Weems Lawsuit Vs Association of Related Churches

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 42

Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 1 of 42 PageID 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

CHARLES S. WEEMS, IV, an individual,


KERRI WEEMS, an individual,
and CELEBRATION
GLOBAL, INC., a Florida not for profit Case No.:
corporation, HONEY LAKE FARMS,
INC., a Florida not for profit corporation,
NORTHSTREAM MANAGEMENT
GROUP, LLC, a Florida limited liability
company, and WEEMS GROUP, LLC,
a Florida limited liability company,

Plaintiffs,

v.

ASSOCIATION OF RELATED CHURCHES,


a Texas not-for-profit corporation,
CHRIS HODGES, individually,
DINO RIZZO, individually, and
JOHN SEIBELING, individually,

Defendants.
/

COMPLAINT & DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiffs, Charles Stovall Weems, IV (“Pastor Weems”), Kerri Weems (“K.

Weems”), Celebration Global, Inc. (“Celebration Global”), Honey Lake Farms, Inc.

(“Honey Lake Farms”), NorthStream Management Group, LLC (“NorthStream”),

and Weems Group, LLC (“Weems Group”), sue Defendants, Association of Related

Churches (“ARC”), Chris Hodges (“Hodges”), Dino Rizzo (“Rizzo”), and John

Seibeling (“Seibeling”), and allege as follows:


Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 2 of 42 PageID 2

OVERVIEW OF THE CASE

1. This case arises out of a continuing unlawful conspiracy masterminded

by the Defendants to protect and expand their church growth business interests and

endeavors and the substantial income they generate by destroying Plaintiffs and

eliminating them as perceived threats and competitors, which included engineering a

takeover at Celebration Church of Jacksonville, Inc. (“Celebration Church”) to allow

Defendants to effectively gain control over its operations and substantial assets, cover-

up numerous criminal and tortious acts committed in the process, and frame the

Weemses’s for financial crimes they never committed.

2. Defendants were consumed by greed and the desire to advance their own

financial and business interests when they deliberately targeted Pastor Weems and

those closest to him because he rejected their unbridled church growth model and was

focused on missionary work and developing supporting businesses that Defendants

perceived as a significant threat to their economic interests.

3. Using ARC’s significant influence and power as a vehicle to facilitate and

conceal their nefarious scheme, Defendants intentionally caused substantial financial

and other irreparable harm to the Plaintiffs through a pattern of unlawful and often

criminal acts that included extortion, bribery, psychological abuse, wire fraud, and

computer crimes which ultimately caused over $100 million in damages.

4. This action seeks to hold Defendants accountable for their illegal and

tortious misconduct and put a stop to the substantial harm their unlawful actions

continue to cause.

2
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 3 of 42 PageID 3

PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE

5. This is an action for damages well in excess of $75,000.00, exclusive of

interest, costs, and attorneys’ fees, as well as equitable relief.

6. Plaintiff, Pastor Weems, is a resident and citizen of Duval County,

Florida.

7. Plaintiff, K. Weems, is a resident and citizen of Duval County, Florida.

8. Plaintiff, Celebration Global, is a Florida not for profit corporation with

its principal place of business located at 2627 Belfort Road, Jacksonville, Florida

32216.

9. Plaintiff, Honey Lake Farms, is a Florida not for profit corporation with

its principal place of business located at 2627 Belfort Road, Jacksonville, Florida

32216.

10. Plaintiff, NorthStream, is a Florida limited liability company with its

principal place of business located at 2627 Belfort Road, Jacksonville, Florida 32216,

whose sole members are Pastor Weems and K. Weems.

11. Plaintiff, Weems Group, is a Florida limited liability company with its

principal place of business located at 2627 Belfort Road, Jacksonville, Florida 32216,

whose sole members are Pastor Weems and K. Weems.

12. Defendant, ARC, is a Texas not-for-profit corporation with its principal

place of business located at 1201 Lee Branch Lane, Birmingham, AL 35242.

13. Defendant, Hodges, is a resident and citizen of Birmingham, Alabama.

14. Defendant, Rizzo, is a resident and citizen of Birmingham, Alabama.

3
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 4 of 42 PageID 4

15. Defendant, Seibeling, is a resident and citizen of Memphis, Tennessee.

16. Non-party, Celebration Church, is a Florida not-for-profit corporation

with its principal place of business at 9555 R.G. Skinner Parkway, Jacksonville,

Florida 32256.

17. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to

28 U.S.C. §1332 because it involves claims between citizens of different states with an

amount in controversy that exceeds the sum of $75,000.00, exclusive of interest and

costs.

18. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391, venue is proper in this District because a

substantial part of the events and omissions giving rise to the claims alleged herein

occurred in this District.

19. Defendants, directly and/or through employees, agents, authorized

representatives, co-conspirators, subsidiaries, affiliates, and/or other persons, entities,

and/or representatives acting under their management, direction, supervision, and/or

control, engaged in numerous contacts in, with, and/or directed at the state of Florida

upon which this action is based.

20. Defendants knowingly and intentionally entered into one or more

contracts or agreements, pursuant to which they, directly and/or through employees,

agents, authorized representatives, co-conspirators, subsidiaries, affiliates, and/or

other persons, entities, and/or representatives acting under their management,

direction, supervision, and/or control, committed and engaged in tortious and overt

acts within and directed at the state of Florida.

4
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 5 of 42 PageID 5

21. Based on the facts alleged throughout this Complaint, this Court has

personal jurisdiction over each Defendant under Section 48.193, Florida Statutes,

because they each personally, directly, in concert with one another, and/or through

an employee, agent, co-conspirator, subsidiary, affiliate, and/or other person or entity

acting under their management, supervision, direction, and/or control, engaged in one

or more of the following acts:

a. committing tortious acts within the state of Florida;

b. committing intentional torts expressly aimed at Florida,


effects of which were suffered in Florida;

c. operating, conducting, engaging in, or carrying on a


business or business venture within the state of Florida, or
having an office in Florida;

d. engaging in substantial and not isolated activity within the


state of Florida; and/or

e. engaging in a conspiracy to commit tortious acts against


Plaintiffs within the state of Florida and engaging in overt
acts in furtherance of that conspiracy within or directed at
the state of Florida.

22. Based on the facts alleged throughout this Complaint, sufficient

minimum contacts exist between each Defendant and the state of Florida to satisfy

Due Process under the United States Constitution because Defendants: (1) engaged

in substantial and not isolated activity within and directed at the state of Florida;

(2) conducted business through employees, agents, co-conspirators, and/or authorized

representatives located in the state of Florida; and/or (3) committed and conspired to

commit intentional torts expressly aimed at Florida, the effects and harms of which

were calculated to and did cause injury within the state of Florida. Accordingly, each

5
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 6 of 42 PageID 6

of the Defendants could and should have reasonably anticipated being sued for the

claims alleged herein in the state of Florida.

