Case 3:13-cv-01624-W-NLS Document 36 Filed 07/08/14 Page 1 of 9

1 C. Keith Greer, Esq. (State Bar No. 135537) (SPACE BELOW FOR FILING STAMP ONLY)
GREER & ASSOCIATES, A.P.C.
2 17150 Via Del Campo, Suite 100
San Diego, California 92127
3 Telephone: (858) 613-6677
Facsimile: (858) 613-6680
4
Frederick Gaston Esq. (State Bar No. 231179)
5 GASTON & GASTON, thA.P.L.C.
1010 Second Avenue, 24 Floor
6 San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 398-1882
7 Facsimile: (619) 398-1887
8 Attorneys for Plaintiffs,
ROBERT ZAHAU, deceased,
9 ESTATE OF ROBERT ZAHAU,
MARY ZAHAU-LOEHNER,
10 and PARI Z. ZAHAU
11

12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

13 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
14 ROBERT ZAHAU, deceased, through ) Case No. 13-CV-1624-W-NLS
his personal representative, MARY )
15 ZAHAU-LOEHNER; ESTATE OF )
ROBERT ZAHAU, represented by ) SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
16 MARY ZAHAU-LOEHNER, an ) FOR WRONGFUL DEATH
individual; and PARI Z. ZAHAU, an )
17 individual, )
) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
18 Plaintiffs, )
)
19 vs. )
)
20 )
)
21 ADAM SHACKNAI, an individual; )
DINA SHACKNAI, an individual; and )
22 NINA ROMANO, an individual, )
)
23 )
Defendants. )
24 )
25 ROBERT ZAHAU, deceased, through his personal representative, MARY
26 ZAHAU-LOEHNER; ESTATE OF ROBERT ZAHAU, represented by MARY
27 ZAHAU-LOEHNER, an individual; and PARI Z. ZAHAU, an individual
28 (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Plaintiffs”), complain of Defendants

SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR WRONGFUL DEATH

 Case 3:13-cv-01624-W-NLS Document 36 Filed 07/08/14 Page 2 of 9

1 ADAM SHACKNAI, an individual; DINA SHACKNAI, an individual; and NINA

2 ROMANO, an individual, on information and belief as follows:
3 JURISDICTION AND VENUE
4 1. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this case
5 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 based on the diversity of the parties and that the
6 amount in controversy exceeds $75,000.
7 2. The acts and omissions complained of herein occurred in Coronado,
8 California and therefore the proper venue for this action is the Southern District of
9 California in San Diego, California.
10 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
11 3. Plaintiffs demand a jury trial.
12 IDENTIFICATION OF THE PARTIES
13 4. Plaintiff, PARI Z. ZAHAU (“PARI”) is the mother and only surviving
14 parent of REBECCA ZAHAU (“REBECCA” or “DECEDENT”), deceased. PARI
15 is also the surviving spouse of ROBERT ZAHAU, the father of REBECCA, who
16 passed away on July 9, 2013. PARI is, and at all times herein mentioned was, a
17 citizen of Buchanan County, State of Missouri.
18 5. Plaintiff, MARY ZAHAU-LOEHNER (“MARY”) is the sister of
19 REBECCA ZAHAU, deceased, and the daughter and personal representative of
20 ROBERT ZAHAU, deceased, and is acting as the executor of the ESTATE
21 ROBERT ZAHAU. Per Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 377.30, MARY, as the personal
22 representative for ROBERT ZAHAU, has standing to bring ROBERT’s wrongful
23 death action. MARY is, and at all times herein mentioned was, a citizen of
24 Buchanan County, State of Missouri.
25 6. Plaintiff, ROBERT ZAHAU, deceased, (“ROBERT”) will be
26 represented by Plaintiff MARY, as personal representative. ROBERT died intestate
27 on July 9, 2013. At the time of his death and at all times herein mentioned herein,
28 ROBERT ZAHAU was a citizen of Buchanan County, State of Missouri. Pursuant

-2-
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR WRONGFUL DEATH
 Case 3:13-cv-01624-W-NLS Document 36 Filed 07/08/14 Page 3 of 9

1 to Revised Statutes of Missouri, Section 474.010, PARI, his surviving spouse, is

