8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
1/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Melody Ann Castillo GillespieP.O. Box 8323Porterville, California 93257Telephone: (559) 788-0630Cell: (559) 779-8253Plaintiff/Debtor,pro se, in propia persona
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA-FRESNO
In Re: Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Case
Melody Ann Gillespie No.: 11-17815-A-13
Debtor,
________________________________
Melody Ann & Courtney Ray Gillespie,
Roxann Davidson,
Plaintiffs,
v.
ADVERSARIAL ACTION #:
Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, and
Nickol D. Gerritsma, individually and as _________________________
As Trustees of the H.M. Wysocki Trust, A Core Proceeding pursuant to
Nancy & Alan Castleman, individually and 28 U.S.C. 157(b)(2)(E),(G)
As Trustees for/Managing Directors of (H), (I), (K), (L)& (M) with
Shawn Ray Enterprises Business Trust,
Individually and as owner operator of Partly Non-Core Proceedings,
FirstAmendmentRadio.com, aka far.com, namely contingent-unliquidated
also aka Liberty Radio Live, Complaint for Personal Injuries
and any owned/operated enterprises, inextricably intertwined with
New Paradigm Holding Co., the issues herein raised, per
Robert J. Fletcher, 28 U.S.C. 157(b)(2)(O)Brett Thompson, and
John & Jane Does 1-10,
Defendants. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
____________________________________
In re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
1
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
2/49
1
8
24
25
26
27
28
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
ORIGINAL COMPLAINT IN ADVERSARIAL ACTION
1. Debtor and Plaintiff Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie files this her OriginalComplaint for Damages, Declaratory Judgment, Foreclosure of Mechanics Lien
and Injunctions, together with her co-Plaintiffs Roxann Davidson and Courtney
Gillespie, for relief as a core proceeding adversarial action under the umbrella of
the above-entitled-and-numbered Chapter 13 Petition to establish the inventory of
the estate assets.
2. In briefest essence, the Plaintiff Debtor and her husband are suing to recovereither the title earned or damages for the conversion of their time, toil, and talent as
well as not inconsiderable actual cash investment all made over the past sevenyears (since June 1, 2004).
3. This is a core action within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. 157 because by andthrough this action Debtor/Plaintiff Melody Gillespie seeks (with reference to the
subsections of 157(b)(2): (E) orders [against the defendants to this Original
Complaint] to turn over property of the estate; [to resolve]. . . (G) motions to
terminate, annul, or modify the automatic stay1; (H) proceedings to determine
avoid, or recover fraudulent conveyances [including all of Defendant Nicklas
Arthur Hoffmans attempts to convert the debtors property and title, subject of this
lawsuit]; (I) determinations as to the dischargeability of particular debts [such as
Nicklas Arthur Hoffmans claims for $44,800 as of August 9, 2009, plus accruals
since, all of which claims of indebtedness Plaintiffs Courtney Ray and Melody
Ann Gillespie submit are fraudulent]; . . . (K) determinations of the validity
In re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
2
1 Motions concerning the modification of the automatic stay will or may be relevant to the Defendants
previous counterclaim in a Tulare County Superior Court Action 10-238961 which Plaintiff DebtoRemoved on August 8, 2011, under Eastern District Bankruptcy Caption & Case number ofAdversaryProceeding #: 11-01205, but which counterclaim was ordered remanded over Debtors objection, andwithout allowing amendment, after a non-evidentiary hearing by order signed on October 6, 2011, enteredOctober 7, 2011. Plaintiff debtor has moved, of even date with the filing of this original complaint as anadversarial action, that the Court reconsider the remand all issues subject to her notice of removal, asallowed under 28 U.S.C. 1334, 1443, and 1452.
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
3/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
8
17
18
12
13
14
15
16
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
extent, or priority of liens [including the foreclosure of Courtney Ray & Melody
Ann Gillespies Mechanics Lien attached as Exhibit D to this Original Complaint
(L) confirmations of plans [Debtor Melody Ann Gillespies plan, and its viability,
depends almost totally on this Courts resolution of her massive investments in the
subject property at 1831 North Lime Street in Porterville, CA]; (M) orders
approving the use or lease of property, including the use of cash collateral
[including but not limited to whether tortfeasor Nicklas Arthur Hoffman should
have any continuing rights to use, enjoy, or conduct his business from 1831 North
Lime Street at Debtors expense utilizing the unpaid product of Debtors and
Courtney Ray Gillespies labors and investments of time and money].4. All the parties plaintiffs and defendants live and/or have their principal placeof business and all of the transactions and occurrences giving rise to this action
took place within the Fresno Division of the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of California. Jurisdiction is proper under 28 U.S.C. 1331 and
1334, and 18 U.S.C. 1961-1964(c).
DECLARATORY JUDGMENT TO CONSTRUE COMMERCIAL
RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES & NATURE OF CONTRACT
5. At the root of all the issues to be resolved by this adversarial action is thenature of the contractual relationship between Plaintiffs Courtney and Melody
Gillespie and the Defendants. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2201-2201 as well as 28
U.S.C. 157 & 1334, Plaintiffs seek that the court allow them to offer and present
evidence, after a reasonable time and meaningful opportunity for discovery
pursuant to Rule 26(f) et seq. of the Federal Rules, and to present all such evidence
to a jury for findings of fact according to Common Law, and mixed questions of
fact and law as allowed by American Caselaw and Precedents, that at the
termination of all such evidence and upon the report of the findings of the jury, the
Court will enter judgment in favor of the Plaintiffs and against the DefendantsIn re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
3
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
4/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
8
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
16
17
18
19
20
construing the meaning, purpose, and intent of the contracts in a just and equitable
manner according to principles of common law and equitable traditions of fairness.
