crew: most corrupt sources: amended complaint and jury demand

8/4/2019 CREW: Most Corrupt Sources: Amended Complaint and Jury Demand

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/crew-most-corrupt-sources-amended-complaint-and-jury-demand 1/17

CIVIL DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

)

RJI GOVERNMENT STRATEGIES, INC., )

)md )

)

RJI CAPITAL CORPORATION )

)

P laintiffs/Counter-Defendants, )

)

v . )

)

)

TANYA ALICE RAHALL, )

)

md ))

HILLIARD ALAN ZOLA )

)Defendants/Counter-Plaintiff (Rahall). )

Civil Action No. 2009 CA 7515B

Next Event: Deadline for Discovery

Requests: March 9, 2010

Judge John M. Mott

AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

COME NOW Plaintiffs RII Government Strategies, Inc. and RJI Capital Corporation, by

Counsel, an d for their Amended Complaint allege the following upon personal knowledge or

information and belief:

PARTIES

1. PlaintiffRII Government Strategies, Inc. ("RJI-GS") is a Delaware corporation

with its principal place of business at 1710 Rhode Island Avenue, NW, 2nd Floor, Washington,

D.C. 20036.

2. PlaintiffRJI Capital Corporation (uRJI Capital") is a Delaware corporation with

its principal place of business at 1710 Rhode Island Avenue, NW, 2nd Floor, Washington, D.C.



20036. RJI-GS and RJI Capital are also collectively and individually referred to in the

Complaint as "RJr'.

3. Defendant Tanya Alice Rahall is a citizen of the United States who resides at

1830 Jefferson PlaceNW, Apt. 10, Washington, D.C., 20036.

4. Defendant Hilliard Alan Zola is a citizen of the United States who resides at 1

Logan Circle NW, Apt. 7, Washington, D.C., 20005.

JURISDICTION

5. Jurisdiction is proper in this Court pursuant to D.C. Code § 11-921, because the

acts giving rise to these Claims occurred in, andlor were directed at, the District of Columbia,

and the Defendants reside in the District of Columbia.

NATURE OF THE ACTION

6. This is an action for conspiracy, intentional interference with contract, intentional

interference with business expectancy, breach of the duty ofloyalty and other employment

obligations, misappropriation of trade secrets and conversion arising out of the harm caused to

RJI by Defendants' self-dealing, attempts to divert RJI business to their own benefit, and other

unlawful acts including the theft ofRJl's trade secrets. As part of Defendants' scheme, they

have sought to use Defendant Rahall's relationship with her brother, Congressman Nick Rahall

of West Virginia, as an attempt to intimidate and threaten RJI.

7. RJI-GS is a government relations finn that was founded in 2003. RJI-GS

provides expertise and services in the areas of defense, national security, energy, appropriations,

and taxation on legislative and regulatory issues. RJI-GS is the wholly-owned subsidiary ofRJ!

Capital.

2



8. Defendant Rahall is the sister ?f Congressman Nick Rahall from the 3rd District

of w e s t Virginia Prior to her employment, Defendant Rahall represented to RJI that she had

extensive experience on Congressional relations and lobbying matters, and personal contacts that

could be valuable to RJI's current and future clients.

9. On November I, 2008, RJI hired Defendant Rahall to serve as Vice-President at a

salary of$90,000 per year. RJI also provided Defendant Rahall with other benefits, including

health insurance and participation in its 40 I(k) plan. Defendant Rahall was responsible for

developing new business for RJI and providing lobbying services to RJI clients. On January 1,

2009, RJI reduced Defendant Rahall' s salary to $70,000 per year as a result of her failure to meet

performance expectations.

10. At the time RJI hired Defendant Rahall, it provided her with a copy of the RJI

Employee Handbook. Defendant Rahall acknowledged receiving the RJI Employee Handbook

and had the document in her possession throughout the time of her employment.

11. As set forth in the Employee Handbook, Defendant Rahall's obligations included:

a. The duty to maintain the confidentiality of all client information;

b. The duty to maintain the confidentiality of all RJI corporate information;

c. The duty not to use her employment with RJI for private gain, to advance

personal interests, or to obtain favors or benefits for herself, members of her

family or any other individuals, corporations, or business entities; and

d. The duty to conduct her personal affairs in such a fashion that her duties

and responsibilities to RJI are not jeopardized and that no legal questions arise

with respect to her association or work with RJI.