2 ROBERT’s sole heir.
3 7. Defendant, ADAM SHACKNAI (“ADAM”) is, and at all times
4 mentioned in this Complaint was, a citizen of Shelby County, State of Tennessee.
5 8. Defendant, DINA SHACKNAI (“DINA”) is, and at all times mentioned
6 in this Complaint was, a citizen of Maricopa County, State of Arizona.
7 9. Defendant, NINA ROMANO (“NINA”) is, and at all times mentioned
8 in this Complaint was, a citizen of San Joaquin County, State of California.
9 GENERAL ALLEGATIONS/ STATEMENT OF FACTS
10 10. On or around the morning of July 13, 2011, Defendants ADAM, DINA
11 and NINA, and each of them, conspired to plan, and did in fact, enter into a
12 common scheme of conduct with the intent to murder REBECCA in Coronado,
13 California, and did in fact, murder REBECCA by each of them personally
14 committing one or more of the following acts in furtherance of the common scheme
15 and conspiracy:
16 (a) striking REBECCA on the head multiple times with a blunt instrument;
17 (b) physically restraining her;
18 (c) further restraining her by binding her legs with tape;
19 (d) gagging her;
20 (e) binding her hands behind her back with rope;
21 (f) binding her ankles together with rope;
22 (g) removing the previously placed tape from her legs;
23 (h) strangling her to the point of unconsciousness or death;
24 (i) making and placing a rope noose around her neck;
25 (j) tying the other end of the rope leading to the noose to a bed;
26 (k) carrying her to the adjacent balcony and pushing her over the railing of
27 the balcony causing her to fall and, if she was still alive at that time, to then
28 die by asphyxiation.

-3-
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR WRONGFUL DEATH
 Case 3:13-cv-01624-W-NLS Document 36 Filed 07/08/14 Page 4 of 9

1 (l) during the course of the conspiracy to murder REBECCA, each of the
2 Defendants also kept watch to avoid detection and removed evidence of the
3 acts which they committed, including wiping down objects they had touched
4 in order to remove DNA and finger prints; and
5 (m) as a further ploy to cover up their wrongdoing, and in furtherance of their
6 common scheme, Defendants painted the following words on the inside of
7 door near the balcony where she was left hanging:
8 SHE SAVED HIM
9 CAN YOU SAVE HER
10 11. On the morning of July 13, 2011, REBECCA was found dead, naked,
11 bound and gagged, with a rope noose around her neck. Her cause of death was
12 asphyxiation, which was caused by either manual strangulation before she was
13 hanged, or from being hanged with a rope noose around her neck from the second
14 story deck of the Coronado vacation home at which she was staying. The Coroner
15 for the County of San Diego determined that she died on that date.
16 12. Each of the Defendants named herein were present at the location where
17 the murder of REBECCA occurred and all of them actively participated in the
18 planning, implementation, execution and subsequent concealment of the scheme to
19 murder REBECCA. Because the only individuals who know the true facts and
20 sequence of events with absolute certainty are the decedent REBECCA and the
21 Defendants themselves, the allegations made herein are made on information and
22 belief based on the evidence that has been uncovered to date. Plaintiffs intend to
23 seek leave to amend the Complaint as additional facts are developed and uncovered
24 during the course of discovery.
25 ALLEGATIONS OF SPECIFIC ACTS
26 ATTRIBUTED TO EACH DEFENDANT
27 13. Due to DINA’s prior incidents of confronting and threatening
28 DECEDENT, DINA’s prior history of being unable to control her anger, her

-4-
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR WRONGFUL DEATH
 Case 3:13-cv-01624-W-NLS Document 36 Filed 07/08/14 Page 5 of 9

