieri never had the decency to say
thank you, nor give any credit to anyone who was not touching him sexually or
fawning over his looks.
f.
Clark J. Gable’s first film experience almost resulted in his
death. Alfieri kept Clark Gable in a cold wet bathtub, tied up, for hours. Gable was unable to move. Alfieri had a real “operating” drill in
his hand and was screwing it in to Clark’s abdomen during the filming of the
scene. Ms. Kelly reacted
warning Alfieri of the extreme danger and liability of using a real drill,
potentially puncturing Gable’s skin or electrocuting him. Alfieri refused to stop and continued
shooting the scene.
g.
Trevino witnessed as Alfieri tied 5’8”, 130 lb actor Joel
Moody up to a chair while Alfieri strangled him for a scene. Alfieri threw Moody onto the floor over
and over without a cushion, protection or any safeguard from head and body
injury. Alfieri found the chair in the dumpster, therefore, during a take as
Moody was tied to it, the chair broke and Moody fell again to the floor.
h.
Alfieri’s resentment of Sienna led him to have his character,
the killer, strangle and kill Sienna.
Alfieri chose to use a real plastic bag with no ventilation while tying
a rope around Sienna’s neck.
Everyone on set was terrified Sienna was not going to live. Alfieri,
being the director and actor, demanded the scene be repeated over and
over. After a multitude of takes
on this scene Alfieri screamed out “This bitch cannot even die right!”
31.
Production wrapped at the end of May 2011. Trevino kept peace among cast and crew,
paid for crew’s overtime, offered actors wages equal to California Labor Laws
and provided immediate medical attention to cast when needed. Trevino’s determination to see her film
move forward made it possible to finish the filming of “Looking for Clara.”
32.
On or about May 31, 2011, Alfieri claimed that some of the
equipment that Trevino had paid for had been stolen or damaged. Alfieri blamed the theft on many crew
members - Roberto Moscioni, Massimiliano Trevis (Director of Photography), and
Trevis’s brother. Alfieri attacked
them in a tirade screaming and crying calling them thieves in front of the entire
production, creating a set-up so that Alfieri could collect insurance
monies.
33.
It is Trevino’s belief that Alfieri conspired with the Italian
equipment rental company to collect on the alleged stolen and damaged
equipment. Trevino, keeping the books, demanded Alfieri produce receipts for
the equipment rented. No receipts were provided for what was to be used to pay
camera-$10,000, equipment-$14,000, meals/local restaurant-$12,000,
housing-$7,000, cleaning/laundry-$1,000. Although Alfieri had delivered many receipts including,
but not limited to, his lap dances, cocktails and wardrobe, he could not
produce a single valid rental equipment receipt nor was he able to prove
payment for housing and daily meals at the local Calcata
restaurant. It is Trevino's belief that Alfieri made separate secret
agreements with the providers of such services with the promise of deferred
payment and some type of producer credit in the movie. Based on this
information, it is estimated that Alfieri pocketed around $50,000 dlls of the
Italian budget. Trevino believes
this is where the issues began with her being Executive Producer and sole
financier of Alfieri’s struggling movie.
34.
Later Alfieri stated to Trevino that he had filed a claim with
the Italian insurance company covering the equipment. Alfieri stated that the insurance company had NOT covered
the missing or damaged equipment and the he had paid the equipment rental
company €900. No receipt has ever been produced.
35.
Based on information and belief, Alfieri retained the original
hard drives containing all of the audio and video files of “LOOKING FOR CLARA.”
Alfieri gave a copy of the hard drives to Trevino, so she could pass them along
to Ms. Kelley’s assistant in Los Angeles and the movie could be
edited. Since handing over the
hard drives to Ms. Kelley’s assistant on June 2, 2011, Trevino has at no time
been in possession of the movie footage.
Alfieri Returns to the United States,
Discontinues Communication With Cast and Crew, Turns Antagonistic and Plots
Against Rest of Crew Involved, Jeopardizing Post-Production
36.