23. At all times material to this action, Defendants were the agents, licensees,

employees, partners, joint-venturers, co-conspirators, masters, and/or employers of

one another, and each of them acted within the course and scope of an agency, license,

partnership, employment, conspiracy, ownership, joint venture, or contractual

relationship with one another. At all times material to this action, each Defendant’s

acts, omissions, and misconduct alleged herein were known to, authorized, approved,

and/or ratified by the other Defendants; and/or Defendants engaged in such acts,

omissions, and misconduct in concert or active participation with one another or to

aid or abet one another.

24. Defendants conspired and agreed with each other and others to engage

in unlawful and tortious conduct intended to harm and injure Plaintiffs, in furtherance

of which Defendants and their agents and co-conspirators engaged in overt acts within

and directed at the state of Florida and could and should have reasonably anticipated

that the acts and omissions alleged herein connected them to Florida in a meaningful

way.

25. Defendants’ actions and misconduct alleged herein produced and/or

substantially contributed to producing the damages, injuries, and harms Plaintiffs

suffered, and for which they seek recovery and redress through this action; which

injuries and harms occurred in the state of Florida and the greatest effects of which

were suffered within the state of Florida.

6
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 7 of 42 PageID 7

26. All conditions precedent to the filing and maintenance of this action

have occurred, have been performed, and/or have been waived.

COMMON FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS TO ALL COUNTS

Overview of the Plaintiffs

27. Pastor Weems and K. Weems founded Celebration Church in 1998 and

devoted over 23 years of their lives to their church, its congregation, and its missions.

28. Initially, Celebration Church was comprised of a single site in

Jacksonville, Florida, but through years of dedication and sacrifice Pastor Weems and

K. Weems grew that single site into a global, multi-site, non-denominational church

with nearly 20,000 members.

29. Pastor Weems served as Celebration Church’s Senior Pastor, CEO, and

President from its inception until he was forced to resign and separate himself and his

family from the church on April 15, 2022.

30. As Senior Pastor of Celebration Church, Pastor Weems had sole

authority to set and shape the vision and direction of Celebration Church, and his

responsibilities included: (1) complete plenary authority, control, and responsibility

for directing missions and spiritual activities of the church; (2) serving as President and

Chief Executive Officer of the church and having authority to direct all of its day-to-

day operations, including establishing budgets, raising funds, and directing monies;

and (3) acting as Chairman of the Board.

7
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 8 of 42 PageID 8

31. Celebration Church’s Board of Trustees were nominated exclusively by

the Senior Pastor for one calendar-year terms and responsible for management and

oversight of its corporate matters and financial resources.

32. Celebration Church’s “Overseers” were nominated by the Senior Pastor

and confirmed by the Board of Trustees, provided apostolic oversight to the Senior

Pastor, and were charged with protecting the Church through counsel, prayer, and if

required, the investigation and discipline of the Senior Pastor.

The Weemses’s Anti-Growth Vision and Missionary Work

33. In 2018, Pastor Weems came to the realization that Celebration Church

had become too “corporate” and focused on generating attendance and revenue and

needed to concentrate on helping the poor, missionary work, equality, and simplifying

the church by creating alternative revenue streams that would make the church less

donation dependent.

34. Pastor Weems also came to recognize that the modern church growth

system and its constant pressure to grow attendance and generate more and more

revenue to keep the corporate “machine” running was having significant negative

psychological and health impacts on pastors, who needed counseling, guidance, and

treatment to recover from the adverse effects of the growth model that Defendants are

at the forefront of promoting.

35. To execute his new vision, Pastor Weems and K. Weems developed a

plan that included establishing several corporate entities that collectively would house

and fund Celebration Church’s significant administrative and personnel operations,

8
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 9 of 42 PageID 9

quickly reduce expenses and Celebration Church’s debt, and operate and fund the

missionary work on which Pastor Weems wanted to focus.

36. The plan for this vision included the following:

A. a retreat and outpatient facility for pastoral care—Honey


Lake Farms—and an adjoining medical clinic—Honey
Lake Clinic, Inc.—that would provide Christian mental
health treatment services, the revenue from which would be
used to build out and support Honey Lake Farms’ mission;

B. a for profit corporation—NorthStream—designed to


provide centralized and shared management services to
Celebration Church and numerous other churches that
enabled church leadership to focus their attention on
ministry and missions rather than operational aspects of
their churches; that would also develop Restorative
Community Developments (RCD’s1), the first of which was
Honey Lake Farms; and

C. a separate entity—AWKNG, Inc.—which would act as a


hub for the restorative/ministry programing used at Honey
Lake Farms, a theology school, missionary partnerships,
media operations, and other similar endeavors.

37. Celebration Global was designed to be the umbrella organization under

which Pastor Weemses’s missionary work would be housed.

38. As they began implementing their anti-growth, missionary focused

vision, Pastor Weems and K. Weems contributed their own personal money and

invested in Weems Group for a combined total of approximately $1.2 million that was

used to fund the operations of Honey Lake Farms, NorthStream, and AWKNG.

1
Restorative Community Developments are self-contained investment portfolios ideal for
venture philanthropists and impact investors, combining profitability with socially and
environmentally conscious that directly impact human flourishing in both rural and urban
areas.

9
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 10 of 42 PageID 10

Overview of Defendants

39. ARC is a cooperative of independent churches from different

denominations, networks, and backgrounds, the members of which consist of

(a) churches “planted” or launched through ARC and (b) churches that invest in the

mission of ARC financially.

40. Although ARC started as a loosely connected group of people who

wanted to help smaller churches, it eventually (under the leadership of Hodges) shifted

its focus to generating large attendance growth and church “planting” to vastly expand

Defendants’ influence and revenue streams.

41. ARC has become one of the largest church planting organizations in

North America and has planted more than a thousand churches since 2000.

42. ARC-planted churches enter into contractual agreements with ARC that,

among other things, provide for initial loans to launch the church and require the

church to pay 10% of tithes and offerings to ARC until this loan is repaid; following

which the church is required to send ARC an ongoing amount of 2% of its monthly

tithes/offerings.

43. Celebration Church is not an ARC-planted church, and at all times

material to this action had no legal, contractual, or financial obligations to ARC or

any of the other Defendants.

