JJD 1996 Arrest, Incarceration & Court Case
Mar 15, 2019 1:54:31 GMT
sammyt, almagata, and 6 more like this
Post by jenn on Mar 15, 2019 1:54:31 GMT
Filed in Placer County Superior Court on April 17, 1997 and amended on September 26, 1997
Joseph DeAngelo, Plaintiff vs. Vintners Distributors, Inc. and Gilbert Guzman)
(Vintners Distributors is the Foothills Shell Foodmart in Roseville CA)
Plaintiff Alleges COUNT ONE – NEGLIGENCE and COUNT TWO – FALSE IMPRISONMENT
1. Plaintiff, DeAngelo is a resident of Placer County
2. Defendant, Gilbert Guzman is a resident of Placer County
5. On or about July 28, 1995, plaintiff was a customer at a filling station business owned, maintained, controlled, managed and operated by defendants and ……. Plaintiff purchased gasoline and attempted to pump the gasoline into the tank of his vehicle; when the pump failed to operate properly, plaintiff requested a refund for the gasoline not pumped; defendant GUZMAN, the apparent operator of the business, failed or refused to properly ascertain the actual nature of plaintiff’s request and to refund plaintiff’s money; after plaintiff was able to pump the rest of his pre-purchased gasoline, defendant GUZMAN telephoned police and reported that plaintiff had attempted to rob the business. Defendant GUZMAN was at that time an employee of defendant VINTNERS DISTRIBUTORS INC., and by virtue of said employment, plaintiff is in the class of persons to whom defendants owed a duty to employ, train and instruct competent, English-speaking persons capable of distinguishing the difference between an attempted robbery and a request for a refund of unused pre-paid gasoline purchase money.
6. As a direct and legal result of the negligence of defendants, plaintiff was subsequently arrested on April 16, 1996, and charged with the crime of attempted robbery, causing plaintiff to suffer the expenditure in excess of $5,000.00 in attorney’s fees and related costs to defend the charges, which were ultimately dismissed with a finding of factual innocence by the court; defendants’ breach of their duties plaintiff entitle him to damages described below;
7. As a further direct and legal result of the negligence of defendants, plaintiff has suffered great mental, physical, emotional and nervous pain and suffering; as a result of these injuries plaintiff is entitled to damages in an amount within the jurisdiction of the Superior Court.
COUNT TWO – FALSE IMPRISONMENT
9. Defendant GUZMAN’S action in reporting an attempted robbery long after plaintiff had peaceably concluded his business and left the premises were unreasonable, unprivileged and only for some evil and malicious reason best known by GUZMAN.
10. Immediately prior to the acts of defendant resulting in plaintiffs arrest and incarceration, plaintiff had been legally upon the premises of defendant’s business.
11. In making the false report of an attempted robbery resulting in plaintiff’s arrest and incarceration, defendant GUZMAN acted with deliberate malice and for no other purpose than to embarrass, humiliate and ridiculing plaintiff.
12. As a proximate result of the acts of defendant GUZMAN, plaintiff sustained shock and injury to his nervous system, resulting in plaintiff’s suffering severe mental anguish, which will result in some permanent disability to plaintiff, all to his general damage in a sum exceeding $25,000.00
13. As a proximate result of the acts of defendants, plaintiff will incur medical and incidental expenses for the care and treatment of these injuries, the exact amount of which is unknown at the present time.
14. The acts of defendants were willful, wanton, malicious and oppressive and justify the awarding of punitive damages in the sum of $1,000,000.00.
Notes: Plaintiff’s attorney was fined twice by the court and submitted to collections. Response was filed asking court to give plaintiff nothing. Punitive Damages request dismissed on Nov. 1997. Interrogatories done and set for trial long cause (3 days).
Feb 20, 1998 SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT:
3. This case involves an incident where plaintiff was a customer at defendant’s filling station, and while there experienced a non-functioning gas pump. When he attempted to inform the clerk that the pump was not working and asked for his change for the gas not pumped, the clerk became uncooperative, apparently not able to speak English well enough to understand plaintiff. Plaintiff left the premises peacefully and subsequently the clerk called police and reported plaintiff as an attempted robber. SOME EIGHT MONTHS LATER PLAINTIFF WAS ARRESTED BY POLICE IN A STING OPERATION WHERE LETTERS WERE SENT INFORMING PLAINTIFF, AND OTHERS, THAT THEY HAD WINE AND A PRIZE.
