Yerk v. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals

Filing 1

COMPLAINT against People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals with Jury Demand (Filing fee $350 receipt number F012777) filed by Jason Yerk.(drn)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
for the
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Jason Yerk, an individual,
Plaintiff
v.
People for the Ethical Treatment
of Animals, a Virginia not-for-profit
corporation
Defendant

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

Civil Action No.:

PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT
PARTIES
1.

Jason Yerk (“Yerk”) is an individual who resides in the State of Florida and is
therefore domiciled in and a citizen of the State of Florida for the purposes of
diversity jurisdiction.

2.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (“PETA”) is a not-for-profit corporation
organized under the laws of Virginia, with its principal place of business at 501 Front
St., Norfolk, Virginia 23510 and is therefore a citizen of Virginia for the purposes of
diversity jurisdiction.

Yerk v PETA
Civil Action No.:
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION AND VENUE
3.

Venue is proper in this district because the underlying incident which forms the basis
of this suit occurred in Lee County, Florida, Jason Yerk’s causes of action accrued in
Lee County, FL and the acts or omissions of the Defendant occurred in Lee County,
FL.

4.

This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1332, based on the complete diversity of citizenship between the parties and an
amount in controversy exceeding $75,000.00, exclusive of interest and costs.

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS.
5.

On or about October 21, 2008, Guillermo Quintana reported to PETA that Lee County
Sheriff’s Deputy Travis Jelly was engaging in unlawful animal abuse of his canine
partner.

6.

Upon receiving this report, PETA’s Cruelty Investigations Department Coordinator
Christina Wheeless requested that Quintana have an active-duty employee of the Lee
County Sheriff’s Office (“LCSO”) contact PETA to provide supplemental
corroborating information.

2

Yerk v PETA
Civil Action No.:
7.

Pursuant to Wheeless’s request, Quintana provided Yerk’s contact information to
PETA. Wheeless subsequently contacted Yerk and left a phone message requesting
that he provide her with a statement so that the abuse tip could be acted upon.

8.

Yerk then contacted Wheeless to discuss the prospect of providing information to
PETA which would substantiate Quintana’s report (substantiating information is
hereon forward referred to as the “disclosure”). As an absolute condition of the
disclosure, Yerk demanded and received confirmation that the information he was
providing would not be disclosed to his employer and would otherwise remain strictly
confidential. In making the demand, Yerk advised PETA representatives that he
would lose his employment if his employer was made aware of his disclosure. This
was so because the culture of his employer was to eliminate any employee that took
a public adverse action towards a co-employee.

9.

Notwithstanding PETA’s representatives’ promises, assurances and representatations,
on or about November 4, 2008, PETA Cruelty Investigations Department caseworker
Kristen DeJournett violated the confidentiality agreement with Yerk by revealing
Yerk’s name and/or other identifiable information to the LCSO.

10.

PETA’s unlawful and improper disclosure resulted in damage to Yerk, including,
inter alia, the termination of the Plaintiff’s employment with the LCSO.

3

Yerk v PETA
Civil Action No.:
COUNT I - BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY
11.

The Plaintiff realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1-11 as if fully set forth herein.

12.

PETA and Yerk had a fiduciary relationship whereby Yerk confided information to
PETA in exchange for PETA’s exercise of its superior power, authority and influence
in the pursuit of the prosecution of LCSO Deputy Travis Jelly.

13.

PETA’s disclosure to the LCSO of the confidential information given to it by Yerk
breached that fiduciary relationship.

14.

PETA’s breach of its fiduciary duty caused Yerk to sustain damages including but not
limited to lost wages and benefits, lost future earning capacity and mental anguish and
suffering.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jason Yerk hereby requests that this Honorable Court award
him the damages sustained as a result of the Defendant’s breach of its fiduciary duty,
including but not limited to lost wages and benefits, lost future earning capacity and mental
anguish and suffering.

COUNT II - CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD
15.

The Plaintiff realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1-11 as if fully set forth herein.

4

Yerk v PETA
Civil Action No.:
16.

PETA and Yerk had a confidential relationship whereby Yerk confided information
to PETA in exchange for PETA’s exercise of its superior power, authority and
influence in the pursuit of the prosecution of LCSO Deputy Travis Jelly.

17.

PETA abused this confidential relationship by disclosing to the LCSO the information
given to it by Yerk.

18.

As a direct result of PETA’s abuse of the confidential relationship, Yerk has sustained
damages including but not limited to lost wages and benefits, lost future earning
capacity and mental anguish and suffering.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jason Yerk hereby requests that this Honorable Court award
him the damages sustained by him as a result of the Defendant’s constructive fraud, including
but not limited to lost wages and benefits, lost future earning capacity and mental anguish
and suffering.

COUNT III - FRAUDULENT MISREPRESENTATION
19.

The Plaintiff realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1-11 as if fully set forth herein.

20.

PETA misrepresented to Yerk that the information given by him would be kept
confidential and not revealed to the LCSO.

5

Yerk v PETA
Civil Action No.:
21.

PETA should have known that the statement pertaining to the information’s
confidentiality was false.

22.

PETA made this misrepresentation to Yerk with the intent that Yerk rely upon it.

23.

Yerk did, in fact, rely upon the misrepresentation in reporting LCSO Deputy Travis
Jelly’s act to PETA.

24.