44. Historically, Celebration Church gratuitously donated approximately

$150,000 to $200,000 per year to or for the benefit of ARC’s church planting

operations. However, Defendants were constantly pressuring Pastor Weems to

10
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 11 of 42 PageID 11

commit to donating 2% of Celebration Church’s income to ARC for church planting

purposes.

45. ARC is not a denomination and claims that it does not issue directives

on what its member churches should promote doctrinally, philosophically,

ministerially, or politically; and further claims that all of its member churches are

completely and totally autonomous—operationally, financially, and governmentally.2

46. ARC has attained a significant amount of power and influence through

its church growth model and church-planting operations, and is able to maintain and

expand such power and influence through affiliated entities and “partners” that it

heavily encourages its members to use.

47. Hodges is one of the co-founders of ARC and Founder and Senior Pastor

of Church of the Highlands (“Highlands”), one of the largest churches in the United

States with over 60,000 members and 23 campuses.

48. Hodges fully embraces the modern church growth model and has vocally

expressed his goal to help 1,000 churches break the 1,000-attendance barrier.

49. Hodges founded and operates several entities closely affiliated with ARC

and Highlands that are heavily promoted as ARC “partners,” including GrowLeader,

LLC (“GrowLeader”) and Highlands College.

50. GrowLeader is a for-profit company that is closely affiliated with and

heavily promoted through ARC that generates significant revenue and resulting

2
https://www.arcchurches.com/about/our-structure/

11
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 12 of 42 PageID 12

financial benefits to Defendants by providing fee-based mentoring, coaching, training,

and consulting services and related resources focused on promoting and advancing the

modern church growth system to churches and their leadership.

51. Hodges derives significant power and financial benefits from the

promotion and advancement of GrowLeader and Highlands through ARC.

52. Rizzo is the Executive Director of ARC and an Associate Pastor at

Church of the Highlands3 who also served as an Overseer at Celebration Church until

September 2021.

53. Seibeling is a Founder and Senior Pastor of The Life Church and

founding board member of ARC who also served as an Overseer at Celebration

Church until September 2021.

54. Promoting the use of ARC attorneys by churches is one means through

which Defendants furtively maintain control and oversight over ARC members.

55. Attorneys David Middlebrook and Steven Goodspeed (“Middlebrook

Goodspeed”) specialize in the areas of church formation, governance, operations, and

taxes. At all times material to this action, Middlebrook Goodspeed were law partners

whose firm was promoted as an ARC “partner,” and they contemporaneously

represented ARC and Celebration Church, as well as numerous other ARC member

churches.

3
https://jamesriver.church/author/drizzo

12
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 13 of 42 PageID 13

56. Middlebrook’s current law firm, The Church Lawyers Group, is a

featured ARC “partner” that provides special resources for ARC members.

57. Middlebrook Goodspeed prepared Celebration Church’s governing

Bylaws installed in 2015.

58. Attorneys Lee Wedekind (“Wedekind”) and Kristin Ahr (“Ahr”) work

for the Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP law firm (“Nelson Mullins”) and

have served as litigation counsel for ARC and Rizzo. At all times material to this

action, Wedekind and Ahr, through Nelson Mullins, represented ARC; including

when they purportedly represented Celebration Church during the events described

below.

59. At all times material to this action, Defendants acted as the principals of

and directed and controlled the acts and conduct of Middlebrook Goodspeed and

Wedekind and Ahr upon which the claims set forth herein are based; during the

performance of which Middlebrook Goodspeed and Wedekind and Ahr were acting

in the capacity as Defendants’ undisclosed agents carrying out Defendants’ directives

under Defendants’ control.

The Implementation of Weemses’s New Vision & Direction for Celebration

60. In 2019, Pastor Weems and K. Weems began working toward

implementing Pastor Weems’s new vision and direction for Celebration Church and

transitioning Pastor Weems from Celebration Church’s Senior Pastor to a Founding

Pastor role in which he would be able to spend much more of his time and energy on

13
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 14 of 42 PageID 14

missions and less on the church’s day-to-day operations, while also continuing to have

an ongoing relationship with the congregation he founded and pastored.

61. Pastor Weemses’s vision to shift Celebration Church’s focus away from

growth and toward missionary work is antithetical to Defendants’ church growth

business and operational model and financial interests.

62. As Pastor Weems began to implement his new shift in focus, he informed

Defendants that Celebration Church would only be willing to donate funds to ARC if

they were earmarked for missionary work and helping pastors get the counseling,

guidance, and treatment they needed to shift their focus to ministry and missions,

rather than church growth; while also expressing his concerns over the ARC system

and its focus on planting churches to help expand ARC and GrowLeader and

Defendants’ own personal interests, causing stress and psychological harm for pastors.

63. Middlebrook Goodspeed consulted Pastor Weems and Celebration

Church on his transition to the Founding Pastor role and the memorialization of

agreed upon terms and conditions of a Founding Pastor agreement, retirement

package for Pastor Weems and K. Weems, parsonage, and continued and ongoing

financial support for the missions in which Pastor Weems was involved.

64. Celebration Church’s Board of Trustees and Overseers were fully aware

of, approved, and agreed on behalf of Celebration Church to the terms, conditions,

and agreements associated with Pastor Weemses’s transition to Founding Pastor, the

Weemses’s’ retirement package, their parsonage, and the commitment to provide

financial support for the missions with which Pastor Weems would be involved.

14
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 15 of 42 PageID 15

65. Attendant to his transition to Founding Pastor, Pastor Weems was also

working on identifying someone as a potential eventual successor to the Celebration

Church Senior Pastor position.

66. Defendants were aware of this and seized on it as an opportunity to oust

Pastor Weems from Celebration Church and plant an ARC-affiliated pastor they knew

they could control and who would continue to advance Defendants’ church growth

model.

67. Defendants identified ARC agent Tim Timberlake (“Timberlake”) as the

perfect candidate to fill this role, and Rizzo subsequently vouched for Timberlake to

Pastor Weems.

68. At all times material to this action, Defendants acted as the principals of,

directed, and controlled acts and conduct of Timberlake upon which the claims set

forth herein are based; during the performance of which Timberlake acted in the

capacity as Defendants’ undisclosed agent carrying out Defendants’ directives under

Defendants’ control.

69. Unaware of the clandestine agency relationship between Defendants and

Timberlake and Defendants’ planting of Timberlake to advance their conspiracy

against Plaintiffs, Pastor Weems moved forward with the Founding Pastor transition

plan, pursuant to which Timberlake initially would serve as lead pastor at Celebration

Church’s Jacksonville campus while Pastor Weems retained legal control and

authority as the Senior Pastor, President, CEO, and Chairman of the Board. Pastor

Weems would coach Timberlake through his development plan while observing his

15
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 16 of 42 PageID 16

performance and simultaneously working to memorialize the agreed upon terms of his

transition to Founding Pastor.

