DISTRICT COURT, LARIMER COUNTY,
COLORADO
Larimer County Justice Center
201 La Porte Avenue, Suite 100
Fort Collins, Colorado 80521
Phone Number: (970) 498-6100
Christopher McIntire,
Plaintiff,
v.
The Board of Governors of the Colorado State
University System d/b/a Colorado State University;
Anthony Frank in his official capacity as President
of Colorado State University; Rocky Mountain
Planned Parenthood, Inc., a Colorado nonprofit
corporation; Planned Parenthood of the Rocky
Mountains Services Corporation, a Colorado
nonprofit corporation; and Advanced Bioscience
Resources, Inc., a California corporation
Defendants.


COURT USE ONLY

Attorney for Plaintiff:
Barry K. Arrington, No. 16486
Arrington Law Firm
3801 East Florida Avenue, Suite 830
Denver, Colorado 80210
(O) 303-205-7870
(F) 303-463-0410
E-mail: barry@arringtonpc.com

Case Number:

Courtroom

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff Christopher McIntire submits the following Complaint:
I. PARTIES
1.
Plaintiff is an individual with an address of 928 Osage Avenue, Manitou
Springs, Colorado 80829.

1



 2.
Plaintiff pays taxes in the State of Colorado. Defendants CSU (as defined
below) and Frank (as defined below) have expended and will continue to expend public
funds in violation of the Abortion Funding Prohibition Amendment (as defined below)
contrary to the Constitution of the State of Colorado. Plaintiff has therefore suffered an
injury-in-fact because he seeks review of what he claims are substantial unlawful
government expenditures that are contrary to Colorado’s state government.
3.
Defendant The Board of Governors of the Colorado State University
System is a body corporate capable in law of suing and being sued. The Board of
Governors of the Colorado State University System does business under the name
“Colorado State University,” and shall be referred to herein as “CSU.”
4.
Anthony Frank (“Frank”) is the president and chief executive officer of
CSU. Frank is sued in his official capacity only.
5.
Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood, Inc., d/b/a Planned Parenthood of
the Rocky Mountains, Inc. (“Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood”) is a Colorado
nonprofit corporation formed on October 20, 1988. Its principal office address is 7155
East 38th Avenue, Denver, Colorado 80207.
6.
Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains Services Corporation
(“PP Services”) is a Colorado nonprofit corporation formed on August 26, 1999. Its
principal office address is also 7155 East 38th Avenue, Denver, Colorado 80207.
7.
Advanced Bioscience Resources, Inc. (“ABR”) is a California corporation
with an address of 1516 Oak Street, #303, Alameda, California 94501. This Court has
personal jurisdiction over ABR, because, as explained in detail below, ABR has
conspired with the other defendants in this state to break the laws of Colorado and has
participated with the other defendants in unlawful activities in this state.
II. VENUE
8.

Pursuant to C.R.C.P. 98(b)(2), venue is proper in this Court.
III. GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

A. The Abortion Funding Prohibition Amendment
9.
In November 1984, the voters of the State of Colorado approved an
amendment to the Colorado Constitution (hereinafter the “Abortion Funding Prohibition
Amendment”) which prohibited the use of public funds, either directly or indirectly, to
pay for induced abortions. The Abortion Funding Prohibition Amendment, set forth as
Article V, Section 50 of the Colorado Constitution, states:
No public funds shall be used by the State of Colorado, its
agencies or political subdivisions to pay or otherwise reimburse,

 either directly or indirectly, any person, agency or facility for
the performance of any induced abortion, PROVIDED
HOWEVER, that the General Assembly, by specific bill, may
authorize and appropriate funds to be used for those medical
services necessary to prevent the death of either a pregnant woman
or her unborn child under circumstances where every reasonable
effort is made to preserve the life of each.
(emphasis added)
10.
The Abortion Funding Prohibition Amendment became effective on
January 14, 1985.
11.
In November 1986, an initiative proposing the repeal of the Abortion
Funding Prohibition Amendment was rejected by Colorado voters. Thus, Colorado voters
have twice affirmed the Abortion Funding Prohibition Amendment’s prohibition on the
use of Colorado taxpayer dollars to directly or indirectly subsidize induced abortions.
12.
to this day.

