Attorneys for Plaintiffs Burke
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
DONNA BURKE, for herself; DAVID BURKE and SCOTT BURKE, minors, by
and through
their Guardian Ad Litem, DONNA BURKE
Plaintiffs,
v.
TEEN HELP, a partnership; TRANQUILITY BAY, a corporation; THE
CARIBBEAN CENTER
FOR CHANGE, a corporation; WORLDWIDE ASSOCIATION OF SPECIALTY
PROGRAMS, a
corporation; BRIGHTWAY HOSPITAL, a corporation; RESOURCE
REALIZATIONS, a
corporation; R&B BILLING, a corporation; DIXIE CONTRACT SERVICES, a
corporation; TEEN ESCORT SERVICES, a corporation; KEN KAY; ROBERT B.
LICHFIELD; KARR FARNSWORTH; BRENT M. FACER; JAY KAY; JEAN DAVIS;
LORRAINE
BLACK; and DELBERT GOATES, M.D.; DAVID GILCREASE,
Defendants.
____________________________/
No.
COMPLAINT FOR NEGLIGENCE; NEGLIGENT CHILD ABUSE; FALSE IMPRISONMENT;
INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS; BREACH OF FIDUCIARY
DUTY; RICO;
NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
Come now plaintiffs, Donna Burke on behalf of herself, and David
Burke and
Scott Burke, by and through their Guardian Ad Litem, Donna Burke,
and allege
as follows:
PARTIES
1. Plaintiff
Donna Burke is the mother of the plaintiffs David Burke and
Scott Burke, who are minors, and appears for both herself and for
her minor
sons as their Guardian Ad Litem. David Burke and Scott Burke were
enrolled in
Tranquility
Bay
from 1997 to 1998. The Plaintiffs were, at all times
material, and are currently, all citizens of the State of Texas.
2. The
Worldwide Association of Specialty Programs is a non-profit
corporation organized under the laws of the State of Utah with its
principal
place of business in
St. George,
Utah,
of which Karr Farnsworth is the
Executive Director. It is an umbrella organization controlling and
regulating
all Teen Help programs. It is the alter ego of each and every other
named
entity defendant, being under the control of and responsible to a
centralized
governing group of the named individual defendants, among others.
3. Teen Help
is a partnership organized under the laws of the State of Utah
and doing business in the State of Utah, nationally, and
internationally. It
is the alter ego of each and every other named defendant, Robert B.
Lichfield
being its general partner, and answers to a centralized governing
group of the
named individual defendants. It purports to help the parents of
troubled
adolescents find placement in appropriate treatment centers, but, in
practice,
only refers such parents to its own stable of youth camps. It is
the
defendants' marketing arm to recruit adolescent inmates for
Tranquility Bay,
Paradise Cove, Casa By The Sea, and other off-shore cult camps run
by some of
the other defendants.
4.
Tranquility Bay is a corporation organized under the laws of the
State of
Utah and is doing business within in the State of
Utah,
nationally, and
internationally. It sometimes goes by the name of The Caribbean
Center For
Change. It is the alter ego of each and every other named
defendant, being
under the control of and responsible to a centralized governing
group of the
named individual defendants, among others. It is one of many closed
and
secret cult centers owned and operated by the defendants where
adolescents are
impounded, tortured, berated, brainwashed, and otherwise abused by
the defendants.
5. Brightway
Hospital was at all times material a corporation organized and
licensed under the laws of the State of Utah and was doing business
within the
State of
Utah. It is the alter ego of each and every other named
defendant,
being under the control of and responsible to a centralized
governing group of
the named individual defendants. It purported to be an adolescent
treatment
center which, among other things, conducted psychological
evaluations. In
reality, Brightway was a lock-down facility to which kidnapped
adolescents
were transported and held before being placed in and transported to
various
cult centers owned and operated by the defendants, among others.
Its
operation was so incompetent that the State of
Utah has
revoked its hospital license.