70. In December 2019, Celebration Church’s Compensation Committee

(including Seibeling and Rizzo) approved a compensation package that included

(among other things) Celebration Church’s acquisition of a parsonage for the

Weemses’s and the payment of $100,000 per year to Pastor Weems until age 65; the

terms of which were memorialized in a Compensation Resolution fully executed and

approved by the Board of Trustees.

71. On December 20, 2019, Celebration Church entered into a Parsonage Use

License Agreement with Pastor Weems and K. Weems, effective as of January 10, 2020.

72. Based on the agreements memorialized in the Compensation Resolution

and the rights that accrued to Pastor Weems and K. Weems by virtue of the benefits

Celebration Church agreed to provide, the Weemses’s sold their home and moved into

a temporary parsonage.

73. During the same time period, Timberlake abruptly moved to Jacksonville

without prior notice to Pastor Weems, 11 months ahead of the agreed upon schedule,

and immediately began exerting pressure on Pastor Weems to hand over control of

Celebration Church.

74. In early 2020, as a result of the COVID pandemic and lockdowns,

Celebration Church was limited to video services until September 2020. During this

difficult time, Pastor Weems and K. Weems were instrumental in helping the church

navigate through the financial difficulties caused by COVID and lockdowns and other

16
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 17 of 42 PageID 17

operational problems created by certain executive leadership under the control of Lisa

Stewart (“Stewart”), Celebration Church’s CFO at that time.

75. When in-person services finally resumed, Timberlake started leading

Sunday morning services at Celebration Church’s Jacksonville campus and Pastor

Weems focused on mission work, reaching more of the church’s members across the

country and world through video, refining the organization of the church and its

missions and related organizations, and working with Middlebrook Goodspeed to

memorialize Celebration Church’s agreements concerning Pastor Weems’s transition

to Founding Pastor.

76. One of Pastor Weems’s and K. Weems’s primary focuses during this time

was Honey Lake Farms.

77. In her role as CFO of Celebration Church at that time, Stewart also

served as CFO of Honey Lake Farms and Honey Lake Clinic.

78. Around this time, Celebration Church and Kevin Cormier (“Cormier”)

entered into a collaboration whereby construction-type entities owned by Cormier

were hired by Celebration Church to perform land and housing improvements and

management services at Honey Lake Farms. Not long thereafter, Cormier promised

to donate $1 million of in-kind construction-type services at Honey Lake Farms.

79. Throughout 2020, construction work and land management services

were performed at Honey Lake Farms by Cormier’s companies, which Pastor Weems

was led to believe was part of Cormier’s $1 million pledge. Pastor Weems expected

17
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 18 of 42 PageID 18

that Stewart was properly accounting for this donation and responsibly managing the

church’s finances in accordance with her fiduciary duties.

80. In December of 2020, the Honey Lake Farms Lodge opened and started

offering retreats and its outpatient facility for pastoral care.

81. Honey Lake Clinic also began generating revenue providing Christian

mental health treatment services.

82. Pastor Weems soon appointed Cormier as a Celebration Church Trustee

and Stewart left her position as Celebration Church CFO and transitioned to work

solely for Honey Lake Clinic as its CEO.

83. During her time working as CFO for Celebration Church and Honey

Lake Clinic, Stewart gave false financial reports to Pastor Weems, which

misrepresented balances in the church’s accounts, and engaged in additional

fraudulent misconduct.

84. For example, in 2020 Stewart refused to separate the AWKNG mission

organization as a separate 501(c)(3) entity distinct from the church and concealed her

insubordination to Pastor Weemses’s and the Board of Trustees’ directives to separate

the funds designated for the AWKNG organization into a separate account from that

of the church. By doing this, she was able to hide her financial and operational

mismanagement and retain control of funds to create inaccurate and misleading

reports in which Stewart materially misrepresented the church’s unrestricted cash as

$2.2 million more than it actually was. This and other fraudulent acts were

documented in Celebration Church’s 2020 audit.

18
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 19 of 42 PageID 19

85. Stewart also provided Cormier with unrestricted access to Honey Lake

Farms’ bank accounts and failed to supervise his activities. Pastor Weems had no

access to view these accounts, which Cormier used to reimburse his companies for

expenses without any oversight or accountability.

86. Pastor Weems eventually discovered and verified that Cormier had

embezzled church funds, engaged in a fraudulent billing scheme, and attempted to

commit usury.

87. Stewart knew that Cormier had not donated any of the $1 million in work

that he pledged and that the work for which he was billing the church was actually

supposed to be “donated” (i.e., free), but allowed payments to be issued to Cormier’s

entities knowing that no agreements were in place to support them and that no

authorization or approvals were obtained for the work allegedly performed. Cormier

also stopped submitting any substantiation for his invoices but continued to get

payments.

88. In April of 2021, Pastor Weems confronted Cormier about his above-

described misconduct and Cormier admitted that he reneged on his pledge to donate

$1 million of in-kind services and sought to remedy the situation by “donating” the

work he claimed to have performed but for which he had not yet been paid, along with

a house that the church had been renting from him.

89. Meanwhile, Pastor Weems and K. Weems continued working tirelessly

to bring stability, structure, consistency, and clarity to Celebration Church’s staff,

congregation, and organization, and to greatly improve the church’s financial position.

19
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 20 of 42 PageID 20

They believed everything was moving forward as planned with the transition to Pastor

Weemses’s role as Founding Pastor and the church’s related agreements concerning

the Weemses’s’ retirement packages, funding for Celebration Global, and the

parsonage.

90. In May of 2021, the Weemses’s and Celebration Church agreed on the

property that would be the Weemses’s’ permanent parsonage and it was sold to the

Church for that purpose—following which Celebration Church agreed to and did treat

that property as the Weemses’s' parsonage under the Parsonage Use License Agreement.

91. The Board of Trustees also represented that they were working with

Middlebrook Goodspeed on finalizing written documents (such as a Founding Pastor

Emeritus Operating Agreement) memorializing the terms that Celebration Church

already verbally agreed upon and approved concerning Pastor Weems’s transition to

Founding Pastor, the Weemses’s’ retirement compensation, the parsonage, and the

funding of the missions with which Pastor Weems is involved.

