CAUSE NO. CV-0081158 ROSIE YANAS and CHRISTOPHER STONE, individually and as next friends of CHRISTOPHER JAKE STONE, Plaintiffs, MARK MCLEOD and GAIL MCLEOD, individually and as next friends of AARON KYLE MCLEOD, PAMELA STANICH, individually and as next friend of JARED CONARD BLACK, SHANNAN CLAUS SEN, individually and as next friend of CHRISTIAN RILEY GARCIA, CLAYTON HORN, RHONDA HART, individually and as the representative of the estate of KIMBERLY VAUGHAN, ABDUL A212 and FARAH NAZ, individually and as next friends of SABIKA AZIZ SHEIKH, and FLO RICE, Plaintiffs-Intervenors, vs. ANTONIOS PAGOURTZIS, ROSE MARIE KOSMETATOS, DIMITRIOS PAGOURTZIS, LUCKYGUNNER, LLC d/b/a LUCKYGUNNERCOM, RED STAG FULFILLMENT, LLC, MOLLENHOURGROSS, LLC, JORDAN MOLLENHOUR, and DUSTIN GROSS, Defendants. COUNTY COURT AT LAW GALVESTON COUNTY, TEXAS COURT NO. 3 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED THIRD AMENDED PETITION AND REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE Filed 3/4/2020 5:08 PM Dwight D. Sullivan County Clerk Galveston County, Texas TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE EWING: COMES NOW ROSIE YANAS and CHRISTOPHER STONE, individually and as next friends of CHRISTOPHER JAKE MARK MCLEOD and GAIL MCLEOD, individually and as next friend of AARON KYLE PAMELA STANICH, individually and as next friend of JARED CONARD SHANNAN CLAUSSEN, individually and as next friends of CHRISTIAN RILEY CLAYTON RHONDA HART, individually and as the representative of the estate of KIMBERLY ABDUL AZIZ and FARAH NAZ, individually and as next friends of SABIKA AZIZ SHEIKH, and FLO RICE ?le this THIRD AMENDED PETITION AND REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE would show unto this Honorable Court, as follows: I. DISCOVERY CONTROL PLAN 1. Pursuant to Texas R. Civ. P. 190.4(a) and Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors request that discovery be conducted by Court Order (Level 3). Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors af?rmatively plead that this suit is not governed by the expedited-actions process in Rule 169 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. II. PARTIES 2. Plaintiffs CHRISTOPHER STONE and ROSIE YANAS, as well as the under 18- year-old minor for whom they appear as next friends, resided in Galveston County, Texas at the time of the Incident made the basis of this lawsuit. 3. Plaintiffs-Intervenors MARK MCLEOD and GAIL MCLEOD, as well as the under 18-year-old minor for whom they appear as next friends, resided in Galveston County, Texas at the time of the Incident made the basis of this lawsuit. 4. Plaintiff-Intervenor PAMELA STANICH, as well as the under 18?year?old minor for whom she appears as next friend, resided in Galveston County, Texas as the time of the Incident made the basis of this lawsuit. 5. Plaintiff-Intervenor SHANNAN CLAUS SEN, as well as the under 18-year-old minor for whom she appears as next friend, resided in Galveston County, Texas as the time of the Incident made the basis of this lawsuit. 6. Plaintiff-Intervenor CLAYTON HORN resided in Galveston County, Texas at the time of the Incident made the basis of this lawsuit. 7. Plaintiff-Intervenor RHONDA HART, as well as her deceased 14-year-old daughter, resided in Galveston County, Texas at the time of the Incident made the basis of this lawsuit. 8. Plaintiffs-Intervenors ABDUL A212 and FARAH NAZ, as well as their deceased daughter for whom they appear as next friends, are domiciled in Karachi, Pakistan. Plaintiffs- Intervenors resided in Karachi, Pakistan at the time of the Incident that is the basis of this lawsuit. Plaintiffs-Intervenors? daughter, Sabika Aziz Sheikh, was a 17-year-old minor who resided in Santa Fe, Texas at the time of the Incident that is the basis of this lawsuit. 9. Plaintiff-Intervenor FLO RICE resided in Galveston County, Texas at the time of the Incident made the basis of this lawsuit. 10. Defendant ANTONIOS PAGOURTZIS is a resident and citizen of the State of Texas. Defendant has been served and made an appearance. ll. Defendant ROSE MARIE KOSMETATOS is a resident and citizen of the State of Texas. Defendant has been served and has made an appearance. 12. Defendant DIMITRIOS PAGOURTZIS is a resident and citizen of the State of Texas and can be served with process care of: the Galveston County Sheriff, 601 54th St, Galveston, TX 77551 and the US. Marshals Service for the Southern District of Texas, US Courthouse, 515 Rusk Avenue, Room 10130, Houston, TX 77002. 13. Defendant LUCKYGUNNER, LLC d/b/a LUCKYGUNNERCOM (?Luckygunner?) is a foreign limited liability company located in the State of Tennessee which conducts business in the State of Texas. This lawsuit arises from Luckygunner?s performance of business in Texas. Luckygunner does not maintain a regular place of business in Texas and does not maintain a designated registered agent for service of process in Texas. In accordance with Tex. Civ. Prac. Rem. Code and/or the Texas Secretary of State is the agent for service of Luckygunner and may be served with process by mailing the citation via certified mail return receipt requested to the Texas Secretary of State, PO. Box 12079, Austin, Texas 78711?2079. Luckygunner?s most recent home office for service of process is 448 N. Cedar Bluff Road, #201, Knoxville, TN 37923. 14. Defendant RED STAG FULFILLMENT, LLC (?Red Stag?) is a foreign limited liability company located in the State of Tennessee which conducts business in the State of Texas. This lawsuit arises from Red Stag?s performance of business in Texas. Red Stag does not maintain a regular place of business in Texas and does not maintain a designated registered agent for service of process in Texas. In accordance with Tex. Civ. Prac. Rem. Code and/or the Texas Secretary of State is the agent for service of Red Stag and may be served with process by mailing the citation via certified mail return receipt requested to the Texas Secretary of State, PO. Box 12079, Austin, Texas 78711-2079. Red Stag?s most recent home of?ce for service of process is 5502 Island River Dr., Knoxville, TN 37914. 15. Upon information and belief, Defendant MOLLENHOURGROSS, LLC (?MollenhourGross?) is the sole managing member of Luckygunner and Red Stag. MollenhourGross is a foreign limited liability company located in the State of Tennessee which conducts business in the State of Texas. This lawsuit arises from MollenhourGross? performance of business in Texas. MollenhourGross does not maintain a regular place of business in Texas and does not maintain a designated registered agent for service of process in Texas. In accordance with Tex. Civ. Prac. Rem. Code and/or the Texas Secretary of State is the agent for service of MollenhourGross and may be served with process by mailing the citation via certi?ed mail return receipt requested to the Texas Secretary of State, P.O. Box 12079, Austin, Texas 78711-2079. MollenhourGross? most recent home of?ce for service of process is 11409 Municipal Center Dr., Unit 23434, Knoxville, TN 37933. 16. Defendant JORDAN MOLLENHOUR (?Mollenhour?) is a co-founder of Defendant Luckygunner and Defendant Red Stag and is a principal of MollenhourGross. Defendant Jordan Mollenhour is a non-resident of Texas who conducts business in the State of Texas. This lawsuit arises from Jordan Mollenhour?s performance of business and commission of a tort in the State of Texas. Jordan Mollenhour does not maintain a regular place of business in Texas. Jordan Mollenhour does not have a designated agent for service of process in Texas. Upon information and belief, Jordan Mollenhour may be served with process at 3057 Kingston Pike, Apt 4, Knoxville, TN 37919. 17. Defendant DUSTIN GROSS (?Gross?) is a co-founder of Defendant Luckygunner and Defendant Red Stag and is a principal of MollenhourGross. Defendant Dustin Gross is a non- resident of Texas who conducts business in the State of Texas. This lawsuit arises from Dustin Gross? performance of business and commission of a tort in the State of Texas. Dustin Gross does not maintain a regular place of business in Texas. Dustin Gross does not have a designated agent for service of process in Texas. Upon information and belief, Dustin Gross may be served with process at 11124 Kingston Pike 41-119, Knoxville, TN 37934. 18. Defendants Luckygunner, MollenhourGross, Mollenhour, and Gross are collectively referred to as ?Luckygunner Defendants.? JURISDICTION AND VENUE 19. Venue for this action properly lies in Galveston County, Texas, pursuant to Texas Civ. Prac. Rem. Code because all or a substantial portion of the events giving rise to the claim occurred in Galveston County. 20. Jurisdiction is proper because this is a civil case in which the matter in controversy is within the Court?s jurisdictional limits. Pursuant to Texas R. Civ. P. Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors seek more than $1,000,000 in monetary damages. IV. FACTS 21. On March 2, 2018, a mere two weeks after a l9-year-old former student went on a murderous rampage at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, 17-year-old Dimitrios Pagourtzis went to Luckygunner.com to purchase ammunition for his own school shooting. 22. Using a prepaid American Express gift card, Dimitrios Pagourtzis seamlessly and quickly purchased handgun and shotgun ammunition using his own name and address. Even though Pagourtzis was too young to legally purchase or possess handgun ammunition under federal law, Luckygunner did not require that he provide identification or proof of age. Instead, in less than two minutes, Luckygunner?s automated system approved his purchase. 23. Less than two weeks later, Dimitrios Pagourtzis went on to Luckygunner.com once again, and ordered shotgun ammunition. This time, he used another prepaid American Express gift card. Once again, the 17-year-old did not need to produce any identi?cation or provide proof of age to complete the purchase, and his order was approved in two minutes. 24. Two months later, on May 18, 2018, Dimitrios Pagourtzis carried out one of the deadliest school shootings in American history. Using the ammunition that he purchased from Luckygunner and his parents? ?rearms, Pagourtzis shot and killed ten of his classmates and teachers and wounded at least thirteen others. 