6. Plaintiffs have framed their primary claims for damages in this case underthe Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act because Defendant
Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, acting as a principal within the meaning of 18 U.S.C.
2(b) and 1962(a), has organized his businesses together with associates for
twenty years or more as an enterprise to acquire, direct, invest, and manage
properties through the conduct of a continuing pattern of racketeering including
murder or attempted murder2, continual harassment by assault and battery,
intimidation of witnesses, and unfair business transactions often disguised by theutilization of deceptive and manipulative devices such as false trusts and/or
holding companies and/or other individual associates who hold title in his place
but under his control and for his benefit, all in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(a)-
(b).
7. Nickol D. Gerritsma, Robert J. Fletcher, Nancy and Alan Castleman are alsosued for racketeering under 18 U.S.C. 1962(c) & (d) as parties acting under the
direction and control of Nicklas Arthur Hoffman as employees, co-conspirators, or
agents. Plaintiff Roxann Davidson, not a party to any commercial transaction with
Defendant Hoffman, in particular has suffered from a pattern of assault and battery
In re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
4
2Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, though never convicted of murder, appeared to admit
murder to Plaintiff Roxann Davidson, after he shot a pellet gun twice at her within a singletwenty-four hour period that she was lucky to be alive, but others have not been so lucky.Strange circumstances and unexplained accidents have also led to the death of Hoffmanspregnant wife and crippling injury of his oldest son. Hoffman has poisoned the Plaintiffs dogand may have poisoned the Plaintiffs food at one point. Plaintiffs believe that the Defendant hasset up a chair on his property with a clear line of sight from his roof to their property and haveheard the Defendant instructing his minor daughter on how to kill the Plaintiffs dogs andintimidate them. Whether indictable or subject to conviction beyond reasonable doubtPlaintiffs submit and contend that Nicklas Arthur Hoffman has shown murderous tendencies andattitudes which constitute a nearly continual and ongoing assault and intentional infliction ofemotional distress which goes far beyond the ordinary connotations of the word harassment.
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
5/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
10
8
28
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
with intentional infliction of emotional distress, while Hoffman has sought to
intimidate her as a potential witness and thereby obstruct justice.
8. With regard to their underlying property disputes, Plaintiffs Courtney andMelody Gillespie contend, and by and through this complaint ask this Court to
review, interpret, and construe the documents and prior testimony evidencing the
parties agreement, by entry of a declaratory judgment, to declare and adjudge that
Plaintiff Courtney Gillespie agreed with Nicklas Arthur Hoffman on February 1,
2005, to purchase the five acres of land located at 1831 North Lime Street in
Porterville, California through a trust arrangement for $60,000.00.
9. The best characterization of the nature and contours of the original contractis probably to call it a Contract for Deed or Contract for Sale, although some
references to a Deed of Trust and Trustee suggest the intent to create a mortgage,
although these terms could also be construed to suggest an intent to create a private
and joint trust between the parties (without specifying any beneficiary, but
circumstances implying that Melody Gillespie was the intended beneficiary)
Plaintiffs Courtney and Melody Gillespie seek quiet title to the entire property
and/or partition, and/or a declaratory judgment that their rights as beneficiaries of a
trust have been violated through the malfeasance and breaches of fiduciary duty
perpetrated against them by both Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman an
Hoffmans daughter and Trustee Nickol D. Gerritsma.
10. Plaintiffs Courtney and Melody Gillespie ask this United States BankruptcyCourt to declare and adjudge that this contractual amount of $60,000.00 has
already been paid in full, with substantial interest, in that Plaintiffs have paid a
combination of cash, labor, and equipment to Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman
with a total value in excess of $720,000, not counting damages resulting from any
criminal or tortious conduct, and that Plaintiffs Courtney and Melody Gillespie, as
In re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
5
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
6/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
8
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
husband and wife, should accordingly be granted quiet title in this property, which
is indivisible under the California Land Conservation Act (aka Williamson Act).
11. Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffmans efforts to swindle the Plaintiffs andcheat them of their money and rightfully purchased property, however, has
expanded to something much more grandiose than a simple real estate fraud, in
that Defendant has resorted to actual violence, threats of violence, theft, and
continual harassment and acts of intimidation to try to force the Plaintiffs to
abandon their investment and leave their property.
12. Plaintiffs Courtney and Melody Gillespie claim in this action that they areentitled to both land and money damages for emotional distress, assault, battery
breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, conversion, constructive and actua
fraud, attempts at malicious prosecution, attempted wrongful eviction, slander of
title, and trespass from Nicklas Arthur Hoffman and the other Defendants, as well
as a permanent injunction against Hoffman and anyone acting on his behalf from
further harassment and intimidation.
13. Plaintiff Roxann Davidson seeks only damages for Defendant NicklasArthur Hoffmans extreme and outrageous infliction of emotional distress, assault,
and attempted murder.
A Continuing Pattern of Racketeering & Infringement on Civil Rights:
Predicate Acts & Threats of Violence, Bullying, Coercion & Duress
14. Under 18 U.S.C. 1961(1) (with bold-italic emphasis added):
(1) "racketeering activity" means (A) any act or threat involvingmurder, kidnapping, gambling,arson,robbery, bribery, extortion, . . .
which is chargeable under State law and punishable by imprisonmentfor more than one year
15. On March 10, 2011, between 12:00 noon and 1:00 p.m., when Plaintiff
Courtney Gillespie left for work, Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman attempted to
murder or at least to maim or severely injure Plaintiff Roxann Davidson and later
In re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
6
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
7/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
that day fired at and likewise sought to main or severely injure Plaintiff Melody
Gillespie about 7:00 pm by firing a high powered pellet rifle once each at these two
Plaintiffs in two related episodes on the same day.
