f0 Mam eff/W . 31:? 0 From; 949,0 a .- CFS HM 9r? C/Ccfr; c, Wag Fm%?r~ [5 50/592990 5/19/14 (9/9543?) WM 54/ maijg/ he crimi/ maria 54445/ or rfac/ 50 4045 54am WW5 @644 saz'7L 4/ 5&7; WaxF he was Alma/19% (M6 VLOO 61/18 (/icbf?emg cab? 300714: 4446/ Rm d5] 6/695 71%? Frauc?/ Z/cAar #5545sz w/USPZ/?uyfo 556 (fl/Mag in? #0/11 w?b EMS, [5 +frm'd/e whmi V?egp Two Mafia/dad; Mame 535146 Viv my 555.74ng @W?fomo, 4/1-2 dag/CW? 7230K over Mr my [Ar Nov, Joli/M Wig We amp/?y?wf/ 16:50., was? we? moor- WI NW6, ?og/1 vlm?o ?ay MM Famed? "7792/14 @06 Swag/9 Now) my We cur/a hype-pa 7/7/43 {Cf/?9 (99?4 war/(S pmj?? ?bers Wageng We! 4% [were (Ni 551/715,, dmfy, #66: 50/5? 53/5 0cm M06 Qw- wp #(Zgyf Oar Way/'71 [20105, Mme had 4% ?x'm doth? same ?C5m 0% Same [odd M?Ay/yiorg my <1?ng ?671 wpkelr mow @Cic/g or? F?lda? are Sui/[l wa?i?gt fora/r] Lu?ich 607446.. 0pm 0m get/arm? Zews/ we Cam/7' Mada sv/Ma/ wlte/ is Mo+ (LCM mafia! we NO (puma/ark; < "(nurse It . . plot figricredfll [Man/a. at flee 63: a Bee? indl'vi'hmfl' Johnston. IA 5013M>>)le 3 Phone eon an 1474 Fix see 490 we mw mm February 2, 2015 SENT CERTIFIED MAIL, REFURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Elecu'ic Car Distn'oulors Anenlien' Robert W. Thomas RE: Wholesale Financing, Account ND. 5242 Dear Mr. Thomas This letter Is to advise you of the occurrence of an event of dehun under Itie Inventory Security Agreement executed by Elenlnc Car Distributors ("Dealership") In favor of Agricredil Acceptance LLC 81 You have Failed to provide evidence or insurance as required under ttre inventory Security Agreement Please provide evidence at insurance within 10 days letter. As a Loss Payee under your insurance policy, we have been notified by your insurer, . that your insurance policy will be cancelled EKBCIIVG unless payment IS received prior In such date. Please either make payment to the above-named insurer to maintain tne insurance on the Collateral or provide to MD with evidence u! alremeli've insurance all Collateral (Such as an acceptable certificate Di insurance anottrer insurance carrier). The Invenlury Security Agreement requires Ihe Dealership to carry insurance on ttre Collateral (as delined in tire inventory security Agreement) and tailure to maintain such Insurance constitutes an event of default. MC rs providing you wittr an opportunity to remedy this issue and expecls your prompt cooperation. AAC Intends to suspend all runner advances under your wholesale facilin until tne issue checked above is resolved. AAC reserves all rights it nae to exercise all remedies available to it against Dealership and any guarantors under ttreir agreements AAC or at law or in equlty. Nellher this letter nor the events at deteuit described nerein snail be construed as a waiver or any evean or delautt not nerein. any iuture event or default, righIs and/ctr remedies available to AAC 3! law. all or which AAC specifically retalns. It you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at calm-13.2474, extension 2917. Sincerely. Agricredil Acceptance Deb Hunig Account Manager cc: Kevin Peters, Operations Manager. Account Management MC 495: ins/1:) Page I on noncredit is a subsidiary of D. tag- Landon international A MEMBER or m: RABDEANK GROUP gricredit delauelalldalle Anna-alt Acceptance LLC will com, P0 an aunt) John-tent IA an we 2474 Fat us 490 0919 mug-scrum February 2. 2015 SENT CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Eleclnc Car Distributors i Robert W. Thomas RE: Wholesale Financing, Account Not 5242 Dear Mr. Thomas: This letter is to advise you or nonpayment under the lnventory Securlly Agreement executec by Electric Car (-Dealersnip') in layer of Acceptance LLC Tire Inventory Security Agreement requires timely settlement nf amounts awed. Pursuant to the inventory Security Agreement. MC nerehy raqull'es immediate settlement and payment of 53055030 wnicn represents tne past due amnunl under ttre lollowing delinquent invcloes; nvemom lnvaig Amgum Past lnyuw?gri?