Alfieri’s return to the United States was the beginning of a
tirade towards Trevino. Within 24 hours, Alfieri was setting his plot to
separate Trevino from what she rightfully owned. His degrading comments and creation of friction in his
relationship with Trevino included, but were not limited to, fights, screaming
matches, demands and threats that Alfieri should keep the movie and cut Trevino
out completely even though she had given up her home, accounts and any finances
she had left. Alfieri became
hostile on many days with Trevino, starting fights, evincing paranoia of
betrayal, and angry that Trevino had kept relations with anyone associated with
the production. Alfieri wrote: “Engaging
in a too friendly behavior with the actors. No Professional. . . . . texting writing on FB walls . . .
These are people that have hurt me and took advantage . . . I wouldn’t had
imagined that by EP was going to romantically mingle with all of them . . . as
far as erasing you from fb . . . yes sorry pissed me off seeing those stupid
comments . . .”
37.
Following the verbal attacks Trevino also received continuous
harassing emails and text messages from Alfieri. In one message Alfieri comments about Trevino’s unconditional
love for him stating: “. . . sign
a contract where it says I own 100% the movie . . . take ur name out then u can
say u gave me the money to show love and all the bullshit u r saying . . .
unconditional my ass . . .” This was Alfieri’s devised plan to not only steal
all of Trevino’s money, but to take the last thing she had left, her first
movie.
38.
Despite problems with Alfieri, Trevino developed a close
friendship with Daniela Carloni—Alfieri’s mother. Trevino and Daniela Carloni communicated via skype and email
daily. Daniela Carloni begged
Trevino to be patient with Alfieri and not to abandon him.
39.
Trevino bought Daniela Carloni a plane ticket from Rome to Los
Angeles so Daniela Carloni could surprise her son, Alfieri, and celebrate his
40th birthday with him. The ticket
was later cancelled as Daniela Carloni’s dog, Jane, would not be allowed to
travel in the cabin with her.
Trevino’s money was wasted and never reimbursed.
40.
Consistent with Trevino’s position as sole investor and
bookkeeper under the Production Financing Agreement, Alfieri and Trevino met on
or about July 3, 2011, to go through the production’s financial records and
receipts. The focus turned towards
Alfieri’s inability to account for over half of Trevino’s entire investment,
Alfieri, miraculously, returned to his prior, flirtatious and loving self all
of a sudden seeing a life for the two of them together again. Alfieri invited Trevino to call him the
next day so they could celebrate Independence Day together. Trevino had other plans for the holiday
and was unable to fulfill his wish.
41.
Alfieri had requested that the Production Financing Agreement
be revised. According to Alfieri,
he should receive an additional
$130,000 for his services on the movie, and he should receive
them in “first position”—i.e., before
Trevino was reimbursed for her investment. Trevino refused to agree to this revision. Alfieri’s outrageous claims included
being paid for doing stunts, visual effects, accounting, set design,
post-production supervision, costume design, on-set dressing, music
supervision, product placement coordination, animal coordination and craft
service – none of which Alfieri
performed.
42.
Trevino demanded all receipts to start accounting for
budget. Alfieri had all receipts
in a “Looking for Clara” jar. As
Trevino organized documents and receipts, she realized Alfieri had used her
monies for much more than production.
Alfieri, with many other receipts for production, also submitted
multiple receipts for Italian strip clubs, food for his two dogs, lap dances,
cigarettes, liquor, his mother’s groceries, his luxury visits to the tanning
salons as well as outings with high-end call girls. Alfieri scoffed when Trevino demanded he reimburse the production
for his personal entertainment expenses.
43.
On July 20, 2011, Alfieri invited Trevino to lunch to
celebrate her birthday.
Trevino believes it was because she was demanding monies returned from
his ludicrous salacious endeavors back to the production financials. Alfieri arrived with a smile, flowers
and a birthday card to buy time. After lunch, Alfieri held Trevino in his arms,
kissed her and said: “I know you miss me. I know you miss my ‘pito’ [in
Spanish, a whistle, or a child’s word for penis] … Baby, I cannot give it to you today but I will send you a picture.” The following day, Alfieri emailed
Trevino a picture of one of his black dildos from his collection.
44.