6. Dixie
Contract Services is a corporation organized under the laws of the
State of
Utah and is doing business within in the State of
Utah,
nationally,
and internationally. It is the alter ego of each and every other
named
defendant, being under the control of and responsible to a
centralized
governing group of the named individual defendants, among others.
It hires
and directs so-called escort services to kidnap adolescent
candidates from
their homes, often in the middle of the night, and take them by
force to
Brightway hospital for psychological screening and passport
procurement before
being transported abroad.
7. R & D
Billing is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of
Utah and is doing business within in the State of
Utah,
nationally, and
internationally. It is the alter ego of each and every other named
defendant, being under the control of and responsible to a
centralized
governing group of the named individual defendants, among others.
It bills
and collects exorbitant fees charged by the various Teen Help cult
centers by
misrepresenting to insurance companies that the Teen Help programs
are either
therapeutic or educational depending on the coverage available.
8. Resource
Realizations is a corporation organized under the laws of the
State of
Utah and is doing business within in the State of
Utah,
nationally,
and internationally. It is the alter ego of each and every other
named
defendant, being under the control of and responsible to a
centralized
governing group of the named individual defendants, among others.
It plans
and conducts the behavior modification seminars for inductees and
their
parents, which modifies the values and impairs the psychological
health of
both groups.
9. Robert B.
Lichfield is an owner, partner, shareholder, or otherwise
directs the conduct and activities of each and every named corporate
or
partnership defendant.
10. Karr
Farnsworth was, at all times material, an owner, partner,
shareholder, or otherwise directed the conduct and activities of
each and
every named corporate or partnership defendant.
11. Brent M.
Facer was, at all times material, an owner, partner,
shareholder, or otherwise directed the conduct and activities of
each and
every named corporate or partnership defendant.
12. Jay Kay
was, at all times material, the director of Jamaica Bay, and an
owner, partner, shareholder, or otherwise directed the conduct and
activities
of each and every named corporate or partnership defendant.
13. Jean
Davis, a citizen of
Jamaica,
was, at all times material, an employee
of some or all of the other defendants, and the director of Jamaica
Bay III.
14. Lorraine
Black, a citizen of
Jamaica,
was, at all times material, an
employee of some or all of the other defendants, and the case worker
assigned
to Scott Burke.
15. Delbert
Goates, M.D. was, at all times material, a citizen of the State
of Utah, and a psychiatrist attached to
Brightway
Hospital.
He purported to
screen enrollees into the Teen Help programs, but routinely rendered
services
of no value for which he separately billed the parents abandoning
their
children to Teen Help amounts in addition to the exorbitant fees
they were
already paying. Furthermore, he routinely allowed into the program
young
people who either were ineligible under any standard to be
incarcerated by the
defendants or who were so mentally ill that they should have been
hospitalized
someplace clinically sound.
16. David
Gilcrease was, at all times material, a citizen of the State of
Utah, and the director of Resource Realizations, Inc. He is an
owner,
partner, shareholder, or otherwise directed the conduct and
activities of each
and every other named corporate or partnership defendant. He runs
introductory secret TASK seminars designed to brain wash the child
and use him
to recruit the parents into the program. If the parents refuse to
participate
in the seminars, they are not allowed to talk to their children who
have
participated. Due to the seminars, the children become co-dependent
upon the
defendants, and so do the parents once they attend. If the parents
do not
attend, their children, due to the dogmas taught, perceive
themselves as elite
and isolated from their parents, and come to belong to the
defendants more
than they belong to their parents.
17. Doe
defendants I through X are persons unknown to the plaintiffs but who
will be added to the complaint when their identity is ascertained.
18. In all
things herein alleged and at all times material, all defendants
were acting as agents for or joint venturers with the other
defendants.
JURISDICTION
19.
Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331
and
1332(a)(1). The matter in controversy exceeds the sum of Seventy
Five
Thousand Dollars, exclusive of interest and costs.
VENUE
20. Venue is
appropriate in this Court pursuant to the provisions of 28
U.S.C. § 1391(a) and (c).