| Number Descrigficn mu n! Refer IO Month End Statement dated 30560.80 0113112015 TOTAL: 30.56D.50 Fiymtm Inuit b0 racalvod an (10) dayl [ram the date Int-r. MC Inlends '0 suspend all Vurmer advances under your wholesale facility until payment is named. this paymem Is not received MC have no cholce bul (a take whatever steps it may deem newssary lo pmlecl flsell'. Thais remedies Include, without limitation: - Tennlnatinn cl wnolesale factlily and ma permanent cessation or all renninetlon or me Inventory Security Agreement Declaration of all outstanding pelances umler Dealerships wholesale racility immediately due and payable ln lull - Repossession or loreclosure or collateral securing the Dealerships Dbligalmns to AAC - commencement ol legal proceedings against and/or any guarantors MC Page pl: unclean ls - supildiary clue L39: Lennon |n|nnulinllal A MEMBER or me GROUP AAC reserves all rights it has to exercise all remedies available to it against Dealership and any guarantors under their agreements with AAC or at law or in equity. Neither this letter nor the events of default described herein shall be construed as a waiver of any events of default not described herein. any future event of default. rights and/or remedies available to AAC at law. all of which AAC speci?cally retains. If you have already sent payment to bring your account current, thank you and you may disregard this letter. If you have not. please send a check in the amount of 30.560.80 via online ACH payment to my attention at the following address: Agricredit Acceptance LLC PO Box 2000 Johnston. IA 50131?0020 if you have any questions. please do not hesitate to contact me at 800-873-2474. extension 2917. Sincerely, Agricredit Acceptance LLC Deb Hurtig 6 Account Manager cc: Kevin Peters. Operations Manager. Account Management AAC 4957 (05113) Page 2 of 2 13.2. ms: mama--swan Evita--:8 name . 2 seam" Rum>> E35 322 Emu 1193 2:35 waHN 06 man: anagxcazmfiaprnzocuho: 25:" 312. 3355335.": 95332 2.532." 33 9:25" Eu mrmqan mafian 9: 352659: annals" 622.; 5.2.3 SEES xk 22. .323" pimps \3 \tr PF WA A >325. 36:3 what: ma 1:25. auras Sis: . 9E3. 5.2.8 ?5.39: 5.35m Em 9:2: can can a: H.253 aha>>: 53.5 ".393 what; 33.3 E3 95: Hutu $3 :92 3.5.3 <snium 052:5: )Agiu azfififiuififi 55345235 $352 32,923.: 32?; 5553 5.332. 553 man 53m. 34m CLERK OF THE. COURT PLAINTIFF OR ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF Kent, Districl Clark Knith Stanley 121 Austin. Room 101 413 Slrcet Jasper, Tun: 75951 Center TX 75935 flaw--2m 936-598-2981 CAUSE NO. 34266 THESTATEOFTEXAS CITATION FOR PERSONAL SERVICE NOTICE TO DEFENDANT: 'You have been sued. You may employ an Buomcy. If you or your mommy do no! file a wIiIlcn [he clerk issued Illis cIIalion by Ten O'clock (10 00) AM. an (hr: Munflay n:xl followmg Ihe expiralion of (20) days ancr yau were served Ihis citation and pcIl'Iion. a defaulI judgmem may be lakcn againsI you." DEFNDANT ROBERT THOMAS . GREETINGS. are hmby cummanded Io appcar before the District Clerk of Jasper CounIy. Texas, to bx: held DI the Courthouse of said CounIy in Jasper, Jasper County. Texas, by filing a milIm nhswer to Original Feulioh it or before'Tm o'cluck (10:00) AM on the Monday nExI I'Ificr oftwuuy (7.0) days dam of s'uvice hereof. a cbpy of FIRST AMENDED ORIGINAL PETITION. Which accompanies Ihis amnion In Cans: Number 34266. filed on (he duckcl of said'CaurI on Ihis dale: stled. . . LAURA KONTOMITRAS VS. MICHAEL BOOTH MICHAEL BOURGOGNE. THOMAS ALLEN. DURAWORKS METALS A HOLDINGS. INC.. ROBERT SPAAK. RANDY GLESSNER .CDURTNEV WILLIAMS WA COURTNEY aouRcoGye. VALERIE .I. SPAAK. MARV ALLEN. ROBERT w. THOMAS. THERESA M. WILLIAMS. ELECTRIC CAR DISTRIBUTORS. INC, . Th: officer cxcculing Ihis \vriI shall serve 01:: slum: ID Ihe requlremcms of law. and mc'msnasIcs IheIeof. and make due mum as Ih: law directs. Issued and given under my hand and seal Dfsaid Coun at Jasper. Texas. (his daIc: Jammy 11. 