In late July 2011, Alfieri resumed frequent communication with
Trevino due to the arrest of one of the lead actors, Clark J. Gable—Clark
Gable’s grandson. The incident got
a lot of publicity. Alfieri was
furious because the name of the film “Looking for Clara” had been mentioned by
Davis, Gable’s manager. Alfieri considered this breach of contract by Gable.
45.
Alfieri’s delusional paranoia led him to plot against everyone
else involved in post-production.
He told Trevino that they should get rid of attorney Joshua Fine and
Co-Director/Chief-Editor XXXX. Trevino did not agree. Seeing all the conflict and
difficulties caused by Alfieri, Trevino offered to step out of the project if
Alfieri found a new investor who could take over the Executive Producer role
and had Trevino reimbursed for the money she had already invested. Alfieri
started crying and said; "No! You can never leave me. You and I started
this together... and we finish it together. You are now part of my life. You
are close to my mother, my family... even Marco, my manager.... You CANNOT
leave me... If I go to hell, you go to hell with me!"
46.
On August 2, 2011, Alfieri leaves a voicemail message to
Trevino. “I’m gonna… come up with a strategy to get rid of Christine… she
fucked herself up, so there’s no way we’re going to give her the extra money…
I’m the sole manager of Bondolini and I don’t like to go to court. I don’t like
to get sued… I don’t have time for this…”
Alfieri Abandons Trevino, Withdraws the
Remainder of Trevino’s Investment to Keep It for Himself, is Unable to Account
for Most of the Budget, and Files a “Preemptive Strike” Lawsuit Against Trevino
47.
On or about August 2, 2011, Trevino was informed by Christine Kelley and Massimiliano Trevis that, previous to her arrival in Italy, Alfieri
had made many defamatory comments when confiding to cast and crew stating that
he despised Trevino. Alfieri
claimed Trevino was obsessed with him and “he would never, ever be with
Trevino.” Questions arose from
cast and crew: “Are you just spending her money?”
48.
On or about August 3, 2011, Trevino emailed a detailed letter
to Alfieri, Marco Cuadros (Alfieri’s manager) and Joshua Fine (Real Estate
attorney acting as Alfieri’s rep).
In the letter, Trevino expressed her concerns about the way
Post-Production was being handled and requested the agreement be respected as
well as her position as the Executive Producer.
49.
Upon receipt, Marco Cuadros called Trevino immediately.
Feeling she could confide in Marco Cuadros, Trevino told him why she invested
and about the intimate relationship she had with Alfieri. Trevino was shaken
and concerned about the rest of her investment. She told Cuadros she was going to withdraw what was left of
her investment from the bank and would oversee the rest of the budget based on
Alfieri’s refusal to produce legitimate proof of production expenditures.
50.
Marco Cuadros raced to Alfieri’s home to alert him of
Trevino’s intention to withdraw her money.
51.
On August 3, 2011, the same day, Alfieri secretly withdrew the
remaining $17,500 of Trevino’s investment from the Bondolini account,
immediately disconnected his telephone and changed his number in order to avoid
Trevino and remove her from his life forever. Trevino reported the theft of the
$17,500 to the West Hollywood Sheriff’s Department.
52.
Trevino still inquires as to the whereabouts of her
investment, and to post-production status of the movie. Alfieri has refused to provide this
information although there is a contractual agreement.
53.
On September 9, 2011, Alfieri emails Trevino informing her
that “Joshua M Fine is not representing Bondolini or Victor Alfieri” anymore.
54.
More recently, Trevino has learned that the $17,500 was not
the only part of Trevino’s investment that Alfieri kept for himself. Among other things, Trevino is informed
and believes, and based thereon alleges, that:
a.
Alfieri withdrew $3,000 in cash from the Bondolini account to
pay Ms. Kelley. Alfieri only
paid Ms. Kelley $2,000 and pocketed the other $1,000.
b.
Alfieri withdrew all the money he originally invested in the
film and production company, leaving Trevino as the sole investor of “Looking
for Clara” and as the only responsible party for all Bondolini taxes and fees
as well as clearance costs for a different film—“Arturo Bond.”
c.