Plaintiff was required to bail and hire an attorney. Eventually, the case was dismissed. Both parties agreed to a settlement in arbitration. Appears to be less than $5,000.00
Joseph DeAngelo, Plaintiff vs. Vintners Distributors, Inc. and Gilbert Guzman)
(Vintners Distributors is the Foothills Shell Foodmart in Roseville CA)
Plaintiff Alleges COUNT ONE – NEGLIGENCE and COUNT TWO – FALSE IMPRISONMENT
1. Plaintiff, DeAngelo is a resident of Placer County
2. Defendant, Gilbert Guzman is a resident of Placer County
5. On or about July 28, 1995, plaintiff was a customer at a filling station business owned, maintained, controlled, managed and operated by defendants and ……. Plaintiff purchased gasoline and attempted to pump the gasoline into the tank of his vehicle; when the pump failed to operate properly, plaintiff requested a refund for the gasoline not pumped; defendant GUZMAN, the apparent operator of the business, failed or refused to properly ascertain the actual nature of plaintiff’s request and to refund plaintiff’s money; after plaintiff was able to pump the rest of his pre-purchased gasoline, defendant GUZMAN telephoned police and reported that plaintiff had attempted to rob the business. Defendant GUZMAN was at that time an employee of defendant VINTNERS DISTRIBUTORS INC., and by virtue of said employment, plaintiff is in the class of persons to whom defendants owed a duty to employ, train and instruct competent, English-speaking persons capable of distinguishing the difference between an attempted robbery and a request for a refund of unused pre-paid gasoline purchase money.
6. As a direct and legal result of the negligence of defendants, plaintiff was subsequently arrested on April 16, 1996, and charged with the crime of attempted robbery, causing plaintiff to suffer the expenditure in excess of $5,000.00 in attorney’s fees and related costs to defend the charges, which were ultimately dismissed with a finding of factual innocence by the court; defendants’ breach of their duties plaintiff entitle him to damages described below;
7. As a further direct and legal result of the negligence of defendants, plaintiff has suffered great mental, physical, emotional and nervous pain and suffering; as a result of these injuries plaintiff is entitled to damages in an amount within the jurisdiction of the Superior Court.
COUNT TWO – FALSE IMPRISONMENT
9. Defendant GUZMAN’S action in reporting an attempted robbery long after plaintiff had peaceably concluded his business and left the premises were unreasonable, unprivileged and only for some evil and malicious reason best known by GUZMAN.
10. Immediately prior to the acts of defendant resulting in plaintiffs arrest and incarceration, plaintiff had been legally upon the premises of defendant’s business.
11. In making the false report of an attempted robbery resulting in plaintiff’s arrest and incarceration, defendant GUZMAN acted with deliberate malice and for no other purpose than to embarrass, humiliate and ridiculing plaintiff.
12. As a proximate result of the acts of defendant GUZMAN, plaintiff sustained shock and injury to his nervous system, resulting in plaintiff’s suffering severe mental anguish, which will result in some permanent disability to plaintiff, all to his general damage in a sum exceeding $25,000.00
13. As a proximate result of the acts of defendants, plaintiff will incur medical and incidental expenses for the care and treatment of these injuries, the exact amount of which is unknown at the present time.
14. The acts of defendants were willful, wanton, malicious and oppressive and justify the awarding of punitive damages in the sum of $1,000,000.00.
Notes: Plaintiff’s attorney was fined twice by the court and submitted to collections. Response was filed asking court to give plaintiff nothing. Punitive Damages request dismissed on Nov. 1997. Interrogatories done and set for trial long cause (3 days).
Feb 20, 1998 SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE STATEMENT:
3. This case involves an incident where plaintiff was a customer at defendant’s filling station, and while there experienced a non-functioning gas pump. When he attempted to inform the clerk that the pump was not working and asked for his change for the gas not pumped, the clerk became uncooperative, apparently not able to speak English well enough to understand plaintiff. Plaintiff left the premises peacefully and subsequently the clerk called police and reported plaintiff as an attempted robber. SOME EIGHT MONTHS LATER PLAINTIFF WAS ARRESTED BY POLICE IN A STING OPERATION WHERE LETTERS WERE SENT INFORMING PLAINTIFF, AND OTHERS, THAT THEY HAD WINE AND A PRIZE.
Plaintiff was required to bail and hire an attorney. Eventually, the case was dismissed. Both parties agreed to a settlement in arbitration. Appears to be less than $5,000.00