2015 Kathy Kent. DISTRICT CLERK JASPER COUNTY. TEXAS . DcpuIy SERVICE OF CITATION RET RN Came Io hand on.Il\e day or ml", a: o'clock and. cxecuch 3| Counly.Tcxas, on lh: day cf .201 a! o'clock M.. by Ihe wiIhInAnamcd in person, a [me copy or this Counly. T:an Canslable/Depuly i Filed 112112015 11 01 33 AM Kathy Kent District Clerk Jasper County. Texas Cheryl Brown Deputy NO. 34,266 LAURA KONTOMITRAS Plaintiff, IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF v. . MICHAEL BOOTH HAEL C'L?em MET I i - JUDICIAL HOLDINGS, INC. . ii RANDY Mix WILLIAMS CO . GOGN VALERIE J. tc; AND efendants. - JASPER COUNTY, TEXA - 24H ail/Mrs grad, FIRST AMENDED ORIGINAL PET ION pin/vi Marlin @574;er - - . Discovery Level. Discovery in this case is intended to be conducted under level 2 of rule 190 ofthe Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. 2. Parties a. Plaintiff is an individual with residences in the States ofTexas and California. - Defendant Michael?Booth ai?k/a MichaeLBourgognc is an individual whose place ofernployment is located at 34390 Gateway Drive, Palm Desert, California 922i 1. No service is necessary at this time. Defendant Thomas {\llcn is an individual residing at 4 Scarborough Way, Rancho Mirage, California 92270. No service is necessary at this time. (1. Defendant Duraworks Metals Holdings, inc._ is a Texas corporation. Personal service may be had upon it by serving its president, Thomas Allen, at 4 Scarborough-Way, Rancho Mirage, California 92270. No service is necessary at this time. e. Defendant Robert Spaak is an individual residing at 146 Loch Lomond Road, Rancho Mirage, California 92270. No service is necessary at this time. f. Defendant Randy Glessner is an individual whose place of employment is located at 34390 Gateway Drive, Paim Desert, California 9221 I. No service is necessary at this time. Defendant courtney Williams afkfa Courtney Bourgogne is an individual residing at residing at 64 I 6 Bradley Place, Los Angeles, California 90056. No service is necessary at this time. h. Defendant Valerie Spaak is an individual residing at 146 Loch Lomond Road. Rancho Mirage, California 92220. No service is necessary at this time. i. Defendant Mary L. Allen is an individual residing at 4 Scarborough Way, Rancho Mirage; California 92270. No service is necessary at this time. . - I I. Defendant Robert W. Thomas is an individual whose principal place of business is 7I44i Highway 1 1, Rancho Mirage, California 92270. Personal service may be had upon him at that address. - - - . k: Defendant Theresa M. Williams is an individual residing at residing at 64l6 Bradley Place, Los Angeles, California 90056. Personal service may be had upon her at that address. j. Defendant Electric Car Distributors, lnc. is a California company whose principal place of business is 7144] Highway Rancho Mirage, California 92270. Personal service may be had upon it by serving its registered agent lncorp Services, Inc. at 5716 Gorsa Ave, Suite 1 10, Westlake Village, California 91362. 3. The subject matter in controversy is within thejurisdictional limits ofthis court. 4. Plaintiff seeI-rs monetary reliefover 1 ,000,000. 5. This court has jurisdiction over Defendant Duraworks as Defendant Is a Texas corporation whose principal place ofbusiness is in Jasper County, Texas. 6. This court hasjurisdiction over each Defendant because each Defendant purposefully availed himselfor itself, either individually or acting as a participant in a conspiracy with the other defendants, ofthe privilege of conducting activities in the state of Texas and established minimum - ., .- contacts sufficient to conferjurisdiction over said Defendant, and the assumption ofjurisdietion over each Defendant will not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice and is consistent with the constitutional requirements of due process. 7. Plaintiff would show that each Defendant had continuous and systematic_contacts with the state of Texas suf?cient to establish generaljurisdiction over each Defendant. 