Clark v. Hidden Valley Lake Association

Filing 44

STIPULATION AND ORDER granting 43 Request to File Second Amended Complaint. Signed by Judge Susan Illston on 5/31/2017. (afmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/1/2017)

1

4

Victor C. Thuesen, SBN 92467
LAW OFFICES OF VICTOR C. THUESEN
11 Western Avenue
Petaluma, California 94952
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
email: [e-mail]

5

Attorneys for Plaintiff WAYNE CLARK

6

10

William Munoz, SBN 191649
Heather Barnes, SBN 263107
MURPHY PEARSON BRADLEY & FEENEY
520 Capital Mall, Suite 250
Sacramento, CA 95814
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
[e-mail]

11

Attorneys for Defendant Hidden Valley Lake Association

2
3

7
8
9

12
13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

WAYNE CLARK,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
HIDDEN VALLEY LAKE
)
ASSOCIATION, INC., et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
____________________________________)

No.

3:16-cv-2009 SI

STIPULATION TO FILING OF
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
AND (PROPOSED) ORDER THEREON

Plaintiff WAYNE CLARK and Defendant HIDDEN VALLEY LAKE ASSOCIATION
hereby stipulate to the following:
1.

At the Case Management Conference of March 24, 2017, the parties agreed to

25

file a Stipulation and Proposed Order amending the First Amended Complaint by dismissing

26

the Twelfth and Thirteenth Causes of Action and to attach the (Proposed) Amended Complaint

27

to the stipulation. The Court entered an Order that such be done;

28

2.

The parties have subsequently agreed to amending the First Amended Complaint

STIPULATION TO FILING AMENDED COMPLAINT AND (PROPOSED) ORDER - CASE NO.: C 3:16-cv2009 SI

1

1

by dismissing as well the First and Second Causes of Action, for Breach of Contract and Breach

2

of the Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, respectively;

3

3.

The parties further agree that, aside from the dismissals of the First, Second,

4

Twelfth and Thirteen Causes of Action, the (Proposed) Second Amended Complaint does not

5

change the substance of the remaining Causes of Action and that Defendant’s Answer to the

6

First Amended Complaint shall be deemed to be the Answer to the Second Amended

7

Complaint;

8
9
10

4.

A true and correct copy of the (Proposed) Second Amended Complaint

incorporating the above described amendments is appended hereto;
5.

The dates established by the Pretrial Preparation Order of December 12, 2016, as

11

amended, will not be disturned by the filing of the (Proposed) Second Amended Complaint.

12

Dated: May 26, 2017

LAW OFFICE OF VICTOR C. THUESEN

13
14
By /s/ Victor C. Thuesen
Victor C. Thuesen
Attorney for Plaintiff WAYNE CLARK

15
16
Dated: May 26, 2017

MURPHY, PEARSON, BRADLEY & FEENEY

17
18
19

By /s/ William A. Munoz
William A. Munoz
Attorneys for Defendant
HIDDEN VALLEY LAKE ASSOCIATION

20
21
22

(PROPOSED) ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

23

Pursuant to the Stipulation of the Parties, and good cause appearing, it is ORDERED

24

that the (Proposed) Second Amended Complaint attached hereto may be filed with the Court

25

within _ days of this Order and that Defendant Hidden Valley Lake Association’s Answer to the

26

First Amended Complaint shall be deemed its Answer to the Second Amended Complaint.

27

Dated: _________
5/31/2017

28

_______________________________
SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge

STIPULATION TO FILING AMENDED COMPLAINT AND (PROPOSED) ORDER - CASE NO.: C 3:16-cv2009 SI

2

1

4

VICTOR C. THUESEN, SBN 92467
LAW OFFICE OF VICTOR C. THUESEN
11 WESTERN AVENUE
PETALUMA, CA 94952
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]

5

Attorney for Plaintiff WAYNE CLARK

2
3

6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

9

THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

WAYNE CLARK,

)
)
vs.
)
)
HIDDEN VALLEY LAKE
)
ASSOCIATION, INC., and
)
DOES 1 through 20,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
____________________________________)