The Abortion Funding Prohibition Amendment remains in force and effect

B. Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood Performs Abortions
13.
Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood has denied that it performs
abortions. It has asserted that abortion services are performed solely by its affiliate
PP Services. Those statements were false. Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood does in
fact perform induced abortions.
14.
In 2014 the office of the Public Administrator for the 20th Judicial District
brought a civil action against Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood entitled Sisk v. Rocky
Mountain Planned Parenthood, Inc., Civil Action No. 2014CV31778 in the District
Court for the City and County of Denver, Colorado (the “Sisk Action”).
15.
In the Sisk Action Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood was accused of
failing to report suspected child abuse when it performed an abortion on a 13 year-old
girl who was accompanied to the facility by her abusive stepfather, the man who got her
pregnant and later pled guilty to child abuse.
16.
Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood was named as a defendant in the
Third Amended Complaint in the Sisk Action (the “Sisk Complaint”). PP Services was
never named as a party in the Sisk Action.
17.
In its Answer to the Sisk Compliant Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood,
Inc. d/b/a Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains, Inc. identified itself by the
acronym “PPRM.”

 18.
In paragraph 20 of the Sisk Complaint the plaintiff alleged: “R. Z. [i.e.,
the 13 year-old sex abuse victim] was then taken to another room for the abortion
procedure.”
19.
In its response to paragraph 20 of the Sisk Complaint Rocky Mountain
Planned Parenthood stated: “PPRM admits only that R. Z. requested, and was provided,
abortion care at its health center.” The plain meaning of this admission is that the
abortion was performed by Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood personnel at Rocky
Mountain Planned Parenthood’s facility.
20.
In paragraph 22 of the Sisk Complaint the plaintiff alleged: “After the
abortion R. Z. was released from the recovery room, but no adult was present to assist
her. Instead Jane Does 1-4 allowed R. Z. to leave Planned Parenthood’s facility
unaccompanied, and R. Z. located Smith in his vehicle in the parking lot.”
21.
In its response to paragraph 22 of the Sisk Complaint Rocky Mountain
Planned Parenthood stated: “PPRM admits that it released R. Z. from the recovery room
of its health center following her abortion procedure. PPRM denies that R. Z. was
permitted to leave PPRM’s health center unaccompanied.” The plain meaning of these
statements is that after Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood personnel performed the
abortion, they transferred her to the abortion recovery room in Rocky Mountain Planned
Parenthood’s facility and later released her from that room.
22.
In its Answer to the Sisk Complaint Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood
also admitted that R. Z. made an appointment for an abortion (which it called “health
services”) at its facility (paragraph 13); that the girl was seen for medical treatment (i.e.,
the abortion) at its facility (paragraph 14); that the girl completed the required forms to
obtain the abortion at its facility (paragraph 15); and that its employees were the ones
who provided the “medical care,” i.e., the abortion (paragraph 32).
23.
In the first affirmative defense listed in its answer Rocky Mountain
Planned Parenthood stated that it relied on certain information in connection with
complying with the Colorado Parental Notification Act. Obviously, only an entity that
performs an induced abortion need comply with the Colorado Parental Notification Act.
Thus, this affirmative defense is tantamount to admitting that Rocky Mountain Planned
Parenthood did in fact perform the abortion in question in the Sisk Action.
24.
In its Answer to the Sisk Complain Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood
never stated that personnel acting on behalf of any other entity (including but not limited
to PP Services) performed the abortion on R. Z.
25.
On July 14, 2015, a non-profit organization known as the Center for
Medical Progress (“CMP”) released the first of a series of undercover videos which
captured meetings and conversations with high level executives of Planned Parenthood
Federation of America and certain of its affiliates, including defendant Rocky Mountain
Planned Parenthood. Specifically, two of the CMP videos have depicted meetings and