25. This lawsuit is brought on behalf of those who were shot that day. Because many of Dimitrios Pagourtzis? victims did not survive, their estates are represented in this lawsuit by their parents. - . 26. Plaintiffs Christopher Stone and Rosie Yanas are, or more exactly were, the parents of their beloved son Christopher Jake Stone, a 17-year-old junior at Santa Fe High School who 7 went by Chris. On May 18, 2018, Chris awoke, breakfasted and went on his way to school, to spend another happy and productive day educating and preparing himself for all the dreams, goals and promise youth presents. 27. Chris was a football player and was on the ultimate frisbee team. He looked forward to being a plant operator after graduation. He loved football, and his friends described him as the ?life of the party? with an infectious laugh. Just a week before he was shot, Chris had taken his girlfriend to prom, and his family had watched him get dressed up in his tuxedo?53; . I a 28. Plaintiffs?Intervenors Mark McLeod and Gail McLeod are the parents of Aaron Kyle McLeod, a freshman at Santa Fe High School who went by Kyle. Kyle was a bright student who enjoyed playing tennis, watching musicals, and playing PlayStation. Kyle?s friends remembered him as cheerful and smiling he made a point of waving at friends and neighbors. He was close to his family, and he is missed by them every single day. 29. Plaintiff-Intervenor Pamela Stanich is the mother of Jared Conard Black, a student at Santa Fe High School. Jared was a bright, optimistic student who enjoyed art, science ?ction and playing video games. Jared had just turned 17 on May 16, 2018. On the morning he was murdered, Jared was looking forward to his birthday party, which he had planned for the next day. His family remembers him as someone who was caring and loving and who looked out for little children and others needing help. Jared loved anime and comic books, wrestling, wolves and super heroes. . .. 30. Plaintiff-Intervenor Shannan Claussen is the mother of Christian Riley Garcia, a freshman at Santa Fe High School who went by Riley. Riley was a bright student who enjoyed football, basketball, music and being outdoors. 31. Riley enjoyed being on the lake whether he was water skiing or night-?shing; he had just gotten his boating license. He loved board games, the outdoors, cake, and his little sister for whom he gladly wore a costume and plastic sword to be guard while she was the princess. He was a devoted member of his church and beloved by his family. 32. Plaintiff-Intervenor Clayton Horn, 18, is now a senior at Santa Fe High School. On May 18, 2018, Clayton Horn, who was a picture of youth and health, was a junior at Santa Fe High School and enjoyed pole vaulting, riding bulls, playing football and other outdoor activities. Clayton was shot in the arm and lower extremities. He was hospitalized after the shooting and underwent multiple surgeries. His life has been irreparably changed by the shooting. 10 Vat-x, 33. Plaintiff?Intervenor Rhonda Hart is the mother of Kimberly Vaughan, who was a student at Santa Fe High School. Kimberly was a bright, energetic, optimistic student with many talents, dreams and aspirations. Kimberly was on her way to earning her Gold Award, the highest award a Girl Scout can earn. She was looking forward to teaching American Sign Language classes. ll 34. Plaintiffs-Intervenors Abdul Aziz and Farah Naz are the parents of Sabika Aziz Sheikh, who came to the United States in August 2017 from Pakistan as an exchange student. Sabika was placed with a host family in Santa Fe, Texas and enrolled as a senior at Santa Fe High School for the 2017?2018 academic year. She came to the United States on a mission of diplomacy?she wanted to learn about life in the United States and women?s empowerment, but she also wanted to share Pakistani culture with Americans. She wanted what teenagers the world over want: friendship, a chance to grow and learn, and adventure. 35. Sabika excelled academically and threw herself into life in America?she volunteered at the local library, dressed up as a pirate for Halloween, kept score at the high school?s baseball games, and went to prom with friends. She became close to her host family, traveling to West Texas with them, celebrating holidays, and engaging in lip contests with her host siblings. On the morning she was murdered, Sabika was thinking about how excited she was to return to Pakistan to see her beloved family and friends, who she had dearly missed while studying abroad in America. 36. Plaintiff-Intervenor Flo Rice was the 2018 substitute Teacher of the Year at Santa Fe High School. She is married to Scot Rice, has two daughters, and was an avid runner. On May 18, 2018, Plaintiff-Intervenor Flo Rice was working as a substitute teacher at Santa Fe High School overseeing a class playing basketball. She was shot ?ve times in the legs. She was hospitalized and underwent multiple surgeries before spending weeks in rehabilitation. She struggles with post-traumatic stress disorder. She once ran over twenty miles a week, but now needs a cane to walk. Her life has been irreparably changed by the shooting. 37. Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis is a former student at Santa Fe High School who deliberately murdered ten of his classmates and teachers and wounded many others on May 18, 12 2018, using his parents? weapons, a .38 caliber handgun and a shotgun, each loaded with the ammunition that he purchased from Luckygunner. 3 8. Chris, Kyle, Jared, Riley, Kimberly and Sabika were among the murdered students; Clayton and F10 were among those injured by Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis. They were murdered less than three weeks before the end of the school year. Each person shot by Dimitrios Pagourtzis was looking forward to the end of school and to spending their summer with family and friends. 39. Dimitrios Pagourtzis planned his attacks to kill, wound, maim and terrify as many of his teachers and fellow students as he could. He took steps to obtain weapons and ammunition, and even planted homemade explosives on school grounds. However, Dimitrios Pagourtzis could not have carried out this mass murder if he had not had access to weapons and ammunition. 40. This mass shooting was enabled by the illegal and negligent actions of the Luckygunner Defendants, who conspired to pro?t from and aid the sale of ammunition to juveniles, who are legally prohibited from purchasing or possessing handgun ammunition, by establishing and maintaining a webstore platform designed to avoid actually verifying the single most important characteristic of an ammunition customer under federal law the customer?s age. 41. The shooting was also enabled by Defendant Red Stag, who knew that Luckygunner did not require proof of age of its customers from most states, but nevertheless shipped ammunition to Dimitrios Pagourtzis, a juvenile under federal law, via FedEx without a required adult signature for receipt of the package. 42. Finally, the shooting was enabled by the negligent actions of Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos, who knew that their son was at risk of harming himself 13 or others but still irresponsibly and negligently stored their ?rearms, so that their son could access them. Providing Juveniles and Minors with Access to Guns and Ammunition is a Well-Known Danger 43. It has long been recognized that providing juveniles (those under the age of 18) and minors (those under the age of 21) with access to deadly weapons and ammunition poses a grave and unacceptable risk to public safety. For this reason, federal law, and many state laws, restrict access to both ?rearms and ammunition for juveniles and minors. 44. Pursuant to the Youth Handgun Safety Act, individuals under the age of 18 are prohibited from knowingly possessing ammunition suitable only for use in a handgun. 18 U.S.C. 922(x)(2). It is also illegal to aid or abet, willfully cause, or conspire to cause, the illegal possession of such ammunition by a juvenile under the age of 18. 18 U.S.C. 2, 371. In addition, it is illegal for anyone to sell, deliver or otherwise transfer handguns and handgun ammunition to individuals they know or have reasonable cause to believe are under the age of 18. 18 U.S.C. 922(x)(1). 45. When the federal Youth Handgun Safety Act was passed, the accompanying House Conference Report noted that the act was aimed at preventing juvenile misuse of handguns and associated crimes.1 46. In addition to the provisions of the Youth Handgun Safety Act, licensed gun companies are prohibited from selling handguns or handgun ammunition to anyone who they know or have reason to believe is under the age of 21. 18 U.S.C. 922(b)(1). FFLs are also 1 HR. Conf. Rep. No. 103-711, at 390-91 (1993). 14 prohibited from selling shotguns, ri?es or ammunition for shotguns or ri?es to anyone they know or have reason to believe is under the age of 18. Id.2 47. As the Senate Report accompanying the passage of the federal Gun Control Act in 1968 noted, ?[t]he clandestine acquisition of ?rearms by juveniles and minors is a most serious problem facing law enforcement and the citizens of this country.?3 48. Upon information and belief, the Luckygunner Defendants and Defendant Red Stag knew (or consciously avoided knowing) that juveniles and minors are particularly at risk of misusing ammunition. 49. More speci?cally, the dangers of providing ?rearms and ammunition to individuals under the age of 21 has never been more apparent than in recent years. Some of the country?s most infamous tragedies have been perpetrated by juveniles and minors, including: The Columbine High School shooting perpetrated in 1999 by a 15-year-old and an 18-year-old; resulting in the deaths of 13 people, including 12 students; 0 The Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in 2012 by a 20-year-old, killing 26 people, including 20 ?rst-graders; - The Marjory Stoneman Douglas Shooting in February 2018 by a 19-year-old, killing 17 people and injuring 17 others; 50. Of course, these mass shootings are just a fraction of all shootings committed by juveniles and minors. 