Alfieri paid the Italian crew less than what he outlined in
the budget and/or reported to Trevino, again, stealing funds for his own
personal use.
d.
Cristina Attanasio, Italian crew member, witnessed Alfieri and
his mother talking about how they were going to spend the money Trevino wired
to Italy— not on “Looking For Clara”, but Trevino’s money to be spent on “renovations
for their homes in Italy”. Ms. Attanasio witnessed Alfieri falsify receipts to
be submitted to Trevino as production expenditures.
e.
Alfieri remains unable to document over $70,000 of supposed
production transactions and expenditures, this does not include the $14,000
Trevino paid him prior to the production to be the Director of “Looking For
Clara”.
ALFIERI
FILES (BUT DOES NOT SERVE) A COMPLAINT CONTAINING FALSE CLAIMS AGAINST TREVINO,
AND LEAKS IT TO THE PRESS
55.
Feeling the pressure, on September 21, 2011, Alfieri filed (but
never served) a “pre-emptive
strike” lawsuit against Trevino knowing TMZ and other entertainment-focused
media outlets would pick it up due to its salacious and defamatory
allegations. As a result of the
publicity surrounding the false claims, Trevino suffered and continues to
suffer much damage to her career and business image. Among other things, Trevino worked long-term at a company
and applied for an executive position at the company that would have paid an
annual salary of $70,000, allowing her to continue her other business. After Alfieri’s public complaint,
Trevino was informed that the employer wanted to hire her but “could not”
because of the publicity surrounding the allegations against her. Trevino recently learned that her
interpreting agency business has also been severely damaged, with earnings
decreasing by $80,000 last year due to Alfieri’s false allegations and media
manipulation. In early June 2012, Trevino was nearly banned from a project with
one of the biggest international TV networks. Network representatives stated
that based on Alfieri’s complaint and the media coverage of the resulting
scandal, Ms. Trevino’s reputation was questionable. Alfieri’s defamation of Ms.
Trevino continues to negatively affect Ms. Trevino’s current and future
business and personal life.
56.
Trevino is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges,
that Alfieri plotted this lawsuit to get publicity as well as to threaten and
intimidate Trevino into walking away and giving him everything Alfieri felt he
deserved. Alfieri associated with
other persons to claim the alleged slander has cost him possible work and
income although Alfieri has been on California’s unemployment system and
collecting from it for years.
57.
Based on Alfieri’s allegations of slander and defamation
Trevino is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that Alfieri
conspired with former actress Patricia Kotero, aka Apollonia Kotero, best known
for acting in Prince’s early 1980’s film “Purple Rain.”
a. Apollonia
Kotero made contact with Trevino on August 5, 2011 immediately after Alfieri
withdrew the money from the Bondolini account.
b. On
or about September 22, 2011, a day after Alfieri filed the complaint, Apollonia
Kotero writes to Trevino requesting again information on Alfieri. Trevino explains to Kotero about the
pending legal matter of Alfieri and refuses to give any further information.
c. On
or about September 23, 2011, Apollonia Kotero calls Trevino on the phone
claiming she’s wanting to produce a film with Alfieri and would like a
reference. Trevino feels Kotero
called to obtain detailed information on Alfieri and Trevino’s film
project. Puzzled, Trevino
questions Kotero and Kotero denies any close relationship with Alfieri.
d. On
or about October 25, 2011, Apollonia Kotero denies ever calling Trevino. Kotero
accuses Trevino of disclosing information Kotero did not request when, in
reality Trevino only provided the information Kotero was requesting. Kotero’s response: “I was sickened by
the information you revealed to me . . . your lawyer would be horrified by a
client that does this.” This is
believed by Trevino to be an “act” improvised by an actress.
58.
Roger Muse, Alfieri’s attorney, sent a couple of letters to
Ms. Kelley demanding the drives and footage. Ms. XXXX reserves her rights to keep the drives until she
is paid in full under California Labor Laws. Alfieri and attorney Roger Muse
continue to defame Trevino by sending letters to the cast and crew with claims
of theft of hard drives, footage and financial books. Alfieri had always denied having a copy of the film. Ms. Kelley and Alfieri are, in fact, the ones who have been in possession of all media.