NO. 3:16-CV-2009 SI

Plaintiff,

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

(PROPOSED) SECOND AMENDED
COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATION OF
PRIVACY, CALIFORNIA
CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE I, SECTION
1; DEFAMATION; NEGLIGENT
SUPERVISION; NEGLIGENT
INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL
DISTRESS; INTENTIONAL INFLICTION
OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS; LIBEL;
FALSE LIGHT INVASION OF PRIVACY;
INTERFERENCE WITH PROSPECTIVE
ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE AND
BUSINESS RELATIONS; VIOLATION
OF LABOR CODE §§201 AND 203 FOR
LATE PAYMENT OF WAGES
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

21

Plaintiff WAYNE CLARK respectfully alleges and complains against the above-named

22

defendants, HIDDEN VALLEY LAKE ASSOCIATION and DOES 1-20, inclusive, and each of

23

them, and demands a jury trial of all issues and causes of action, as follows:

24
25
26

1.

This is an action brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 as complete diversity exists

between the parties.
2.

Plaintiff WAYNE CLARK (“CLARK” or “Plaintiff”) resides in the State of

27

Washington. Defendant HIDDEN VALLEY LAKE ASSOCIATION (“Defendant” or “HVLA”) is

28

incorporated in the State of California and has its current place of business in Lake County in the
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT - CASE NO. 3:16-CV-2009 SI

1
2

State of California.
3.

The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, government, associate

3

or otherwise, of Defendants sued herein as Does 1 to 20, inclusive, are unknown to plaintiff at this

4

time and plaintiffs therefore sue said Defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will seek leave

5

to amend this First Amended Complaint to show their true names and capacities when the same have

6

been ascertained. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that each of the Defendants

7

designated as a Doe is in some manner responsible for the occurrences and injuries alleged herein.

8

Plaintiff believes all Doe Defendants are residents of the State of California.

9

4.

The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, government, associate

10

or otherwise, of Defendants sued herein as Does 1 to 20, inclusive, are unknown to plaintiff at this

11

time and plaintiffs therefore sue said Defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiff will seek leave

12

to amend this First Amended Complaint to show their true names and capacities when the same have

13

been ascertained. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that each of the Defendants

14

designated as a Doe is in some manner responsible for the occurrences and injuries alleged herein.

15

Plaintiff believes all Doe Defendants are residents of the State of California.

16

5.

CLARK is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all times herein

17

mentioned, except where explicitly specified otherwise, each and every Defendant was the agent and

18

employee of each and every other Defendant, and in doing the things, acts and omissions hereinafter

19

alleged, was acting within the course and scope of such agency and employment, and in so doing was

20

acting with the consent, permission, and authorization of each of the remaining Defendants. All

21

actions of each Defendant as herein alleged were ratified and approved by the officers or managing

22

agents of each and every other Defendant.

23

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

24

VIOLATION OF CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 1, SECTION 1

25

6.

26

Director of Golf.

27

7.

28

Plaintiff is a professional golfer. He was hired in 2011 to serve as Defendant’s

On April 15, 2015, HVLA General Manager Cindy Spears (“Spears”) gave verbal

notice to plaintiff CLARK that HVLA was terminating his contract for no cause effective that day.
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT - CASE NO. 3:16-CV-2009 SI

2

1

8.

CLARK was a very popular employee of HVLA. In order to justify CLARK’S

2

termination Spears engaged in a course of conduct and action to impugn CLARK’s personal and

3

professional reputation. In the months following Clark’s termination, Spears manufactured

4

information about Clark’s performance as the Director of Golf that was untrue. She conveyed this

5

information to individuals that had no reason to know of it even if it were true. The information

6

included claims that Clark had embezzled funds of the Association, that he drank alcohol and

7

watched pornography while working, that he was going to be arrested for criminal conduct and that

8

he had engaged in fraud, dereliction of duties and theft, all of which she knew were untrue. She told

9

nonHVLA employees about such scurrilous and scandalous information about CLARK with the

10

intent that the nonHVLA employees would gossip about CLARK and publish the false information

11

on social media, including Facebook. The result was that certain nonHVLA employees posted false

12

information on Facebook and other websites that were intended to support the idea that CLARK had

13

been terminated for the conduct described herein. Spears conveyed such information as well to

14

employees of HVLA that had no reason to know of such information. She also started the rumors

15

that CLARK had been terminated “for cause.”

16

9.

