Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
---------------------------------------------------
LEO STOLLER, )
)
Plaintiff, )
) CIVIL ACTION
v. )
)
LANCE G. JOHNSON; ) File No: 08-L-010766
DAVID ABRAMS; ) Libel and Slander
ALFRED GOODMAN; )
ROYLANCE, ABRAMS, BERDO & )
GOODMAN LLP; )
)
JOHN AND JANE DOES; )
ABC CORPORATIONS; )
and OTHER UNKNOWN ENTITIES )
)
Defendants. )
---------------------------------------------------
COMPLAINT
COMES NOW, the Plaintiff, Leo Stoller, and commences this action against the
Defendants Lance G. Johnson; David Abrams; Alfred Goodman; Roylance, Abrams, Berdo &
Goodman LLP, and not yet identified JOHN DOES and/or ABC CORPORATIONS, and/or
OTHER ENTITIES that are unknown at this time; and bring the following causes of action to
wit:
Plaintiff brings this action and demands trial by jury on all counts.
I. PARTIES
1. Plaintiff, Leo Stoller, (hereinafter "STOLLER"), is a citizen of the state of
Illinois, and resident of Cook County, Illinois, who at all times does currently reside and conduct
business in Cook County Illinois. At all times relevant to this action, Plaintiff was, and is, a
"nationally" known trademark expert for over 30 years, who provides expert witness testimony
Washington D.C., and trademark attorney with the law firm of Roylance, Abrams, Berdo &
Goodman LLP., who regularly does business in Cook County Illinois. Defendant Lance G.
Johnson is engaged in the conduct complained of in the course and scope of his employment and
is sued in his individual capacity. Defendant Lance G. Johnson's partners are David Abrams and
Alfred Goodman. Lance G. Johnson encouraged, sanctioned, condoned and ratified the conduct
D.C., and trademark attorney with the law firm of Roylance, Abrams, Berdo & Goodman LLP
who regularly does business in Cook County Illinois. Defendant David Abrams engaged in the
conduct complained of in the course and scope of his employment and is sued in his individual
capacity. Defendant David Abrams' partners are Lance G. Johnson and Alfred Goodman. David
Abrams encouraged, sanctioned, condoned and ratified the conduct of Defendants Lance G.
2
Johnson and Alfred Goodman.
Washington D.C., and trademark attorney with the law firm of Roylance, Abrams, Berdo &
Goodman LLP who regularly does business in Cook County Illinois. Defendant Alfred Goodman
engaged in the conduct complained of in the course and scope of his employment and is sued in
his individual capacity. Defendant Alfred Goodman is a partner with Lance G. Johnson and
David Abrams. Alfred Goodman encouraged, sanctioned, condoned and ratified the conduct of
firm, a domestic limited liability partnership, and upon information and belief, charted under the
laws of Washington D.C. where it is located and doing business in Cook County Illinois
6. At all times relevant to this action, Roylance was doing business in Cook County,
committed a tort in whole or in part in Cook County, and/or performed work or legal services in
omissions which are tortuous and caused injury in Illinois. Venue is proper in Cook County,
Illinois, pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-101(2) because the Defendants filed a counterclaim against
3
Leo Stoller and prosecuted Case No: 05 C 00725 in the United States District Court, Northern
District of Illinois, Eastern Division. This court has jurisdiction over the subject matter and
venue is proper within Cook County, Illinois for all of the parties, the Plaintiff who is a resident
of Cook County, and the Defendants, all of whom do business regularly within Cook County.
expert, and the Defendants who are well-known trademark attorneys with personal vendettas
against the Plaintiff and wants to destroy the Plaintiff's reputation and his business. The
Defendants are attempting to destroy Stoller's reputation in the trademark industry and to prevent
Stoller from being able to acquire trademarks, license trademarks, and/or act as a trademark
expert.
9. The Defendants began writing defamatory things about the Plaintiff and prepared
a paper containing per se false, unfair, and defamatory statements about Leo Stoller that was
submitted in a libelous paper to the 32nd Annual Intellectual Property Institute presented by the
Intellectual Property Law Section of the State Bar of California, on November 8-10, 2008,
Marriott Hotel, Monterey, California. This paper was also published on the Internet.