59.
On January 5, 2012, Roger Muse sent a letter by email and
postal service to Roxane Davis, Clark J. Gable’s manager, in which he accuses
Trevino of making salacious assertions about Alfieri appearing on set “nude and
inebriated.” Mr. Muse threatened Ms. Davis: “If you again repeat those, or any
defamatory statements to the press or to anyone, either orally or in writing, we will thereupon immediately add you as a defendant to the pending lawsuit
against Ms. Trevino.”
60.
In the same letter to Ms. Davis, Mr. Muse accuses Ms. Trevino,
in regards to her current situation as a defendant in a lawsuit, by stating: “Ms.
Trevino has, by her own intentional conduct, placed herself in the position in
which she finds herself.” Davis’s
response to the Muse and Alfieri clan was: “you’re a joke.” Followed with “I
can assure you, Mr. Whomever, that what I know is not through Trevino…do not
contact me again.”
61.
On January 6, 2012, Joshua Fine wrote an email to Roxane
Davis. “In Mr. Muse's letter, there is an error that attributes the source of
several of your purported statements of fact as being Ms. Trevino. To be
clear, you stated to me yesterday that Clark Gable previously stated to
you that Victor (1) appeared nude on set and/or in production meetings, (2) was
drunk on set all the time, and (3) initiated a physical altercation with Clark
on set.”
62.
Although Joshua Fine’s position as production attorney was
terminated in early September 2011, he continues to involve himself in
communications with cast, crew and potential witnesses in this litigation. It is Trevino’s belief, based on
credible information, that:
a. Fine
offered Ms. Kelley’s assistant money to steal the duplicate hard drives and
turn them over to Alfieri.
b. Fine
continues to involve himself and demand information and documents from Trevino
without following protocol and contacting Trevino’s counsel.
c. March
2012, Fine contacts actor Joel Moody to have him do ADR for the film without
informing Trevino in writing while litigation is pending, therefore breaching,
once again, the agreement between Bondolini and Trevino. Joshua Fine sent an email directly to
Joel Moody and not his manager. Moody confides in Davis regarding Fine’s email,
in which Fine requests Moody to do ADR two days later. Fine then threatens, “it’s in your contract.”
Moody feels pressured and later that evening states to Roxane Davis “I’m really
in fear that Victor will do something and I don’t want him to kill me.”
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
(Fraud
in the Inducement; False Promise)
(By
Trevino against Alfieri and Roes 1 to 10, inclusive)
63.
Trevino incorporates the allegations of paragraphs 1 through
62 as if set forth herein in full.
64.
Between June 2010 and July 2011, Alfieri used an intimate and
romantic relationship to secure multiple contributions of money from Trevino
for Alfieri's benefit. In pursuing these contributions from Trevino, Alfieri
misled Trevino, misrepresented to Trevino, and concealed facts, as to, among
other things: (a) the nature of their relationship, (b) the existence of other
investors in the movie, (c) Alfieri's intended use of Trevino's investment, (d)
the nature of Trevino's involvement in the production, and (e) the budget and
production schedule for the movie.
65.
Trevino is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges,
that Alfieri knew that he was making these false representations and material
omissions, and that he did so for the purpose of inducing Trevino's reliance
and payment of money to Alfieri and his company, Bondolini.
66.
Trevino reasonably relied on the statements and conduct of Alfieri
in deciding to contribute approximately $150,000 into Bondolini.
67.
As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing, Alfieri
damaged Trevino in the amount of her $150,000 investment, plus interest, and
further deprived Trevino from enjoying any return on her investment in the form
of profit participation in the movie's exploitation. Trevino has suffered damages in an amount of at least
$150,000.00; plus further general and compensatory damages, subject to proof at
trial.
68.
The above conduct of cross-defendants was an intentional
misrepresentation, deceit, or concealment of a material fact known to
cross-defendants with the intention on the part of cross-defendants of thereby
depriving cross-complainant of property or legal rights or otherwise causing injury,
and thus was despicable conduct that subjected her to a cruel and unjust
hardship in conscious disregard of cross-complainant’s rights, so as to justify
an award of exemplary and punitive damages. Cross-defendants were guilty of malice, fraud, and oppression
as defined in Civil Code Section 3294,
and she should recover, in addition to actual damages, exemplary and punitive
damages to make an example of and to punish cross- defendants.