Prior to his termination, CLARK had never been given a negative performance

17

evaluation and had performed his duties well at all times. He was never informed of deficient

18

performance or given any opportunity to respond as was required by the terms of his employment

19

contract and HLVA’s practice and procedure associated with those terms.

20

10.

In addition to the foregoing, Spears started rumors about CLARK that she knew to

21

be untrue including that he had inappropriately taken monies from the HVLA golf shop; that he

22

failed to charge all people for playing golf even though it was required; that he had pornography on

23

his computer; that he mismanaged the golf operation budget and increased HVLA subsidization from

24

HVLA funds; that his employment contract was illegal and invalid; that he did not pay for food or

25

drinks at the HVLA bar; that he made fraudulent use of his credit card, and; that HVLA paid for

26

CLARK’s participation in golf tournaments inappropriately.

27
28

11.

At all times during and following CLARK’s employment with HVLA, he had the

right to have his personnel information kept private. Spears violated this right when she purposefully,
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT - CASE NO. 3:16-CV-2009 SI

3

1

knowingly and willingly disclosed information regarding CLARK’s confidential employment terms,

2

her unsupported claims about CLARK’S performance and conduct as alleged herein and other

3

confidential personnel information for the purpose of impugning his reputation and justifying his

4

termination for cause.

5

12.

As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ violation of his Constitutional right

6

to privacy in his employment information, CLARK has suffered and continues to suffer a substantial

7

loss of earnings and other employment benefits that he would have received in post-termination

8

employment had Defendants not involved itself in publishing false and harmful information about

9

his employment with Defendant as herein alleged. Plaintiff has also suffered and continues to suffer

10
11
12

emotional harm, humiliation and mental anguish all to Plaintiff's damage.
13.

The conduct of Defendants was willful, oppressive, fraudulent and malicious, thereby

entitling Plaintiff to an award of punitive damages.

13

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

14

DEFAMATION

15
16
17

14.

Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein by reference each and every allegation

contained in paragraphs 1 through _, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.
15.

On information and belief, Plaintiff asserts that Defendant HVLA or its agents, orally

18

uttered to others, or caused to be published, that CLARK was an incompetent employee, or words

19

to that effect, and that any problems with the golf operations at HVLA were caused by CLARK.

20

16.

On information and belief, Plaintiff further alleges that Spears orally uttered to others,

21

or caused to be published, that CLARK was negligent in the performance of his duties and that she

22

further orally uttered to others, or caused to be published, words which tended directly to injure

23

CLARK with respect to his office, profession, trade or business. Among other things, Spears

24

deliberately represented to individuals that were neither employed by nor officers or representatives

25

of HVLA that CLARK was going to be arrested for criminal conduct including fraud, dereliction of

26

duties, theft and embezzlement, all of which she knew were untrue. She made these claims to

27

nonHVLA employees with the intent that the nonHVLA employees would gossip about CLARK and

28

publish the false information on social media, including Facebook. The result was that certain
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT - CASE NO. 3:16-CV-2009 SI

4

1

nonHVLA employees posted false information on Facebook and other websites that appeared to

2

support the idea that CLARK had actually committed such actions and was a scurrilous man.

3

17.

The utterances and publications made by Defendants were not privileged because

4

Defendants published these statements with personal animosity, hatred and ill will toward CLARK,

5

and they were published to persons who were not interested, and to persons who do not stand in a

6

relationship with an interested person.

7
8
9

18.

Such publications were false and injured CLARK’s reputation and his ability to retain

his job or to obtain other employment.
19.

The publicity created by Defendants was offensive and objectionable to CLARK and

10

to a reasonable person of ordinary sensibilities in that Spear’s defamatory statements were the

11

catalyst for CLARK’s termination and continued for a significant period of time after CLARK’S

12

termination and have precluded CLARK from finding comparable replacement employment.

13
14
15

20.

The publicity created by Defendants was done with malice in that it was made either

with knowledge of its falsity or in reckless disregard of its truth.
21.

As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' defamatory statements, CLARK

16

suffered and continues to suffer a substantial loss of earnings and other employment benefits and has

17

suffered and continues to suffer humiliation and mental anguish all to plaintiff's damage in an

18

amount not yet ascertained, but within the minimum jurisdiction of this Court. Plaintiff will seek

19

leave to amend this Second Amended Complaint and insert the amount when the same is ascertained

20

or on proof thereof.