3



12 . D e fe nd an t R ah al l' s p er fo rm a nc e a t R JI w as p oo r a nd in ad eq ua te . D e sp ite

De fe nda n t R a ha ll ' s r ep re se n ta ti on s a bou t h er e xt en s iv e e xp er ti se a nd p er sonal c ont ac ts ,

D efe nd an t R ah all f aile d to b rin g s ig nif ic an t b us in es s to R JI fo r m os t o f h er tim e a t t he c om pa ny .

13 .On

o r a bo ut J un e 1 8, 2 00 9, R JI e nte red in to a c on tr ac t w ith M o un ta in ee r L LC

( "Moun ta in ee r" ) in c on ne ctio n w ith th e d ev elo pm en t a nd im p leme nta ti on o f a f ed er al m ar ke tin g

s tr ate gy . U n de r th e c on tr ac t, R JI a gr ee d to w o rk o n Moun ta in ee r's b eh alf to e sta blis h

c oo pe ra tiv e re la tio ns hip s w ith k ey m em be rs o f th e U .S . C on gre ss a nd s ta ff a s w ell a s th e

r ele va nt a ge nc ie s o f th e U .S . G o ve rnm en t, in cl ud in g th e U .S . D e pa rt me nt o f E n er gy , O ff ic e o f

F os si l E n er gy a nd th e N at io na l E ne rg y T ec hn ol og y L ab or at or y o n is su es r ela te d to Moun ta in ee r.

R JI a ls o a gr ee d t o p ro vid e m es sa gin g s tr at eg ie s a nd m a na ge c ommun ic at io ns w ith g ov er nm en t

entities.

14. D efen dan t R ahall co nd ucted bu sin ess d evelo pm en t activities to b rin g in

Moun ta in ee r a s a n R JI c lie nt w ith s ub st an tia l d ir ec tio n , a ss is ta nc e, a nd a dv ic e f rom M r . C alv in

R . H um ph re y, S en io r V ic e P re sid en t o f Rll, De fe nd an t R ah al l s ubmit te d, a nd R JI p ai d, e xp en se

r ep or ts r ela te d to b us in es s d ev elo pm en t o f Moun ta in ee r, in clu d in g m ea l a nd e nte rta inm en t

e xp en se s, lo n g d is ta nc e c alls , d oc um en t a nd p ro po sa l p ro d uc tio n, a nd r es ea rc h. D e sp ite th e f ac t

t ha t R JI 's p ro po sa l to Moun ta in ee r lis te d n um e ro us R JI emp lo ye es a nd c on tr ac to rs w h o w ould

a ss is t Moun ta in ee r, D e fe nd an t R ah al l d ec id ed to s er vic e Moun ta in ee r o n h er ow n w ith ou t

m an ag em en t c on se nt a nd a ga in st th e c orp ora te p lan fo r s erv ic in g o f th e c lien t. A c op y o f th e

M o un ta in ee r P ro po sa l is a tta ch ed h ere to a s E x. I .

1 5. R JI 's co ntra ct w ith M o un ta in ee r a llo we d e ith er p arty to te rm in ate th e a gr ee me nt

a cc or din g to it s te rm s. I t s ta te s in r ele va nt p ar t:

7.1 This Agreement may be term inated at any tim e by either

p arty b y a 6 0 (s ix ty ) d ay s w ritte n n otic e to th e o th er p arty , b ut su ch

4

;.:- .



termination shall not affect the obligation of the Company to pay

specific matter fees as provided in Clause 3.2 hereof as to any

Service or part of a Service still subject to a separate fee schedule.

7.2 Either party may terminate this Agreement with or without

cause upon fifteen (IS) days prior written notice to the other party.

If a default occurs, the non-defaulting party may immediatelyterminate this Agreement and may exercise any other remedies

available to it under law or equity ... .

16. At some point after RJI executed the Mountaineer contract but not later than July

2009, Defendant Rahall began acting in concert with Defendant Zola to steal the Mountaineer

business from RJI, including without limitation by providing confidential information regarding

RJI and Mountaineer to Defendant lola.