SECOND
CAUSE OF ACTION
(Breach
of Contract)
(By
Trevino against Alfieri, Bondolini, and Roes 1 to 10, inclusive)
69.
Trevino incorporates the allegations of paragraphs 1
through 68 as if set forth herein
in full.
70.
The Production Financing Agreement was executed on March 20,
2011 by and between Trevino and Alfieri (as managing agent for Bondolini).
71.
Section 1 of the Production Financing Agreement provides that,
in exchange for Trevino's contribution of money, Bondolini would produce the
movie in accordance with the agreed-upon budget and production schedule.
72.
Trevino contributed the agreed-upon sums and otherwise fully
performed her obligations under the terms of the Production Financing
Agreement. All necessary preconditions to Trevino's enforcement of the
obligations under the agreement occurred.
73.
Trevino is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges,
that in or about July or August of 2010, Bondolini, at the direction of
Alfieri, has ceased production of the movie and otherwise failed to meet the
agreed-upon budget or production schedule thus breaching the Production
Financing Agreement. Trevino is further informed and believes, and based
thereon alleges, that Bondolini, at the direction of Alfieri, has no intention
of completing production of the movie in the future which constitutes a breach
of the construction financing agreement.
74.
As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing breaches,
Alfieri and Bondolini have prevented Trevino from recouping any of her
investment, or enjoying any profits from the exploitation of the movie. Trevino
has been damaged in a sum of at least $150,000 plus interest at the legal rate
from the date of breach and continuing through judgment.
THIRD
CAUSE OF ACTION
(Breach
of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith & Fair Dealing)
(By
Trevino against Alfieri, Bondolini, and Roes 1 to 10, inclusive)
75.
Trevino incorporates the allegations of paragraphs 1 through
74 as if set forth herein in full.
76.
The Production Financing Agreement was executed on March 20,
2011 by and between Trevino and Alfieri (as managing agent for Bondolini). The
Production Financing Agreement contained implied covenants of good faith and
fair dealing which provided that neither party would do anything to prevent the
other party from receiving the benefit of its bargain.
77.
Trevino contributed the agreed-upon sums and otherwise fully
performed her obligations under the terms of the Production Financing
Agreement. All necessary preconditions to Trevino's enforcement of the
obligations under the agreement occurred.
78.
Trevino is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges,
that in or about July or August of 2010, Alfieri, Bondolini, and Roes 1 to 10,
inclusive, and each of them, breached the implied covenant of good faith and
fair dealing when they failed to use all of Trevino's investment solely for the
agreed-upon purpose of producing the movie.
79.
As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing breaches,
Alfieri, Bondolini, and Roes 1 to 10, inclusive, and each of them, have
prevented Trevino from recouping any of her investment, or enjoying any profits
from the exploitation of the movie. Trevino has been damaged in a sum of at
least $150,000 plus interest at the legal rate from the date of breach.
FOURTH
CAUSE OF ACTION
(Breach
of Fiduciary Duty)
(By
Trevino against Alfieri and Roes 1 to 10, inclusive)
80.
Trevino incorporates the allegations of paragraphs 1 through
79 as if set forth herein in full.
81.
The facts and conduct alleged herein gave rise to fiduciary
duties on the part of Alfieri vis-a-vis Trevino. Among other things, Alfieri's
conduct and representations regarding their romantic relationship, Alfieri's
position in the entertainment industry, and Alfieri's direct receipt of (most
of) Trevino's contribution into Bondolini, created vulnerability in Trevino
that resulted in Alfieri's empowerment over Trevino, and which prevented
Trevino from effectively protecting herself.
82.