18 to 20-year-olds are offenders in gun homicides at a rate nearly four times higher than adults 21 and older. 2 While Luckygunner is believed to have had a federal license at some point in time prior to the sales at issue here, it is not known at the time of this ?ling whether this license was surrendered, revoked, or is currently maintained under a different name. 3 3. Rep. No. 90-197, at 79 (1968). 15 51. Since December 2012, there have been at least 74 shootings perpetrated by individuals under the age of 21 at K-12 schools. 52. The defendants in this action who provided Dimitrios Pagourtzis with his weaponry and ammunition callously and inexcusably ignored these known and obvious dangers. 53. The dangers posed by juveniles and minors purchasing ammunition has not abated since the Santa Fe Shooting. In June 2019, a 20-year old purchased one thousand rounds of ammunition online. On August 3, 2019, a few days after turning 21, he drove from Allen, Texas to a Wal-Mart in El Paso. That day, he murdered 22 people and injured many others. The Luckygunner Defendants Established a Business that Intentionally Avoids Knowledge of the Customer?s Age 54. It is a well-known problem that youth attempt to buy ammunition illegally. It is also well known that consumers seeking to purchase a product that they are not legally allowed to purchase may seek to do so using an intemet commerce site. 55. The Luckygunner Defendants knew (or consciously avoided knowing or learning) that juveniles and minors who want to illegally obtain ammunition, including for illegal purposes, were highly likely to attempt to purchase ammunition on websites, such as Luckygunner. 56. However, instead of designing a website that enabled them to verify the purchase age for every customer, the Luckygunner Defendants made a decision to ask for proof of age unless the shipment was destined for a small handful of states where certain proof is expressly required by state law. 57. In other words, for customers from most states, the Luckygunner Defendants made a deliberate choice to remain ignorant of a fact?age?that is determinative of whether the transaction is legal under federal law. 16 58. Upon information and belief, Defendants Mollenhour and Gross launched Luckygunner in 2009 through their limited liability company, MollenhourGross. 59. From approximately 2009 and 2010, Luckygunner did business under the names Luckygunner.com, Luckysurvival.com, Gunsforsale.com, Ammoforsale.com, Bulk-ammo.com, Bulkammo.com, Ammo.net, and Military Ballistics Industries. 60. From the very beginning, speed took precedence over safety at Luckygunner. As Luckygunner brags on its website, prior to the establishment of its webstore, ?[ammunition] backorders were the law of the land as guns went hungry and shooters grew frustrated.? 61. Speed remains priority number one for Luckygunner to this day. Customers are promised $100 if any order placed by 3 pm on a business day is not shipped on the same day. 9 3 4 Ifyou order in the next 3h48m and we don't ship today we will pay YOU 5100 r; 62. Once orders are placed, Luckygunner?s ?100% automated? system approves them within minutes, and the orders are sent to Defendant Red Stag (also owned by MollenhourGross) for shipment. 63. While the Luckygunner Defendants have dedicated signi?cant resources to designing their webstore and shipping methods to provide customers with fast and easy access to ammunition, they have failed to take similar steps to ensure that ammunition is not shipped to juveniles and minors, even though they knew or, at a minimum, were aware of a high likelihood that juveniles and minors regularly attempt to buy ammunition in violation of federal law and have committed violent crimes, including murder, with such illegally purchased ammunition. 17 64. Instead, upon information and belief, the Luckygunner Defendants intentionally designed their website and shipping protocols to avoid verifying the age of the vast majority of its customers. The Luckygunner Defendants do not require that customers from most states?such as Texas?provide a copy of identi?cation or a ?rearms permit or other form of proof of age. Defendant Red Stag does not require proof of age in most states when its packages are shipped. Neither company even requires that an adult sign for the packages they ship. 65. This failure is striking, because the Luckygunner Defendants have the capability to verify the age of its customers, and apparently do so for a small handful of states. Since certain state laws?such as in Connecticut, Illinois and New ersey?af?rmatively require that customers show their identi?cation cards or pistol permits to purchase ammunition, Luckygunner requires customers from those states to scan or email a copy of that identi?cation or permit to their email address. 66. However, these requirements are conspicuously absent for customers from most other states to which Luckygunner ships, even though federal law makes it illegal for anyone under the age of 18 to purchase or possess handgun ammunition, for anyone to aid or abet or willfully cause the purchase or possession of handgun ammunition by anyone under 18, or to conspire to cause the purchase or possession of handgun ammunition by anyone under 18, and for anyone to sell, deliver or transfer handgun ammunition to anyone they know or have reasonable cause to believe is under the age of 18. 67. While Luckygunner states on its website that it does not sell ammunition to anyone under the age of 2 1 Luckygunner takes no meaningful steps to verify the age of its customers from most states, such as Texas. Requiring customers to check a box indicating that they agree with the ?Terms and Conditions? or asking customers to simply input a birthdate is not veri?cation of age. 18 This is especially true for an online seller?which, unlike a traditional ?brick and mortar? seller? has no opportunity to see or interact with the prospective purchaser to make an in-person assessment of their likely age or age range. 68. The website?s current ?Terms and Conditions,? which contain a single line stating that the customer agrees that he or she is ?not currently less than twenty-one (21) years old,? is a far cry from verifying the legality of the online transactions. This may be why Dimitrios Pagourtzis took no steps to conceal his identify or address. He knew that no one would care enough to check and see if the sale was legal. 69. The Luckygunner Defendants agreed and conspired to set up their business to avoid knowing whether or not their customers were old enough to purchase or possess handgun ammunition?despite knowing that there was a high likelihood that such an approach to selling ammunition would result in prohibited juveniles unlawfully purchasing and possessing ammunition. 70. This decision stands in marked contrast to the way that many other online sellers of regulated products take steps to verify purchaser age. From alcohol to tobacco to prescription drugs, online sellers frequently set up a system that requires the purchaser to either upload identi?cation or provide proof of age upon delivery. 71. The Luckygunner Defendants? disregard for public safety is particularly irresponsible because they have been placed on notice that their website has been used to purchase ammunition with which to carry out at least one other mass shooting. In 2012, Luckygunner sold over 4,000 rounds of ammunition to a 24-year-old severely-mentally ill man who used the ammunition to kill 12 people and injure 58 others at the Aurora Century 16 movie theater in Aurora, Colorado. 19 72. Back-to-back school shootings involving underage shooters in early 2018 served as another tragic opportunity for Luckygunner to reform its business. In January 2018, a 15-year-old high school sophomore, obsessed with Nazis, killed two of his classmates and injured 18 others at Marshall County High School near Benton, Kentucky. A few weeks later, and just two weeks prior to Pagourtzis? ?rst purchase from Luckygunner, a 19-year-old killed 17 students and educators at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. Yet, upon information and belief, Luckygunner did not take any steps in the aftermath of these shootings to ensure that juveniles and minors could not purchase ammunition from its webstore. Defendants Luckvgunncr and Red Stag Illegally and Negligentlv Sold and Delivered Ammunition to a Juvenile 73. On March 2, 2018, 17-year-old Dimitrios Pagourtzis went on to Luckygunner.com and ordered 50 rounds of handgun ammunition and 105 rounds of shotgun ammunition. To complete his order, the 17-year-old did not have to show his ID or verify his age. He did not have to create a Luckygunner account or set up a secure two-step authorization. He did not even need to show that he was old enough to possess a validly issued credit card. Instead, Pagourtzis simply used an American Express gift card to place his purchase and declined the ?adult signature required? option for shipping. 74. Upon information and belief, Pagourtzis was so con?dent that Luckygunner would not check his age that he felt comfortable using his own name to illegally purchase the ammunition. At most, and upon information and belief, all he was required to do was check a box agreeing to a standard set of terms and conditions, one of which is that the purchaser is not under 21.4 4 Documents produced by Luckygunner in response to a subpoena calling for all documents relating to purchases by Dimitrios Pagourtzis appear to contain no indication or record that this terms and conditions box was even checked off. 20 75. In less than two minutes, Luckygunner approved his order and sent it to Red Stag for ful?llment. Upon information and belief, Red Stag mailed the ammunition to Pagourtzis via FedEx two days later without verifying his age and without requiring that an adult sign for the package. 76. Less than two weeks later, on March 13, 2018, Pagourtzis went onto Luckygunner.com once more, and ordered additional shotgun ammunition. Once again, the 17- year?old did not have to provide proof of his age; to the contrary, at most, and upon information and belief, he was only required to check a box agreeing to the standard terms and conditions set forth above. This time he completed the purchase using another American Express gift card, and once again, declined the ?adult signature required? shipping option. Like the previous purchase, the order was approved in two minutes and sent to Red Stag for shipment. 