Equine Law Matter - Closed - Get Information, Read Court Documents

DR. CESAR PARRA, Plaintiff, HUNTERDON COUNTY SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS, (HUNTERDON SPCA), ASHLEY MEYER, et al, Defendants.

No. Hnt – L-121-14

Hunterdon County

COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

The Plaintiff,.DR. CESAR PARRA. residing at … Whitehouse Station,
County of Hunterdon, State of New Jersey, by way of Complaint against the Defendants, says:
BACKGROUND
l. Plaintiff was a bond fide resident of the State of New Jersey when this cause of
action arose, and resides at Whitehouse Station, Hunterdon County, New Jersey
08889.
2. The Defendant, HUNTERDON COUNTY SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION
OF CRUELTY OF ANIMALS (Hunterdon SPCA) is an organization established pursuant to
N.J.S.A. 4:22·9, ct seq., with a principal place of business located at 576 Stamets Road, Milford,
Hunterdon County, New Jersey.
3. The Defendant, ASHLEY MEYER, is or was an employee/agent of the Defendant
Hunterdon SPCA with a last known address of .
4. On or about March 14, 2012, the Defendant Ashley Meyer, acting individually
and/or on behalf of the Hunterdon SPCA caused to be filed two criminal complaints and two
civil summonses against the Plaintiff, Dr. Cesar Parra.
5. Complaint No. 1022·SC-004603 charged the Plaintiff with a criminal violation of
NJ.S.A. 4:22-17(b)(l), torment/torture of a living animal. The criminal activity is alleged to
have occurred on or about June 6, 2009.
6. On or about May 23, 2012 the Hunterdon County Prosecutor’s Office summarily
dismissed criminal Complaint No. I 022-S C-004603 on the grounds that there lacked sufficient
probable cause to file the Complaint and prosecute the Plaintiff.
7. Complaint No. I 022-SC-004602 charged the Plaintiff with a criminal violation of
N.J.S.A. 4:22-l7(a)(l), overdriving, overworking and needlessly abusing and killing a living
animal. The criminal activity is alleged to have occurred on or about June 6, 2009.
8. On April 5, 2012, the Readington Township Municipal Court dismissed
Complaint No. 1 022-SC-004602 as time-barred by the expiration of the applicable statute of
limitations.
9. Complaint No. 1022-SC-004604 charged the Plaintiff with a civil violation of
N.J.SA. 4:22-26(a)(l) for actions alleged to have occurred on June 6, 2009.
10. Complaint No. 1 022-SC-004605 charged the Plaintiff with a civil violation of
N.J.S.A. 4:22-26(a)(2) for actions alleged to have occurred on June 6, 2()09.
1!. Civil Complaints Nos. 1 022-SC 004604 and 1 022-SC 004605 were dismissed by
the North Hunterdon Municipal Court Prosecutor on or about July 12, 2012.
FIRST COUNT
(Libel and Defamation of Character)
12. The Plaintiff hereby repeats and reiterates the allegations of the first eleven
paragraphs of this Complaint, as if fully set forth herein.
13. The Defendant, Ashley Meyer, individually and on behalf of the Hunterdon
SPCA caused to be filed two (2) separate criminal and two (2) separate civil charges against the
Plaintiff which were completely baseless, without merit and without justifiable probable cause
for issuance.
14. All of the charges filed by the Defendants against the Plaintiff have been
dismissed and none of the facts set forth therein have been substantiated.
15. The charges filed by the Defendants against the Plaintiff were made recklessly,
negligently and without consideration of the truth or falsity of said charges or the reasonably
foreseeable damage to the Plaintiff’s career, business and professional reputation.
16. As a direct and proximate result of the filing of the two (2) criminal and two (2)
civil charges against the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff was forced to retain legal counsel at his own
expense and to defend said charges at great cost and expense.
17. As a direct and proximate remit of the filing of the two (2) criminal and two (2)
civil charges against the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff has been subjected to ridicule, public
embarrassment, harassment and defamation of his good character.
18. As a direct and proximate result of the filing of the two (2) criminal and two (2)
civil charges against the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff has suffered financial loss from his business and
economic damages attributable to the public disparagement of the Plaintiff within the field of
business he derives his living and income.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally,
as follows:
A. For compensatory and consequential damages.
B. For punitive damages.
C. For counsel fees and costs.
D. For such other relief as the Court deems proper and just.
SECOND COUNT
(Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress)
19. The Plaintiff hereby repeats and reiterates the allegations of the first eighteen
paragraphs of this Complaint, as if fully set forth herein.
20. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of the Defendants, the Plaintiff has
suffered severe and debilitating emotional distress.
21. The conduct of Defendants is so outrageous and offensive that the emotional
distress caused by the Plaintiff was clearly foreseeable and proximately caused by their actions.
22. Defendants are guilty of the common law of outrage. The behavior of the
Defendants rises to a level which would incense and outrage the sensibilities of any ordinary
person.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally
as follows:
A. For compensatory and consequential damages.
B. For punitive damages.
C. For counsel fees and costs.
D. For such other relief as the Court deems proper and just.
THIRD COUNT
(Fraud and Misrepresentation)
23. ‘The Plaintiff hereby repeats and reiterates the allegations of the first twenty-two
paragraphs of this Complaint, as if fully set forth herein.
24. The Defendant Ashley Meyer misrepresented and made false statements to Court
staff in the issuance of filing the four complaints against the Plaintiff