FACTS
21. Donna
Burke was, in 1997, a single mother of two sons, David, aged 16
years, and Scott, aged 14 years. She had been previously divorced
from her
wealthy husband, David Burke, who goes by the name "Stoney". His
new wife,
Lynda, was, at all times material, a family law judge in Houston,
Texas.
Defendants have exploited her judicial position by retaining her as
one of
their recruiters.
22. Shortly
before August, 1997, Scott Burke, then living with his mother,
had begun to experiment with marijuana and engage in minor
truancies. Donna
informed Stoney of this behavior, and encouraged him to take greater
part in
their son's life. In response, Stoney, without telling Donna,
obtained a
custody order from family court which he delivered to defendants,
directing
them to abduct Scott by force from his middle school while it was in
session
into the Teen Help program.
23. In
August, 1997, they did so, and took Scott to Brightway Hospital,
where they forcibly detained him on the pretext of psychological
evaluation
while they speedily got his passport. Dr. Goates, meanwhile,
administered
medications to keep Scott from fighting back.
24. Donna
was frantic that her son Scott had suddenly disappeared from
school and was nowhere to be found. She eventually learned that he
had been
abducted into Teen Help. When she finally discovered that he had
been taken
out of the country to Jamaica, she tried by telephone to contact
him, but was
told by defendants, both in Utah and Jamaica, that she would not be
allowed
any contact. She then resorted to writing letters, but later
learned that not
one of them had been delivered to Scott.
25. Donna
then began to fear that the same fate awaited her older son, David.
In contrast to Scott, David was a model son, obedient to all rules,
respectful of authority, an "A" student, and a star soccer player at
his high
school. David, however, had been ill as a result of an Epstein-Barr
virus
which had sidelined him for a year.
26. In
November, 1997, Defendants, at Stoney's behest and again, without
notice to Donna, abducted David by force from his high school while
it was in
session and took him to Brightway Hospital. There, Dr. Goates could
plainly
see that David had no behavioral or psychological problems that
would warrant
his being in the Teen Help program. Defendants, however, once in
possession
of David's passport and his father's money, shipped him off to
Jamaica as
well.
27. Both
David and Scott had already suffered from years of their father's
abuse caused by alcohol. David's response had been to become
totally obedient
and to achieve the highest standards, with which he father was never
satisfied. Scott rebelled, and had begun to act out his
frustrations over his
father's abandonment.
28. As if
these two fine young men had not suffered enough, Defendants began
to heap upon them the most sadistic and unwarranted physical and
psychological
abuse. Defendants subjected them to a steaming squalid jungle camp
infested
with flies, mosquitoes, scorpions, and vermin. The food was
primitive,
filthy, and meager. The so-called case workers were untrained,
unlettered,
and uncredentialed natives. Hygiene consisted of bathing by garden
hose
without soap. There was no ventilation in the buildings. There was
no
protection outdoors from the sun. Scott and David, both fair
skinned, were so
burned that their skin was cracking. Defendants deprived David of
his ulcer
medication and Scott's of his Attention Deficit Disorder medicine.
The boys
slept upon mattresses with no sheets with no protection from the
swarms of
insects. They were covered with bites.
29. Worse
still was the psychological abuse, by which punishment was meted
out for infractions so minor as to sink to the level of dementia.
The merest
glance away from one's paper in class, or moving without permission
could
result in severe punishment such as being forced to lie on the floor
for 24
hours without bathroom privileges and without letting one's chin
touch the
floor. Monitors were everywhere, and there was never any privacy.
Donna was
not allowed to telephone. Her mail never reached the boys, and
their's to her
reflected predictable nothingness.
30. Whereas,
from Defendants' video advertisement, Donna initially thought
that there might be some merit in Scott's being at Tranquility Bay,
David's
abduction made no sense whatsoever, and finally woke her to the fact
that
something was wrong. David's friends held a car wash to raise money
for her
airfare to
Jamaica.