 conversations with high level officials of defendant Rocky Mountain Planned
Parenthood.
26.
These meetings and conversations concerned the harvesting and sale of
livers, eyes, brains, and other organs and body parts extracted from aborted unborn
babies. Each of the videos which have been released by CMP have depicted barbaric,
shocking, and disturbing practices and information about how Planned Parenthood
Federation of America affiliates, including defendant Rocky Mountain Planned
Parenthood, have sought to profit from these practices.
27.
In the video highlighting defendant Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood,
released on July 28, 2015, Dr. Savita Ginde, Vice President and Medical Director of
defendant Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood, is seen negotiating the price for the
harvesting and sale of body parts and organs of aborted babies. The video was taken
inside defendant Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood’s Denver facility. In the video
Dr. Ginde outlines how best to harvest usable body parts and organs from aborted babies
to preserve the body parts for sale to others. The CMP video also depicts a defendant
Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood employee picking through various body parts of
aborted babies. Upon information and belief, these babies were aborted by defendant
Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood by Dr. Savita Ginde who was, at all relevant times
herein, acting within the scope of her authority and employment with defendant Rocky
Mountain Planned Parenthood.
28.
Moreover, the second CMP video released on July 30, 2015 depicts Dr.
Savita Ginde saying, “It’s a baby.” Another defendant Rocky Mountain Planned
Parenthood employee adds, “Another boy!” All this occurs while the body parts of an
aborted baby are being displayed and examined in a petri dish inside the defendant Rocky
Mountain Planned Parenthood’s Denver abortion facility.
29.
In or about March 2010 CSU entered into a contract with defendant Rocky
Mountain Planned Parenthood whereby CSU was to purchase parts of human fetuses
aborted by defendant Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood (the “Planned Parenthood
Contract”). The Planned Parenthood Contract is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
30.
CSU entered into the Planned Parenthood Contract directly with Rocky
Mountain Planned Parenthood, because Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood is the
entity that actually performs the abortions and is thus in a position to provide the parts of
the aborted fetuses. It would make no sense to enter into the contract with Rocky
Mountain Planned Parenthood if PP Services were the entity performing the abortions.
31.
Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood through its agents and employees
has performed and continues to perform induced abortions.

 C. Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood Attempts to Disguise its Abortion
Business
32.
In 2001 Jane Norton was the Executive Director of the Colorado
Department of Health and Environment (“CDPHE”).
33.
Ms. Norton directed that CDPHE determine whether Rocky Mountain
Planned Parenthood and/or PP Services were being provided Colorado taxpayer funds
which resulted in the subsidization, directly or indirectly, of abortion services in violation
of Colorado’s Abortion Funding Prohibition Amendment.
34.
At Ms. Norton’s direction, CDPHE thereupon retained the Greeley,
Colorado, accounting firm of Anderson & Whitney to determine whether Rocky
Mountain Planned Parenthood was separately incorporated, maintained separate facilities,
and maintained financial records which demonstrated financial independence from
PP Services.
35.
On September 5, 2001, Anderson & Whitney provided its report to
CDPHE. Anderson & Whitney determined that Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood
was indeed subsidizing PP Services and refused to comply with the recommendations of
the independent auditor and directions from CDPHE to separate their activities and
operations.
36.
Upon information and belief, Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood has
not taken any action to demonstrate its independence from its abortion-providing affiliate
or to otherwise become independent from its abortion-providing affiliate and thus be
eligible to receive Colorado public funds in compliance with Colorado’s Abortion
Funding Prohibition Amendment.
37.
Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood and PP Services are, and, at all
times relevant herein, have been interrelated and integrated affiliates which occupy the
same office space, utilize the same medical professional and lay staff, utilize the same
medical supplies and services, utilize the same office supplies and services, utilize the
same utilities, and, either individually or jointly, periodically file claims for payment
from public funds for services rendered to Colorado citizens. As a result, payments to or
for the benefit of Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood amount to payments to or for the
benefit of PP Services.
38.
In summary, PP Services is a mere instrumentality for the transaction of
Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood’s abortion activities. Indeed, the sole reason for
PP Services’ existence is to evade the proscriptions of the Abortion Funding Prohibition
Amendment. PP Services has no existence separate and apart from Rocky Mountain
Planned Parenthood and exists merely as a convenient fiction to disguise Rocky
Mountain Planned Parenthood’s abortion activities. That CSU contracted with defendant
Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood instead of defendant PP Services to traffic in body
parts of aborted fetuses further supports the fact that defendant Rocky Mountain Planned