By the acts set forth herein — including, without limitation,
Alfieri's acceptance of Trevino's money, Alfieri's conduct preventing the
timely completion of the movie, Alfieri’s use of the funds contributed by
Trevino other than for the agreed-upon purpose, and Alfieri's secret
misappropriation of approximately $21,000 ($17,500 he withdrew from the account
plus $1,000 he pocketed from Ms. Kelley’s pay plus $2,500 from LLC fees, taxes and
clearance of another film—He withdrew this money because it was originally in
the account) from the Bondolini account — Alfieri breached his fiduciary duties
to Trevino.
83.
As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing breaches,
Trevino has been damaged in a sum of at least $150,000 plus interest at the
legal rate from the date of breach.
FIFTH
CAUSE OF ACTION
(Constructive
Fraud)
(By
Trevino against Alfieri and Roes 1 to 10, inclusive)
84.
Trevino incorporates the allegations of paragraphs 1 through
83 as if set forth herein in full.
85.
The facts and conduct alleged herein gave rise to a fiduciary
and/or confidential relationship between Alfieri and Trevino. Among other
things, Alfieri's conduct and representations regarding their romantic
relationship, as well as Alfieri's direct receipt of (most of) Trevino's
contribution into Bondolini, created vulnerability in Trevino that resulted in
Alfieri's empowerment over Trevino, which prevented Trevino from effectively
protecting herself.
86.
Through the conduct alleged herein — and in particular by
misleading Trevino and concealing facts as to, among other things: (a) the
nature of their relationship, (b) the existence of other investors in the
movie, (c) Alfieri's intended use and actual use of Trevino's investment, (d)
the nature of Trevino's involvement in the production, and (e) the budget and
production schedule for the movie — Alfieri gained an unfair and prejudicial
advantage over Trevino.
87.
Trevino reasonably relied on the representations made by
Alfieri in agreeing to contribute approximately $150,000 into Bondolini, and in
allowing Alfieri to maintain control over the use of those funds.
88.
As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing, Trevino has
been damaged in a sum of at least $150,000 plus interest at the legal rate.
89.
The above conduct of cross-defendants was an intentional
misrepresentation, deceit, or concealment of a material fact known to
cross-defendants with the intention on the part of defendants of thereby
depriving cross-complainant of property or legal rights or otherwise causing
injury, and thus was despicable conduct that subjected cross-complainant to a
cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of cross-complainant’s rights,
so as to justify an award of exemplary and punitive damages. Cross-defendants were guilty of malice,
fraud, and oppression as defined in Civil Code Section 3294, and she should recover, in addition to actual damages,
exemplary and punitive damages to make an example of and to punish
cross-defendants.
SIXTH
CAUSE OF ACTION
(Conversion)
(By
Trevino against Alfieri, Bondolini, and Roes 1 to 10, inclusive)
90.
Trevino incorporates the allegations of paragraphs 1 through
89 as if set forth herein in full.
91.
Between July 2010 and May 2011, Trevino contributed
approximately $150,000 to Bondolini. Trevino paid approximately $105,000 of the
investment directly to Alfieri, in his capacity as managing member of
Bondolini. Trevino paid approximately $35,000 into Bondolini's business
account. Trevino paid approximately $10,000 to various third-parties on behalf
of Bondolini. Cross-complainant
has the right to immediate possession of the above-referenced personal
property.
92.
Trevino is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges,
that Alfieri and Bondolini accepted the money paid directly to them, but did
not use the money for the agreed-upon purpose, refused to return it, and
converted it to their own use. Cross-defendants have failed and refused to provide receipts
documenting the use of the money for Bondolini production purposes.
93.
Trevino is further informed and believes, and based thereon
alleges, that Alfieri also withdrew approximately $21,000 ($17,500 he withdrew
from the account plus $1,000 he pocketed from Ms. Kelley’s pay plus $2,500 from
LLC fees, taxes and clearance of another film—He withdrew this money because it
was originally in the account) from the Bondolini account, and used those funds
for his own personal use.
Cross-complainant also has the right to immediate possession of the
above-referenced personal property.
94.
Cross-complainant has demanded from
cross-defendants the return of the personal property described in paragraphs 91
and of this First Amended Cross-Complaint, but cross-defendants have failed and
refused to return such personal property.
95.