31. She went
with her brother in March, 1998. There, she saw first hand the
terrible condition of her sons, their surroundings, food, and the
prison
environment in which they were subsisting. After traveling several
hours by
plane and five hours by taxi, she arrived to a most stilted visit.
A staff
member lurked within five feet so that there was no privacy. After
only four
hours, when she was forced to leave, her sons clinged to her,
begging her not
to go.
32. Her
custody fight with Stoney proceeded in the Houston courts. Walter
Mahoney, the court-appointed counsel for Scott and David, went to
visit them
in Jamaica,
but spent no time with them and did nothing to get them out of the
program. The court-appointed psychologist, Richard Austin, Ph.D.,
was no more
effective.
33. About
this time, David Van Blarrigan's attempt to free himself from
Tranquility
Bay
hit the news. Donna was galvanized by the plight of other
captives. She became militant and determined to rescue her sons.
In August,
1998, she returned unannounced to Jamaica with a female colleague.
They got
by the guard at the barbed wire compound called Tranquility Bay III,
in a
valley 45 minutes from the seaside compound. She saw the bedraggled
young men without shoes and covered with bites, rashes, and chemical
burns. Being away from the coast the heat was stifling, even for a
Houston resident. The smell
of raw sewage was overpowering. Donna reprimanded the director,
Jean Davis,
for allowing such conditions. The behavior of some captives showed
should
have been hospitalized in mental institutions. Others, like David,
should not
have been there at all.
34. At the hotel, Donna met a woman who was taking her son out.
Donna
returned and demanded that her sons be released to her. Tranquility
Bay
personnel telephoned Stoney, who refused. Lorraine Black, Scott's
case
worker, who was uneducated, told Donna, who is highly educated, that
she was
crazy and was the reason that her sons were in the program. The
entire
compound, and especially her sons, were punished for Donna's
disruption as a
warning to parents who show up without permission and unannounced.
35. The
boys were allowed telephone communication with their father, but not
with their mother. Defendants further breached the biological
family unit by
appointing among the native staff "fathers" and "mothers" and
organizing
groups of captives into "families". These surrogate parents, by
demanding the
strictest obedience to their every whim, engendered the
co-dependence upon
which the program thrives, further breaking the will and spirit of
Donna's two
sons. When she left this time, Scott slipped a note in her pocket
asking to
come home. When this note got to the family law judge, and then,
through
counsel, to Stoney, he notified Tranquility Bay, and Scott was
punished.
36. David
was released on November 30, 1998, and Scott on
December 23, 1998.
Both are changed from the wonderful, spontaneous young men that they
were before Tranquility Bay into robotic victims, afraid of any
authority figure.
They have lost their individuality, their spirits are broken, and
their
characters ruined. Instead of independent men, they are afraid,
haunted by
nightmares, subject to panic attacks, and refuse to go anywhere near
a beach.
If a voice is raised, they dissolve in fear. They never voice an
opinion of
their own, fearful that it might not find approval. Even if they
are
troubled or sad, they mask it by saying that everything is fine.
They no
longer feel. If Defendants broke an occasional bad habit, they did
it by
breaking the lad himself.
37. Whereas
Donna had raised these young men with no help from an absent,
alcoholic father, and was their mainstay throughout their adolescent
years,
they now regard her as powerless. Defendants took them from her and
she could
not get them back. They became dependent on Defendants instead of
their
mother, and Defendants destroyed Donna's relationship with her
sons. Now,
they trust no one, not even God.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
(Negligence)
38.
Defendants owed Plaintiffs a duty to screen David and Scott in order
to
protect them from induction into a boorish and brutal program whose
rigors
might foreseeably injure them. Defendants breached their duty by
failing to
screen the boys out of their program and, to the contrary, by
admitting them
into a program which they knew, or should have known, would be
detrimental to them.
39.
Defendants owed Plaintiffs a duty to consult some reputable
psychiatrist
to see whether or not the boys should even be in a sadistic program
of this
nature.
40.