17. Defendant Zola paid Defendant Rahall to work on an outside government

relations matters for him during the time wben she was employed by RJI. Defendant Rahall did

not inform RJI that she was engaged in government relations work. for any person or entity other

than RJI. On information and belief, all government relations work Defendant Rahall performed

for Defendant Zola could and should have been performed within the scope of her duties for RJI.

18. Until September 2009, RJI provided Defendant Zola with office space and other

facilities free of cost based on Defendant Zola's longstanding relationship with Mr. Ron Wahid,

RJI's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer. After learning of Defendant Zola's unlawful

conduct, RJI instructed Defendant Zola to quit the premises and Defendant Zola agreed to do so.

However, Defendant Zola has continued to use RJP s address and fax number at 1710 Rhode

Island Avenue, N.W., Suite 200, Washington, D.C. 20036 for his Government Relations firm of

Dierman, Wortley, Zola &Associates ("DWZ") without authorization. A copy of DWZ's web-

page is attached hereto as Ex. 2.1

1T his d ocu men t w as p rin te d d ire ctly fro m DWZ 's w ebsite o n F eb rua ry 3, 2 01 0.

5



19. Beginning during-her. employment with RJI and/or shortly thereafter, Defendant

Rahall began revising the Mountaineer Contract to replace RJI in a new draft document with

RTK, an entity she controls that is not affiliated with RJI.

20. On July 31, 2009, Defendant Rahall communicated with Defendant Zola about

their plan to divert to themselves a business proposal that Tony Williamson of Celestial Capital

Corporation had offered to RJI.

21. On August 4,2009, RJI terminated Defendant Rahall's employment. Mr. Wahid

directed Defendant Rahall to return to the Company all materials, documentation, and equipment

belonging to RJI at that time. Defendant Rahall has failed to return RH's property and has given

some or all of this property to Defendant Zola.

22. In furtherance of Defendants' conspiracy and at their instigation, on August 5,

2009, the day after RJI terminated Defendant Rahall's employment, Mountaineer terminated the

contract between it and RJI "effective immediately." A copy of this termination letter is attached

hereto as Ex. 3. Mountaineer's "effective immediately" termination breached its agreement with

RJI.

23. Mountaineer has not paid RJI according to the terms of its contract with RJI.

Mountaineer agreed to pay RJI a monthly retainer of $15,000, starting June 1,2009. RJI

received one payment from Mountaineer, but, in violation of her duties to Plaintiffs, Defendant

Rahall never invoiced Mountaineer for the second payment during the time she was at RJI. RJI

later discovered that Defendant Rahall had prepared a second invoice for Mountaineer in the

name ofRTK, the entity she controls that has no affiliation with RJI. RJI does not know whether

Defendant Rahall sent the RTK invoice to Mountaineer or not.

6



2 4. D efe nd an ts Z ola an d R ah all ac tin g to gethe r ca use d M o un tain eer to brea ch its

c on tr ac t w ith R JI . M o un ta in ee r w as in du ce d to p ro vid e in a dv an ce its d ra ft te rm in atio n le tte r to

D ef en da nt Z ola , w ho w as n ot w or kin g f or Rll a nd n o t a uth o ri ze d to r ec ei ve c on fi de nt ia l

c om p an y i nf orm at io n . f or h is r ev iew . Mounta in ee r i ni ti al ly in te nd ed t o g iv e R JI 1 5 d ay s n o tic e

o f te rm in at io n , b ut w a s i ns tr uc te d b y De fe nd an t Z o la t o b re ac h t he a gr eem en t b y imm e di at el y

cancel li ng i t. Se e B -M a il b etw ee n H illia rd Z ola a nd V ic to ria B an ta , a tta ch ed h er eto a s E x. 4 .

Moun ta in e er c ompl ie d w i th De f enda nt Z o la 's i ns tr u ct ion .

25 . In 2 008 , D efen dan t R ab all th re aten ed to u nd erm in e R JI's go vern men t relatio ns

b us in es s b y in fo rm in g M r. H ump hr ey th at th e " do or s o n C ap ito l H ill w ill b e c lo se d" to Rll, an d

its e mp lo ye es a nd c lie nts , if s he d id n ot r ec eiv e w ha t s he w an te d o n c er ta in is su es . D e fe nd an t

R ah all m ad e s im ila r th re ats to M r. W a hid in 2 00 9. U po n in fo rm atio n a nd b elie f, D e fe nd an ts

h av e i nte nd ed to u se D e fe nd an t R a ha ll 's r ela tio n sh ip w it h h er b ro th er t o e ff ec tu ate t he ir th ef t o f

R J I b us in es s a nd o th er u n law fu l a ct s.