Stoller. As a result of Defendants' conduct, Leo Stoller has been injured and suffered damages,
including injury to his business reputation, loss of prospective business opportunities, and loss of
expected returns of his investment in his trademark business. Plaintiff seeks the relief, which is
11. Defendants' statements about Leo Stoller constitute defamation per se under
4
Illinois law. The statements: (1) falsely impute the commission of a criminal offense, (2) falsely
impute an inability or want of integrity in performing the duties of Stoller in his profession; and
12. The Defendants, with intentional and/or reckless disregard for the truth, and with
actual malice, inaccurately and unfairly issued a libelous paper (Exhibit A), which slandered the
Plaintiff and defamed Leo Stoller. Defendants issued the paper for the improper purpose of
generating publicity for themselves by harming Leo Stoller's reputation and business
13. The wide and affirmative publication of false statements of fact damaged and
impugned the integrity of Leo Stoller as a professional, impaired his business relationships, and
COUNT I
DEFAMATION
14. Stoller repeats and reallages and incorporates by reference the allegations in
paragraphs 1 and 13 above with the same force and effect as if herein set forth.
15. Defendants published one or more oral and written false statements that were
17. The defamatory statements were included in the paper Exhibit A, but not limited
to the following:
"Leo Stoller is a trademark terrorist who should be in jail. His scheme relied
5
On serial false oaths, falsified evidence, and false testimony by two
Perjury and false specimens of use. It's amazing that he wasn't wearing
18. Defendants defamatory statements were published maliciously and with intent to
destroy the Plaintiff's reputation and ability to earn a living in his chosen profession.
20. The foregoing defamatory statements were made by Defendants with the
knowledge of their falsity and with actual malice, so as to justify an award of punitive damages.
generate publicity for themselves, by placing Plaintiff in a false light and intentionally inflicted
emotional distress on the Plaintiff. As if the Defendants' were the "White Knight(s) seeking their
fame and fortune by ridding the trademark world of the "evil" Stoller!" See Exhibit A.
21. The statements impugned by the Defendants to Stoller, the slurs on Stoller's
character by Defendants, including his honesty, integrity, virtue and/or reputation, the oral and
written statements by Defendants Exhibit A were malicious and done with malice in order to
6
22. Stoller is not a public figure.
Johnson; David Abrams; Alfred Goodman; Roy lance, Abrams, Berdo & Goodman LLP, and not
yet identified JOHN DOES and/or ABC CORPORATIONS, and/or OTHER ENTITIES for
compensatory damages in an amount in excess of the minimum amount required for jurisdiction
in Cook County, Illinois, and for exemplary damages in an amount that will serve to punish
COUNT II
23. Stoller repeats and reallages and incorporates by reference the allegations in
paragraphs 1 and 22 above with the same force and effect as if herein set forth.
by defaming him to the State Bar of California and the Trademark Bar.
25. As a result of Defendants' extreme and outrageous conduct, Stoller was, is, with a
defamation of him.
26. As a result of Defendants' extreme and outrageous conduct, Stoller has suffered
and will continue to suffer mental pain and anguish, severe emotional trauma, embarrassment,
and humiliation.
Johnson; David Abrams; Alfred Goodman; Roylance, Abrams, Berdo & Goodman LLP, and not
yet identified JOHN DOES and/or ABC CORPORATIONS, and/or OTHER ENTITIES for
compensatory damages in an amount in excess of the minimum amount required for jurisdiction
7
in Cook County, Illinois, and for exemplary damages in an amount that will serve to punish
COUNT III
27. Stoller repeats and reallages and incorporates by reference the allegations in
paragraphs 1 and 26 above with the same force and effect as if herein set forth.
28. On or about November 8, 2007, Defendants published one or more oral and
written false statements for the purpose of defaming and inflicting emotion distress on Plaintiff.
29. Each of the said Defendants, Lance G. Johnson; David Abrams; Alfred
Goodman; Roylance, Abrams, Berdo & Goodman LLP, and not yet identified JOHN DOES and/
or ABC CORPORATIONS, OTHER ENTITIES. Knowingly and willfully conspired, aided and
abided each other and agreed among themselves to defame and to inflict emotion distress on
30. Each of the said Defendants did the acts and the things therein alleged pursuant to
and/or ratified and adopted the acts, in that they all collaborated and conspired to defame LEO
STOLLER.