Defendants owed Plaintiffs a duty not to induct the boys into their
program unless and until they had the informed consent of both
parents having
legal custody of the boys.
41.
Defendants owed Plaintiffs a duty to employ, or at least engage,
professionals qualified to address any specific needs which
legitimately
justified the boys' induction and retention into such a program.
42.
Defendants breached their duty by inducting the boys into their
demented
program, by failing to engage quality professional help, and by
punishing the
boys as criminals instead of addressing any specific need justifying
their
presence at
Tranquility
Bay.
43.
Defendants' conduct proximately caused the boys personal injury and
emotional distress from and after their 1998 induction to date.
Defendants
conduct foreseeably and proximately caused Donna Burke grievous
emotional
distress over the welfare and safety of her sons and cost her many
thousands
of dollars to fund the benighted treatment they received, the
emotional scars
from which will probably last a life time.
44.
Defendants' conduct was malicious, wanton, and in reckless disregard
of
the boys' health, safety and welfare, by reason of which they are
entitled to
recover punitive damages against them.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment as hereafter stated.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
(Negligent Child Abuse)
45.
Plaintiffs incorporate by this reference paragraphs 1 through 37 as
if
stated in full.
46.
Defendants, while having the care, custody and control of the boys
as a
surrogates for their mother, had a duty to promote their health,
safety, and
welfare. Instead, Defendants breached their duty to the boys by
isolating
them and keeping them prisoner in Jamaica where:
a. they
negligently removed them from the United States without mother's
consent,
b. they
negligently subjected them to conditions and circumstances likely
to produce great bodily harm,
c. they
negligently inflicted upon them unjustifiable physical pain and
mental suffering.
d. They
negligently caused them to suffer pain, thirst, fatigue, and
confinement.
e. they
negligently caused or permitted them to be injured and infected,
and
f. they
negligently caused and permitted them to be placed in such a
situation that their emotional and physical health was endangered
and impaired.
47.
Defendants conduct proximately caused Plaintiffs personal injury and
emotional distress.
48.
Defendants conduct was malicious, wanton and in reckless disregard
of
the boys' health, safety and welfare, by reason of which they are
entitled to
recover punitive damages.
WHEREFORE,
Plaintiffs pray for judgment as hereafter stated.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
(False Imprisonment)
49.
Plaintiffs incorporate by this reference paragraphs 1 through 37 as
if
stated in full.
50. The boys
learned upon arrival at
Tranquility
Bay that their mother was
unaware of its purpose and program. They sought at that time to
communicate
with her and to leave the program, but Tranquility Bay censored
their mail,
restrained them from any contact with the outside world, and
refused to
permit their return home.
51.Tranquility Bays imprisonment of the boys without adjudication
caused
them serious and permanent emotional distress, and psychological
injury.
52.
Tranquility Bay's conduct was malicious, wanton and in reckless
disregar
of the boys' health, safety and welfare, by reason of which they are
entitled
to recover punitive damages.
WHEREFORE,
Scott and David pray for judgment against Defendants as hereafter
stated.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress)
53.
Plaintiffs incorporate by this reference paragraphs 1 through 37 as
if
stated in full.
54.
Tranquility Bay's philosophy of tormenting and intimidating the
boys,
invading their privacy, depriving them of nutritious and wholesome
food,
proper sanitation, educational opportunities, exposing them to
denigrating
immoral and filthy conditions, subjecting them to imprisonment,
attempting to
break their will, inflicting unjust punishment, depriving them of
legal
rights, keeping them in isolation, depriving them of the care,
comfort,
support, and sustenance of their mother, and other demented conduct,
caused
the boys personal injury and mental and emotional distress.
55.
Defendants' conduct in depriving the boys of their mother's society,
companionship, and communication caused them grief, anxiety and
worry.
56.
Defendants' conduct was in reckless disregard of Plaintiffs' health,
safety and welfare, by reason of which Plaintiffs are entitled to
recover
punitive damages.