 Parenthood engages directly in abortion operations and only uses defendant PP Services
as a convenient fiction when it suits its purposes in the context of challenges under the
Abortion Funding Prohibition Amendment or reporting to State of Colorado officials or
others.
39.
There is such unity of interest between the two entities that the separate
personalities or identities of these two corporations no longer exists. Justice and equity
require that the separate existence of the two corporations be disregarded, because
defendant Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood uses PP Services for the specific purpose
of evading and defeating rightful claims under the Abortion Funding Prohibition
Amendment.
D. The First National Bank Commercial Checking Account
40.
CSU maintains a commercial checking account with an account number
ending in 0536 at First National Bank, Fort Collins, Colorado (the “FNB Account”). All
funds in the FNB Account are owned by CSU and no other person or entity.
41.
All funds deposited into or withdrawn from the FNB Account are and, at
all times relevant herein, have been “public funds” as that term is defined in the Abortion
Funding Prohibition Amendment.
E. CSU Purchases Parts of Fetuses Aborted by Planned Parenthood
42.
Pursuant to the Planned Parenthood Contract, defendant Rocky Mountain
Planned Parenthood issued its Invoice #04272010, a copy of which is attached as
Exhibit 2.
43.
In response thereto, CSU issued check no. 767466 to defendant Rocky
Mountain Planned Parenthood to pay Invoice #04272010. Check no. 767466 was drawn
on the FNB Account.
44.
Defendant Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood negotiated check no.
767466 and the check was paid by First National Bank from funds on deposit in the FNB
Account on or about June 24, 2010.
45.
Invoice #04272010 was issued by defendant Rocky Mountain Planned
Parenthood for the specific purpose of inducing CSU to pay it public funds to subsidize
its abortion activities.
46.
The purported purpose of Invoice #04272010 (i.e., “instrument supply”
and “administrative start-up”) was a thinly disguised cover-up of the real purpose of the
invoice as described in the previous paragraph. The payment sought by Rocky Mountain
Planned Parenthood on account of this invoices bears absolutely no relation to the actual
cost of transportation, processing, preservation, quality control and storage of fetal tissue.
Indeed, it does not even purport to cover such costs.

 47.
Pursuant to the Planned Parenthood Contract, defendant Rocky Mountain
Planned Parenthood provided 10 specimens of tissue from aborted human fetuses and
issued its Invoice #04052011, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit 3.
48.
CSU issued check no. 800972 to defendant Rocky Mountain Planned
Parenthood to pay Invoice #04052011. Check no. 800972 was drawn on the FNB
Account.
49.
Defendant Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood negotiated check no.
800972 and the check was paid by First National Bank from funds on deposit in the FNB
Account on or about May 26, 2011.
50.
It is known in the abortion industry that Planned Parenthood affiliates,
including defendant Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood, make a profit on these types
of transactions. For example, the first CMP video released on July 14, 2015, documents
a meeting with Dr. Deborah Nucatola, the Senior Director of Medical Services for
Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the parent organization of defendant Rocky
Mountain Planned Parenthood. Dr. Deborah Nucatola oversees all abortion practices for
all Planned Parenthood affiliates in the nation, including defendant Rocky Mountain
Planned Parenthood. In this July 14, 2015 video, as she negotiates prices to be paid for
aborted baby parts, Dr. Deborah Nucatola asserts the following regarding affiliates
(which includes defendant Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood):
I think for affiliates, at the end of the day, they’re a non-profit,
they just don’t want to—they want to break even. And if they
can do a little better than break even, and do so in a way that
seems reasonable, they’re happy to do that.
51.
The plain meaning of this statement is that Planned Parenthood’s affiliates
(including defendant Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood) price the body parts in which
they traffic at a price designed to do better than break even, i.e., at a price in excess of the
cost of transportation, processing, preservation, quality control and storage of fetal tissue,
thereby profiting from the sale of the body parts.
52.
In a video made public on July 30, 2015, defendant Rocky Mountain
Planned Parenthood Vice President and Medical Director Dr. Savita Ginde is depicted as
negotiating a fetal body parts deal. In the video she agrees multiple times to illicit pricing
per body part harvested, brainstorms ways to ensure that her company’s abortion doctors
provide usable fetal organs, and suggests ways to avoid legal consequences.
53.
In the video Dr. Ginde states: ““I think a per-item thing [i.e., charging per
body part rather than a flat fee for the entire fetus] works a little better, just because we
can see how much we can get out of it.” Dr. Ginde’s statement makes it clear that prices
are set to maximize revenue, not to merely cover costs.