25. Defendant Ashley Meyer was aware or should have been aware that her
allegations against the Plaintiff were untrue, false and would lead to criminal charges being
brought against the Plaintiff. Defendant Meyer acted with reckless disregard for the truth and
fraudulently represented herself to Court personnel.
WHEREFORE:Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendant, Ashley Meyer as
follows:
A. for compensatory and consequential damages
B. For punitive damages
C. For counsel fees and costs.
D. For such relief as the Court deems proper and just.
FOURTH COUNT
(Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress)
26. The Plaintiff hereby repeats and reiterates the allegations of the first twenty-five
paragraphs of this Complaint, as if :fully set forth herein.
27. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of the Defendants, the Plaintiff has
suffered severe and debilitating emotional distress.
28. The conduct of Defendants was and is negligent and does not comport with the
actions of a reasonably prudent person. Defendants acted with negligent regard
for the truth and their actions were careless.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally,
as follows:
A. For compensatory and consequential damages.
B. For punitive damages.
C. For counsel fees and costs.
D. For such other relief as the Court deems proper and just.
FIFTH COUNT
(Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress)
26. The Plaintiff hereby repeats and reiterates the allegations of the first twenty-five
paragraphs of this Complaint, as if :fully set forth herein.
27. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of the Defendants, the Plaintiff has
suffered severe and debilitating emotional distress.
28. The conduct of Defendants was and is negligent and does not comport with the
actions of a reasonably prudent person. Defendants acted with negligent regard
for the truth and their actions were careless.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the’Defendants, jointly and severally,
as follows:
A. For compensatory and consequential damages.
B. For punitive damages.
C. For counsel fees and costs.
D. For such other relief as the Court deems proper and just.
FIFTH COUNT
(Negligent Interference with Prospective Economic Relations)
29. The Plaintiff hereby repeats and reiterates the allegations of the first twenty-eight
paragraphs of this Complaint, as if fully set forth herein.
30. The Defendant, Ashley Meyer, individually and on behalf of the Hunterdon
SPCA caused to be filed two (2) separate criminal and two (2) separate civil charges against the
Plaintiff which were completely baseless, without merit and without justifiable probable cause
for issuance
31. All of the charges filed by the Defendants against the Plaintiff have been
dismissed and none of the facts set forth therein have been substantiated.
32. The charges filed by the Defendants against the Plaintiff were made recklessly,
negligently and without consideration of the truth or falsity of said charges or the reasonably
foreseeable damage to the !Plaintiff’s ongoing business within the area of equine sales and
training which Defendants should have known.
33. Through the Defendants’ negligence as a direct and proximate result of the filing
of the two (2) criminal and two (2) civil charges against the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff’s business was
disrupted and Plaintiff sustained economic loss.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally,
as follows:
A. For compensatory and consequential damages.
B. For punitive damages.
C. For counsel fees and costs.
D, For such other relief as the Court deems proper and just.
SIXTH COUNT
(Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress)
34. The Plaintiff hereby repeats and reiterates the allegations of the first thirty-three
paragraphs of this Complaint, as if fully set forth herein.
35. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of the Defendants, the Plaintiff has
suffered severe and debilitating emotional distress.
36. The conduct of Defendants is so outrageous and offensive that the emotional
distress caused by the Plaintiff was clearly foreseeable and proximately caused by their actions.
37. Defendants are guilty of !he common law tort of outrage. The behavior of the
Defendants rises to a level which would incense and outrage the sensibilities of any ordinary
person.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally
as follows:
A. For compensatory and consequential damages.
B. For punitive damages.
C. For counsel fees and costs.
D. For such other relief as the Court deems proper and just.
SEVENTH COUNT
(John and Jane Does 1-10)
38. The Plaintiff hereby repeats and reiterates the allegations of the first thirty-seven
paragraphs of this Complaint, as if fully set forth herein.
39. To the extent that there exist persons or entities whose names and
identities are not presently known to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff alleges and asserts all of the
causes of action previously set forth in this Complaint against those individuals and reserves the
right to amend this Complaint as discovery reveals their identities. This includes additional
members of the SPCA or persons making false and malicious statements or comments about the
Plaintiff.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants John and Jane Does
1-10, as follows:
A. For compensatory and consequential damages.
B. For punitive damages.
C. For counsel fees and costs.
D. For such other relief as the Court deems proper and just.
JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff demands a trial by Jury on all counts of this Complaint.
CERTIFICATION PURSUENT TOR. 4:5-1
I hereby certify that this matter is not the subject of any other pending action in any other
court or arbitration proceeding contemplated and all known necessary parties have been joined in
this action.
Scholl, Whittlesey & Gruenberg, LLC
Franklin G. Whittlesey

View Complaint