8. Piaintiffwould also show that the cause ofaction arose from or relates-to the contacts of each Defendant to the state of Texas, including but not limited to the_ownership and Operation of Defendant Durawurk-s (whether legally or illegally), thereby conferring specific jurisdiction with' respect to each Defendant. - - 9. venue in Jasper County is proper in this cause-under Section 15.002 of the TeXas Civil Practice-and Rernedies Code because Jasper County is the county ofresidence of Defendant Duraworlcs Metals Holdings, lric. - I 10. Venue in Jasper County is proper in this cause under Section 15.002 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code because all or a. substantial part of the events giving rise to this suit occurred in Jasper County. 1 l. Facts. a. Defendant Michael Booth is a ?nancial predator and ?confidence man". He was previously convicted in the State of Washington for Federal felony wire fraud and money laundering. At all times relevant to this facts alleged herein, he remained under post?conviction supervision by the United States government which placed restrictions on him regarding his participation in ?nancial transactions requiring him to engage in a shell game of accounts, peeplc and money in an effort to elude Federal authorities. b. In the Washington situation leading to his conviction, Booth established a modus operandi for his seams and schemes which he has used for almost twenty yeai's. While not exactly a Ponzi scheme under the general de?nition, this modus operandi functions very similarly: -There, he and another individual established a company, allegedly legitimate, offering brokering and discounting services for the lease or delivery of equipment to customers. Booth, through the company, targeted and preyed on customers in ?nancial dif?culty and promised impossible ?nancial returns (htindre'ds ofmillions ofdollars) within impossible timeframes (within one or two'days). in return or these promises, Booth and his company obtained advance fees from the customers, totaling in the millions of dollars. Booth?and his conspirators spent the money not on the customers? bene?ts but instead on a lavish lifestyle for himselfand his cronies. Obviously, Booth?s fantasy claims never materialized and 'his customers did not receive the bene?t'of Booth?s fraudulent promises. Boo'th basically ?stole from Peter to pay Paul" except, in this case, he was Paul. c. Booth was convicted and served signi?cant prison time for his wrongs. Upon his release, he was placed under release restrictions that prohibit his participation in ?nancial transactions. As will be seen in this cause, Booth has wholly failed to abide by those terms and conditions and has blatantly and fraudulently continued his mode of Operation that led to his downfall previously. d. Allen is purportedly a former municipal court judge from the State of California. He is also a member ofthe California bar although his status is uncertain due to several previous disciplinary issues with the California bar. He attempts to use his role as a minorjudicial functionary to wield ?shock and awe" on those unfortunate enough to come into contact with Booth. He functions as the "straw man" for Bootli's activities. He holds an inordinate amount of assets many ofwhich, in fact, belong to Booth. He also administers a trust and/or holds property in trust- for Bootli?s bene?t and provides Booth with funds and property from that trust in violation of the Federal rules governing Booth-?5 release from prison. The purpose of the "Istraw man" is to hide from the United States government the true'assets available to Booth by which to make restitution to his victims and further to allow Booth to continue his fraudulent business activities. Allen- does so by misusing the auspices ofthe office ofattorneyand the judiciary, presumably in an effort to bring some level of credibility andgravitas, as well as a cover of reSpectability,' to a convicted thief. . e. . Spaak and Glessner associates-ofBooth who each operate to carry out the. - details .of Booth's activities. Valerie Spaak and Mary Allen are the'spouses-of Robert Spaak and Thomas Allen and signed contracts with' Plaintiff as guarantors ofthe contracts at issue herein. f. Williams is the purported Spouse of Booth whose. function