 54.
The amounts CSU paid defendant Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood
for these parts of human fetuses is substantially in excess of defendant Rocky Mountain
Planned Parenthood’s actual cost of transportation, processing, preservation, quality
control and storage of fetal tissue. Defendant Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood uses
the profits it generated from the CSU transactions to subsidize its abortion activities.
55.
In a video of a February 6, 2015 conversation, Mary Gatter (President of
the Medical Directors’ Council of Planned Parenthood Federation of America and
Medical Director of Planned Parenthood of Pasadena and San Gabriel Valley) haggled
over the price of aborted fetus parts. She stated that the money received for the parts “has
to be big enough that it is worthwhile.” She stated that if the prices that had been
discussed are low, “then we can bump it up. I want a Lamborghini.” Obviously, the
actual cost of transportation, processing, preservation, quality control and storage of fetal
tissue has no bearing on the price for which Dr. Gatter was negotiating. Indeed, that cost
is a fixed and determinable sum, and therefore negotiation would be unnecessary if the
goal were simply to recover that amount. Instead, Dr. Gatter negotiated for the highest
price the market would bear. On information and belief, Dr. Gatter’s tactics are typical,
and support the conclusion that defendant Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood’s prices
are designed to exceed its costs.
F. CSU Purchases Parts of Aborted Fetuses from ABR
56.
From 2010 to 2015 ABR sold parts of aborted fetuses to CSU. Exhibit 4
is an invoice by invoice summary of CSU’s purchase of aborted fetus parts from ABR.
In summary, from January 2010 to August 2015 CSU paid ABR a total of $96,945 on
account of 224 separate invoices for aborted fetus parts issued to it by ABR.
57.
Exhibit 4 also itemizes each of the checks CSU issued in payment of the
invoices identified in the preceding paragraph. Each of the CSU checks identified in
Exhibit 4 was drawn on the FNB Account. Each of the CSU checks was negotiated by
ABR. And each of the CSU checks was duly paid by First National Bank from the funds
on deposit in the FNB Account. The funds paid to ABR were “public funds” as that term
is defined in the Abortion Funding Prohibition Amendment.
58.
Cate Dyer, worked as a procurement technician for ABR before founding
her own company. In a May 22, 2015 video Dyer states that ABR would pay an “advisor
fee” to a clinic manager or director in order to preserve their exclusive right to harvest
fetal tissue at that location. “There’s like, well enough known,” Dyer said, that “for a
long time there were certain clinics that because they had paid advisors that were sitting
on boards for these clinics, that were also an advisor to ABR, you were just never going
to go anywhere with them, you know what I mean?” On information and belief, ABR’s
subsidies to abortion providers as described by Dyer are typical and apply to the abortion
providers who supplied the body parts sold to CSU by ABR.
59.
Thus, CSU used public funds to purchase the tissue of aborted fetuses
from ABR. On information and belief, ABR used those public funds to acquire parts of

 aborted fetuses from abortion providers at a price in excess of the abortion provider’s cost
of transportation, processing, preservation, quality control and storage of fetal tissue, and
ABR also subsidized those abortion providers’ operations. Thus, such use of public
funds constitutes an indirect subsidy of the abortions performed by these abortion
providers.
IV. FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Declaratory Judgment Against CSU and Frank)
60.
Plaintiff incorporates the allegations set forth in the foregoing paragraphs
as if fully set forth herein.
61.
Plaintiff is entitled to a declaratory judgment pursuant to the Colorado
Uniform Declaratory Judgment Act, C.R.S. §§ 13-51-101 et seq., and C.R.C.P. 57 to
determine his rights with respect to CSU’s and Frank’s unlawful expenditure of public
funds in violation of the Colorado Constitution.
62.
Plaintiff requests this Court to enter judgment declaring that CSU’s and
Frank’s actions described herein violate the Colorado Constitution.
63.
Plaintiff requests this Court to enter judgment declaring that any contracts
entered into to purchase fetal organs, as described herein, were void ab initio and not
merely voidable.
V. SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Preliminary and Permanent Injunction Against CSU and Frank)
64.
Plaintiff incorporates the allegations set forth in the foregoing paragraphs
as if fully set forth herein.
65.
The unconstitutional expenditure of public funds by CSU and Frank has
caused Plaintiff and other Colorado taxpayers to suffer real, immediate and, irreparable
injury for which there is no adequate remedy at law.
66.
Requiring CSU and Frank to comply with the Abortion Funding
Prohibition Amendment will serve the public interest. Moreover, the balance of equities
favors an injunction.
67.
Plaintiff requests this Court to enter its order preliminarily and
permanently enjoining CSU and Frank from further violations of the Abortion Funding
Prohibition Amendment.
VI. THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Unjust Enrichment Against Planned Parenthood and ABR)