92. Defendants all were aware of the agreements Celebration Church made

and approved concerning Pastor Weems’s transition to Founding Pastor, the

Weemses’s’ retirement compensation, the parsonage, and the funding to be provided

to Celebration Global for the missions with which Pastor Weems is involved.

93. However, unbeknownst to Pastor Weems, Defendants and their agents

were already working behind the scenes for quite some time on a plan to oust Pastor

Weems from his leadership position and interfere with Plaintiffs’ agreements with

Celebration Church.

20
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 21 of 42 PageID 21

94. Among other things, this included: the planting of Timberlake and

direction and approval of his subversive acts described below; enlisting Timberlake

and Cormier to help oust Pastor Weems; enlisting Stewart to manufacture evidence of

supposed financial crimes and mismanagement to use against the Weemses’s; and

enlisting Gaby Sullivan (K. Weems’s assistant and an employee of NorthStream) to

illegally access and download K. Weemses’s private data, emails, medical

information, and therapy sessions and provide them to Defendants to use against the

Weemses’s. Sullivan told multiple Celebration Church staff members that she was

“protected” and that Celebration Church was going to be taken over.

95. In September 2021, Hodge’s Highlands church announced that it was

spending $4.5 million to build its own “Lodge Retreat Center”—a center for pastoral

counseling reported as being “the vision of” Hodges and Rizzo4 that was virtually

identical to the Honey Lake Farms’ Lodge that had been up and running since

December 2020. Around the same time, Rizzo and Seibeling stepped down as

Celebration Church Overseers.

96. Honey Lake Farms’ Lodge and The Lodge Retreat Center (once

completed) would have been competitors. However, Defendants knew Honey Lake

Farms’ Lodge had a significant advantage because it was already operational and had

numerous retreats, counseling and restorative programs led by professional therapists

4
https://ministrywatch.com/church-of-the-highlands-quietly-advances-controversial-
pastoral-retreat-center/

21
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 22 of 42 PageID 22

and able to provide outpatient clinical care through its association with Honey Lake

Clinic, which Defendants’ “Lodge” was unable to provide.

97. Defendants also perceived Honey Lake Farms as a threat because it was

providing counseling services that included programs designed to improve pastoral

mental health by moving away from the church growth model.

98. During this same time period, Pastor Weems uncovered more evidence

of Cormier embezzling money from Celebration Church.

99. On September 22, 2021, Pastor Weems informed Rizzo and Seibeling

about Cormier’s embezzlement and fraud and resulting need to dismiss him from the

Celebration Church board. To Pastor Weems’s surprise, they revealed that Cormier

called them back in April of 2021 (10-days after Pastor Weems first confronted

Cormier about his financial misconduct) and asked them to initiate an investigation

against Pastor Weems.

100. In October of 2021, the Weemses’s continued to move forward with their

transition plan and missionary work, meeting and developing an advantageous

business relationship with Historical Concepts, a highly respected architecture and

development firm in Atlanta, and commissioned (at a cost over $14,000) the rendering

of a master site plan for Honey Lake Farms so that they could begin recruiting

investors for the RCD portion of the project.

101. The Weemses’s immediately drove from their meeting with Historical

Concepts to the 2021 ARC conference at Seacoast Church in South Carolina to

22
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 23 of 42 PageID 23

demonstrate their goodwill toward their friends at ARC and put forth the idea of

working together around missions.

102. As a result, Pastor Weems and Greg Surratt agreed to partner to expand

the availability of pastoral health retreats by hosting them at Honey Lake Farms and

Surratt’s lodge, which would have generated an estimated $1.5 million in income for

Honey Lake Farms and AWKNG over the next 24 months.

103. Not long thereafter, AWKNG and Honey Lake Farms held a fundraiser

to raise money for scholarships for pastors and ministers to attend wellness retreats,

which raised approximately $250,000 and connected Plaintiffs with Willie Robertson

(well known for the “Duck Dynasty” reality show). Robertson expressed interest in

partnering with Honey Lake Farms and even shot some episodes of his series, “Buck

Commander,” at the farm. During the fundraising event, discussions were had with

Robertson around potential future filming and other types of partnerships around

youth programs and community evangelism at Honey Lake Farms.

104. In addition to Robertson, Honey Lake Farms was poised to partner with

Wildwood Ranch, Hand of Hope, and Convoy of Hope on very profitable and

beneficial endeavors for Honey Lake farm’s mission.

105. NorthStream had also secured an advantageous business relationship

with the city of Greenville, FL related to its first RCD and was launching its first RCD

in Africa through Project Africa in Zimbabwe.

23
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 24 of 42 PageID 24

106. Plaintiffs had also developed an advantageous business relationship with

David Maura through which they were poised to secure significant investments in their

operations at Honey Lake Farms and NorthStream.

The Implementation of the Plan to Destroy Plaintiffs


and Frame Pastor Weems and K. Weems for Financial Crimes

107. In November of 2021, Pastor Weems approached the Honey Lake Clinic

board about releasing disbursements to Honey Lake Farms in compliance with the

clinic’s bylaws. Although strongly opposed by Stewart and Honey Lake Clinic CFO,

Devan Schandig, the board voted unanimously in favor of the disbursement.

108. Soon thereafter, Defendants began to execute the final phase of their plan

to destroy Plaintiffs.

109. Unbeknownst to Pastor Weems, Rizzo and Timberlake contacted Surratt

and informed him that Pastor Weems was about to be put under investigation by

Cormier, Powell, and Rowe and that Surratt should cut all ties with Pastor Weems

and Honey Lake Farms, which led to Surratt to immediately call Pastor Weems and

cancel the projects they had planned to partner in together.

110. Heading into a December 2021 Celebration Church Board of Trustees

meeting, the Weemses’s were completely in the dark about the plot against them and

believed the Board of Trustees was set to give final approval the written documents

memorializing the existing agreements with Celebration Church.

111. Instead, acting under the influence and control of Defendants and their

agents, the Trustees abruptly changed course at the December 8, 2021 meeting;

24
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 25 of 42 PageID 25

producing a draft Founding Pastor Emeritus Agreement with substantially different terms

than those that had already been agreed upon by Celebration Church (most notably,

termination provisions that would allow the Trustees to deny the Weemses’s the

rights and benefits Celebration Church had already agreed to provide), and slashing

the already agreed upon funding promised by Celebration Church to Celebration

Global by fifty percent (approximately $24 million over 15 years).

112. This drastic reduction in missions funding combined with the campaign

targeting Plaintiffs’ strategic partnerships all but assured the failure of the mission

organizations and operations in which the Weemses’s had already personally

invested.