26 . O n or abo ut A ugu st 6, 2009, D efen dan t Zo la com mun icated w ith a form er R JI

e mp lo ye e, B ar to n M a rc ois , w ho s ta te d. " he r [D ef en da nt R ah all's ] b ro th er w ill k now h ow to

m ak e th in gs d if fic ult b y m ak in g th in gs h ar d o n" C alv in H ump hr ey , a n R JI S en io r V ic e P re sid en t.

S ee E -M a il f rom B ar to n M a rc ois to H illia rd Z ola ( Au g. 6 , 2 00 9) , a tta ch ed a s E x. 5 . D e fe nd an t

lo la d id n ot d en y in re spo nse to this co mm un ic atio n th at effo rts w ou ld b e m ad e to ha rm R JI o n

Cap it o l H i ll .

2 7. A fter D efe nd an t R ah all w as term in ated , sh e re qu es ted th at R JI gra nt h er

p erm is sio n to r etu rn to th e R JI o ff ic e to r etr ie ve " pe rs on al p ro fe ss io n al w o rk d at a" s to re d o n t he

R J I c om p ut er . R J I g ra nte d h er p erm is si on to r et ri ev e o n ly " pe rs on al m e di ca l f ile s. s to re d

p er so n al p as sw o rd s, r ea l e st ate b us in es s f il es , a nd s to ck p o rt fo lio d o cum en ts ." See B-Ma il f rom

7



P ed er G ar sk e to T an ya R ah all. (A u g. > 1812 00 9), a tta ch ed a s E x. 6 . W h en D efe nd an t R ah all

r etu rn ed o n A ugu st 1 8, 20 09 , s he m is ap pr op ri ate d R JI c on fid en ti al a nd p ro pr ie ta ry d o cum en ts

a nd c omm un ic atio ns b y d ow nlo ad in g a t le as t 2 63 d oc um en ts fr om th e R JI c om pu te r n etw or k a nd

se nd in g th em to h er p ers on al e ma il a cc ou nt. S he a ls o e -n taile d o r o th er wis e fo rw ar de d s om e o r

a ll o f t he se c on fi de nti al a nd p ro pr ie ta ry c ommun ic atio n s a nd d oc um en ts t o D e fe nd an t Z ola a nd

o n A ugu st 1 2, 20 09 , a fte r h er te rm in at io n, a sk ed D e fe nd an t Z ola to s en d h er a ll th e c on fid en tia l

d oc um en ts r ela te d to Mounta in ee r a nd a no th er c li en t o f RJI' s th at h e h ad . S ee E-Mai l f rom

T an ya R ahall to H illiard Zo la (A ug. 12 , 2 009 ), attached as E x. 7. A t n o tim e d urin g the perio d in

q ue stio n w as D efe nd an t Z ola a n e mp lo ye e o fR ll, s o h e s ho uld n ev er h av e h ad th is p ro prie ta ry

i nf orma tio n o fR JI 's i n th e f ir st p la ce .

2 8. R JI h as d ev elo pe d p ro prie ta ry in fo rm atio n c on stitu tin g tra de se cr ets in c on ne ctio n

w ith its g ov er nm e nt r ela tio ns a nd c on su ltin g b us in es s. S uc h tr ad e s ec re ts in cl ud e R JI p ric in g

t erm s a nd p rop os al s, c ont ra ct s w i th c li en ts , c li en t i de n ti fi ca ti on , a nd o th er s en s it iv e b u si ne ss

d ev elo pm en t a nd in te rn al in fo rm ati on . R lI h as u n de rta ke n e ff or ts to p re se rv e th e s ec re cy o f th is

i nf orma tio n th ro ug h a ctio n s s uc h a s r eq uir in g its em plo ye es to a bid e b y d u tie s o f c on fid en tia lity

a nd lo ya lty t o R JI a nd b y i ns tit utin g a s ec ur e in fo rm a tio n n etw o rk t o s to re p ro pr ie ta ry

information.