As a result of PETA’s fraudulent misrepresentation,Yerk has sustained damages
including but not limited to lost wages and benefits, lost future earning capacity and
mental anguish and suffering.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jason Yerk hereby requests that this Honorable Court award
him the damages sustained by him as a result of Defendant PETA’s fraudulent
misrepresentation, including but not limited to lost wages and benefits, lost future earning
capacity and mental anguish and suffering.

COUNT IV - BREACH OF ORAL CONTRACT
25.

The Plaintiff realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1-11 as if fully set forth herein.

26.

Yerk and PETA entered into a valid oral contract whereby Yerk agreed to provide
confidential information to PETA in exchange for PETA’s assistance in the pursuit
of the prosecution of LCSO Deputy Travis Jelly.
6

Yerk v PETA
Civil Action No.:
27.

PETA breached this contract by revealing the confidential information to the LCSO.

28.

As a result of PETA’s breach of this oral contract,Yerk has sustained damages
including but not limited to lost wages and benefits, lost future earning capacity and
mental anguish and suffering.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jason Yerk hereby requests that this Honorable Court award
him the damages sustained by him as a result of Defendant PETA’s unlawful breach of the
oral contract between the parties, including but not limited to lost wages and benefits, lost
future earning capacity, mental anguish and suffering and attorney’s fees.

COUNT V - NEGLIGENT MISREPRESENTATION
29.

The Plaintiff realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1-11 as if fully set forth herein.

30.

PETA misrepresented to Yerk that the information given by him would be kept
confidential and not revealed to the LCSO.

31.

PETA should have known that the statement pertaining to the information’s
confidentiality was false.

32.

PETA made this misrepresentation to Yerk with the intent that Yerk rely upon it.

33.

Yerk reasonably and justifiably relied upon PETA’s representation that the
information’s confidentiality would be maintained.
7

Yerk v PETA
Civil Action No.:
34.

As a result of PETA’s negligent misrepresentation,Yerk has sustained damages
including but not limited to lost wages and benefits, lost future earning capacity and
mental anguish and suffering.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jason Yerk hereby requests that this Honorable Court award
him the damages sustained by him as a result of the Defendant’s negligent misrepresentation,
including but not limited to lost wages and benefits, lost future earning capacity and mental
anguish and suffering.

COUNT VI - NEGLIGENCE
35.

The Plaintiff realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1-11 as if fully set forth herein.

36.

PETA voluntarily assumed a duty to keep the information given to it by Yerk
confidential and not reveal any identifying information to the LCSO.

37.

PETA breached this duty of confidentiality when it revealed Yerk’s identity to the
LCSO.

38.

As a proximate cause of PETA’s negligence,Yerk has sustained damages including
but not limited to lost wages and benefits, lost future earning capacity and mental
anguish and suffering.

8

Yerk v PETA
Civil Action No.:
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jason Yerk hereby requests that this Honorable Court award
him the damages sustained by him as a result of the Defendant’s negligence, including but
not limited to lost wages and benefits, lost future earning capacity and mental anguish and
suffering.

COUNT VII - TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE WITH A CONTRACTUAL
RELATIONSHIP
39.

The Plaintiff realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1-11 as if fully set forth herein.

40.

Yerk and the LCSO had a contractual relationship under which Yerk had certain
rights, such as the right to receive compensation in return for services rendered.

41.

PETA had knowledge of this contractual relationship.

42.

PETA’s disclosure of the confidential information given to it by Yerk was an
intentional and unjustified interference with the aforementioned contractual
relationship that induced or otherwise caused LCSO not to perform its duties under
the contract.

43.

As a result of the LCSO’s failure to perform its duties under the contract,Yerk has
sustained damages including but not limited to lost wages and benefits, lost future
earning capacity and mental anguish and suffering.

9

Yerk v PETA
Civil Action No.:
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jason Yerk hereby requests that this Honorable Court award
him the damages sustained by him as a result of the Defendant’s intentional interference with
his contractual relationship with the LCSO, including but not limited to lost wages and
benefits, lost future earning capacity and mental anguish and suffering.

COUNT VIII - TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE WITH AN ADVANTAGEOUS
BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP
44.

The Plaintiff realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1-11 as if fully set forth herein.

45.

Yerk and the LCSO had an advantageous business relationship under which Yerk had
certain rights, such as the right to receive compensation in return for services
rendered.

46.

PETA had knowledge of this business relationship.

47.

PETA’s disclosure of the confidential information given to it by Yerk was an
intentional and unjustified interference with the aforementioned business relationship.

48.

As a result of PETA’s intentional and unjustified interference with the
aforementioned business relationship,Yerk has sustained damages including but not
limited to lost wages and benefits, lost future earning capacity and mental anguish and
suffering.

10

Yerk v PETA
Civil Action No.:
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Jason Yerk hereby requests that this Honorable Court award
him the damages sustained by him as a result of the Defendant’s intentional interference with
the aforementioned business relationship, including but not limited to lost wages and
benefits, lost future earning capacity and mental anguish and suffering.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
The Plaintiff demands trial by jury of all issues so triable.

Date: July 15, 2009

Respectfully Submitted,
/s/ Christopher Blain, Esq.
Christopher Blain, Esq.
Florida Bar No.: 671711
Vernis & Bowling of Clearwater, P.A.
1346 South Fort Harrison Ave.
Clearwater, FL 33021
[phone]; [phone] (fax)

11