is to provide additional "cover" to 306th in the prohibited transactions and holdings in which he engages and develops. g. Duraworks Metals Holdings, Inc. is a company established in the State of Texas at Booth?s direction. Purportedly, similar to the Washington scam, Duraworks would serve as a middle man between its customers and suppliers whereby the customers would receive materials needed for a fee. Additionally, Duraworks would obtain monies from investors which would then be used to manufacture high end. deluxe golf carts for sale to the public, a portion ofprofits allegedly to be returned to the anCE-iim??- h. Booth is, without question, the ringleader and intellectual director of the fraudulent business practices and criminal enterprise. To Plaintiff?s knowledge, despite Booth and his conSpirators' activities, the lack ofany production and the large in?ux ofcapital, Duraworks has yet to make any pro?t or to actually produce more than three actual products. i. Following Booth?s release from Federal prison, and in spite ofthe restrictions placed on him by the United States government, Booth began cultivating a relationship with Plaintiff in an effort to defraud her ofmoney, individually and through the Duraworks operation. Plaintiff?s husband passed away unexpectedly in early 20l2, leaving Plaintiff with-some ?nancial security. Beginning almost immediately thereafter, Booth began plying his con?dence game trade on Plaintiff particularly using Plaihtiff?sgrief as a valuable tool in his Machiavellian arsenal. Booth utilized a personal effort toward Plaintiffseeking to capitalize on her griefand loss with personal assurances that he would out for her" and similar-fairy tales. Booth rel?ntles'sly preyed on Plaintiff's loss - as a vulture circling its target. Combined with his-tried and true Ponzi?esque promises, Booth eventually convinced Plaintiff? to in_vest andlor loan Booth almost two . million ?dollars toward Duraworks and the ill-fated (and in fact non-existent) golf cart venture. As he did in Washington, Booth promised both incredible markets and returns for this venture'. Plaintiff and Defendants then executed a sequence ofagrecments beginning in September 2013. Interestingly, although Booth was at all times the sole negotiator and contact with Plaintiff, he refrained from signing most, but not all, ofthe documentation, presumably to avoid the eyes of the United States government. However, he did sign at least one. Most ofthe transactions were designed to occur through the greased palms of Allen as Booth continued his efforts to hide his involvement from Federal authorities. j. and timely provided the required funding. Despite the huge influx ofcash by Plaintiff, Defendants have, to date, produced only minimal golfcarts, none of which have been veri?ed to Plaintiff nor for which payment been made to Plaintiff. In contrast, Booth and his cohorts have used the funds provided by Plaintiff for their personal use, including expensive cars, trips, c0untry club memberships, offshore accounts, and numerous other extravagances unrelated to the purposes ofthe agreements with Plaintiff. Additionally, Booth and his cronies have amassed a large collection of real estate holdings in the State ofCalifornia. I k. in short, Booth has yet again orchestrated a ?rochter to pay me." scenario to the detriment of and, literally, at the expense of Plaintiff. Defendants? concerted efforts have deprived and continue to deprive Plaintiff of the monies rightfully belongingtto her while they continue to use those-monies to subsidize their lecherous and fraudulent activities. Defendants? activities toward the textbook definition ofa ?con game." I. In furtherance oftliis fraudulent scheme, Booth coordinated and oversaw the diversion of Plaintiff's money and property to the other Defendants, including the creation ofand/or investment in other businesses including but not limited to Defendant Duraworks, Defendant Electric and Defendants Williams. Count I Breach ofContract l2. Plaintiff and Defendants entered into