77. Upon information and belief, Red Stag mailed the ammunition via FedEx the next day without verifying Dimitrios Pagourtzis? age and without requiring that an adult sign for the package. Upon information and belief, Red Stag Ful?llment does not verify the age of the customers to whom it ships ammunition. 78. Upon information and belief, Luckygunner falsely warranted to American Express that Pagourtzis? purchases were lawful, when they were not. This warranty is required in American Express? standard merchant agreements as to all transactions. Luckygunner?s failure to verify customer age for most handgun ammunition sales prevents it from knowing whether that warranty is true or for any such sale.5 5 It is not known whether American Express further requires that its merchants who sell ammunition verify that the purchasers of handgun ammunition are of legal age. 21 79. Dimitrios Pagourtzis? use of prepaid American Express gift cards was a red ?ag. Had the Luckygunner Defendants had any measures in place to ?ag suspicious?that is, potentially illegal?transactions, the use of a prepaid gift card should have given rise to additional scrutiny. A gift card can be bought by anyone and is not attached to a veri?able address. Just like a ?burner? cell phone, a prepaid gift card is dif?cult to trace to its user. For this reason, gift cards are a well- known mechanism for engaging in illegal online transactions. 80. Upon information and belief, Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis used the ammunition sold and shipped to him by the Luckygunner Defendants to perpetrate the mass shooting at Santa Fe High School on May 18, 2018. Defendants Antonios I?ageurtzisgnd Rose Marie Kosmetatos Knew Their Son Was At Risk of Harming Others But Still Did Not Prevent Their Son From Accessing Firearms 81. Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos knew that their son was at risk of harming himself or others but still irresponsibly and negligently stored their ?rearms, so that their son could access them. In the months and weeks leading up to the shooting, Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis exhibited many warning signs that Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos noticed but did not address. 82. Any reasonable parent would have ensured that their child, who was exhibiting signs of emotional distress and violent fantasies, did not have access to weapons that he could use to kill others (or himself). Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos did not do even the bare minimum to prevent their son from accessing deadly weapons. Without their negligent actions and irresponsible ?rearms storage, their son would not have had access to the ?rearms that he used to kill and injure so many people in one of the worst mass shootings in Texas history. 22 83. There were many warnings that Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis harbored violent and hateful impulses and was a danger to himself and others. Had Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos heeded the obvious warning signs and prevented their son from accessing their ?rearms, Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis would have been unable to access their guns to murder ten of his classmates and teachers and injure thirteen more. 84. Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis had a fascination with the Columbine High School shooting that should have been a red ?ag to his family. 85. Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis took pains to dress like the Columbine shooters wearing a full?length black trench coat and black combat boots regularly to school, despite the South Texas heat. Among the insignia pinned to his trench coat was a medallion identical to one worn by one of the Columbine shooters. 86. Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis? ?xation on the Columbine shooting was so obvious that his friends even joked that he dressed like the Columbine shooters. 87. Many of the details of Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis? attack on his classmates and teachers indicate that he took inspiration from the Columbine shooters?down to details such as how he constructed explosive devices that he planted around the school. 88. There were other warning signs that would have been visible or accessible to his parents. On social media, Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis followed numerous gun-related accounts and evinced a fascination with ?rearms. On his Instagram account, he posted a photograph of a semiautomatic pistol, a knife, and a ?ashlight, captioned ?Hi fuckers,? in late April 2018?only a few weeks before the day of the shooting. 23 89. Also in the weeks before the shooting, Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis uploaded a photograph to his Facebook page of a t?shirt reading, TO he wore this t-shirt along with his trench coat and combat boots on the day he murdered ten of his schoolmates and teachers. 90. Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis had also demonstrated an interest in the guns used by the German army in World War II. He posted on Facebook an image of a jacket with Nazi and fascist insignia. On his Facebook page, he also posted artwork inspired by an electronic musician with a following among neo-Nazi groups. 91. Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos knew that something was gravely wrong with their son. 92. In an interview that he provided to a Greek radio station not long after the shooting, Defendant Antonios Pagourtzis said that he believed that his son had been teased and bullied at school. 93. Defendant Antonios Pagourtzis also told the Greek radio station that he had been so worried about his son?s well-being in the two weeks leading up to the shooting that he had stayed home from work to be with him? ?as if I knew something would happen.? 94. Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos owned the two weapons that their son used on the day of the Incident and knew that their son was experiencing extreme emotional distress. Yet they did not take basic steps to prevent their son from accessing the guns. 95. To the contrary, Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos stored ?rearms in an irresponsible and negligent manner that allowed them to be accessible to their emotionally unstable son?a son who was so troubled that his father had taken two weeks off of work to stay at home with him. 24 96. At seventeen years of age, Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis could not lawfully purchase a ?rearm from a dealer. He depended upon his parents? irresponsible and negligent storage of their ?rearms in order to carry out his murderous plans. 97. If Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis had not had his parents? weapons, he would not have been able to carry out the massacre at Santa Fe High School. Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis Murdered Ten Victims with the Ammunition and Firearms He Obtained from the Defendants 98. Early on the morning of May 18, 2018, Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis took his parents? two ?rearms from his family?s house. 99. The weapons taken by Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis and used in his killing Spree were a .38 caliber handgun and a Remington Model 870 shotgun. 100. Upon information, Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis loaded his weapons with the ammunition that he purchased from Luckygunner and took the remainder with him. 101. At or around 7:30 am. on May 18, 2018, Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis carried the two ?rearms onto the campus of Santa Fe High School. 102. When he arrived on campus, Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis hid his parents? guns in his trench coat. He went to a four-room arts complex within Santa Fe High School and opened ?re. Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis later told authorities that he spared some students he liked, so that they could tell his story. 103. Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis coldly and calculatingly shot his football teammate, Plaintiff-Intervenor Clayton Horn, while Clayton was in art class. The ?rst bullet struck and shattered Clayton?s left arm. While Clayton was laying on the ground after being shot, Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis moved closer and stood over the top of Clayton Horn. Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis then raised the .38 caliber handgun and pointed it directly at Clayton. 25 104. As Clayton looked up at the gun barrel and saw Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis begin to squeeze the trigger, Clayton moved at the last instant. Consequently, the bullet intended to end his life, instead ripped through and exited his leg, struck the cellphone in his jeans pocket, and ricocheted into his left arm before coming to rest. As Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis moved to the adjacent room to continue his killing spree, Clayton pulled himself up and exited the crime scene to a nearby soccer ?eld and awaited medical attention. Clayton suffered injuries to his arm, elbow, leg and other parts of his body. 105. In the immediate panic after the shooting began in one classroom, students in an adjacent classroom tried to exit through a back door in the art room complex but found that it was locked. These students then took refuge in the storage closets or ?ed through the ?rst classroom?s front door after Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis came into the second classroom. 