16. The scene setting for this attempted murder Plaintiff Roxann Davidson was
pulling weeds in the garden at 1831 North Lime Street in Porterville in the
property, subject of this litigation, adjacent to his, and Plaintiff Melody Gillespie
was in the driveway climbing up a short stairway into the permanently parked RV
on the passengers side. (This RV functions as Plaintiff Roxann Davidsons
home.)
17. After shooting at Plaintiff Roxann, Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffmanwhile standing close by the fence on his side of the property where he was
accompanied by his ten year old daughter Mattie Hoffman, spoke loudly to Roxann
Davidson and told her that he intended to kill the Plaintiffs Courtney and Melody
Gillespie as well as her.
18. (The pellet gun in question belonged to Bret Thompson, who left California
for Oregon on or about May 15, 2011, after retrieving his pellet gun from the
Sierra Sportswear where it had been left on consignment in Porterville, California.)
19. The next day, while Plaintiff Melody Gillespie went to Visalia to file a
Motion for Order to Show Cause why Nicklas Arthur Hoffman should not be held
in contempt for violation of the already extant October 29, 2010, Civil Restraining
Order entered in California Superior Court protecting Melody and Courtney
Gillespie and to keep Nicklas Arthur Hoffman away from their property, to wit on
March 11, 2011, Hoffman shot Roxann Davidson again with the same high
powered pellet gun, and this time hit her in the face while she was in the same
garden. Defendant Hoffman told her on this occasion that he intended to hit her
eye and would not miss next time.
In re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
7
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
8/49
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
9/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
24. Previously, at 3:30-5:00 a.m., on January 17, 2011, Nicklas Arthur Hoffman
was seen and identified by Plaintiff Roxann prowling on the Plaintiffs (Courtney
and Melody Gillespies) property, trespassing under cover of night in plain
violation of this same October 29, 2011 protective order. As a direct result and in
the aftermath, Plaintiffs have filed ten or more complaints and reports concerning
such conduct with the Tulare Sheriffs Department, but the county authorities have
not taken any action against Defendant Hoffman, which leaves the Plaintiffs
without effective protection.
25. On a separate and unrelated occasion, November 7, 2010, the same
Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman made a pretextual but false allegation that thePlaintiffs had cut his telephone lines, but used this false pretext as an excuse to
gain access to the property to attempt to murder Courtney and/or Melody Gillespie
by rigging a propane tank to blow them up when they next turned on the hot water.
26. (Blowing up architectural improvements to property, whether or not it
resulted in death or injury to any person, would nonetheless constitute arson with
the meaning of all relevant state and federal laws.
26. On this occasion, Defendant Hoffman said to Brett Thompson and another
younger associate, in the presence and within the hearing of the Plaintiffs, anyway
theyre not going to be here much longer (admittedly, this phrase could be
construed either as a continuing threat of murder or of retaliatory wrongful
eviction, if it were not for the Defendants history of threatening, murderous
chatter and pattern of verbal harassment).
28. This entire event including the threat was also reported to the Police, to no
avail. Mr. Hoffmans abusive conduct was effectively continuous, repetitive and
harassing, because on June 15, 2010, Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman had used
a Sawzall (recipro saw or sabre saw, Sawzall being a trademark of the
Milwaukee Electric Tool Company) to cut the electric wires and subpanels on theIn re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
9
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
10/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
property occupied by Plaintiffs and used the pretextually obtained access to the
property to put rat poison into Plaintiffs food, leading to Plaintiff Melody
Gillespie suffering symptoms of poison from poisoned milk.
29. And again, after this incident, Plaintiff Courtney Gillespie sought to file a
report with the local Porterville office of the Tulare County District Attorney.
However, the Tulare County Assistant District Attorney Jason Ahn for Porterville
on or about June 17, 2010, advised the Plaintiffs that the State would not prosecute
certain incidents involving destruction of property and interference with use of
property because a property dispute existed which cast all these events in the light
of a civil dispute, despite the repeated threats of violence.30. Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffmans conduct has been ongoing and
unremitting for several years. On April 22, 2009, between noon and 1:30 p.m.
Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, assisted by Brett Thompson, stole more than
$6,000.00 in brand new construction equipment from the Plaintiffs.
31. During July 2011, as Plaintiffs only discovered on August 2-3, 2011
Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman intentionally caused excess electrical usage in
the amount of $1,000.00 (normal monthly bills for the combined property being
$480 or less), and then utilized electronic identity information unlawfully obtained
and other unlawful means to access and take over Plaintiffs electrical account
from Southern California Edison, all in violation of18 U.S.C. 1028(a)(7).
32. On or about April 15, 2010, and June 15, 2010, Defendant Nicklas ArthurHoffman had previously violated 18 U.S.C 1028(a)(7) by using, without lawful
authority, one or more means of identification of Plaintiff Courtney and/or Melody
Gillespie to investigate and obtain information concerning them and also to
terminate Plaintiffs electricity and transfer their fully paid and at that time current
account to his own name.