written agreements. Those agreements required Defendants to perform certain obligations and duties which they wholly failed to perform. The foregoing acts and omissions by Defendant constitute breaches ofthat agreement. Count II Fraud 13. Defendants made speci?c representations to Plaintiff as to its experience, expertise and abilities. Defendants further made additional representations to Plaintiff during the course of dealing between the parties intended to induce Plaintiff into dealings with Defendants. As set forth, each ofthese representations was false and misleading. Plaintiffrelied on those representations to her detriment. As a result, each misrepresentation constitutes fraud. Cou nt 111 Conversion l4. Plaintiffmade payment to Defendants for goods andforservices.Defendants failed to provide thOSe goods and/or services and has failed to return those funds despite demand by Plaintiff. Defendants? actions in this regard constitute conversion. Count IV . conspiracy I 5. At all times relevant, each Defendant was the agent ofthe remaining Defendants and was acting in Such scope. Each Defendant conspired and agreed to defraud-Plaintiff as set forth herein above. Further, the Defendants have a pattern ofconduct ofsuch fraudulent conduct. Each Defendant carried out the acts set forth herein in furtherance of that 'conSpiracy and/or ratifi?d or a - adopted those acts as their own. Count Alter-Ego/Single Business Theory At all times relevant, each Defendant was a holder, bene?cial owner, subscriber or af?liate of Defendant Duraworks. Each Defendant, jointly and severally, caused Duraworks to be used for the purpose of perpetrating a fraud on Plaintiffdirectly for their own personal benefit. As a result, each Defendant is responsible personally for the acts and-or omissions of Duraworks. Count VI UnjustEnriehment 17. At all times relevant, Defendants, independently or acting in concert with other Defendants, obtained a bene?t from Plaintiffdue to fraud. duress or taking ofundue advantage, as set forth herein. Defendants were therefore unjustly enriched and received a windfall to the detriment of Plaintiff. Damages IS. As a direct and proximate result of the occurrence made the basis of this lawsuit, Plaintiff was caused to sufferdamages within the jurisdictional limitsofthis court. Exemplary Damages - l9. Pursuant to Chapter 4i of the Texas Civil Practice Remedies Code, Plaintiff requests I the Court award exemplary damages due to Defendants? fraudulent conduct. . Conditions Precedent 20. All conditions precedent required of Plaintiffs have been performed or have occurred. - - . Attorneys? Fees - . 2i . Attorney?s Fees. Reasonable fees for the attorney's services rendered and to be rendered should be awarded to Plaintiffs pursuant to Texas Civil Practice Remedies Code Ann. 38. . - Prayer - . - 21. Plaintiff prays that- a. Defendants be cited to appear and answer; b. Plaintiff be granted judgment in 'an amount within thejurisdictional limits of this Court; c. Plaintiff be granted judgment for reasonable attorney's fees, with additional contingent amounts in the event of appellate proceedings; d. Plaintiffs be granted judgment for all costs of court; and e. Plaintiffs be granted all further reliefto which Plaintiffs may be entitled. Respectfully submitted, FAIRCHILD, PRICE, SMITH, LLP P. O. Box 1719 . Center, Texas 75935-l7l9 (936) 598-2981 FAX: (936) 598-9155 J. KEITH STANLEY, TBA #45006129 - Attorney for Plaintiff CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE in compliance with Rule 2 I a, Texas Rules ofCivil Procedure, I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing instrument was served upon all attorneys ofrecord on this the day ofJanuary, by one or more of the following depositing sai_d instrument in a post of?ce or official depository_under the care and custody of the United S_tates Postal Service: postag'e prepaid, certi?ed 'mail, return r?ceipt requested, or first class mail; (2) telephonic transfer to recipient's current telecopier number, or (3) hand delivered. Keith Stanley