106. Chris Stone, Riley Garcia, Jared Conard Black and Sabika Aziz Sheikh had sought refuge in the supply closets, but the shooter knew that several people were hiding there, and he began shooting into the closets. He taunted the students as he ?red. As Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis was shooting into the supply closet where she lay hidden, Sabika began praying. Riley blocked the door with his body so that several of his classmates could escape through another exit. His bravery allowed others to escape, but it also cost him his life, as Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis shot through the door and killed him. 107. Kyle McLeod was shot and texted his sister as the shooting went on around him. He had been hit in the arm and was crying and scared. His sister told him she loved him and sought to comfort him. He did not survive. 26 108. At some point during Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis? attack, school police of?cer John Barnes confronted him, but Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis responded by shooting Of?cer Barnes in the arm. 109. Plaintiff-Intervenor Flo Rice was overseeing a class playing basketball when she heard the ?re alarm go off. Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis coldly and calculatingly ?red ?ve bullets that struck Flo Rice, shattering her legs. While waiting for help to arrive, Flo Rice pretended to be dead for fear that the shooter would return. 110. More police of?cers from various agencies arrived, exchanging gun ?re with the shooter. At around 8 am, after negotiations with the police, Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis left the classrooms and surrendered. 111. In total, Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis killed eight students and two teachers by shooting them with his parents? guns. He wounded an additional thirteen others. 112. Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis? violent acts destroyed many lives. For the families of his victims and for those who he wounded, there is no end to their suffering. Each person that he killed had dreams, hopes, and aspirations, but Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis ended those dreams and cut off those hopes and aspirations. 113. Had the Luckygunner Defendants and Defendant Red Stag acted responsibly and in compliance with federal law, and not blinded themselves to the fact that they were selling and shipping ammunition to juveniles and minors, Dimitrios Pagourtzis would not have been able to commit his murderous rampage. 114. Had Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos responsibly stored their ?rearms in the face of their son?s dangerous disposition and erratic behavior, the 27 Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors? loved ones would be alive and uninjured, along with all of their classmates and teachers. 115. Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos failed to take basic measures to ensure that their emotionally disturbed son who harbored violent fantasies did not have access to deadly weapons. 1 16. Had Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos taken these basic measures securing ?rearms and warning the school district??Chris, Kyle, Jared, Riley, Kimberly, Sabika and the other victims of the shooter?s rampage would still be alive, and Clayton and F10 would not have suffered multiple gunshot wounds and trauma. 1 17. While Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis pulled the trigger, the remaining Defendants? irresponsible actions placed the guns and ammunition in his hands. V. CAUSES OF ACTION COUNT I NEGLIGENCE AS TO DEFENDANTS ANTONIOS PAGOURTZIS AND ROSE MARIE KOSMETATOS 118. Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors incorporate and re-allege the above paragraphs as if stated fully here. 119. Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos were subject to the general duty imposed on all persons not to expose others to reasonably foreseeable risks of injury and had a duty to exercise reasonable care in making available ?rearms and to refrain from engaging in any activity creating reasonably foreseeable risks of injury to others. 120. Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos breached their duty in one or more of the following ways: 28 a. In storing their ?rearms in such a manner that they could be accessed by their teenage son, who was emotionally unstable and harbored violent fantasies; b. In failing to pay attention or reasonably respond to Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis? emotional disturbance; c. In failing to intervene to prevent Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis from acting in furtherance of his violent fantasies; d. In failing to seek assistance from mental health professionals to prevent their son from acting in furtherance of his violent fantasies; e. In failing to inform the school district that their son was emotionally disturbed and harboring violent fantasies; f. In failing to inform law enforcement that their son was emotionally disturbed and harboring violent fantasies; and g. In failing to secure all dangerous objects in their home so that their son could not access them. 121. Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos knew or should have known that acting responsibly required them to store their ?rearms in a manner that would not have allowed access by their teenage son. 122. Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos nonetheless stored their ?rearms in an irresponsible manner in which they were easily accessed by Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis. 123. Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis? behavior in the weeks leading up to the shooting made criminal activity reasonably foreseeable. 29 124. Each of the above facts or omissions by Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos constitutes negligence, and that negligence was a proximate cause of the wrongful deaths of Christopher Jake Stone, Aaron Kyle McLeod, Jared Conard Black, Christian Riley Garcia, Kimberly Vaughan, and Sabika Aziz Sheikh; and the injuries to Clayton Horn and Flo Rice. COUNT II NEGLIGENCE 125. Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors incorporate and re-allege the above paragraphs as if stated fully here. 126. The Luckygunner Defendants and Defendant Red Stag were subject to the general duty imposed on all persons not to expose others to reasonably foreseeable risks of injury. 127. The Luckygunner Defendants and Defendant Red Stag had a duty to exercise reasonable care in selling and shipping ammunition and to refrain from engaging in any activity creating reasonably foreseeable risks of injury to others. In fact, companies that sell or deliver ?rearms and ammunition have an obligation to exercise the highest duty of care in transferring these products because of the potential for harm if ?rearms and ammunition get in the wrong hands. 128. On March 2, 2018, Luckygunner sold 105 rounds of gauge Winchester Super-X and 50 rounds of 38 Special Magtech 158 grain, semi-jacketed hollow-point ammunition (?38 Special Ammunition?) to 17-year?old Dimitrios Pagourtzis. The 38 Special ammunition is advertised as handgun ammunition on Luckygunner?s website and is only suitable for use in a handgun. 30 129. Pagourtzis paid for the ammunition by using an American Express card which listed an expiration date 8 years into the future. This card was a prepaid gift card, and easily identi?ed as such. 130. Even though Luckygunner states on its website that it only sells ammunition to individuals over the age of 21, it allowed Dimitorios Pagourtzis to choose a shipping option that does not require an adult to sign for the package. 131. Neither Luckygunner nor Red Stag attempted to verify or obtain proof of Pagourtzis? age before shipping him the ammunition that he ordered on March 2, 2018. To the contrary, the Luckygunner Defendants set up a website to avoid any such veri?cation or knowledge of age. 132. Defendant Red Stag knew that Luckygunner did not verify the age of most of its ammunition customers. 133. On March 13, 2018, Luckygunner sold 35 additional rounds of 12-gauge ammunition to 17-year-old Dimitrios Pagourtzis. Pagourtzis paid for the ammunition by using another American Express gift card. This card also expired over eight years later and was also easily identi?ed as a gift card. 134. Neither Luckygunner nor Red Stag attempted to verify or obtain proof of Pagourtzis? age before shipping him the ammunition that he ordered on March 13, 2018. 135. The Luckygunner Defendants and Defendant Red Stag breached their duty in the following ways: 0 In selling and shipping ammunition into the possession of a 17-year-old; - In setting up and maintaining a webstore that did not utilize any mechanism to verify the age of its ammunition purchasers from Texas (to the contrary, the 31 Luckygunner Defendants set up and maintain a website designed to avoid any such veri?cation or knowledge of ammunition purchasers? age for most states); a In setting up and maintaining shipment protocols that did not involve verifying the age of most ammunition customers; 0 In intentionally blinding themselves to the age of most of their ammunition customers; and In knowingly allowing a 17-year-old to purchase ammunition using only a gift card, which can be bought by anyone and is not attached to a veri?able address. 136. The Luckygunner Defendants and Defendant Red Stag knew or should have known that acting responsibly required them to sell and ship ammunition only after verifying the purchaser was not underage. 137. The Luckygunner Defendants and Defendant Red Stag are vicariously liable for the actions or inactions of its agents and/or employees while acting within the scope of their agency and/0r employment. 138. Each of the above acts or omissions by the Luckygunner Defendants and Defendant Red Stag constitutes negligence, and that negligence was a proximate cause of the wrongful deaths of Christopher Jake Stone, Aaron Kyle McLeod, Jared Conard Black, Christian Riley Garcia, and Sabika Aziz Sheikh; and the injuries to Clayton Horn and F10 Rice. 139. By designing a webstore that deliberately avoids determining the actual age of most of its ammunition customers including customers from Texas the Luckygunner Defendants conspired to violate the federal restrictions on handgun ammunition purchases by minors. See 18 U.S.C. 371, see also 18 U.S.C. 2. 