29 . D efen dan t R ahall u nd ersto od sh e w as actin g u nlaw fu lly w hen she pro vid ed these

d oc um en ts to M r. Z ola a nd e ve n in stru cte d h im to d ele te o ne o f th e d oc um en ts a fte r r ea din g s o

a s to d estro y th e e vid en ce o f h er ille ga l a cts. S ee E -M ail fr om T an ya R ah all to H illia rd Z ola

( Au g. 2 0, 2 00 9) , a tta ch ed h er eto a s E x. 8 .

30. D efen dan t R ah all h as also im pro perly d isclo sed co nfid en tial R JI in fo rm atio n to

Wa sh in gto n , D .C . lo bb yis t, C li ff M a dis on , a nd h er b ro th er E d R ah all ,

8



3 1.· A fter D efe nd an t R ah all's term in atio n, sh e an d D efen da nt Z ola so ugh t to p ro fit

f rom t he g ov er nm e nt r ela ti on s w o rk f or Mounta in ee r a n d C ons te ll at io n C a pit al. R JI w o u ld h av e

c on tin ue d to r eta in a nd c on du ct th is b us in es s h ad it n ot b ee n fo r D e fe nd an ts ' u nla wf ul c on du ct

3 2. D efen dan ts' co nd uct h as c au sed a nd threa te ns to co ntin ue to cau se R JI irrep arab le

harm.

33. A s a resu lt o f D efen dan t R ahall's u nlaw fu l co nd uct, R n has exercised its legal

r ig ht to w ith ho ld h er s ala ry .

C OU NT I

(Br ea ch o f Du ty o f L o ya lt v- R ah al ))

34 . R JI rea lleg es an d in co rpo rates b y referen ce pa rag ra ph s 1 thro ugh 3 3 a bo ve as if

f u ll y s e t f o rt h h e re in .

35 . D efendan t Rahall, as an em ployee ofRJI, had a duty of loyalty to RJI.

36 . D efen dan t R ahall w as aw are at a ll tim es o f her d uty o flo yalty to R JI, an d

a ff irm ati ve ly a ck n ow le dg ed a nd a cc ep te d i t, a nd a gr ee d to a bi de b y t hi s o bl ig at io n .

3 7. D e fe nd an t R ab all's c on du ct, in clu din g w ith ou t lim ita tio n s ha rin g c on fid en tia l R JI

in fo rm a ti on w it h D e fe nd an t Z o la a nd o th er s, u su rp in g R J I's c or po ra te o pp or tu n it ie s f or p er so n al

g ai n, a nd c au si ng Mount ai ne er t o t erm in a te it s r el at io n sh ip w ith R J I, c on sti tu te b re ac he s o f h er

d uty o flo ya lty to R JI .

38 . A s a direct an d proxim ate resu lt o fR ahall's breaches, R JI has su ffered d am ages in

an am ou nt to b e p ro ven at tria l.

C ou nt 1 I

( To rti ou s I nte rf er en ce W i th C o ntr ac t- Ra ha ll a nd Z o la )

39. R JI rea lleges an d incorpo ra tes by referen ce paragraphs I thro ugh 38 abo ve as if

f u ll y s et f o rt h h e re in .

9



40 . R JI's agree men t w ith M ou nta in eer is a va lid , b in din g co ntrac t.

41 . D efen dants R ahall and Zola w ere aw are at all re levan t tim es o f these

r ela tio n sh ip s. D e fe nd an ts g ain ed th is k now le dg e t hr ou gh R J I's c on fid en tia l i nf orma tio n a nd

De fe nd an t R ah al l's em pl oym en t a t R J I.

4 2. D ef en da nts R ah all a nd Z ola m is ap pro pr ia te d f or th eir o wn p ur po se s c on fid en tia l

RJt in fo rm a ti on a nd im p ro pe rl y u til iz ed D e fe nd an t R a ha ll 's em plo yme nt a t R JI to in d uc e

Mounta ineer to b re ac h i ts c on tr ac t w ith R JI .

43 . A s a direct, proxim ate result of D efend an ts' actio ns, R JI ha s s uf fe re d d am a ge s in

a n a mo un t to b e p ro ve n a t tr ia l.

C o un t I III To rtio us I nte rfe re nc e W ith A n E co nomic A dv an ta g~ Ra ha ll a nd lo la }

4 4. R JI realle ges an d in co rp orates by referen ce p arag rap hs I thro ug h 4 2 abo ve a s if


4 5. R JI h ad v alid b us in es s e xp ec ta nc ie s w ith M o un ta in ee r, C on ste lla tio n C ap ita l, a nd

o ther c li ent s .