1 ridiculing and publicly demeaning the DECEDENT for allegedly causing harm and
2 the eventual death of DINA’s six-year-old son, Maxfield, as well as her extreme
3 jealousy over the DECEDENT’s relationship with her ex-husband, Jonah Shacknai,
4 Plaintiffs allege, based in further part on an eye witness report placing DINA at the
5 1040 Ocean Boulevard residence the evening of the murder, that on the evening of
6 July 12, 2011, DINA aggressively confronted the DECEDENT at the Ocean
7 Boulevard residence, along with her sister, NINA. This confrontation arose from an
8 accident the prior day when DINA’s son Maxfield fell over a second floor railing at
9 the Ocean Boulevard residence, causing him brain damage and eventually his death
10 on July 16, 2011. DECEDENT was babysitting Maxfield at the time of the fall.
11 14. Plaintiffs allege, based in part on the mud found on DECEDENT’s feet
12 and four subgaleal hemorrhages on the back right side of her head, that in response
13 to the aggressive confrontation from Defendants DINA and NINA, DECEDENT,
14 fearing for her safety, attempted to flee the residence. However, before DECEDENT
15 could evade her attackers, she was struck four times on the back of the head with a
16 blunt object by DINA, rendering her unconscious. Plaintiffs believe that at this time,
17 ADAM, who had taken an Ambien earlier in the evening and was sleeping in the
18 guest house at the residence, was awakened by the commotion and came to the
19 scene.
20 15. Once confronted with the reality that DECEDENT would eventually
21 regain consciousness, and thereafter probably disclose information about this
22 incident and possibly other information of a personal nature that could cause public
23 humiliation and embarrassment to Defendants and Jonah Shacknai (i.e., the ex-
24 husband of DINA, father of Maxfield, brother of ADAM and the boyfriend of the
25 DECEDENT), the Defendants entered in to a conspiracy and common scheme to
26 murder the DECEDENT and hide their involvement.
27 16. Due to the lack of markings on her body evidencing her being dragged
28 back into the house, Plaintiffs allege that ADAM carried the DECEDENT back into

-5-
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR WRONGFUL DEATH
 Case 3:13-cv-01624-W-NLS Document 36 Filed 07/08/14 Page 6 of 9

1 the house. Based on the facts that DECEDENT was found naked and the clothing

2 she was wearing on that date was not found at the scene of the murder, Plaintiffs

3 allege that once inside the residence, the Defendants stripped off her clothing. Based

4 on the tape residue found on DECEDENT’s legs, and the fact that no tape with

5 similar adhesive was found at the scene, Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants first

6 restrained DECEDENT with tape, and gagged her, while they were devising and

7 planning the rest of the scheme, and later removed the tape from the scene.

8 17. Thereafter, the Defendants contrived an elaborate scheme to murder

9 REBECCA and conceal their involvement. DINA previously resided in the

10 residence, and thus was familiar with where to find items necessary to further the

11 scheme, including, inter alia, the ski rope used to bind and hang the DECEDENT.

12 18. The final scheme agreed to that evening by the Defendants involved

13 binding DECEDENT’s hands (behind her back) and ankles with rope they found at

14 the residence. Plaintiffs allege that based on the knots having nautical qualities and

15 ADAM being a tug boat captain with experience tying nautical knots, that ADAM

16 bound the DECEDENT. Plaintiffs further base this allegation on the fact that the

17 ropes had the same black paint residue found on DECEDENT’s nipples, thus

18 implicating the person who tied the knots as the person who also pinched the

19 Decedent’s nipples, and that ADAM had admitted to masturbating to pornography

20 on his cell phone that evening, the further inference being that the two instances of

21 sexual behavior are consistent with ADAM’s state of mind that evening. The

22 Defendants also placed a blue t-shirt around her neck and stuffed it in her mouth,

23 using it as a gag to both muffle her screams and cover up any marks that would

24 suggest murder. Based on the type of injury to DECEDENT’s throat, which

25 commonly occurs with strangulation and is unlikely to occur with a hanging, and

26 the amount of strength needed to create such injury, Plaintiffs allege that in the early

27 hours of July 13, 2011, ADAM choked REBECCA to death.

28 19. Once they murdered REBECCA, DINA instructed ADAM to leave a

-6-
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR WRONGFUL DEATH
 Case 3:13-cv-01624-W-NLS Document 36 Filed 07/08/14 Page 7 of 9

1 cryptic message on the door outside the room where the murder was committed. The
2 message was painted using black paint at a height that is consistent with an
3 individual who is approximately the height of ADAM. The message read: “SHE
4 SAVED HIM. CAN YOU SAVE HER.”
5 20. ADAM, based on black paint residue found on the noose, then
6 tightened the noose around the neck of the DECEDENT and attached the rope to the
7 base of the bed. ADAM then picked up REBECCA, then threw her over the edge of
8 the adjacent balcony. Either DINA or NINA was sitting on the bed to which the
9 rope was secured, to ensure that the bed remained anchored to the floor as
10 evidenced by the bed having moved less than a foot. While the scheme was being
11 perpetrated, Defendants DINA and NINA also acted as look outs to avoid detection
12 and encouraged ADAM to commit the acts alleged herein. Although each of the
13 Defendants was in part responsible for putting the DECEDENT in harms way, none
14 of them made any effort to help her or to save her from the injuries that eventually
15 resulted in her death.
16 21. The Defendants were careful to remove any evidence of their
17 involvement, including the disposal of the tape and REBECCA’s clothes. Once the
18 staging was complete, the Defendants fled the scene, instructing ADAM to call the
19 police in the early morning with claims of suicide.
20