21

22.

22

The conduct of Defendants was willful, oppressive, fraudulent and malicious, thereby

entitling plaintiff to an award of punitive damages.

23

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

24

NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION

25
26
27
28

23.

Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein by reference each and every allegation

contained in paragraphs 1 through 22, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.
24.

Plaintiff alleges that Defendant HVLA owes all of its employees a duty to supervise

its employees in a manner consistent with common law. As an employee of HVLA, HVLA owed
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT - CASE NO. 3:16-CV-2009 SI

5

1
2

CLARK this same duty.
25.

HVLA breached its duty to CLARK by failing to supervise Cindy Spears and

3

discipline her appropriately upon notice of her unsafe, unhealthy, and unlawful conduct even though

4

it knew or should have known from complaints by CLARK and other employees that Cindy Spears

5

was abusing her office, mistreating employees, making false statements about them, violating their

6

right to privacy by discussing confidential employment information with people who had no need

7

to know and creating a negative and abusive work environment.

8

26.

As a direct and proximate result of this breach of duty, Plaintiff has suffered

9

substantial economic losses and mental and emotional harm, including, but not limited to lost

10

wages, humiliation, mental anguish, embarrassment, loss of sleep, depression, as well as other

11

compensatory and consequential damages. He has also suffered pecuniary losses including the costs

12

of relocating and costs of trying to find replacement employment.

13
14

27.

The conduct of Defendants was willful, oppressive, fraudulent and malicious, thereby

entitling plaintiff to an award of punitive damages.

15

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

16

NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

17
18
19

28.

Plaintiff realleges and incorporates herein by reference each and every allegation

contained in paragraphs 1 through 27, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.
29.

In terminating plaintiff for conduct and reasons that were not accurate, Defendants

20

could foresee that plaintiff would suffer great emotional distress. In purposely stating purported

21

facts she knew to be untrue for the purpose of harming CLARK’s reputation and goodwill in the

22

community and his profession, Cindy Spears negligently caused plaintiff great emotional distress.

23

Plaintiff did and does in fact suffer such distress.

24

30.

As a direct and proximate result of this breach of duty, plaintiff has suffered

25

substantial economic losses and mental and emotional harm, including, but not limited to lost

26

wages, humiliation, mental anguish, embarrassment, loss of sleep, depression, as well as other

27

compensatory and consequential damages. He has also suffered pecuniary losses including the

28

costs of relocating and trying to find replacement employment.
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT - CASE NO. 3:16-CV-2009 SI

6

1
2

31.

The conduct of Defendants was willful, oppressive, fraudulent and malicious,

thereby entitling plaintiff to an award of punitive damages.

3

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

4

INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

5
6
7

32.

Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation

contained in paragraphs 1 through 31, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.
33.

On information and belief, plaintiff alleges that Defendants orally uttered to

8

others, or caused to be published, direct statements and statements by innuendo that CLARK was

9

negligent in the performance of his duties, and purposely stating purported facts she knew to be

10

untrue for the purpose of harming CLARK’s reputation and goodwill in the community and his

11

profession, Cindy Spears intentionally caused plaintiff great emotional distress. Plaintiff did and

12

does in fact suffer such distress.

13

34.

On information and belief, Plaintiff alleges that Defendants orally uttered to

14

others, or caused to be published words which tended directly to injure CLARK with respect to

15

his office, profession, trade or business. Since his termination, CLARK has applied for golf pro

16

positions unsuccessfully.

17

35.

Defendant’s statements spawned an environment rife with innuendo, speculation

18

and rumor about CLARK and his personal and professional character, profession, trade and

19

business. Hidden Valley Lake is a small community. On information and belief, plaintiff alleges

20

it has a very tight-knit group. CLARK’s termination was reported widely in several editions of

21

the Association’s newsletter, and HVLA’s several social media pages. Plaintiff believes that

22

rumors among HVLA were started or contributed to by Cindy Spears and HVLA Board

23

Members’ various public comments. Such innuendos have created a public perception that

24

CLARK was terminated for incompetence in his profession and other wrongs involving moral

25

turpitude.

26

36.