46. D efend ants R ahall and Zo la w ere aw are at all tim es of these business

e xp ec ta nc ie s. D e fe nd an ts g ai ne d th is k now le dg e t hr ou g h R J I's c on fid en tia l in fo rm a ti on a nd

De fe nd an t R a ha ll 's em plo ym e nt a t R JI .

4 7. D efen dan ts R aha ll an d Z ola ab used co nfid en tial R JI in fo rm atio n an d D efen dan t

R ah all's e mp lo ym en t a t R JI to usurp RJ I's b u si ne ss e xp e ct anc ie s w i th Moun ta in e er ,

C on st el la ti on C ap it al , a nd o th e rs .

48 . A s a d irec t, pro xim ate resu lt o f'D efen dan ts' a ctio ns, R J1 h as su ffe re d d am ag es in

a n a mo un t to b e p ro ve n a t tria l.

10



C ou nt IV( Co nv er sio n-R ah al I a nd Z ola )

49 . R JI re alleg es an d in co rp ora tes b y referen ce pa ra grap hs I th ro ugh 48 abo ve as if


5 0. D efen dan ts R ah all an d Z ola u nla wfu lly po ssess R JI p ro pe rty rela tin g to

Moun ta in e er , C on st el la ti on C api ta l, a nd o th e rs .

5 1. D efen dan t R ah all h as re fu sed to retu rn R JI's pro perty d esp ite bein g d ire cte d to d o

s o b y R JI p ur su an t to h er o blig atio ns to th e C om pa ny . D efe nd an t Z ola k nows th at h is p os se ss io n

o fR JI 's p ro pe rty is u na uth or iz ed a nd in v io la tio n o f la w.

5 2. A s a d irec t, pro xim ate resu lt o f D efen dan ts' ac tio ns, R JI has su ffered d am ag es in

a n a mo un t to b e p ro ve n a t tr ia l.

C ou nt V

(Co n sp ir ac y-Ra ha ll a nd Z o la )

53 . R JI real leg es a nd in co rp orates b y re fe ren ce parag rap hs 1 thro ug h 5 2 ab ove as if

f u ll y s e t f o rt h h e re in .

54 . D efen dan ts R ah all an d Z ola tacitly o r ex pressly ag reed to p articip ate in an o n-

g o in g s ch em e a nd u n law fu l o n -g oin g c on sp ir ac y t o s te al R JI 's b us in es s r ela tio n sh ip w ith

Mounta in ee r a nd t o u su rp R J I's c or po ra te o pp o rt un it ie s w ith Mounta in ee r, C o ns te ll ati on C a pita l,

a nd o th er e n ti ti es .

55 . D efe nd an ts R ahall an d Z ola en gag ed in n um ero us o vert a cts in fu rth eran ce o f t his

c on sp ir ac y, i nc lu d in g w it ho u t l im ita tio n D e fe nd an t R a ha ll 's tr an sm is si on o f c on fi de nt ia l R JI

c or po ra te p ro pe rt y t o D e fe nd an t Z o la a nd De fe nd an t Z o la 's e dit s t o th e Mounta in ee r te rm in ati on

le tt er a nd c ommunic ati on w ith th is R Jl c li en t.

11



56. As a direct, proximate result of Defendants' conspiracy, RJI has suffered damages

in an amount to be proven at trial.

Count VI

(Misappropriation of Trade Secrets Under the District of Columbia Uniform Trade Secrets Act-

Rahall and Zola)

57. RJI realleges and incorporates by reference paragraphs I through 56 above as if

fully set forth herein.

58. As part of its business operations, RJI has developed proprietary information

constituting trade secrets as part ofits government relations and consulting business. Such trade

secrets include RJI pricing terms and proposals, contracts with clients, client identification, and

other sensitive business development and internal information.

59. RJI has undertaken reasonable efforts to protect its trade secrets and proprietary

information, RJI employees are subject to duties of confidentiality and loyalty under the terms

of the RJI Employee Handbook. Additionally, RJI maintains a secure information technology

server that stores all company information in a confidential manner.