21 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

FOR
22 WRONGFUL DEATH
23 22. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference herein paragraphs 1
24 though 21 of this Complaint and further allege against all Defendants as follows.
25 23. On or about July 13, 2011, Defendants, and each of them, entered into
26 a common scheme and plan to murder REBECCA, and in furtherance thereof
27 intentionally, willfully, wantonly and maliciously caused physical harm to
28 REBECCA by stalking, attacking, choking, gaging, binding, and hanging her at the

-7-
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR WRONGFUL DEATH
 Case 3:13-cv-01624-W-NLS Document 36 Filed 07/08/14 Page 8 of 9

1 Premises. Each of the defendants had his/her own motives for committing these

2 wrongful acts, including anger and revenge against REBECCA arising from the

3 fatal injuries suffered by six-year-old Maxwell Shacknai, nephew to ADAM, niece

4 to NINA and daughter to DINA, while REBECCA was taking care of him two days

5 before she was murdered. In addition, Defendant DINA SHACKNAI was extremely

6 jealous of REBECCA’s relationship with her ex-husband, JONAH SHACKNAI and

7 her now deceased son, Maxwell. The Defendants were further motivated to silence

8 REBECCA in order to keep her from disclosing matters that could prove extremely

9 embarrassing to the Defendants and their families.

10 24. Each of the acts alleged herein were done with a wanton, reckless

11 disregard for the rights of the DECEDENT and with the full knowledge that she

12 would die as a result of said acts.

13 25. As a result of Defendants’ intentional, reckless, wanton and unlawful

14 conduct, REBECCA sustained severe and serious injury to her person, which was

15 the sole cause of her death.

16 26. By the performing the acts and/or omissions set forth above,

17 Defendants, and each of them, wrongfully and proximately caused the death of

18 REBECCA.

19 27. As a proximate result of said Defendants’ wrongful conduct, and the

20 death of REBECCA, Plaintiffs PARI and ROBERT ZAHAU have been injured and

21 suffered damages resulting from the loss of comfort, society, attention, services and

22 support of her daughter, REBECCA, in an amount according to proof. These

23 Plaintiffs were also financially dependant on REBECCA and thus were also

24 damaged by the loss of financial support they were receiving from REBECCA at the

25 time of her death and reasonably expected to receive in the future.

26 28. As a further actual and proximate result of said Defendants’

27 negligence, Plaintiffs incurred funeral and burial expenses in and amount according

28 to proof at trial.

-8-
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR WRONGFUL DEATH
 Case 3:13-cv-01624-W-NLS Document 36 Filed 07/08/14 Page 9 of 9

1 29. Pursuant to C.C.P. Sections 377.60 and 377.61, Plaintiffs have brought

2 this action, and claim damages from said Defendants for the wrongful death of

3 REBECCA, and the resulting injuries.

4 PRAYER FOR RELIEF

5 WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment against Defendants, and each for

6 them, as follows:

7 1. For compensatory damages according to proof;

8 2. For special damages according to proof;

9 3. For reimbursement of funeral expenses and costs of burial;

10 4. For pecuniary damages according to proof;

11 5. For interest on all sums awarded, according to proof;

12 6. For costs of suit incurred herein; and

13 7. All other relief to which Plaintiffs may be entitled under law.

14 Dated: July 8, 2014 GREER & ASSOCIATES, A.P.C.

15

16 By /s/ C. Keith Greer, Esq.

C. Keith Greer, Esq.
17
Attorney for Plaintiffs
18

19 GASTON & GASTON, A.P.L.C.

20

21 By /s/ Frederick Gaston, Esq.

Frederick Gaston, Esq.
22 Attorney for Plaintiffs
23

24

25

26

27

28

-9-
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR WRONGFUL DEATH