In re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
10
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
11/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
33. During July December, 2009, Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman
repudiated or announced his intentions to breach and disregard his actual
contractual arrangements with the Plaintiffs, Courtney Ray & Melody Ann
Gillespie, and began a reign of terroristic acts against this plaintiffs which included
repeated violations or attempts to violate 18 U.S.C. 1029 (a)(8) and 18 U.S.C
1029 (b)(1)-(2) in that Nicklas Arthur Hoffman and his employee Brett
Thompson had obtained and conspired to use and did in fact utilize a listening
device or devices configured unlawfully to scan or otherwise eavesdrop on
Plaintiffs conversations.
34. nder 18 U.S.C. 1961(5),U(5) "pattern of racketeering activity" requires at least two acts ofracketeering activity, one of which occurred after the effective date ofthis chapter and the last of which occurred within ten years (excludingany period of imprisonment) after the commission of a prior act ofracketeering activity.
35. Plaintiffs submit that the list of assaults, robberies, and utilization of
electronic means to effect illegal and unauthorized financial transactions or
interference with accounts itemized above constitute a pattern of racketeering with
multiple predicate acts identified with particularity as to time, place, and means.
36. The Plaintiffs have reported many more incidents than the above list be
declarations filed with and information provided to the Tulare County Superior
Court in Visalia, but the California State Court has not taken of these issues or
shown any concern for the welfare of the Plaintiffs.
The R.I.C.O. Enterprise37. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman is not the title owner of the property on which he
and the Plaintiffs live, from which Defendant Hoffman and others involved in the
Sean Ray Enterprises Business Trust, including but not limited to Licensed
California Attorney Robert J. Fletcher, operate and broadcast Radio Liberty,
In re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
11
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
12/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
FirstAmendmentRadio, and various other related Patriot Movement Television
and Radio broadcast enterprises, the complete list of which entities Plaintiffs do
not even know.
38. A major part of Defendants racketeering enterprise has been to cause and
compel the Plaintiffs, reduced to a state of obligation very near to debt peonage, to
subsidize or support his Radio & Television Broadcast operations by paying 100%
of his electrical bills since November 2004, as well as by contributing their labor
and cash investment to the improvement and addition of real estate by substantial
construction and maintenance of all or part of 12 structures on 10 acres of which
Nicklas Hoffman claims sole proprietary (de facto) ownership and over which heplainly exercises (both de facto and, to the extent to which Plaintiffs have sought
and been denied police protection, effective de jure) absolute control, bordering on
the ancient Roman standard of ius vita necisque (the power of life and death), in
violation of Plaintiffs Civil Rights under 18 U.S.C. 241 & 242.
39. The title owner of the property is the H.M. Wysocki Trust of which Nicklas
Arthur Hoffmans daughter Nickol D. Gerritsma is the Trustee. Nancy and Alan
Castleman are trustees for a second trust, the Shawn Ray Enterprises Trust which
may also operate under the fictitious business name New Paradigm Holding
Company. Robert J. Fletcher acted as attorney and counselor for Nicklas Arthur
Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, and the H.M. Wysocki Trust, but he is sued as an
individual for his own actions in the furtherance of this series of Racketeer
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations, their employees and officers, and not
merely as an attorney for these parties.
40. Plaintiffs allege upon information and belief (and relevant on-line searches)
that none of these entities are properly registered with the California Secretary of
State or in any other way licensed or authorized to do business in this state.
In re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
12
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
13/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
41. Furthermore, these entities, together with Robert J. Fletcher, Nickol D
Gerritsma, the Castelmans, and Nicklas Arthur Hoffman have engaged in a shell
game, passing title ownership of the subject property and other real estate in
Tulare County, California, back and forth among each other for the purpose of
staging sham sales and foreclosures.
42. As of the date of filing this complaint, it would appear from advertisements
and notices found at Zillow.com and elsewhere on-line that as of July 29, 2011,
in violation of the automatic stay in Melody Ann Gillespies Bankruptcy, a new
sham foreclosure has been instituted against the real property, subject of this
lawsuit, although the Plaintiffs have been unable to verify this information (that anew sham foreclosure has already been initiated) as of the present date.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION FOR DAMAGES under 18 U.S.C. 1964(c):
Nicklas Arthur Hoffman Association-in-Fact 18 U.S.C. 1962(a)
43. Plaintiffs re-allege 1-42 of this their Original Complaint and incorporate
the same by reference as if fully copied and restated herein below.
44. Plaintiffs allege that Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman is a natural person
who has received income derived, directly or indirectly, from a pattern of
racketeering activity (including murder or attempted murder, assault with a deadly
weapon and assault with bodily injury, arson or attempted arson, witness
intimidation or retaliation, forgery of contractual documents and evidence filed in
court, and falsification of identity access information via electronic means and
unauthorized manipulation of financial identity and account information) in which
Nicklas Arthur Hoffman has participated as a principal within the meaning o
section 2, title 18, United States Code.
45. Plaintiffs further allege that Nicklas Arthur Hoffman has used or invested
and continues to use or invest, both directly and indirectly, all or part of such
income, or the proceeds of such income, in the acquisition of any interest in, or theIn re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
13
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
14/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
establishment or operation of, the otherwise unnamed Nicklas Arthur Hoffman
R.I.C.O. Association-in-Fact, as well as Shawn Ray Enterprises Business Trust
sometimes d/b/a New Paradigm Holding Company.