60. After her termination from RJI, Defendant Rahall was granted access to return to

RJI's offices for the limited purpose of retrieving her medical records and other personal

information. However, without authorization, Defendant Rahall willfully downloaded at least

270 documents from the RJI computer network and forwarded them to her personal email

account.

61. Additionally, Defendant Rahall provided Defendant Zola with confidential and

trade secret information related to Mountaineer and potentially other RJI clients. He was not an

employee of RJI and had no authority to receive the information. Defendant Zola was aware that

12



h e-wa s n ot -a uth or iz ed to h av e a cc es s to th is in fo rm atio n , b ut n ev er th ele ss u se d it in f ur th er an ce

o f h is a nd D e fe nd an t R ah all's c on sp ir ac y to u nlawf ully in te rf er e w ith R JI 's b us in es s e xp ec ta nc y.

6 2. A cc or din gly , D ef en da nts ' a ctio ns h av e v io late d th e D is tric t o f C olumb ia U nifo rm

Trade Sec re ts Act. D .C . C o de §§ 36-401, et seq. A s a d ir ec t, p ro xim at e c au se o f D e fe nd an ts '

a ctio ns , P la in tif fs h av e s uf fe re d d am ag es in a n amou nt t o b e p ro ve n a t tr ia l a nd a re a dd iti on ally

en ti tl ed t o i n junc ti ve re li ef .

Countvn(Co nv er sio Il=R ah all a nd Z ola )

63. RJI realleges a nd i nc o rp o ra te s b y r ef er enc e p ar ag ra ph s 1 th ro ug h 6 2 a bo ve a s if

f u ll y s et f or th h er ei n.

64. A s an em ployee ofR JI, R ahall w as subject to the duties of loyalty and

c on fid en tia lity to R JI a nd its c lie nts. R ah all w as n ot to d iv ulg e o r im pro per ly u se f or h er own

p urp os es o r b en efit an y k nowled ge s he d eriv ed from h er e mp lo ym en t a t RJI.

65. A fter she w as term in ated , R ahall u nlaw fu lly an d kn ow in gly co nverted at least 263

d oc um en ts th at a re th e p ro pe rty o f R JI f or h er p er so na l b en ef it b y d ow nlo ad in g th em an d

tr an sf er rin g t hem to h er p er so na l ema il a cc ou n t.

66. A s a d irect, pro xim ate cau se o f D e fen dan ts' actio ns, P lain tiffs have su ffered

d am ag es in a n a mo un t to b e p ro ve n a t trial.

13



PRAYERFQ&RELLEF

WHEREFORE, P la in ti ff s R J I G o ve rnm en t S tr at eg ie s, I nc ., a nd R J [ C a pi ta l C o rp or at io n,

r es pe ct fu ll y p ra y t ha t t he C o ur t e nt er ju dgm en t as follows:

67 . On C ou nt I , a J ud gm en t a nd O rd er f in din g th at D ef en da nt R ah all b re ac he d h er

d uty o f lo ya lty to R JI a nd a wa rd in g R JI c om pe ns ato ry d am ag es i ncl ud in g th e re tu rn o f a ll s ala ry ,

b en ef its , a nd c om pe ns at io n p aid to h er i n a n amo un t to b e p ro ve n a t tr ia l b ut c ur re ntly e stim ate d

to ex . ceed $345 ,000 ;

68. O n C ount II, a Judg ment and O rder finding that D efendant R ahall and D efendant

Zo la to rt ious ly in te r fe r ed with R J l's c on tr ac t w it h Mo u nt ai ne er a nd aw ar di ng R J I c omp en sa to ry

damages ina n amo un t t o b e p ro ve n a t t ria l b ut c urre nt ly e stim ate d to e xc ee d $ 34 5,0 00 ;

69 . O n C ount Ill, a Judgm ent and O rder finding that D efendant R OO aUand D efendant

Zo la to rt ious ly in te r fe r ed with R J I's e co nom ic o pp or tu ni ti es , i nc lu di ng w it ho u t l im i ta ti on w it h

M o un ta in ee r, a nd a wa rd in g R JI c om pe ns ato ry d am ag es in a n amo un t to b e p ro ve n a t tr ia l b ut

c ur re nt ly e st im a te d t o e xc ee d $ 34 5, 00 0;