WHEREFORE,
Plaintiffs pray for judgment as hereafter stated.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Breach of Fiduciary Duty)
57.
Plaintiffs incorporate by this reference paragraphs 1 through 37 as
if
stated in full.
58. By
seeking, and obtaining physical custody of the boys from their
mother, and thereafter, by placing them and retaining them in a
captive and
abusive environment of their own making, Defendants undertook a
fiduciary duty
toward the boys to protect and promote their health, safety and
welfare.
59.
Defendants, in the manner described above, breached their fiduciary
duty
as a parental surrogates, which proximately caused the boys to
sustain pain,
suffering, bodily injury and mental and emotional distress, and
caused the
boys great mental and emotional anxiety.
60.
Defendants' conduct was malicious, wanton and in reckless disregard
of
Plaintiffs trust and of the boys' health, safety and welfare, by
reason of
which Plaintiffs are entitled to recover punitive damages.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants as
hereafter stated.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(RICO)
61.
Plaintiffs incorporate by this reference paragraphs 1 through 37 as
if
stated in full.
62. As part
of a scheme and artifice to defraud, and as a means by which
Defendants could obtain money from families having sons about whose
associations, values, study habits, or good citizenship they were
concerned,
Defendants falsely represented to the boys' mother that they were
adept in
behavioral modification for teenagers; that inductees would have
one-on-one
support and guidance by trained and caring counselors; and that the
program
was safe, wholesome, positive, and beneficial. Defendants concealed
that the
program was cultist, coercive, and criminal.
63.
Defendants further made these misrepresentations and indulged in
these
concealments not only to Donna, but to the boys, and the parents of
numerous
other young men inducted into Tranquility Bay.
64. None of
the above stated representations was true, but instead all of
the above stated representations were false, and were made to the
parents of
the young men inducted or kidnapped into the Tranquility Bay program
with the
intent and for the purpose of causing the parents to pay Defendants
large
amounts of money per month per boy enrolled, even though the cost
for the
services rendered was negligible and the services themselves were
demented,
dangerous, and detrimental.
65. The
excessive amount charged by Defendants for the privilege of abusing
David and Scott Burke, and other young men, was fraudulent in that
it was
both far in excess of the actual costs incurred for the abuse meted
out, but
was fraudulent as well in advancing the ruse that Defendants were
providing a
therapeutic, social, and educational experience approximating in
value the
monthly amount charged, including normal operating and overhead
expenses.
66.
Tranquility Bay always reported to Donna Burke and other parents
over
telephone lines that her sons were enjoying the program when in
reality,
Defendants knew that the respective parents' sons were being
tormented and
abused by
Tranquility
Bay so as to become no better than obedient dogs, and
worse off than when they came into the program. Notwithstanding
such
knowledge, Defendants continued to market Tranquility Bay as a
positive and
wholesome experience, and paid returning survivors of the program
to recruit
other parents and their sons to Tranquility Bay by misrepresenting
the nature
and benefits of the program. Defendants made all of the
above-referenced
fraudulent and untrue statements knowing them to be untrue or
knowing that
they had no information to support the truth of their statements.
This, they
did for the purpose and toward the end that the parents of the
enrolled and
captive children would not withdraw their children from the program,
but
instead, would continue to pay the excessive fees charged by
Tranquility Bay
for keeping their children in the program.
67. All of
Defendants' concealment, propounded falsities, and
misrepresentations of true facts were made by telephone or by
letters sent
through the
United States
mails. All of Tranquility Bay's remittances and
payments obtained by Defendants' fraudulent representations were
received
through the
United States
mails across state lines.
68.
Defendants' knowing and intentional failure to disclose material
facts
and their deliberate misrepresentation of material facts in
conjunction with
the telephone conversations and letters, checks and other
remittances sent
through the United States mails described above constitute repeated
violations
of 18 USC §1342 relating to wire fraud and 18 USC §1341 relating to
mail
fraud, and further constitute acts of racketeering activity as that
term is
defined in 18
USC §1961(1)(b).
69.