The utterances and publications made by Defendants were not privileged because

27

Defendants published these statements with personal animosity, hatred, and ill will toward

28

CLARK with the intent to disgrace and injure Plaintiff, to bring him into public disregard and
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT - CASE NO. 3:16-CV-2009 SI

7

1

cause the public to hold him in contempt and ridicule. The statements were published to those

2

persons who were not interested parties and to those persons who do not stand in a relationship

3

with an interested person.

4
5
6

37.

Such publications were false and injured CLARK’s reputation and his ability to

retain his job or to obtain other employment.
38.

The publicity created by Defendants was offensive and objectionable to CLARK

7

and to a reasonable person of ordinary sensibilities in that it made CLARK the object of

8

suspicion of criminal intent, wrongdoing, moral turpitude and professional incompetence.

9

39.

The publicity created by Defendants was done with malice in that it was made

10

either with knowledge of its falsity or in reckless disregard of its truth in that the HVLA, and its

11

individual Board members and administration were aware of and had access to CLARK’s

12

personnel file and employment records.

13

40.

As a direct and proximate result of this breach of duty, plaintiff has suffered

14

substantial economic losses and mental and emotional harm, including, but not limited to lost

15

wages, humiliation, mental anguish, embarrassment, loss of sleep, depression, as well as other

16

compensatory and consequential damages. He has also suffered pecuniary losses including the

17

costs of relocating and costs of trying to find replacement employment.

18
19

41.

The conduct of Defendants was willful, oppressive, fraudulent and malicious,

thereby entitling plaintiff to an award of punitive damages.

20

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

21

LIBEL

22
23
24

42.

Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation

contained in paragraphs 1 through 41, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.
43.

On information and belief, plaintiff alleges that Defendants, through its Board

25

Member(s), General Manager and certain employees, and as directed by its General Manager,

26

caused others to purposely to publish in writing defamatory, unprivileged information publicly,

27

including without limitation that CLARK looked at pornography on his computer, embezzled

28

funds, lost monies by failing to charge players for golf at the golf course, and other purported
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT - CASE NO. 3:16-CV-2009 SI

8

1

facts it knew to be false and untrue all for the purpose of harming CLARK’s reputation and

2

goodwill in the community and his profession. As a result, CLARK has been exposed to

3

disgrace, ridicule, hatred, contempt, and caused plaintiff to be shunned or avoided and injured in

4

his profession. He has also suffered emotional distress as a result of Defendant’s wrongful

5

conduct.

6

44.

On information and belief, plaintiff alleges that Defendants published in writing,

7

or caused to be published in writing words which tended directly to injure CLARK with respect

8

to his office, profession, trade or business and done with fault and malice. Since his termination,

9

CLARK has applied for golf pro positions unsuccessfully.

10

45.

Defendant’s written statements spawned an environment rife with innuendo,

11

speculation and rumor about CLARK and his personal and professional character, profession,

12

trade and business. Hidden Valley Lake is a small community. On information and belief,

13

plaintiff alleges it has a very tight-knit group. CLARK’s termination was reported widely in

14

several editions of the Association’s newsletter, and HVLA’s several social media pages.

15

Plaintiff believes that rumors among HVLA were started or contributed to by Cindy Spears and

16

HVLA Board Members’ various public writings. Such false innuendos have created a public

17

perception that CLARK was terminated for incompentence and moral turpitude reasons.

18

46.

The publications made by Defendants were not privileged because Defendants

19

published these statements with personal animosity, hatred, and ill will toward CLARK with the

20

intent to disgrace and injure plaintiff, to bring him into public disregard and cause the public to

21

hold him in contempt and ridicule. The publications were to persons who were not interested

22

parties and to those persons who do not stand in a relationship with an interested person.

23
24
25

47.

Such publications were false and injured CLARK’s reputation and his ability to

retain his job or to obtain other employment. He was shunned and avoided.
48.

The publicity created by Defendants was offensive and objectionable to CLARK

26

and to a reasonable person of ordinary sensibilities in that it made CLARK the object of

27

suspicion of criminal conduct, wrongdoing, moral turpitude and professional incompetence.

28

49.