46. To wit, and in particular but without any express or implied limitation, by
force, fraud, and manipulation of documentary evidence, Defendant Nicklas Arthur
Hoffman has compelled, coerced, and/or used trickery and manipulation to deceive
the Plaintiffs into subsidizing his own radio/television broadcasting enterprises by
requiring them to pay in full for his electricity for seven years, while continuing to
improve and maintain the ten acres which they share at 1831 North Lime Street
with new buildings, landscaping, none of which would have been possible but forthe land engineering skills and investments (time, toil, and talents) of Plaintiff
Courtney Ray Gillespie and the substantial financial investments (and lesser
investments of time, toil, and talent) of Debtor Melody Ann Gillespie, and
Defendant Hoffman continually reinvested the money and material resources, and
labor value converted, stolen, or extorted from Plaintiffs Courtney Ray & Melody
Ann Gillespie in the increase and augmentation of his Racketeering enterprise or
several racketeering enterprises, as the case may be.
47. The Nicklas Arthur Hoffman R.I.C.O. Association-in-Fact is an enterprise
composed by and consisting of all the named Defendants (Nicklas Arthur
Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, Nancy & Alan Castleman
Shawn Ray Enterprises Business Trust, New Paradigms Holding Co., Robert J
Fletcher, and John & Jane Does 1-10) in this case, working in unlawful agreement
and in combination with each other and in further agreement and combination with
other individuals, including but not limited to Brett Thompson and other unknown
individuals.
48. Among the investments of the Nicklas Arthur Hoffman R.I.C.O
Association-in-Fact acquired by the investment of funds derived in whole or inIn re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
14
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
15/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
part from a pattern of racketeering activity are the assets held in the name of the H
M. Wysocki Trust, separately and as title holder of the real property, subject of this
litigation, located at 1831 North Lime Street, Porterville, California 93257, as well
as the Shawn Ray Enterprises Business Trust, separately and d/b/a New Paradigm
Holding Company.
49. The Nicklas Arthur Hoffman R.I.C.O. Association-in-fact is an enterprise
which is engaged in, and the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign
commerce, as are the H. M. Wysocki Trust, the Shawn Ray Enterprises Business
Trust, the law office of Robert J. Fletcher, and the New Paradigm Holding
Company.50. Plaintiffs allege that they have been injured by this Defendants real estate
manipulations and embezzlement of funds in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(a) and
related schemes to defraud involving violations of 18 U.S.C. 1341, 1343, 1344
and 1346 in their business and property interests, to wit their ownership interest
and investments in and quiet enjoyment of that certain undivided parcel of 10 acres
located at the street address and otherwise known as 1831 North Lime Street in
Porterville, California 93257.
51. Wherefore, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1964(c), Plaintiffs pray for all their costs
of suit and for treble their actual damages (Plaintiffs estimate their actual damages
from Racketeering alone in the minimum amount of $720,000.00), the purposes of
trebling being both to fairly and justly punish the Defendant Nicklas Arthur
Hoffman for his manifold, multifarious, and complex violations of 18 U.S.C
1962(a) and to serve as a fair, just, and equitable example to other defendants
similarly situated.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION FOR R.I.C.O. DAMAGES UNDER 18 U.S.C.
1964(c): Nickol D. Gerritsma 18 U.S.C. 1962(a)
In re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
15
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
16/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
52. Plaintiffs re-allege 1-51 of this their Original Complaint and incorporate
the same by reference as if fully copied and restated herein below.
53. Plaintiffs allege that Defendant Nickol D. Gerritsma is a natural person who
has received income derived, directly or indirectly, from a pattern of racketeering
activity for which she may or may not have been directly responsible as a principal
within the meaning of Title 18 U.S.C. 2 (including her Fathers course of
racketeering activity or conduct including murder or attempted murder, assault
with a deadly weapon and assault with bodily injury, arson or attempted arson,
witness intimidation or retaliation, and falsification of identity access information
via electronic means and unauthorized manipulation of financial identity andaccount information, in which Nicklas Arthur Hoffman has participated as a
principal within the meaning of section 2, title 18, United States Code), but in
which Nickol D. Gerritsma may only have participated as an indirect beneficiary or
silent partner.
54. Nickol D. Gerritsmas official role in the Nicklas Arthur Hoffman
R.I.C.O. Association-in-Fact Racketeering Enterprise is as name-lender, or
front-person/strawman Trustee of and for the H.M. Wysocki Trust, which at
one or more times (if not at all times) relevant to this action, complaint, and lawsuit
was the title owner of 1831 North Lime Street, Porterville, California 93257.
55. Despite her possibly passive, mere status as a front, through her nomina
status as Trustee of the H.M. Wysocki Trust, rather than as a 2 criminal
principal, Plaintiffs nonetheless further allege that Defendant Nicklas Arthur
Hoffmans daughter Nickol D. Gerritsma has used or invested, and continues to
use or invest, both directly and indirectly, all or part of such income, or the
proceeds of such income, in the acquisition of any interest in, or the establishment
or operation of, the otherwise unnamed Nicklas Arthur Hoffman R.I.C.O
Association-in-Fact as well as other associations in fact, to wit the Shawn RayIn re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
16
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
17/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Enterprises Business Trust and New Paradigm Holding Company, which entities
have also, at other times, been the title owner of 1831 North Lime Street in
Porterville, California 93257.
56. The Nicklas Arthur Hoffman R.I.C.O. Association-in-Fact is an enterprise
composed by and consisting of all the named Defendants (Nicklas Arthur
Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, Nancy & Alan Castleman
Robert J. Fletcher, Shawn Ray Enterprises Business Trust, New Paradigms
Holding Co., and John & Jane Does 1-10) in this case, working in unlawful
agreement and in combination with each other and in further agreement and
combination with other individuals, including but not limited to Brett Thompsonand other unknown individuals.