70. O n C ou nt IV , a Ju dgm ent an d O rder finding that D efendants converted R JI's

c or po ra te p ro pe rty , a nd a wa rd in g R JI c om pe ns ato ry d am ag es in a n amo un t to b e p ro ve n a t tr ia l

b ut c ur re nt ly e st im a te d t o e xc ee d $ 3 45 ,0 00 ;

71 . On C ou nt V , a J ud gm en t a nd O rd er f in din g th at D efe nd an ts c on sp ire d to ste al

R JI 's b us in ess r ela ti on sh ip w it h M o un ta in ee r a nd to u su rp R JI's co rp ora te o pp or tu nit ie s w it h

M ou nta in ee r, a nd aw ard in g R JJ co mp en sa to ry d am ag es in an am ou nt to b e p ro ve n a t tria l b ut

c u rr en t ly e s timat ed t o ex .c e ed $345 ,000 ;

72. O n C ount V I, a Judgm en t an d O rder finding that D efendants m isappropriated R JI

tra de s ec re ts in f urth era nc e o f th eir o wn c on sp ira cy , a nd a wa rd in g R JI c om p en sa to ry d am ag es i n

14



an amount to-be-proven at trial but currently estimated to exceed $345,000 as welJ as granting

injunctive relief to RJI prohibiting Defendants from using, storing or further disseminating any

trade secret information as well as returning all RJI trade secret information to the custody of

RJI;

73. On Count VII, a Judgment and Order finding that Defendants unlawfully

converted RJI proprietary information for their own benefit, and awarding RJI compensatory

damages in an amount to be proven at trial but currently estimated to exceed $345,000.

74. That the Court order Defendant RahalI to return all salary paid by RJI during the

time period where she has been breaching her duty of loyalty;

75. That the Court order Defendant Rahall and Defendant Zola to disgorge their

profits from the corporate opportunities they usurped from RJI, including any moneys paid to

them or affiliated entities by Mountaineer and Constellation Capital;

76. That the Court issue injunctive relief ordering Defendant Rahall and Defendant

Zola to return all corporate property ofRJI;

77. That the Court award RJI its costs and attorney's fees incurred in bringing this

action;

78. A finding by the Court that Defendants' conduct was willful, wanton and

malicious, justifying awards of punitive damages where available in the amount of $1,035,000;

and

79. That the Court grant any and all further relief as it may deem to be just and

proper.

15



D ated : Feb ru ary 4, 20 I 0 . R e sp ec tf u ll y s ubm i tt ed ,

Is/Adam J. Smith

By: P ed er A . G ar sk e

A dam J . S mithBAKER & HOSTE TL ER L LP

Wa sh in gto n S qu ar e, S uit e 1 10 0

I 05 0 Con ne ct i c ut A ve . NWWas hin gto n, DC 2 00 36(20 2) 8 6 1- 15 00 (ph one )

(202 ) 861 -1783 ( fac s im i le )

Coun s el /o r P la i nt if fs R .J IGove rnmen t

S e rv ic es . I n c . . a n d R.II Capi ta l Corpora tion

16



JU RY D EMAND

F or all issu es that m ay be tried to a jury, Pl ai n ti ff r e spec tfu ll y demands a jury trial.

BAKER & HOS TE TL ER L LP

By Is lAdam J. Smith

P ed er A . G a rs ke

Adam J. SmithWa sh in gt on S qu ar e, S uite 1 10 0

1 05 0 C onn ec tic ut A v en u e, N .W .

Wa shi ng ton , D .C . 2 0 036(20 2) 8 6 1- 17 63 (ph one )

(202 ) 861 -1783 ( fac s im i le )

Coun se l/ or P la in ti ff s R .J I Gove rnment S er vi ce s , I nc ., a n d

R JI Cap it al Co rpo ra ti on

CER TI FICA TE O F S ERVI CE

Ie rtif y th at o n th e 4 th o f F eb ru ary , 2 01 0, a tru e c op y o f th e fo re go in g d oc um en t w as s er ve d v ia

em ail a nd f ir st- cla ss m a il u po n t he f oll ow in g:

Tam ir Damar i, Esq.

Nos saman LLP /O 'Conno r & Hannan

1 66 6 K S tre et, N .W .

S u it e 5 0 0

Wa shi ng ton , D .C . 2 0 006

ls I Adam Sm it h

A d am Sm ith

17

crew: most corrupt sources: amended complaint and jury demand

Documents