113. Defendants continued to secure Timberlake’s allegiance to their cause,

curate his image, and promote him as a capable leader for Celebration Church by

orchestrating hundreds of thousands of dollars in monetary payments to him directly

and indirectly through his ministry for book sales and promotion, in exchange for

which and at Defendants’ direction, Timberlake relentlessly contacted pastors,

missional partners, strategic partners, leaders of church networks, and donors; telling

them that Pastor Weems was about to be investigated for financial misconduct and

would be removed as Senior Pastor, leaving Timberlake in control of the church, and

that they should deal solely with him since Pastor Weems would be ousted with no

possibility of return. Timberlake even directed Celebration Church youth pastors to

begin telling the youth that Pastor Weems was under investigation for financial

25
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 26 of 42 PageID 26

misconduct—leading several of them, some as young as 12, to be confused and talk

to their parents about this.

114. Timberlake also made it clear that he would take Pastor Weems’s place

at ARC and return Celebration Church’s vision and direction to ARC’s and

GrowLeader’s church growth model.

115. Defendants also committed to ruining the Plaintiffs’ reputations,

specifically in the ministry world, so they could never be in ministry or make a living

and have no possible way of ever being part of Celebration Church again.

116. Pastor Weems was planning on dismissing Cormier at the end of the year

and had enlisted the help of Trustees Rowe and Wiseman to attend the meeting with

Cormier, during which he would be confronted, permanently removed from the board

and the church, and the authorities would be notified, if necessary, pending the

financial audit Pastor Weems had already ordered. On December 31, 2021, Pastor

Weems emailed Cormier to inform him that his one-year term as a Trustee had

concluded and that a new Trustee would be appointed to fill his vacated position,

which would lead to this planned meeting.

117. On January 4, 2022, Cormier responded by providing “notice” that he

and two other trustees, Powell and Rowe, were “bringing a full investigation” on

unspecified allegations and “will be asking our board to review the possibility of asking

Stovall Weems to step down as our current Chairman and Senior Pastor role.”

Cormier further claimed that “[b]ased on our bylaws the removal of board members

during this investigation must be put on hold…”

26
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 27 of 42 PageID 27

118. Pastor Weems responded later that evening, informing Cormier that he

could not initiate such an investigation under Celebration Church’s Bylaws and

advising him of the proper procedures to follow. Pastor Weems also dismissed

Cormier from the Board of Trustees and advised that he would ask the Board of

Trustees to investigate Cormier’s actions over the past year, listing the instances of

fraud for which Cormier would be investigated.

119. On January 7, 2022, now aware of Rowe’s involvement in the plot to

remove him for unspecified reasons, Pastor Weems sent an email dismissing Rowe as

a Trustee based on Cormier’s statements about Rowe’s involvement and an admission

made by Timberlake about which Trustees were involved.

120. On January 7, 2022, almost immediately after dismissing Rowe, Pastor

Weems received a letter (dated January 6) from Rowe and Powell claiming that he

was under discipline, was not in good standing, and was suspended as the church’s

Senior Pastor as a result of “possible improper financial practices and/or failure to

fulfill duties and responsibilities as Senior Pastor.”

121. As these events unfolded, Defendants ensured that they would maintain

ultimate oversight and control over the Weemses’s ouster from Celebration Church

through Middlebrook Goodspeed and the enlistment of ARC attorneys Wedekind and

Ahr to lead the supposed “investigation” of Pastor Weems and K. Weems.

122. On January 8, 2022, Wedekind and Ahr informed Pastor Weems that he

was banned from Celebration Church while he supposedly was “investigated,” barred

27
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 28 of 42 PageID 28

him from church property under threat of criminal prosecution, and instructed him to

cease all contact with everyone associated with Celebration Church.

123. These acts were wholly improper and violative of multiple Celebration

Church Bylaws.

124. Aware of this, Defendants used Middlebrook Goodspeed and Wedekind

and Ahr to amend the Celebration Church Bylaws to give the Trustees the absolute,

unchecked power they needed to unlawfully oust Pastor Weems from the church.

125. Wedekind and Ahr also proceeded with conducting the sham

“investigation” of Pastor Weems; during which Defendants and Middlebrook

Goodspeed worked closely with Wedekind and Ahr to ensure that the supposed

“investigation” would end in the predetermined outcome Defendants wanted.

126. Well-before the supposed “investigation” commenced, Defendants knew

Cormier and Stewart were involved in embezzling money from Celebration Church

and that the “investigation” could be used to frame Pastor Weems for the

embezzlement and justify ousting him from Celebration Church and thereafter install

leadership Defendants could control (Cormier and Timberlake), avoid paying

Plaintiffs the benefits Celebration Church had already agreed to provide, and use

Pastor Weems as the scapegoat for Cormier and Stewart’s illegal activities while

simultaneously eliminating Honey Lake Farms as competition for Highlands’ Lodge

and stomping-out Pastor Weemses’s anti-church growth message.

127. All the while, Defendants believed that their nefarious plot would never

be exposed because it would be protected by the secrecy of ecclesiastical abstention.

28
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 29 of 42 PageID 29

128. During the sham “investigation,” the Weemses’s were essentially made

pariahs, unable to defend themselves and isolated from the church, friends, church

members, and professional colleagues and contacts, most of whom they were

prohibited from contacting and had been told the Weemses’s were suspended and

“under investigation” for unspecified reasons.

129. At the same time, Defendants knew the actions they orchestrated had

placed Plaintiffs in significant financial distress.

130. Then, on January 17, 2022, Defendants sent an extortionate email to

Pastor Weems through their agent, Larry Stockstill, an Overseer and Apostolic Elder

of Highlands and Hodges’ personal pastor.

131. In this January 17, 2022 email, Stockstill acting at Defendants’ direction

openly acknowledged Cormier’s embezzlement but insisted that he remain on

Celebration Church’s Board of Trustees:

132. In this January 17, 2022 email, Stockstill acting at Defendants’ direction

also openly challenged Pastor Weemses’s “new direction in ministry” before

summarizing that Pastor Weems was “under investigation financially…banned from

29
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 30 of 42 PageID 30

the church and it’s property… and no longer [has] a ‘founder’s seat’ and that will

probably not happen,” before laying out in detail the actions Pastor Weems had to

take to “CLEAR [his] NAME,” which included repenting to ARC, Rizzo, and

Seibeling in particular:

133. At the time of this January 17, 2022 email, Pastor Weems and

Celebration Church had no formal relationship with ARC, and ARC had no legal

control over Pastor Weems or Celebration Church. There was no legitimate reason

for ARC or any of the Defendants to be making any demands on Pastor Weems.

