Case 1:16-cv-00144-S-LDA Document 1 Filed 03/23/16 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
BRADLEY SMITH, an individual

C.A.NO.

Plaintiff Pro Se,

Zfilb 111\R 23 P 2: 02

CA 16

v.
DEBORAH
GARCIA,

Defendant.
--------------------------------~/
COMPLAINTDAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
COMES NOW the Plaintiffs, BRADLEY SMITH
(hereinafter, "Plaintiff'), hereby sue the Defendant, DEBORAH GARCIA, and would show as follows:
JURISDICTION
1.

This is an action for damages in excess of fifteen-thousand dollars ($15,000.00), exclusive

of interest, attorney's fees and costs.
2.

The Plaintiff, BRADLEY SMITH, is an individual residing and conducting business in

California.
3.

The Plaintiff, conducts business nationally.

4.

The Defendant, DEBORAH GARCIA is an individual residing in the state of Rhode
Island.

5.

The instant action arose out of the publishing of defamatory content on a U.S. based

website, namely: www.getoutofdebt.org, which is owned by Myvesta Foundation, a Florida Limited
Liability Company located in Broward County, Florida.
6.

Upon information and belief, the Defendant in this instant action is the party referenced in

the posting as the former employee.

Page 1 of7

 Case 1:16-cv-00144-S-LDA Document 1 Filed 03/23/16 Page 2 of 7 PageID #: 2

7.

All conditions precedent to the PJaintiffs' right to bring this action have occmTed, have

been performed or waived, or do not exist.

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
8.

In or around August of 2012, the Defendant caused the publication of misleading, false,

damaging, and defamatory content on the internet.
9.

The

content

that

is

the

subject

of

this

litigation

may

be

found

https :II getoutofdebt. orgl866461reader-raises-concerns-about-financial-rescue-llc-and-success-linkprocessing-He-by-consumer
https :II getouto fdebt. orgl4640 3I my-parents-were-contacted-by -debt-relief-centers-of-america -sharron
10.

The content was published under the pseudonyms, DebtsettlementisaLie andJoni.

11.

The specific portions of the content appears as follows:
a) "You have got to be kidding me. You posted this because they "pay"

you for yours---- training. Of course your gonna back up your pay check!
I've seen you Matt at the debt settlement leadership conference yelling
at the girls booking your room. You look like a little dick guito f---. Trust
me ... We are coming after these companies that are performing bait and
switch marketing. If I were you I would exit training because you suck
and tell Stanley to stop spamming the world with your garbage.
CONSUMERS!!!! DON'T THINK TWICE ABOUT IT. ALL THESE
COMPANIES ARE IN BED TOGETHER AND THEY ARE TRYING TO
MAKE MONEY OFF OF YOU BY RUINING YOUR CREDIT!"

b) "Rescue One Finanical is engaged under the cloak of Freedom Debt
Relief Bait & Switch operation .. They need to stop sending out deceptive
mailers & be shut down or be honest on who they are?? They have
given plenty of opportunities to respond .. yet they choose to be

silent

.. why???DOES RESCUE ONE FINANCIAL HAVE A LENDERS
LICENSE???

SIMPLE

QUESTION

ANSWERED ...... "

Page 2 of7

WHICH

HAS

NOT

BEEN

here:

 Case 1:16-cv-00144-S-LDA Document 1 Filed 03/23/16 Page 3 of 7 PageID #: 3

11.

The Defendant caused this content, the above-quoted language, to be posted on the

12.

The quoted language of the letter is false and misleading, and was posted with the intent to

website.

injure or with conscious disregard of the rights of the Plaintiffs.
13.

The Defendant aimed to discredit and destroy the good reputation of the Plaintiffs in the

financial community.
14.

The quoted language demonstrates the Defendant's malicious intent and purpose, as well

as the degree to which the Plaintiffs have been targeted by the Defendant.
15.

The quoted language serves to injure the Plaintiff in their customer and business

relationships.
16.

The Plaintiffs have suffered damages as a result of these false statements and will continue

to suffer damages if the defamation persists.

COUNT I
DEFAMATION AND DEFAMATION PERSE
17.

· The Plaintiffs hereby re-allege and incorporate into this Count 1 the allegations contained

in paragraphs ( 1-16).
18.

The quoted language are false statements made by the Defendant conceming the Plaintiffs.

19.

Without privilege, the Defendant communicated such false statements to third parties via

the internet and/or intentionally made such statements on the intemet, which were accessible to third parties
without password protection.
20.

Defendant's false statements are and would be highly offensive to a reasonable person and

have been published to third parties with the apparent intent of causing harm to the reputation and economic
interests of the Plaintiffs.
21.

In making and publishing these false statements, the Defendant had knowledge or acted

with reckless disregard as to the falsity of the false statements.

Page 3 of7

 Case 1:16-cv-00144-S-LDA Document 1 Filed 03/23/16 Page 4 of 7 PageID #: 4

22.

Plaintiffs allege that the Defendant made such statements knowing that such statements

would be disseminated across the count1y.
23.

As a direct and proximate result of the Defendants posting the false statements, the

Plaintiffs have sustained, and will continue to sustain, immediate and irreparable harm and injury including,
but not limited to, damage to reputation, losses in revenues, loss of profits, loss of goodwill, loss of business
relations with existing and future business prospects, and loss of competitive business advantage,
opportunity, and/or expectancy.
24.