Defendants are capable of holding a legal or beneficial interest in
property and are persons subject to the Racketeer Influenced and
Corrupt
Organizations Act pursuant to 18 USC §1961(3).
70. The
individual defendants were associated in fact through their
management and operation of Tranquility Bay and its alter ego
entities, which
association in fact constituted an enterprise as the term enterprise
is
defined in 18
USC §1961(4).
71. During
all relevant time,
Tranquility
Bay was an enterprise as the term
enterprise is defined in 18
USC
§1961(4).
72. During
all relevant time, the individual defendants constituted an
enterprise as the term enterprise is defined in 18 USC §1961(4).
73. The wire
frauds and mail frauds perpetrated by the defendants upon the
plaintiffs constituted a pattern of racketeering activity consisting
of more
than two acts of racketeering activity, all of which occurred after
the
effective date of 18
USC §1961 et seq.
74.
Defendants used income derived from the above-described pattern of
racketeering in the operation of their enterprises, the activities
of which
affected interstate commerce, in violation of 18 USC §1962(b).
75. The
individual defendants acquired and maintained control of the
enterprise, the activities of which affected interstate commerce, in
violation
of 18 USC §1962(b).
76.
Defendants conducted or participated in the conduct of the
enterprise
through the above-described pattern of racketeering activity which
enterprise's activities affected interstate commerce in violation of
18 USC §1961(c).
77.
Defendants conspired with each other to violate 18 USC §1962 (a),
(b),
and (c) in violation of §1962(d).
78. As a
direct and proximate result of the foregoing violation of 18 USC
§1962 by Defendants, the Plaintiffs have sustained injury to their
family and
property in an undetermined amount believed to be in excess of
$500,000, plus interest.
WHEREFORE,
Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants as hereafter stated.
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress)
79.
Plaintiffs incorporate by this reference paragraphs 1 through 37 as
if
stated in full.
80.
Defendant parental surrogates had a duty not to injure the boys ,
either
physically or psychologically, but to instruct, educate, and promote
their
physical and psychological well-being consistent with Defendants
representations to their mother and their statutory surrogate
duties.
Defendants, however, negligently placed the boys in their own
confined
environment peopled by sadistic, controlling, untrained persons of
low
intelligence posing as counselors who, without cause, berated,
tormented,
ridiculed, belittled, scolded, deprived, and demeaned the boys so
as to make
them a compliant supplicant of Tranquility Bay, and thereby either
capture
their loyalty or coerce them by fear and threats into supporting
Tranquility
Bays fraudulent scheme to profit from the misery it inflicted upon
the boys
and other minors within its control.
81.
Defendants' conduct was malicious, wanton, and in reckless disregard
of
the boys' health, safety and welfare, by reason of which Plaintiffs
are
entitled to recover punitive damages.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment as follows:
FIRST CAUSE
OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE:
a. Special damages according to proof.
b. General damages according to proof
c. Punitive damages according to proof
SECOND CAUSE
OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENT CHILD ABUSE:
a. Special damages according to proof.
b. General damages according to proof
c. Punitive damages according to proof
THIRD CAUSE
OF ACTION FOR FALSE IMPRISONMENT:
a. Special damages according to proof.
b. General damages according to proof.
c. Punitive damages according to proof.
FOURTH CAUSE
OF ACTION FOR INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS:
a. Special damages according to proof.
b. General damages according to proof.
c. Punitive damages according to proof.
FIFTH CAUSE
OF ACTION FOR BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY:
a. Special damages according to proof.
b. General damages according to proof.
c. Punitive damages according to proof.
SIXTH CAUSE
OF ACTION FOR RICO VIOLATIONS:
a. Special damages according to proof.
b. General damages according to proof trebled.
c. Punitive damages according to proof.
d. Attorneys fees according to proof.
SEVENTH
CAUSE OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
a. Special damages according to proof.
b. General damages according to proof.
c. Punitive damages according to proof.
Dated: April 29, 1999
____________________
|