The publicity created by Defendants was done with malice in that it was made

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT - CASE NO. 3:16-CV-2009 SI

9

1

either with knowledge of its falsity or in reckless disregard of its truth in that the HVLA, and its

2

individual Board members and administration were aware of and had access to CLARK’s

3

personnel file and employment records.

4

50.

As a direct and proximate result of this breach of duty, plaintiff has suffered

5

substantial economic losses and mental and emotional harm, including, but not limited to, lost

6

wages, humiliation, mental anguish, embarrassment, loss of sleep, depression, as well as other

7

compensatory and consequential damages. He has also suffered pecuniary losses including the

8

costs of relocating and costs of trying to find replacement employment.

9
10

51.

The conduct of Defendants was willful, oppressive, fraudulent and malicious,

thereby entitling plaintiff to an award of punitive damages.

11

SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

12

FALSE LIGHT INVASION OF PRIVACY

13
14
15

52.

Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation

contained in paragraphs 1 through 51, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.
53.

On information and belief, Plaintiff alleges that Defendants, itself, through its

16

Board Member(s), HVLA’s General Manager and certain employees, and as directed by its

17

General Manager, caused others to purposely publish orally and in writing to a large number of

18

people and to the public in general unfair and inaccurate depictions of CLARK. The published

19

statements were defamatory and unprivileged information, including without limitation that

20

CLARK looked at pornography on his computer, embezzled funds, lost monies by failing to

21

charge players for golf at the golf course, and other purported facts it knew to be false and untrue

22

all for the purpose of harming CLARK’s reputation and goodwill in the community and his

23

profession. The publications unfairly and inaccurately depicted CLARK in a false light. As a

24

result, CLARK has been exposed to disgrace, ridicule, hatred, contempt, and caused plaintiff to

25

be shunned or avoided and injured in his profession. He has also suffered emotional distress as a

26

result of Defendant’s wrongful conduct. The publications unfairly and inaccurately depicted

27

CLARK and were highly offensive to a reasonable person.

28

54.

On information and belief, Plaintiff alleges that Defendants published in writing,

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT - CASE NO. 3:16-CV-2009 SI

10

1

or caused to be published in writing, words which tended directly to injure CLARK with respect

2

to his office, profession, trade or business and done with fault and malice. It was done

3

intentionally or in reckless disregard of the falsity of the publications and the false light in which

4

CLARK would be placed. Defendants acted negligently in failing to learn whether the

5

publications placed plaintiff in a false light. Since the false publications and his termination,

6

CLARK has applied for golf pro positions unsuccessfully.

7

55.

Defendant’s written statements spawned an environment rife with innuendo,

8

speculation and rumor about CLARK and his personal and professional character, profession,

9

trade and business. Hidden Valley Lake is a small community. On information and belief,

10

plaintiff alleges it has a very tight-knit group. CLARK’s termination was reported widely in

11

several editions of the Association’s newsletter, and HVLA’s several social media pages.

12

Plaintiff believes that rumors among HVLA were started or contributed to by Cindy Spears and

13

HVLA Board Members’ various public writings. Such false innuendos have created a public

14

perception that CLARK was terminated for incompentence and moral turpitude reasons.

15

56.

The publications made by Defendants were not privileged because Defendants

16

published these statements with personal animosity, hatred, and ill will toward CLARK with the

17

intent to disgrace and injure plaintiff, to bring him into public disregard and cause the public to

18

hold him in contempt and ridicule. Their publications were to persons who were not interested

19

parties, and to those persons who do not stand in a relationship with an interested person.

20
21
22

57.

Such publications were false and injured CLARK’s reputation and his ability to

retain his job or to obtain other employment. He was shunned and avoided.
58.

The publicity created by Defendants was offensive and objectionable to CLARK

23

and to a reasonable person of ordinary sensibilities in that it made CLARK the object of

24

suspicion of criminal intent, wrongdoing, moral turpitude and professional incompetence.

25

59.

The publicity created by Defendants was done with malice in that it was made

26

either with knowledge of its falsity or in reckless disregard of its truth in that the HVLA, and its

27

individual Board members and administration were aware of and had access to CLARK’s

28

personnel file and employment records.
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT - CASE NO. 3:16-CV-2009 SI

11

1

60.