30
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 31 of 42 PageID 31

134. At the time of this January 17, 2022 email, Middlebrook Goodspeed were

also, at Defendants’ direction, refusing to do anything to assist Pastor Weems in

preventing the coup unfolding at Celebration Church and instead insisted that Pastor

Weems “not get an attorney or go to the court.”

135. As time dragged on with no imminent resolution of this incredibly

damaging situation in sight, the Weemses’s decided to take action and filed suit on

February 23, 2022 to try to obtain temporary injunctive relief to protect their rights

and force the resolution of the sham investigation.

136. On March 3, 2022, Wedekind filed a Motion to Dismiss in that lawsuit

which lobbed unsubstantiated, unnecessary personal attacks against the Weemses’s

that were completely irrelevant to the legal arguments it raised and further explained

how Celebration Church’s Bylaws were amended on January 13, 2022, to make its

Board “the highest ecclesiastical authority in the church…”

137. Upon reading this, Pastor Weems came to the difficult realization that he

could no longer be a part of Celebration Church and needed to try to protect his family

from any further attacks by resigning and completely separating from Celebration

Church.

138. Thus, on April 15, 2022, Pastor Weems tendered his resignation as

Senior Pastor, President, Chief Executive Officer, Chairman and member of the Board

of Trustees, and registered agent.

139. However, Defendants were not satisfied with Pastor Weemses’s

resignation, were upset over the lawsuit and the publicity it drew, and were likely

31
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 32 of 42 PageID 32

fearful that members of Celebration Church’s congregation would follow Pastor

Weems once he began ministering elsewhere and working with other churches.

Accordingly, Defendants continued to work closely behind the scenes with their

attorneys, Wedekind and Ahr, to create and publicly disseminate a false and

defamatory narrative and statements about Pastor Weems and K. Weems, along with

private and confidential information about K. Weems they had unlawfully gathered,

to try to destroy their reputations, humiliate them, and prevent Plaintiffs from

continuing their ministry and missions.

140. This culminated in an April 24, 2022, “Report of Investigation to

Celebration Church of Jacksonville, Inc.”, a copy of which is attached hereto as

Exhibit A (the “Report”), which Defendants ensured was leaked to the press so that it

would be publicly available before ARC’s Conference in South Carolina on April 25-

27, 2022—at which Hodges was planning to discuss the progress of the Highlands

Lodge and plans for GrowLeader.

141. The ultimate purpose of the public dissemination of the Report was to

frame Pastor Weems and K. Weems for embezzling the money Defendants’ knew

Cormier and Stewart had taken and covered up, which could be used to legitimize the

takeover of Celebration Church and ensure the failure of Plaintiffs’ anti-growth vision

and missionary work while simultaneously using Pastor Weems to publicly

demonstrate what would happen to others if they entertained the idea of opposing

Defendants’ modern church growth philosophy.

32
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 33 of 42 PageID 33

142. Notably, the Report falsely tried to blame Pastor Weems for (among

other things) embezzlement based on a supposed $3 million cash shortfall between

October and December 2020:

143. However, Celebration Church’s own financial statements (prepared by

Stewart) demonstrate that it had a $6 million cash balance in October 2020, not $9

million:

33
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 34 of 42 PageID 34

144. Cormier and Stewart were in fact the ones responsible for over $3 million

embezzled from Celebration Church, which Timberlake knew about and, at

Defendants’ direction, helped cover up to frame Pastor Weems and help support his

installation as Pastor Weems’s replacement at Celebration Church.

145. Defendants’ knew the Report, which was engineered to make it falsely

appear as if it was the product of a legitimate investigation conducted by a reputable

law firm, could be used to sway the opinions of Celebration Church’s members, the

public, and people and businesses affiliated with Plaintiffs to convince them that Pastor

Weems and K. Weems were criminals—even though the reality was that Defendants

were intimately involved in preparing the Report and its conclusions and the lawyers

who authored the Report it were in fact working for and loyal to Defendants.

146. Although Defendants knew the embezzlement and other criminal

accusations the Report leveled against Pastor Weems were demonstrably false, they

continued to ensure that these accusations were advanced publicly and disseminated

to ensure Defendants’ ultimate objective of destroying Plaintiffs was achieved.

147. Thus, on April 27, 2022, acting at Defendants’ direction, Wedekind

prepared and transmitted a letter via email to TurnCoin, Ltd.’s chief legal officer, Arno

Visser, (the “TurnCoin Letter”), which falsely asserted that Pastor Weems “embezzled

and fraudulently transferred [Celebration Church] funds that were used to purchase

TurnCoin” and engaged in “money laundering…in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1956(a)

and 1957”:

34
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 35 of 42 PageID 35

35
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 36 of 42 PageID 36

148. The TurnCoin Letter specifically directed TurnCoin to view the Report

to read about “Weemses’s illegal activities” and included a hyperlink to the Report for

that purpose.

149. This TurnCoin Letter used the Report and false criminal accusations

about Pastor Weems to try to convince TurnCoin to freeze Pastor Weemses’s

investments in hopes of further financially crippling Plaintiffs.

150. Despite knowledge of the actual perpetrators of the embezzlement and

the efforts to conceal it, Defendants ensured that Pastor Weems would be publicly

blamed for it, which not only protected Cormier for his criminal acts but also rewarded

him by ensuring that he would be placed in charge of Celebration Church’s Board of

Trustees.

151. Defendants also further rewarded Timberlake for his role in advancing

Defendants’ conspiracy by partnering with Servolution to promote and generate sales

of Timberlake’s book (The Power of 1440), while simultaneously using the book to

encourage church planting and growth.

152. Based on the agreements and promises made by Celebration Church as

outlined above, the Weemses’s not only stopped drawing a salary from the church but

also invested and gave hundreds of thousands of dollars (almost to the point of

insolvency) to fund the missions Celebration Church had already agreed to fund; all

of which they lost as a result of Defendants’ actions.

36
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 37 of 42 PageID 37

153. Defendants’ actions also caused losses of committed funding and

agreements to Celebration Global totaling approximately $30 million dollars over a

15-year period.

154. Honey Lake Farms was far down the road to being self-sustaining when

Defendants’ actions caused its committed investors and partners to back out, resulting

in millions of dollars of additional losses.

The Unlawful Means Defendants Used to Tortiously Interfere

155. By engaging in the above-alleged conduct, Defendants conducted,

engaged in, and/or participated in a pattern of unlawful and criminal activity

deliberately intended to harm Plaintiffs and carry out defendants’ conspiracy against

them.