57. Among the investments of the Nicklas Arthur Hoffman R.I.C.O
Association-in-Fact acquired by the investment of funds derived in whole or in
part from a pattern of racketeering activity is the H.M. Wysocki Trust, as well as
Defendants the Shawn Ray Enterprises Business Trust, the New Paradigm Holding
Company, and the Law Office of Robert J. Fletcher, each of which entities has
served, at different times, as nominal (title) owners of real property, or as agents
(attorneys-in-fact or at-law) for the nominal owner, including operating as the
sometime owner of the real property subject of this litigation, located at 1831
North Lime Street, Porterville, California 93257.
58. The Nicklas Arthur Hoffman R.I.C.O. Association-in-fact, as well as
Defendants the H.M. Wysocki Trust, the Shawn Ray Enterprises Business Trust
the law office of Robert J. Fletcher, Brett Thompson, and the New Paradigm
Holding Company, are each enterprises which are engaged in, and the activities of
which affect, interstate or foreign commerce.
59. Plaintiffs allege that they have been injured by this Defendants real estate
manipulations and embezzlement of funds (for which Defendant Nickol D.In re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
17
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
18/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Gerritsma has special responsibility and liability equal to that of Nicklas Arthur
Hoffman owing to her title and actual role as Trustee) in violation of 18 U.S.C.
1962(a) and related schemes to defraud involving violations of 18 U.S.C. 1341
1343, 1344, and 1346 in their business and property interests, to wit their
ownership interest and investments in and quiet enjoyment of that certain
undivided parcel of 10 acres located at the street address and otherwise known as
1831 North Lime Street in Porterville, California 93257.
60. Wherefore, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1964(c), Plaintiffs pray for all their costs
of suit and for treble their actual damages (actual damages in the minimum amount
of $720,000.00) the purposes of trebled damages under Civil R.I.C.O. being justlymet here: both to fairly and lawfully punish the Defendant Nickol Hoffman for her
violations of 18 U.S.C. 1962(a) and to serve as an example to deter other
defendants who might be similarly situated to engage in such conduct.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION: NICKLAS ARTHUR HOFFMAN & LAW
OFFICE OF ROBERT J. FLETCHER, 18 U.S.C. 1962(b)
61. Plaintiffs reallege 1-60 of this their Original Complaint and incorporate
the same by reference as if fully copied and restated herein below.
62. Plaintiffs allege that Nicklas Arthur Hoffman is a natural person who
through a pattern of racketeering activity has acquired and does still maintain, both
directly or indirectly, the primary ownership interest in andde facto control of the
Nicklas Arthur Hoffman Association-in-Fact, as well as the Law Office o
Robert J. Fletcher, H.M. Wysocki Trust, the Shawn Ray Enterprises Business
Trust, and the New Paradigm Holding Company, all of which are enterprises
which engaged in, and the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign
commerce, including but not limited to the ownership, operation, and investment
of funds derived from the ten acre parcel of commercial and residential realty
In re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
18
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
19/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
located at and more commonly known as 1831 North Lime Street, Porterville,
California 93257.
63. Plaintiffs allege that Nicklas Arthur Hoffman acting at all times together and
in conjunction with Licensed California Attorney Robert J. Fletcher, at all times
relevant to this Original Complaint, were in fact the primary de facto owners and
de facto managing or controlling directors or 18 U.S.C. 2 principals of the
Nicklas Arthur Hoffman R.I.C.O. Association-in-Fact, which is an enterprise
composed by and consisting of all the named Defendants (Nicklas Arthur
Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, Nancy & Alan Castleman
Shaw Ray Enterprises Business Trust, New Paradigms Holding Co., and John &Jane Does 1-10) in this case, working in unlawful agreement and in combination
with each other and in further agreement and combination with other individuals,
including but not limited to Brett Thompson and other unknown individuals.
64. Among the investments of the Nicklas Arthur Hoffman R.I.C.O
Association-in-Fact acquired by the investment of funds derived in whole or in
part from a pattern of racketeering activity is the H.M. Wysocki Trust, as well as
Defendants the Shawn Ray Enterprises Business Trust, the New Paradigm Holding
Company, and the Law Officer of Robert J. Fletcher which entities have served, at
different times, as nominal (title) owners of real property, and/or as agents and/or
attorneys-in-fact or at-law for the nominal owners, including operating as the
sometime owner of the real property subject of this litigation, located at 1831
North Lime Street, Porterville, California 93257.
65. The Nicklas Arthur Hoffman R.I.C.O. Association-in-fact, as well as
Defendants the H.M. Wysocki Trust, the Shawn Ray Enterprises Business Trust,
and the New Paradigm Holding Company, are each enterprises which are engaged
in, and the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce.
In re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
19
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
20/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
66. Plaintiffs allege that they have been injured by this Defendants real estate
manipulations and embezzlement of funds (for which Defendant Nicklas Arthur
Hoffman had de facto special responsibility and liability owed to Courtney and
Melody Gillespie on account of his representations to Courtney Gillespie that the
two of them would share title and actual roles as Trustee of the trust into which
1831 North Lime Street, Porterville, California 93257 was supposed to be placed)
in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(b).
67. Plaintiffs further allege that Nicklas Arthur Hoffman together with Robert J
Fletcher, conceived of, owned the majority benefit from, directed, and operated
several related schemes to defraud involving violations of 18 U.S.C. 1341, 13431344, and 1346 which injured the Plaintiffs in their business and property interests
to wit their ownership interest and investments in and quiet enjoyment of that
certain undivided parcel of 10 acres located at the street address and otherwise
known as 1831 North Lime Street in Porterville, California 93257.