As a direct and proximate result of this breach of duty, plaintiff has suffered

2

substantial economic losses and mental and emotional harm, including, but not limited to, lost

3

wages, humiliation, mental anguish, embarrassment, loss of sleep, depression, as well as other

4

compensatory and consequential damages. He has also suffered pecuniary losses including the

5

costs of relocating and costs of trying to find replacement employment.

6
7

61.

The conduct of Defendants was willful, oppressive, fraudulent and malicious,

thereby entitling plaintiff to an award of punitive damages.

8

EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION

9

INTERFERENCE WITH PROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC ADVANTAGE AND BUSINESS

10

RELATIONS

11
12

62.

Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation

contained in paragraphs 1 through 61, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.

13

63.

Plaintiff CLARK had an economic relationship with the Professional Golf

14

Association (“PGA”) as CLARK was a professional golfer and obtained notice of employment

15

and income opportunities from said association. This economic relationship included the

16

probability of future economic benefit to CLARK in that had CLARK not been terminated he

17

would have continued to receive income and benefits from future employment in his profession

18

and other professional activities.

19
20
21

64.

Defendant HVLA knew of the economic relationship between CLARK and the

65.

On information and belief, HVLA intentionally intended to disrupt the economic

PGA.

22

relationship between CLARK and the PGA and prospective employers. This intent is evidenced

23

by the actions and words of Cindy Spears to other HVLA employees to contact the PGA for the

24

purpose of placing CLARK in a bad light, interfere with his good reputation and affiliation with

25

the PGA and also to interfere with CLARK’s membership in the PGA.

26
27
28

66.

Plaintiff alleges on information and belief that his inability to secure comparable

employment resulted from HVLA’s disruption of his economic relationship with the PGA.
67.

As a direct and proximate result of this breach of duty, plaintiff has suffered

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT - CASE NO. 3:16-CV-2009 SI

12

1

substantial economic losses and mental and emotional harm, including, but not limited to, lost

2

wages, humiliation, mental anguish, embarrassment, loss of sleep, depression, as well as other

3

compensatory and consequential damages. He has also suffered pecuniary losses including the

4

costs of relocating and trying to find replacement employment.

5
6

68.

The conduct of Defendants was willful, oppressive, fraudulent and malicious,

thereby entitling plaintiff to an award of punitive damages.

7

NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION

8

VIOLATION OF LABOR CODE §§ 201 AND 203

9
10
11

69.

Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation

contained in paragraphs 1 through 70, inclusive, as though fully set forth herein.
70.

Plaintiff held an employment contract with Defendants for which he received

12

commission wages as defined by California Labor Code §200. Defendants terminated plaintiff on

13

or about April 15, 2015 without advance notice. At the time of his termination from employment,

14

Defendant HVLA failed to pay CLARK all commissions earned or were in process of being

15

earned as required by California Labor Code §201. Plaintiff did not secret or absent himself or

16

avoid Defendant’s payment to him.

17

71.

Wherefore plaintiff prays that Defendants pay earned commissions in the amount

18

of proof at trial; penalties according to California Labor Code §203 for wages equivalent to his

19

daily rate for a period not to exceed 30 days; and attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to California

20

Labor Code §218.5.

21

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

22

Plaintiff requests such damages from Defendants as to be proved at trial as follows:

23

1.

For a money judgment representing general and compensatory damages including

24

lost past and future wages, earnings, retirement benefits and other employee benefits, government

25

service credits and all other sums of money, together with prejudgment interest on those

26

amounts.

27

2.

28

For all general and compensatory damages incurred for the lasting harm to

CLARK’s professional reputation and other monetary relief.
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT - CASE NO. 3:16-CV-2009 SI

13

1

3.

For a money judgment for mental pain and anguish and emotional distress.

2

4.

For costs of suit herein incurred.

3

5.

For reasonable attorneys’ fees.

4

6.

For punitive damages.

5

7.

For prejudgment and post-judgment interest.

6

8.

For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

7
8
9
10

JURY DEMAND
CLARK hereby demands a trial by jury of all issues in this case.
Dated: May 26, 2017
LAW OFFICES OF VICTOR C. THUESEN

11
12
13

____________________________________
VICTOR C. THUESEN
Attorney for Plaintiff WAYNE CLARK

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT - CASE NO. 3:16-CV-2009 SI

14