156. Defendants’ conduct alleged in paragraphs 126-134, above, constitutes

racketeering and extortion in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1)(A) and § 836.05, Fla.

Stat.

157. Defendants’ conduct alleged in paragraph 94, above, constitutes

racketeering and an offense against users of computer systems, networks, and

electronic devices in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1)(A) and § 815.06, Fla. Stat.,

158. Defendants’ conduct alleged in paragraphs 55-59, 63, 65-68, 92, 94, 113,

121, 126, and 150-151, above, constitutes racketeering and bribery in violation of

18 U.S.C. § 1961(1)(A) and § 838.16, Fla. Stat..

37
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 38 of 42 PageID 38

159. Defendants’ conduct alleged in paragraphs 139-140, above, constitutes

the communication of libelous matter to newspapers in violation of violated § 836.09,

Fla. Stat.

160. Defendants’ conduct alleged in paragraphs 139-149, above, constitutes

racketeering and wire fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1)(B) and 18 U.S.C.

§1343.

161. Defendants’ overall course of conduct and conspiracy alleged above also

constitutes a scheme to defraud in violation of the Florida Communications Fraud

Act, § 817.034, Fla. Stat.

162. Defendants aided, abetted, counseled, hired, or otherwise procured

others to commit the criminal acts described above and are therefore principals in the

first degree under § 777.011, Florida Statutes.

163. Defendants soliciting others to commit the criminal acts described above,

and in the course of such solicitation commanded, encouraged, hired, or requested

another person to engage in specific conduct which would constitute such offense or

an attempt to commit such an offense, thereby constituting criminal solicitation in

violation of § 777.04(2), Florida Statutes.

164. Defendants agreed, conspired, combined and/or confederated with

another person or persons to commit the criminal acts described above, thereby

committing criminal conspiracy in violation of § 777.04(3), Florida Statutes.

165. Defendants also explicitly or tacitly agreed to participate in a common

scheme and unlawful ongoing conspiracy, in furtherance of which they recommended,

38
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 39 of 42 PageID 39

agreed to, and participated in committing the criminal acts described above, which

caused significant harm and damages to Plaintiffs as a result.

COUNT I
(TORTIOUS INTERFERENCE)

166. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 165, as if fully

stated herein.

167. As more specifically alleged in paragraphs 62-64, 70-71, 89-91, and 100-

106, above, Plaintiffs had advantageous contractual and business relationships of

which Defendants were aware.

168. Defendants intentionally and unjustifiably interfered with Plaintiffs’

advantageous contractual and business relationships.

169. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ unlawful and tortious

interference with Plaintiffs’ advantageous contractual and business relationships,

Plaintiffs suffered substantial economic damages in amounts to be proven at trial.

170. Defendants’ actions alleged herein were unjustified, unlawful and

committed maliciously and deliberately with an intent to injure Plaintiffs and cause

them substantial harm; were committed with actual knowledge of the wrongfulness of

the conduct and the high probability that injury and damage to Plaintiffs would result,

and despite that knowledge, Defendants intentionally pursued their course of conduct,

resulting in injury and damages to Plaintiffs; and/or were committed in conscious

disregard of the Plaintiffs’ rights.

39
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 40 of 42 PageID 40

171. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ tortious conduct, and in

addition to the quantifiable monetary damages Defendants’ conduct caused, Plaintiffs

also suffered and will continue to suffer irreparable harm for which there is no

adequate remedy at law if Defendants are not enjoined from engaging in such conduct

in the future.

172. Based on the facts alleged herein and to be established at trial, Plaintiffs

have the clear legal right to the entry of an injunction prohibiting Defendants’ tortious

misconduct.

173. The public interest would be served by the entry of an injunction

prohibiting Defendants’ unlawful and tortious misconduct.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendants awarding:

a. Compensatory damages in appropriate amounts to be established


at trial;

b. Punitive damages in appropriate amounts to be established at trial;

c. Injunctive relief prohibiting Defendants from engaging in the


tortious and unlawful misconduct alleged herein;

d. Costs associated with this action; and

e. Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and
appropriate to protect Plaintiffs’ rights and interests.

COUNT II
(CONSPIRACY)

174. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 173, as if fully

stated herein.

40
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 41 of 42 PageID 41

175. Defendants agreed and conspired with one another to tortiously interfere

with Counter-Plaintiffs’ advantageous contractual and business relationships.

176. In doing so, Defendants agreed and conspired to do an unlawful act or a

lawful act by unlawful means.

177. Defendants each committed overt acts in pursuance and furtherance of

their conspiracy.

178. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiffs suffered damages in amounts

to be proven at trial.

179. Defendants’ actions alleged herein were unjustified, unlawful and

committed maliciously and deliberately with an intent to injure Plaintiffs and cause

them substantial harm; were committed with actual knowledge of the wrongfulness of

the conduct and the high probability that injury and damage to Plaintiffs would result,

and despite that knowledge, Defendants intentionally pursued their course of conduct,

resulting in injury and damages to Plaintiffs; and/or were committed in conscious

disregard of the Plaintiffs’ rights.

180. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ tortious conduct, and in

addition to the quantifiable monetary damages Defendants’ conduct caused, Plaintiffs

also suffered and will continue to suffer irreparable harm for which there is no

adequate remedy at law if Defendants are not enjoined from engaging in such conduct

in the future.

41
Case 3:23-cv-00811-MMH-LLL Document 1 Filed 07/12/23 Page 42 of 42 PageID 42

181. Based on the facts alleged herein and to be established at trial, Plaintiffs

have the clear legal right to the entry of an injunction prohibiting Defendants’ tortious

misconduct.

182. The public interest would be served by the entry of an injunction

prohibiting Defendants’ unlawful and tortious misconduct.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendants, awarding:

a. Compensatory damages in appropriate amounts to be established


at trial;

b. Punitive damages in appropriate amounts to be established at trial;

c. Injunctive relief prohibiting Defendants from engaging in the


tortious and unlawful misconduct alleged herein;

d. Costs associated with this action; and

e. Such other and further relief as the Court deems just and
appropriate to protect Plaintiffs’ rights and interests.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiffs hereby demand a trial by jury on all issues so triable.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Shane B. Vogt


Shane B. Vogt – FBN 257620
E-mail: svogt@tcb-law.com
David A. Hayes - FBN 096657
E-mail: dhayes@tcb-law.com
TURKEL CUVA BARRIOS, P.A.
100 North Tampa Street, Suite 1900
Tampa, Florida 33602
Tel: (813) 834-9191
Fax: (813) 443-2193
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

42

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy