Complaint for defamation rondo v doral news

Page 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No:

GIANFRANCO RONDON, an individual, COMPLAINT NO.: CASE NO.: ______________ Plaintiff, v. PATRICIA POLEO, an individual; DORAL NEWSPAPER, LLC, a Florida Limited liability company d/b/a DORAL NEWS, JONATHAN LEON, an individual Defendants. ____________________________________/ COMPLAINT Come now, Plaintiff Gianfranco Rondon (“Rondon”), through their undersigned counsel, and files this Complaint against Patricia Poleo (“Poleo”); Doral Newspaper, LLC, A Florida limited liability company d/b/a Doral News (“Doral News”) and Jonathan Leon (“Leon”) collectively, (“Defendants”) and in support states as follows: PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1.

Plaintiff, Rondon is a resident, sui juris, and resides in the Southern District

of Florida. 2.

Defendant, Poleo is a resident, sui juris, and resides in the Southern District

of Florida. 3.

Defendant, Doral News is a Florida limited liability company with its

principal place of business in Miami-Dade, Florida.

1


4.

Defendant, Leon is a resident, sui juris, and resides in the Southern District

of Florida. 5.

Defendants own and operate a newspaper, TV station and online newspaper

business in Doral, Florida and engage in local news publishing in the Doral area and in international news reporting with focus in Venezuelan and Cuban news. 6.

This Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendants under section

48.193, Florida Statutes, including under subprovision (1)(b), as their acts constitute the commission of a tortious act within this state through the publication of a defamatory articles which was published in, and accessed in this District.

Additionally, under

subprovisions (1)(f), Defendants have caused injury to Plaintiff in this state through the publication of the defamatory statements in the course of Defendants’ (1) operating of a website that was published to, and viewed in, this state; and (2) production and editorial control over a website that was consumed or solicited readers for advertising and other purposes from the Spanish-speaking and Hispanic community in this District. In fact, Defendants’ website promises news for Hispanic and Florida on their newspaper and homepage. 7.

This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 as

the matter in controversy exceeds the sum of $75,000.00 and is between citizens of different U.S. states and foreign states. 8.

Venue is proper within the Southern District of Florida as this is the district

in which the defamatory statements were published by the Defendants and/or intended to be read by the general consuming public.

2


9.

All conditions precedent to the filing of this action have occurred or have

been waived. NATURE OF THE ACTION 10.

On or about February 2015, Poleo and on or about March 2015, both wrote a

story about Rondon and published said story in the Doral News website (the “Stories”). 11.

On or about The Story not only states unverified facts that Poleo makes the

reader believe are true about Rondon’s family ties with high ranking political figures in Venezuela, but also makes unverified statements accusing Rondon of criminal acts and of being a “straw man” to political figures in Venezuela. 12.

Rondon is a prominent business person in Venezuela with strong ties in the

South Florida community and his reputation is of outmost importance to his business success. 13.

Poleo, Leon and Doral News made false statements that Rondon is currently

under investigation by authorities in Washington, that his “fortune” and business success may be derived from illegal acts and that he possess bank accounts with billions of U.S. Dollars. Poleo, Leon and Doral News also made false statements about Rondon being a “straw man” for political figures in Venezuela. 14.

In fact, Defendants intend for their newspaper and website to be read in

Florida as this geographical area contains a large of Venezuelans community. 15.

Poleo and Leon made these remarks with the intent to discredit and defame

Rondon both in Venezuela and in the Southern District of Florida.

3


16.

As a result of Poleo and Leon’s publishing the defamatory remarks against

Plaintiffs at Doral News, Rondon’s reputation has been affected among his business partners and associates. 17.

These disparaging and defaming remarks were made directly to Rondon’s

professional reputation and career and with the intention to cause Rondon to be embarrassed among his business partners and associates. 18.

Defendants’ Articles is replete with statements that are outrageous,

scandalous and reminiscent of a tabloid publication. 19.

Defendants’ statements were made with actual malice.

20.

Defendants’ false and defamatory statements were published in electronic

format over the internet and through social media. The statements remain on Defendants’ Website and are continuously available to all viewers. 21.

The Defamatory statements made by the Defendants set forth above are

actionable per se because the statements are facially defamatory and impute upon Rondon conduct of illegal business practices, racketeering, corruption and a conspiracy among all parties. 22.

Alternatively, the defamatory statements made and published by Defendants

are actionable per qoud the statements, when taken in context and the innuendo suggested by the statements imply conduct that degrades and injures Plaintiff, their good name, their reputation, their standing in the community, both personally and professionally, and exposes Plaintiff to distrust, hatred, contempt and obloquy. 23.

As a result, Rondon has been damaged.

4


24.

Rondon has retained the services of the undersigned attorneys in this matter

and they are obligated to pay reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs to pursue this matter. COUNT I INJUNCTION AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS 25.

Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference paragraph 1 through 24 as if

fully set forth herein. 26.

Defendant’s false and derogatory and defamatory remarks have caused and

will continue to cause irreparable harm to Plaintiff’s reputation in the community, interfere with Rondon’s career and professional success. 27.

Without an injunction Rondon will have no other adequate remedy at law to

mitigate or stop these damages from occurring. 28.

Plaintiffs’ substantial likelihood of success on the merits is evident as the

defamatory remarks made by Defendant are false and without basis. 29.

Rondon’s threatened injury to this professional reputation outweigh any

possible harm to the Defendants who only stand to “sell” more stories and improve their reputation among their followers. 30.

Therefore, since these remarks made by Defendant are false and without

basis and made only with the intent to ruin Rondon’s professional reputation in the community, the granting of the preliminary injunction will not disserve the public interest. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands the entry of a preliminary injunction against the Defendants; a judgment against the Defendants for all damages allowed by law; attorney’s fees and costs of suit as incurred in this action; and for any other and further relief as this Honorable Court may deem just and appropriate.

5


COUNT II LIBEL AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS 31.

Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference paragraph 1 through 30 as if

fully set forth herein. 32.

Defendants made written false, derogatory and defamatory allegations, and

statements in the form publication on their online newspaper to third parties parties regarding the integrity, reputation, honesty and overall character of Rondon. 33.

Defendants’ distribution of these written false, derogatory and defamatory

allegations have subjected Plaintiff to distrust, hatred, contempt, ridicule and obloquy among business partners, associates and the public in general. 34.

Defendants made those false, derogatory and defamatory allegations,

accusations and statements with the intent to damage Rondon’s professional reputation. 35.

Rondon was injured as a result.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants for all damages allowed by law; attorneys fees and costs of suit as incurred in this action; and for any other and further relief as this Honorable Court may deems just and appropriate. COUNT III LIBEL PER SE 36.

Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference paragraph 1 through 35 as if

fully set forth herein. 37.

Defendants made written false, derogatory and defamatory allegations,

accusations and statements in the form publication on their online newspaper to third parties regarding the integrity, reputation, honesty and overall character of Rondon.

6


38.

The false, derogatory and defamatory accusations imputes that Rondon has

committed a criminal offense that amounts to a felony. 39.

Defendants letters and distribution of these written false, derogatory and

defamatory allegations have subjected Plaintiff to distrust, hatred, contempt, ridicule and obloquy. 40.

Defendants made those false, derogatory and defamatory allegations,

accusations and statements with the intent to damage Plaintiffs professional reputation. 41.

As a result, Rondon has been injured in that his professional and business

reputation has been tainted. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants for all damages allowed by law, including punitive damages; attorneys fees and costs of suit as incurred in this action; and for any other and further relief as this Honorable Court may deems just and appropriate. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL A jury trial is demanded for all counts. Dated: April 17, 2015. Respectfully submitted, By: /s/ Gerardo A. Vazquez Attorney for Plaintiff Florida Bar No. 6904 Email: gv@gvazquez.com Vazquez & Carballo, PA 200 S. Biscayne Blvd., Suite 4310 Miami FL 33131 Telephone: 305-371-8064 Facsimile: 305-371-4967 Attorneys for Plaintiff

7


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.