 68.
Plaintiff incorporates the allegations set forth in the foregoing paragraphs
as if fully set forth herein.
69.
Planned Parenthood and ABR knew or should have known that the
payments by CSU for fetal organs violated the Colorado Constitution and were void ab
initio and not merely voidable.
70.
Accordingly, the cash payments received by Planned Parenthood and ABR
were received under circumstances as to make it inequitable for them to retain such
benefits.
71.
Therefore, Plaintiff requests the Court to enter an order requiring Planned
Parenthood and ABR to account for and disgorge to the State of Colorado all such
payments.
VII. FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Civil Conspiracy Against All Defendants)
72.
Plaintiff incorporates the allegations set forth in the foregoing paragraphs
as if fully set forth herein.
73.
The defendants agreed, by words or conduct, to accomplish an unlawful
goal of expending public funds in violation of the Abortion Funding Prohibition
Amendment.
74.

One or more acts were performed to accomplish the unlawful goal.

75.
As a Colorado taxpayer, plaintiff has been harmed by the unlawful
expenditure of public funds in violation of the Colorado Constitution.
76.
The harm caused to the plaintiff was caused by the acts performed to
accomplish the unlawful goal.
VIII. FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Piercing the Corporate Veil)
77.
Plaintiff incorporates the allegations set forth in the foregoing paragraphs
as if fully set forth herein.
78.
Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood and PP Services are, and, at all
times relevant herein, have been interrelated and integrated affiliates which occupy the
same office space, utilize the same medical professional and lay staff, utilize the same
medical supplies and services, utilize the same office supplies and services, utilize the
same utilities, and, either individually or jointly, periodically file claims for payment
from public funds for services rendered to Colorado citizens.

 79.
PP Services is a mere instrumentality for the transaction of Rocky
Mountain Planned Parenthood’s abortion activities, and there is such unity of interest
between the two entities that the separate personalities of the corporations no longer
exists. Justice and equity require that the separate existence of the two corporations be
disregarded, because Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood uses PP Services for the
specific purpose of evading and defeating rightful claims under the Abortion Funding
Prohibition Amendment.
80.
Plaintiff requests the Court to enter a declaratory judgment that for
purposes of the application of the Abortion Funding Prohibition Amendment, the separate
existence of the two corporations shall be disregarded and the two entities treated as a
single joint enterprise.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully pleads as aforesaid and prays for the
following relief:
(a) Declaratory judgment that CSU’s and Frank’s actions in contracting with
and/or paying public funds to purchase fetal organs violates the Abortion Funding
Prohibition Amendment.
(b) A preliminary injunction enjoining CSU and Frank from further violations of
the Abortion Funding Prohibition Amendment.
(c) A permanent injunction enjoining CSU and Frank from further violations of
the Abortion Funding Prohibition Amendment.
(d) An order requiring Planned Parenthood and ABR to disgorge to the State of
Colorado all amounts received on account of payments that violated the Abortion
Funding Prohibition Amendment.
(e) A declaratory judgment that for purposes of the application of the Abortion
Funding Prohibition Amendment in this action, the separate existence of Rocky Mountain
Planned Parenthood and PP Services shall be disregarded and the two entities treated as a
single joint enterprise.
(f) For plaintiff’s costs and attorney’s fees as may be provided by law.
(g) For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
Respectfully submitted this 7th day of October, 2015.
/s/ Barry K. Arrington
________________________________
Barry K. Arrington