As a result of Alfieri's wrongful acts and refusal to return
the money, Trevino has been damaged in an amount to be determined at trial, but
which is in excess of the jurisdictional minimum of this Court.
96.
The above conduct of cross-defendants was an intentional
misrepresentation, deceit, or concealment of a material fact known to
cross-defendants with the intention on the part of cross-defendants of thereby
depriving cross-complainant of property or legal rights or otherwise causing
injury, and thus was despicable conduct that subjected cross-complainant to a
cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of cross-complainant’s rights,
so as to justify an award of exemplary and punitive damages. Cross-defendants were guilty of malice,
fraud, and oppression as defined in Civil Code Section 3294, and cross-complainant should recover, in addition to her
actual damages, exemplary and punitive damages to make an example of and to
punish cross-defendants. The
officers, directors, managing agents, or members of Bondolini participated in
the conversion alleged above or authorized or ratified the conduct of Alfieri.
SEVENTH
CAUSE OF ACTION
(Accounting)
(By
Trevino against Alfieri, Bondolini, and Roes 1 to 10, inclusive)
97.
Trevino incorporates the allegations of paragraphs 1 through
96 as if set forth herein in full.
98.
As set forth in the preceding paragraphs, Alfieri has failed
and refused to provide receipts documenting that he used all of Trevino's
investment solely for the agreed-upon purpose of producing the movie. Trevino
is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that Alfieri did not, in
fact, use all of the money for the agreed-upon purpose, and Alfieri refused to
return it.
99.
The precise amount of Trevino's investment that was used by
Alfieri for purposes other than the production of the movie is unknown to
Trevino, and cannot be ascertained without an accounting of the receipts and
disbursements of Alfieri and Bondolini.
EIGHTH
CAUSE OF ACTION
(Defamation)
(By
Trevino against Alfieri, Bondolini, and Roes 1 to 10, inclusive)
100.
Trevino incorporates the allegations of paragraphs 1 through
99 as if set forth herein in full.
101.
As alleged above, Alfieri and Roes 1 to 10, inclusive, and
each of them, made defamatory statements regarding Trevino to third-parties,
contending, inter alia, that Trevino stole property belonging to Alfieri and/or
Bondolini. Said statements, which
are false, expose Trevino to hatred, contempt, ridicule and obloquy because the
statements accuse Trevino of committing a crime.
102.
Alfieri and Roes 1 to 10, inclusive, and each of them, made
further defamatory statements regarding Trevino to third-parties, contending,
inter alia, that Trevino was nothing more than an “obsessed fan” who only
wanted to sleep with Alfieri and that Alfieri was NEVER intimate with
Trevino. Said statements, which
are false, expose Trevino to hatred, contempt, ridicule and obloquy in that as
a natural consequence they caused Trevino actual damage.
103.
As the proximate result of the publication of said false
statements, Trevino was suffered loss of her reputation, shame, mortification,
and hurt feelings all to her general damage in an amount to be determined at the
time of trial.
104.
The publication of said false statements by Alfieri and Roes 1
to 10, inclusive, and each of them, was willful and malicious and oppressive
and Trevino is therefore entitled to an award of exemplary damages.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE,
cross-complainant, Adriana Trevino, prays for judgment against
cross-defendants, and each of them, as follows:
1. For
general damages and compensatory damages in an amount to be proven at the time
of trial;
2. For
interest at the legal rate according to proof at the time of trial;
3. For
an accounting;
4. For
punitive damages against cross-defendants Victor Alfieri, Bondolini, and Roes
1 to 10, inclusive, and each of them, in an amount to be proven at trial;
5. For
attorneys' fees and costs of suit herein incurred; and
6. For
such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
DATED: July 6, 2012. Respectfully
submitted,
HAKIMFAR
LAW, PLC
By:
____________________________
DAVID
HAKIMFAR
Attorney for Cross-Complainant
Disclaimer -- As of October 15, 2018, all
legal issues have been resolved. This resolution was reached during
arbitration. There are no pending issues related to fraud or theft. The
resolution was mutually agreeable. There will be no more posts written about
this story.
No comments:
Post a Comment