32 140. By selling and delivering ammunition that is suitable only for use in a handgun into the possession of a 17-year-old, while deliberately taking steps to avoid verifying the age of the purchaser, the Luckygunner Defendants and Defendant Red Stag knowingly violated 18 U.S.C. 922(x)(1)(B) and aided and abetted the violation of 18 U.S.C. see also 18 U.S.C. 2. 141. These violations of law were a proximate cause of the wrongful deaths of Christopher Jake Stone, Aaron Kyle McLeod, Jared Conard Black, Christian Riley Garcia, Kimberly Vaughan, and Sabika Aziz Sheikh; and the injuries to Clayton Horn and F10 Rice. COUNT NEGLIGENT ENTRUSTMENT AS TO DEF ENDANTS ANTONIOS PAGOURTZIS AND ROSE MARIE KOSMETATOS 142. Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors incorporate and re-allege the above paragraphs as if stated fully here. 143. Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis was an incompetent entrustee for a .38 caliber handgun and a Remington model 870 shotgun. As described in detail above, the shooter evinced a fascination with the Columbine shooting and Nazis and made social media posts advocating violence. 144. Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos were so worried about Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis in the weeks leading up to his massacre of his fellow students and teachers that Defendant Antonios Pagourtzis stayed home from work for two weeks to take care of his son. 145. A reasonably prudent person would have recognized that Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis was an incompetent entrustee for the ?rearms at issue. 33 146. Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos had, at all material times, control of the ?rearms at issue and permitted them to be used by Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis. 147. Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis was able to be in possession of the ?rearms at issue only by consent of Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos. 148. A ?rearm is an exceedingly dangerous article to keep in a manner that allows an emotionally disturbed teenager with violent fantasies, such as Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis, to access it. 149. Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos knew or reasonably should have known that by not entrusting the ?rearms at issue to Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis, they could have prevented him from possessing and dangerously using the guns against himself or innocent third parties. 150. Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos nonetheless permitted Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis to use the ?rearms, knowing or having reason to know, that he would use the product in a manner involving unreasonable risk of physical injury to himself or others. 151. Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos? negligent entrustment of the ?rearms to Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis was a direct and proximate cause of the wrongful deaths of Christopher Jake Stone, Aaron Kyle McLeod, Jared Conard Black, Christian Riley Garcia, Kimberly Vaughan, and Sabika Aziz Sheikh; and the injuries to Clayton Horn and F10 Rice later that day. 34 COUNT IV NEGLIGENCE PER SE AS TO THE LUCKYGUNNER DEFENDANTS AND DEFENDANT RED STAG 152. Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors incorporate and re-allege the above paragraphs as if stated fully here. 153. On March 2, 2018, LuckyGunner sold 50 rounds of 38 Special Magtech 158 grain, semijacketed hollow-point ammunition to 17-year-old Dimitrios Pagourtzis. The 38 Special ammunition is advertised as handgun ammunition on Luckygunner?s website and is only suitable for a handgun. 154. Pagourtzis paid for the ammunition by using an American Express card which expired over eight years later. This card was a prepaid gift card. 155. Luckygunner permitted Dimitrios Pagourtzis to decline the ?adult signature required? shipping option even though it had not veri?ed his age. 156. On March 4, 2018, Red Stag shipped the 38 Special Ammunition to Dimitrios Pagourtzis via FedEx. 157. Neither Luckygunner nor Red Stag attempted to obtain proof of Pagourtzis? age before shipping him the ammunition that he ordered on March 2, 2018. 158. Upon information and belief, the Luckygunner Defendants intentionally designed and maintain their webstore and shipping protocols to avoid learning the age of most of its ammunition consumers, despite knowing that it is illegal for minors to possess handgun ammunition. 159. Defendant Red Stag knew that Luckygunner does not verify the age of most of its customers. 35 160. By designing a webstore that deliberately avoids determining the actual age of most of its ammunition customers including customers from Texas the Luckygunner Defendants conspired to violate the federal restrictions on handgun ammunition purchases by minors. See 18 U.S.C. 371, see also 18 U.S.C. 2. 161. By selling and delivering ammunition that is suitable only for use in a handgun into the possession of a 17-year-old, while deliberately taking steps to avoid verifying the age of the purchaser, the Luckygunner Defendants and Defendant Red Stag knowingly violated 18 U.S.C. 922(x)(1)(B) and aided and abetted the violation of 18 U.S.C. see also 18 U.S.C. 2. 162. These statutory provisions are designed to prevent irresponsible and illegal handgun and ammunition possession and use by individuals who are too young to possess and use it responsibly. 163. The Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors are within the class of people that the statute is designed to protect. 164. The Luckygunner Defendants and Defendant Red Stag are vicariously liable for the actions or inactions of its agents and/or employees while acting within the scope of their agency and/or employment. 165. Each of the above facts or omissions by the Luckygunner Defendants and Defendant Red Stag was a proximate cause of the wrongful deaths of Christopher Jake Stone, Aaron Kyle McLeod, Jared Conard Black, Christian Riley Garcia, Kimberly Vaughan, and Sabika Aziz Sheikh; and the injuries to Clayton Horn and F10 Rice. 36 COUNT CIVIL CONSPIRACY AS TO THE LUCKYGUNNER DEFENDANTS AND DEFENDANT RED STAG 166. Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors incorporate and re-allege the above paragraphs as if stated fully here. 167. Upon information and belief, Defendants Mollenhour and Gross established Luckygunner in or around 2009 through their limited liability company, MollenhourGross. 168. Upon information and belief, Defendants Mollenhour, Gross and MollenhourGross intentionally set up the Luckygunner webstore to avoid knowing customers? age, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(x). 169. Defendants Mollenhour and Gross established Red Stag in May 2013, through their limited liability company, MollenhourGross, to provide shipping services for Luckygunner. 170. Red Stag knows that Luckygunner does not attempt to obtain proof of most of its customers? ages. Yet, upon information and belief, Red Stag does not attempt to verify the age of individuals to whom it is shipping ammunition. 171. Upon information and belief, the Luckygunner Defendants and Defendant Red Stag had a joint objective: to sell and deliver ammunition to all who approached them, knowing full well that there was a high likelihood that many customers and recipients would be prohibited under federal and state law from purchasing ammunition. 172. Their lack of inquiry into most ammunition customers? age is strong evidence that they consciously avoided incriminating knowledge. That is: the Luckygunner Defendants and Defendant Red Stag knew that there was a high likelihood that, of the ammunition they sold and delivered, a certain amount would be transferred to those who are underage. 37 173. They also knew that there is a high risk that youth will misuse the ammunition? often to deadly effect. Yet, they designed and maintained a website and utilized shipping methods that deliberately avoid verifying the age of most ammunition consumers. Upon information and belief, they did this to create a thin veneer of ?plausible deniability,? so that when they foreseeably and inevitably sold or delivered ammunition illegally to underage consumers, they could feign ignorance. 174. As a result of the Luckygunner Defendants? and Defendant Red Stag?s actions as part of this conspiracy, Christopher Jake Stone, Aaron Kyle McLeod, Jared Conard Black, Christian Riley Garcia, Kimberly Vaughan, and Sabika Aziz Sheikh were killed; and Clayton Horn and 10 Rice were injured. COUNT VI PIERCING THE CORPORATE VEIL AS TO DEFENDANT MOLLENHOUR AND DEFENDANT GROSS 175. Plaintiffs and Plaintiff-Intervenors incorporate and re?allege the above paragraphs as if stated fully herein. 176. Defendants Jordan Mollehnour and Dustin Gross are the sole managing members of Defendant MollenhourGross. In turn, Defendant is the sole managing member of both Defendant Luckygunner and Defendant Red Stag. 177. At all relevant times, there was a unity of interest and ownership between Defendants Mollenhour, Gross, MollenhourGross, Luckygunner and Red Stag. 178. Defendants Mollenhour and Gross effectively controlled the operations of Defendants MollenhourGross, Luckygunner and Red Stag. 179. Defendants MollenhourGross, Luckygunner and Red Stag currently or in the past have shared of?ces, employees and attorneys. 38 180. Upon information and belief, Defendants Mollenhour and Gross set up Defendant Red Stag to serve as an instrumentality or business conduit for Defendant Luckygunner. 181. Upon information and belief, Defendants Mollenhour and Gross have failed to maintain arms?length relationships with, and between, Defendants MollenhourGross, Luckygunner and Red Stag. 182. Defendants Mollenhour and Gross used Defendants MollenhourGross, Luckygunner and Red Stag as a vehicle for negligent and unlawful conduct as described above. 183. Defendant Mollenhour and Gross? control of Defendants MollenhourGross, Luckygunner and Red Stag was a direct and proximate cause of the injuries to the Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors. 184. Justice requires disregarding the corporate form and holding Defendants Jordan Mollenhour and Dustin Gross jointly and severally liable for any and all obligations of Defendants MollenhourGross, Luckygunner and Red Stag. COUNT VII GROSS NEGLIGENCE AS TO DEFENDANTS ANTONIOS PAGOURTZIS. ROSE MARIE KOSMETATOS, THE LUCKYGUNNER DEFENDANTS, AND DEFENDANT RED STAG 185. Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors hereby assert a claim for gross negligence. Pursuant thereto, Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors seek punitive or exemplary damages in order to punish and deter the outrageous conduct taken in the needless, reckless and conscious indifference for the safety of Christopher Jake Stone, Aaron Kyle McLeod, Jared Conard Black, Christian Riley Garcia, Clayton Horn, Kimberly Vaughan, Sabika Aziz Sheikh, Flo Rice and their fellow students and teachers. 39 186. Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos were grossly negligent in permitting Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis to have access to their weapons. 187. The Luckygunner Defendants were grossly negligent in selling ammunition to a juvenile, while taking steps to remain deliberately ignorant most of their ammunition customers. 188. Defendant Red Stag was grossly negligent in delivering ammunition to a juvenile without verifying the customer?s age and knowing that Luckygunner remains deliberately ignorant of its customers? age. 189. Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors allege that the conduct of the Luckygunner Defendants, Defendant Red Stag and Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos amounted to gross neglect and/or malice as those terms are de?ned under Tex. Civ. Prac. Rem. Code Ch. 41, 41.001, et. seq.), as well as Texas common law. COUNT ASSAULT AS TO DEFENDANT DIMITRIOS PAGOURTZIS 190. Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors incorporate and reallege the above paragraphs as if stated fully here. 191. Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis intended to cause physical harm to Christopher Jake Stone, Aaron Kyle McLeod, Jared Conard Black, Christian Riley Garcia, Clayton Horn, Kimberly Vaughan, Sabika Aziz Sheikh and F10 Rice. 192. Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis acted to cause Christopher Jake Stone, Kyle McLeod, Jared Conard Black, Riley Garcia, Clayton Horn, Kimberly Vaughan, Sabika Aziz Sheikh and F10 Rice to reasonably believe that he had the present intent and ability to harm them 40 by bringing two loaded ?rearms to Santa Fe High School on May 18, 2018, aiming his guns at each of them and ?ring his guns in their direction. 193. As a result of this assault, as alleged, Christopher Jake Stone, whose estate is represented herein by Plaintiffs Christopher Stone and Rosie Yanas, suffered personal injuries that resulted in his death, awareness of impending death; and other compensable injuries and damages, all to the damage of his estate in an amount to be determined at a trial of this matter. 194. As a result of this assault, Aaron Kyle McLeod, whose estate is represented herein by Plaintiffs-Intervenors Mark McLeod and Gail McLeod, suffered personal injuries that resulted in his death, awareness of impending death; and other compensable injuries and damages, all to the damage of his estate in an amount to be determined at a trial of this matter. 195. As a result of this assault, Jared Conard Black, whose estate is represented herein by Plaintiff-Intervenor Pamela Stanich, suffered personal injuries that resulted in his death, awareness of impending death; and other compensable injuries and damages, all to the damage of his estate in an amount to be determined at a trial of this matter 196. As a result of this assault, Christian Riley Garcia, whose estate is represented herein by Plaintiff-Intervenor Shannan Claussen, suffered personal injuries that resulted in his death, awareness of impending death; and other compensable injuries and damages, all to the damage of his estate in an amount to be determined at a trial of this matter. 197. As a result of this assault, Plaintiff Clayton Horn suffered personal injuries and damages including signi?cant past and future pain, suffering, disability, emotional distress, dis?gurement, and loss of enjoyment of life; past and future medical expenses; past wage loss and impairment of future earning capacity; severe emotional distress in witnessing the injuries and 41 deaths of his peers; and other compensable injuries and damages, all to his damage in an amount to be determined at trial of matter. 198. As a result of this assault, as alleged, Kimberly Vaughan, whose estate is represented herein by Plaintiff-Intervenor Rhonda Hart, suffered personal injuries that resulted in her death, awareness of impending death; and other compensable injuries and damages, all to the damage of her estate in an amount to be determined at a trial of this matter. 199. As a result of this assault, Sabika Aziz Sheikh, whose estate is represented herein by Plaintiffs?Intervenors Abdul Aziz and Farah Naz, suffered personal injuries that resulted in her death, awareness of impending death; and other compensable injuries and damages, all to the damage of her estate in an amount to be determined at a trial of this matter. 200. As a result of this assault, Flo Rice suffered personal injuries and damages including signi?cant past and future pain, suffering, disability, emotional distress, dis?gurement, and loss of enjoyment of life; past and future medical expenses; past wage loss and impairment of future earning capacity; severe emotional distress in witnessing the injuries and deaths of others; and other compensable injuries and damages, all to his damage in an amount to be determined at trial of matter. COUNT BATTERY AS TO DEFENDANT DIMITRIOS PAGOURTZIS 201. Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors incorporate and reallege the above paragraphs as if stated fully here. 202. Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis intentionally caused bodily harm to Christopher Jake Stone, Aaron Kyle McLeod, Jared Conard Black, Christian Riley Garcia, Clayton Horn, Sabika Aziz Sheikh and 10 Rice. 42 203. As a result of this battery, as alleged, Christopher Jake Stone, whose estate is represented herein by Plaintiffs Christopher Stone and Rosie Yanas, suffered personal injuries that resulted in his death, and damages including signi?cant pain, suffering, fear of impending death; awareness of impending death and other compensable injuries and damages, all to the damage of his estate in an amount to be determined at a trial of this matter. 204. As a result of this battery, Aaron Kyle McLeod, whose estate is represented herein by Plaintiffs-Intervenors Mark McLeod and Gail McLeod, suffered personal injuries that resulted in his death, and damages including signi?cant pain, suffering, fear of impending death; awareness of impending death and other compensable injuries and damages, all to the damage of his estate in an amount to be determined at a trial of this matter. 205. As a result of this battery, Jared Conard Black, whose estate is represented herein by Plaintiff-Intervenor Pamela Stanich, suffered personal injuries that resulted in his death, and damages including signi?cant pain, suffering, fear of impending death; awareness of impending death and other compensable injuries and damages, all to the damage of his estate in an amount to be determined at a trial of this matter. 206. As a result of this battery, Christian Riley Garcia, whose estate is represented herein by Plaintiff-Intervenor Shannan Claussen, suffered personal injuries that resulted in his death, awareness of impending death; and other compensable injuries and damages, all to the damage of his estate in an amount to be determined at a trial of this matter. 207. As a result of this battery, Plaintiff Clayton Horn suffered personal injuries and damages including signi?cant past and future pain, suffering, disability, emotional distress, dis?gurement, and loss of enjoyment of life; past and future medical expenses; past wage loss and impairment of future earning capacity; severe emotional distress in witnessing the injuries and 43 death of his peers; and other compensable injuries and damages, all to his damage in an amount to be determined at trial of matter. 208. As a result of this battery, Kimberly Vaughan, whose estate is represented herein by Plaintiff-Intervenor Rhonda Hart, suffered personal injuries that resulted in her death, awareness of impending death; and other compensable injuries and damages, all to the damage of her estate in an amount to be determined at a trial of this matter. 209. As a result of this battery, Sabika Aziz Sheikh, whose estate is represented herein by Plaintiffs-Intervenors Abdul Aziz and Farah Naz, suffered personal injuries that resulted in her death, awareness of impending death; and other compensable injuries and damages, all to the damage of her estate in an amount to be determined at a trial of this matter. 210. As a result of this battery, Flo Rice suffered personal injuries and damages including signi?cant past and future pain, suffering, disability, emotional distress, dis?gurement, and loss of enjoyment of life; past and future medical expenses; past wage loss and impairment of future earning capacity; severe emotional distress in witnessing the injuries and death of others; and other compensable injuries and damages, all to her damage in an amount to be determined at trial of matter. VI. WRONGFUL DEATH AND SURVIVAL CLAIMS 21 1. Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors, individually and as next friends of Christopher Stone, Aaron Kyle McLeod, Jared Conard Black, Christian Riley Garcia, Kimberly Vaughan, and Sabika Aziz Sheikh are statutory bene?ciaries of the deceased. Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs- Intervenors are therefore entitled to bring these causes of action pursuant to the Texas Wrongful Death Act and Texas Survival Statutes set out in Texas Civ. Prac. Rem. Code Ch. 71. Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors, as heirs and next friends of Christopher Jake Stone, Aaron Kyle 44 McLeod, Jared Conard Black, Christian Riley Garcia, Kimberly Vaughan, and Sabika Aziz Sheikh seek damages for the injuries and deaths of the deceased and their own consequent injuries and damages. VII. COMPENSATORY DAMAGES 212. Plaintiffs Christopher Stone and Rosie Yanas are the surviving parents of Christopher Jake Stone, who was ?fteen years old at the time of his death. His parents have lost the love, support, nurture and companionship they would have shared with their son for the rest of their lives. Further, as a result of the wrongful death of Christopher Jake Stone, his estate is entitled to seek damages for the pain, suffering, and mental anguish he suffered prior to his death, and the damages his estate will have incurred for his funeral and burial expenses 213. Plaintiffs-Intervenors Mark McLeod and Gail McLeod are the surviving parents of Aaron Kyle McLeod, who was ?fteen years old at the time of his death. His parents have lost the love, support, nurture and companionship they would have shared with their son for the rest of their lives. Further, as a result of the wrongful death of Aaron Kyle McLeod, his estate is entitled to seek damages for the pain, suffering, and mental anguish he suffered prior to his death, and the damages his estate will have incurred for his funeral and burial expenses. 214. Plaintiff-Intervenor Pamela Stanich is the surviving parent of Jared Conard Black, who was seventeen years old at the time of his death. His mother has lost the love, support, nurture and companionship she would have shared with her son for the rest of their lives. Further, as a result of the wrongful death of Jared Conard Black, his estate is entitled to seek damages for the pain, suffering, and mental anguish he suffered prior to his death, and the damages his estate will have incurred for his funeral and burial expenses 45 215. Plaintiff-Intervenor Shannan Claussen is the surviving parent of Christian Riley Garcia, who was ?fteen years old at the time of his death. His mother has lost the love, support, nurture and companionship she would have shared with her son for the rest of their lives. Further, as a result of the wrongful death of Christian Riley Garcia, his estate is entitled to seek damages for the pain, suffering, and mental anguish he suffered prior to his death, and the damages his estate will have incurred for his funeral and burial expenses. 216. Plaintiff-Intervenor Clayton Horn suffered injuries to his arm, elbow, leg and other parts of his body as a result of gunshot wounds in?icted by Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis. In all reasonable probability, Plaintiff-Intervenor Clayton Horn will continue to suffer in this manner for a long time into the future, if not for the balance of his natural life. The injuries have had a serious effect on Plaintiff-Intervenor Clayton Hom?s health and well-being. 217. Plaintiff-Intervenor Rhonda Hart is the surviving parent of Kimberly Vaughan, who was fourteen years old at the time of her death. Her mother has lost the love, support, nurture and companionship she would have shared with her daughter for the rest of their lives. Further, as a result of the wrongful death of Kimberly Vaughan, her estate is entitled to seek damages for the pain, suffering, and mental anguish she suffered prior to her death, and the damages her estate will have incurred for her funeral and burial expenses. 218. Plaintiffs-Intervenors Abdul Aziz and Farah Naz are the surviving parents of Sabika Aziz Sheikh, who was seventeen years old at the time of her death. Her parents have lost the love, support, nurture and companionship they would have shared with their daughter for the rest of their lives. Further, as a result of the wrongful death of Sabika Aziz Sheikh, her estate is entitled to seek damages for the pain, suffering, and mental anguish she suffered prior to her death, and the damages her estate will have incurred for her funeral and burial expenses. 46 219. Plaintiff-Intervenor Flo Rice suffered injuries to her legs, head and other parts of her body as a result of gunshot wounds in?icted by Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis. Plaintiff? Intervenor Flo Rice now has an 18 inch titanium rod in her left leg, has PTSD, and walks with the assistance of a cane. In all reasonable probability, Plaintiff-Intervenor Flo Rice will continue to suffer in this manner for along time into the future, if not for the balance of her natural life. The injuries have had a serious effect on Plaintiff-Intervenor Flo Rice?s health and well-being. 220. The acts and omissions of Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis, Rose Marie Kosmetatos, Dimitrios Pagourtzis, Red Stag and the Luckygunner Defendants were each a proximate cause of the deaths of Chris, Kyle, Jared, Riley, Kimberly, and Sabika and the injuries of Clayton and Flo. As a result thereof, Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors have suffered damages, including the following elements: a. Medical expenses; b. Burial expenses; 0. Lost wages; d. Physical pain and suffering; e. Mental anguish; and f. Dis?gurement. DAMAGES 221. At the time Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos permitted their son to access the ?rearms, they were acting with reckless disregard for the safety of others. Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos possessed information that alerted them that Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis was likely to harm himself or others. Their gross 47 negligence was a proximate cause of the damages to Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors who are entitled to recover exemplary or punitive damages. 222. The conduct of Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis and Rose Marie Kosmetatos, when reviewed objectively from their standpoint at the time of the conduct, involved an extreme degree of risk, considering the probability and magnitude of the potential harm to others, and they were actually, subjectively aware of the risk involved, but nevertheless proceeded with conscious indifference to the rights, safety, or welfare of others. 223. At the time the Luckygunner Defendants and Defendant Red Stag illegally and negligently sold and delivered ammunition to 17-year-old Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis, they were acting with reckless disregard for the safety of others. The Luckygunner Defendants and Defendant Red Stag knew that selling and delivering ammunition to juveniles was dangerous and illegal, yet the Luckygunner Defendants designed their webstore to af?rmatively avoid verifying their customers? age, and Defendant Red Stag knew that the Luckygunner webstore was designed in this manner. Their gross negligence was a proximate cause of the damages to Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors who are entitled to recover exemplary or punitive damages. 224. The conduct of the Luckygunner Defendants and Defendant Red Stag, when reviewed objectively from their standpoint at the time of the conduct, involved an extreme degree of risk, considering the probability and magnitude of the potential harm to others, and they were actually, subjectively aware of the risk involved, but nevertheless proceeded with conscious indifference to the rights, safety, or welfare of others. 225. At the time Defendant Dimitrios Pagourtzis used firearms to shoot and kill 10 people and injure 13 more, he was acting with the intent to cause substantial injury to his victims. 48 His malicious actions were a proximate cause of the damages to Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs- Intervenors who are entitled to recover exemplary or punitive damages. IX. PREJUDGMENT INTEREST 226. In addition to the above and foregoing allegations, Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs- Intervenors further plead that they are entitled to prejudgment interest at the highest rate allowed by law. X. REQU EST FOR DISCLOSURE 227. Under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194.1, Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors request that Defendants disclose, within 50 days of the service of this request, the information or material described in Rule 194.2(a) through (1) (to the extent not previously disclosed). XI. AUTHENTICATION AND PRESERVATION 228. In accordance with Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 193.7, notice is hereby given that Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors intend to use at trial and/or in pre-trial proceedings, all documents produced in discovery. Defendants are hereby given notice that any document or other material, including electronically stored information, that may be evidence or relevant to any issue in this case is to be preserved in its present form until this litigation is concluded. Pursuant to the doctrine of spoliation, as that term is understood in Texas law, Defendants are further placed on notice of their obligation to safeguard and preserve all documents or other physical evidence now in their possession which might bear in any way upon either discovery or the discovery of admissible evidence in this case and of Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors? intention to seek sanctions of the Court should they fail, either intentionally or by neglect, to do so. 49 XII. PRAYER WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors pray that Defendants Antonios Pagourtzis, Rose Marie Kosmetatos, Dimitrios Pagourtzis, Red Stag, Luckygunner, MollenhourGross, Mollenhour and Gross be cited to appear and answer herein, and that upon ?nal hearing, Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors have judgement against Defendants, jointly and severally, for damages described, for costs of suit, pre-judgment interested permitted by law, and for such other relive, at law and in equity, to which Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs-Intervenors may show themselves justly entitled. Respectfully Submitted, MARTINEZ MCGUI PLLC Clint E. McGuire State Bar No. 24013139 17227 Mercury Drive, Suite Houston, Texas 77546 281-286-9100 281-286-9105 Fax Clint@mmtriallawyers.com Counsel for Plaintiffs Rosie Yanas and Christopher Stone and Plainti?r-Intervenors Mark Mcleod, Gail McCleod, Pamela Stanich, Shannan Claussen, Clayton Horn, Abdul Aziz, Farah Naz and Flo Rice EVERYTOWN LAW Alla Le?