The false statements made by the Defendant impeaches the honesty, integrity or reputation

of Plaintiffs.
26 The false statements made by the Defendant constitutes Defamation Per Se and general are
presumed under the law.
27.

The Plaintiffs have suffered general and special damages in the amount to proven at trial.

28.

In making and publishing such false statements, the Defendant acted maliciously, willfully,

wantonly, and unlawfully.
29.

For such willful and malicious acts, the Plaintiffs seek punitive damages in addition to

actual damages.
30.

Defendants' acts, omissions, conduct and transactions alleged herein were aggravated,

outrageous, and guided by evil motives wherein the Defendant intended to harm the Plaintiffs and/or
consciously pursued a course of conduct knowing that it created a substantial risk of significant harm to the
Plaintiffs.

Page 4 of7

 Case 1:16-cv-00144-S-LDA Document 1 Filed 03/23/16 Page 5 of 7 PageID #: 5

COUNT II
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
31.

The Plaintiffs hereby re-allege and incorporate into this Count 1 the allegations contained

in paragraphs (1-16).
32.

The quoted language are false statements made by the Defendant concerning the Plaintiffs.

33.

As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant posting the false statements, the Plaintiffs

have sustained, and will continue to sustain, immediate and irreparable harm and injury including, but not
limited to, damage to reputation, losses in revenues, loss of profits, loss of goodwill, loss of business
relations with existing and future business prospects, and loss of competitive business advantage,
opportunity, and/or expectancy.
34.

The false statements made by the Defendant impeach the honesty, integrity, or reputation

of the Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs' business, and Plaintiffs' services.
35.

The false statements made by the Defendant are defamatory on their face.

36.

There is a substantial risk that unless Defendant's wrongful acts described herein are

temporarily, preliminarily, and/or permanently enjoined, the Defendant will continue to irreparably injure
the Plaintiffs.
37.

Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law to prevent such future course of conduct as stated

herein; therefore, the Plaintiffs are entitled to injunctive relief.

COUNT III
TORTIOUS INTERFERENCED WITH BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP
38.

The Plaintiffs hereby re-allege and incorporate into this Count 1 the allegations contained

in paragraphs (1-16).
39.

The quoted language are false statements made by the Defendant concerning the Plaintiffs.

40.

Plaintiffs have existing business relationships with clients and other persons relating to

their business.
41.

Plaintiffs have a reasonable expectation offuture business r~lationships with existing

colleagues, prospective clients and employees, and others with whom Plaintiffs do business or with whom

Page 5 of7

 Case 1:16-cv-00144-S-LDA Document 1 Filed 03/23/16 Page 6 of 7 PageID #: 6

Plaintiffs may reasonably expect to do business. This expectancy is based, in part, on the considerable time,
energy, and resources it takes to develop the goodwill and reputation associated with Plaintiff's respective
names.
42.

At all material times, hereto, the Defendant was aware of Plaintiff's existing and/or

prospective business relationships.
43.

As described herein, the Defendant intentionally and/or purposefully interfered with

Plaintiff's existing and prospective relationships by unlawfully making false statements.
44.

The Defendants communicated the false statements via the internet and/or intentionally

made such statements on the internet accessible to third parties without password protection.
45.

As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant posting false statements, Plaintiffs have

sustained, and will continue to sustain, immediate and irreparable harm and injury including, but not limited
to, damage to reputation, losses of revenue, loss of profits, loss of goodwill, loss of business relations with
existing and future business prospects, and loss of competitive business advantage, opporhmity and/or
expectancy.
46.

In making and publishing false statements, the Defendant acted maliciously, willfully,

wantonly, and unlawfully.
47.

For such willful and malicious acts, the Plaintiff hereby seeks punitive damages in addition

to achwl damages.
48.

Defendants' acts, omissions, conduct and transactions alleged herein were aggravated,

outrageous, and guided by evil motives wherein the Defendant intended to harm the Plaintiffs and/or
consciously pursued a course of conduct knowing that it created a substantial risk of significant harm to the
Plaintiffs.
49.

To dissuade the Defendant from pursuing a similar course of conduct in the fuh1re and to

discourage other persons from similar conduct in the fuh1re, an award of punitive damages should be
awarded against the Defendant in the sum of sufficient magnih1de to punish the Defendant and to deter
similar conduct by others.

Page 6 of7

 Case 1:16-cv-00144-S-LDA Document 1 Filed 03/23/16 Page 7 of 7 PageID #: 7

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendant as follows:

A. For a preliminary and permanent injunction compelling the Defendant to remove from
the internet all material pertaining to the Plaintiff and it's businesses;
B. For a preliminary and permanent injunction enjoining the Defendant from publishing
any false statements or defamatory material to any third party;
C. For general damages in an amount to be proven at trial;
D. For special damages in an amount to be proven at trial;
E. For punitive damages in an amount to be proven at trial;
F. For Plaintiff's costs herein incurred;
G. For prejudgment and postjudgment interest on all damages at the highest rate allowed
by law from the date of injury until paid in full; and
H. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 22 11ct day ofFebrumy, 2015

By:

.if_.-Brad Smith

Page 7 of?