Johnson; David Abrams; Alfred Goodman; Roylance, Abrams, Berdo & Goodman LLP, and not
yet identified JOHN DOES and/or ABC CORPORATIONS, and/or OTHER ENTITIES for
compensatory damages in an amount in excess of the minimum amount required for jurisdiction
8
in Cook County, Illinois, and for exemplary damages in an amount that will serve to punish
COUNT IV
32. Stoller repeats and reallages and incorporates by reference the allegations in
paragraphs 1 and 31 above with the same force and effect as if herein set forth.
on Stoller by defaming him to the State Bar of California and the Trademark Bar. Defendants
entered into an agreement between themselves and conspired together to inflict emotional
distress on Stoller.
34. As a result of Defendants' conspiracy, Stoller was, is, with a high degree of
him.
35. As a result of Defendants' conspiracy to defame Stoller, the Plaintiff has suffered
and will continue to suffer mental pain and anguish, severe emotional trauma, embarrassment,
and humiliation.
Johnson; David Abrams; Alfred Goodman; Roylance, Abrams, Berdo & Goodman LLP, and not
yet identified JOHN DOES and/or ABC CORPORATIONS, and/or OTHER ENTITIES for
compensatory damages in an amount in excess of the minimum amount required for jurisdiction
in Cook County, Illinois, and for exemplary damages in an amount that will serve to punish
Defendants, and defer Defendants from similar conduct. Plaintiff requests punitive damages
9
COUNT IV
36. Stoller repeats and reallages and incorporates by reference the allegations in
paragraphs 1 and 35 above with the same force and effect as if herein set forth.
37. Defendants David Abrams and Alfred Goodman aided and abided Defendant
Lance G. Johnson and each other Each of the said Defendants, Lance G. Johnson; David
Abrams; Alfred Goodman; Roylance, Abrams, Berdo & Goodman LLP, and not yet identified
ESQ., his law firm QUINN, EMANUEL, URQUHART, OLIVER & HEDGES, LLP.,
WILLIAM JEFFREY FACTOR, ESQ., and his law firm SEYFARTH SHAW LLP., WILLIAM
LLP., and/or RICHARD F. FOGEL, ESQ. , his law firm SHAW, GUSSIS, FISHMAN,
GLANTZ, WOLFSON & TOWBIN LLC aided and abided each other while conspiring to
intentionally and deliberately slander and defame Stoller in a Paper filed before the California
Bar Association Exhibit A and inflicting emotional distress on Stoller by defaming him to the
38. As a result of Defendants' aiding and abiding each other to defame Plaintiff,
Stoller was, is, with a high degree of likelihood, will continue to be emotionally distressed due to
35. As a result of Defendants' aiding and abeding to defame Stoller, the Plaintiff has
suffered and will continue to suffer mental pain and anguish, severe emotional trauma,
10
embarrassment, and humiliation.
Johnson; David Abrams; Alfred Goodman; Roylance, Abrams, Berdo & Goodman LLP, and not
yet identified JOHN DOES and/or ABC CORPORATIONS, and/or OTHER ENTITIES for
compensatory damages in an amount in excess of the minimum amount required for jurisdiction
in Cook County, Illinois, and for exemplary damages in an amount that will serve to punish
Defendants, and defer Defendants from similar conduct. Plaintiff requests punitive
Respectfully submitted,
Leo Stoller
7115 W. North Avenue, #272
Oak Park, Illinois 60302
(312) 545-4554
VERIFICATION
I, LEO STOLLER, state that I have made reasonable investigation into the facts
contained herein and certify this pleading pursuant to Section I-109 of the Illinois Code of Civil
Procedure.
Leo Stoller
7115 W. North Avenue, #272
Oak Park, Illinois 60302
(312) 545-4554
11
OATH AND DECLARATION
I, LEO STOLLER, depose and state that I have read the foregoing Complaint. The facts
contained therein are true and correct except as to those items stated to be upon information and
belief, and as to those items, these allegations are true and correct to the best of my information
and belief.
I declare that I am authorized to execute this document on my own behalf, that all
statements made of my own knowledge are true, and all statements made on information and
belief are believed to be true; and further that these statements are made with the knowledge that
willful false statements and the like so made are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both,
Leo Stoller
7115 W. North Avenue, #272
Oak Park, Illinois 60302
(312) 545-4554
12