68. Wherefore, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1964(c), Plaintiffs pray for all their costs
of suit and for treble their actual damages (Plaintiffs actual damages from
Racketeering alone in the minimum amount of $720,000.00), the purposes of
trebled damages allowed under Civil R.I.C.O. being both fairly to punish the
Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman and Robert J. Fletcher for their violations of 18
U.S.C. 1962(b) and justly to serve as a deterrent and an example to other
defendants similarly situated who might inflict similar injuries on others.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR DAMAGES UNDER 18 U.S.C.
1964(c): R.I.C.O. Employment & Conspiracy 18 U.S.C. 1962(c)-(d)
69. Plaintiffs reallege 1-68 of this their Original Complaint and incorporate
the same by reference as if fully copied and restated herein below.
70. Plaintiffs allege that Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, at all times relevant to this
Original Complaint, was in fact the primary owner and de facto managing orIn re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
20
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
21/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
controlling director or 18 U.S.C. 2 principal of the Nicklas Arthur Hoffman
R.I.C.O. Association-in-Fact is an enterprise composed by and consisting of all
the named Defendants (Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M
Wysocki Trust, Nancy & Alan Castleman, Shawn Ray Enterprises Business Trust,
New Paradigms Holding Co., Robert J. Fletcher, Brett Thompson, and John & Jane
Does 1-10).
71. Specifically, as described above in 14-42 of this Original Complaint
Plaintiffs allege that Nancy & Alan Castleman, the H.M. Wysocki Trust, the
Shawn Ray Enterprises Business Trust, the New Paradigms Holding Company,
and John & Jane Does 1-10, i.e. all the individuals who cannot be described asprincipals within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. 2 in this case, at all times relevant to
this complaint either worked together or still work as employees or associates of
the Nicklas Arthur Hoffman R.I.C.O. Association-in-Fact enterprise, as well as
the H.M. Wysocki Trust, the Shawn Ray Enterprises Business Trust, and the New
Paradigm Holdings Company, all acting together and in concert with Robert J.
Fletcher d/b/a the Law Office of Robert J. Fletcher, all of which were at all
relevant times and still are enterprises engaged in, or the activities of which affect,
interstate or foreign commerce, which conduct and/or participate, directly and/or
indirectly, in the conduct of such enterprises affairs through a pattern of
racketeering activity in unlawful agreement, and that they did thus plainly violate
18 U.S.C. 1962(c).
72. And/or, in the alternative, Plaintiffs allege that these non-principa
Defendants, whether acting as individuals or as officers or employees of entities,
whether legally constituted or merely de facto, conspired unlawfully to act in
combination with each other and in further agreement and combination with other
individuals, including but not limited to Brett Thompson and other unknown
individuals, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(d).In re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
21
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
22/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
73. Plaintiffs allege that they have been injured by these Defendants real estate
manipulations and embezzlement of funds (for which Defendant Nicklas Arthur
Hoffman had de facto special responsibility and liability owed to Courtney and
Melody Gillespie on account of his representations to Courtney Gillespie that the
two of them would share title and actual roles as Trustee of the trust into which
1831 North Lime Street, Porterville, California 93257 was supposed to be placed)
in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(c)-(d), just as Defendant Nickol D. Gerritsma and
Robert J. Fletcher also owe special fiduciary duties on account of their several
positions as fiduciaries (in the case of the H.M. Wysocki Trust which may have
owed special duties to Courtney and Melody Gillespie on account of the agreement between Nicklas Arthur Hoffman and Courtney Gillespie of which Melody
Gillespie would have necessarily been a beneficiary).
74. Plaintiffs further allege that Defendants Nancy & Alan Castleman, the H.M
Wysocki Trust, Robert J. Fletcher, Nickol D. Gerritsma, the Shawn Ray
Enterprises Business Trust, and New Paradigm Holding Company acted at all
times as employees or agents or as attorneys-in-fact or attorneys-at-law in
conjunction with but under the direction of Nicklas Arthur Hoffman who
conceived of, owned the majority benefit from, directed, and operated several
related schemes to defraud involving violations of 18 U.S.C. 1341, 1343, 1344
and 1346 which injured the Plaintiffs in their business and property interests, to wit
their ownership interest and investments in and quiet enjoyment of that certain
undivided parcel of 10 acres located at the street address and otherwise known as
1831 North Lime Street in Porterville, California 93257.
75. Wherefore, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1964(c), Plaintiffs pray for all their costs
of suit and for treble their actual damages (Plaintiffs actual damages from
Racketeering alone in the minimum amount of $720,000.00), the purposes of
trebled damages under Civil R.I.C.O. being both fairly to punish the DefendantsIn re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
22
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
23/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Alan & Nancy Castleman, Robert J. Fletcher, Nickol D. Gerritsma, the H.M
Wysocki Trust, the Shawn Ray Enterprises Business Trust and the New Paradigm
Holdings Company for their joint and several violations of 18 U.S.C. 1962(c)
and/or 18 U.S.C. 1962(d) and to serve as a just and deterrent example to other
defendants similarly situated who might be tempted to engage in similar conduct or
affairs.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION: NICKLAS ARTHUR HOFFMANS
ASSAULT WITH A DEADLY WEAPON AND BODILY INJURY AGAINST
ROXANN DAVIDSON, Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress and
violations of 18 U.S.C. 241, 242 with Robert J. Fletcher
76. Plaintiffs allege 1-75 of this their Original Complaint above as if the samewere fully recopied and restated herein below.
77. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Roxann Davidsons claims for
personal injury and intentional infliction of emotional distress resulting from
assault with a deadly weapon and bodily injury under 28 U.S.C. 1367, in that
these claims are utterly and inextricably intertwined with the claims for
racketeering stated above, and Federal Question jurisdiction to the extent that the
Porterville Police have, in part through Licensed California Attorney Robert J.
Fletchers persuasion, afforded Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman a degree of
protection
78. On or about March 10-11, 2011, as specifically stated and described in 12-
24 above, Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman used a gun which was either a high
powered b-b gun or a pellet gun of some sort to fire repeatedly at close range
(approximately 50 feet or less) at Plaintiff Roxann Davidson.
79. On or about March 11, 2011, Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman actually hit
Plaintiff Roxann Davidsons left cheek, directly underneath her left eye, while
firing at her, and then warned her that next time he would take her eye out.
In re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
23
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
24/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
80. Plaintiff Roxann Davidsons cheek was swollen and bloated from whatever
it was that grazed or entered her skin (it could have been a pellet of toxin or even
rock salt) for some days or weeks after this incident, but she suffers sensations of
limited area numbness on her left cheek up through the present date.
81. Furthermore, as the direct and proximate and therefore legal result of
Defendants actions, Plaintiff Roxann Davidson has suffered from extreme anxiety
fear, and emotional distress of every kind on a daily and nightly basis ever since
the date of the shooting on March 11, 2011.
82. Wherefore, Plaintiff Roxann Davidson prays for her actual damages in the
amount of $15,000.00.83. Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman believes that he is above-the-law and
beyond the reach of the Police, and in this he is assisted, aided, and abetted by his
California Licensed Attorney-at-Law Robert J. Fletcher, who has (so far) ensured
that no criminal prosecution nor even a competent investigation or acceptance of
Plaintiffs complaint be accepted by the Porterville Police or Tulare County
Sheriffs Office, so that Nicklas Arthur Hoffman believes, and teaches his minor
children, that murder and mayhem of people like the Plaintiffs is both morally and
legally acceptable in a civilized society.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION: INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF
EMOTIONAL DISTRESS BY DEFENDANT NICKLAS ARTHUR
HOFFMAN against all Plaintiffs
84. Plaintiffs reallege 1-83 of their Original Complaint and incorporate the
same by reference as if fully copied and restated herein below.
85. For the past two, now going on three years, to wit, since approximately June
of 2009, Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman has engaged in a pattern of verbal,
physical, financial, and emotional harassment, including assault and battery
robbery, electronic spying, theft of identity, invasion of privacy, and other torts
In re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
24
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
25/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
which was, is, and remains up through the day of the filing of this Original
Complaint extreme and outrageous and utterly unacceptable in civilized society.
86. As the direct and proximate and therefore legal result of this Defendants
conduct, each of Plaintiffs Courtney and Melody Gillespie and Roxann Davidson
have suffered sleep-loss at night, fearfulness and daytime anxiety, inability to
concentrate on productive labor, including their ordinary employment in the
outside world, and are constantly afraid and fearful to leave their home-living
space alone and unguarded for fear that Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman will
introduce poison or plant or create explosive booby traps or other devices of
mayhem.87. Melody Ann Gillespie, in particular, is under constant and continuing
psychological care and counseling.
88. Plaintiffs Courtney Gillespie, Melody Ann Gillespie, and Roxann Davidson
according pray for their actual damages from 2 years and two months and
approximately nine days (800 days total, as of the date of this filing) of continuous
harassment and intentional infliction of emotional distress alone in the amount of
$100 per day each, for a total (as of the date of this filing) of $240,000.00, to be
ncreased by $100/day each day for each Plaintiff until final judgment is paid.i
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION: QUIET TITLE TO 1831 NORTH LIME
STREET, PORTERVILLE, CALIFORNIA 93257
(CALIFORNIA CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 760.010-760.060)
89. Plaintiffs reallege 1-88 of this their Original Complaint and incorporate
the same by reference is if fully copied and restated herein below.
90. The real estate, subject of this litigation is a ten acre plot of land whose
primary original entrance is known as or commonly identified as 1831 North Lime
Street, Porterville, CA 93258, but the legal description of this property is: LOT 10
of Hermosa Orange Colony, County of Tulare, State of California, according to the
In re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
25
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
26/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Map thereof in Book 2, Page 131 of Maps, Tulare County Records. A.P.N. 255-
230-004, more commonly known as 1831 North Lime Street, Porterville CA.
91. Pursuant to 760.030 of the California Code of Civil Procedure, Plaintiffs
file this Action for Quiet Title to Establish and Quiet their title in the ten acres
known as and located with street address 1831 North Lime Street, Porterville,
California 93257 as a matter of rights and remedies cumulative of all other issues
addressed by this their Original Complaint.
92. Plaintiffs allege, as against all Defendants to this action, that their right, title
and interest in 1831 North Lime Street, Porterville, California 93257 is and ought
to be declared and adjudged superior either because of their claims in the Notice ofClaim of Lien Attached as Exhibit D, without foreclosure or because of any of the
following theories of quiet title, or any combination of factors listed herein below:
(1) Contract for Deed/Contract for Sale: if the Memorandum or Memoranda
attached as Exhibit A to this Complaint be construed as a Contract for
Deed/Contract for Sale,the Plaintiffs have paid in full the contract price agreed to
and partially memorialized in writing by Plaintiff Courtney Gillespie and Nicklas
Arthur Hoffman, signing individually and on behalf of the H.M. Wysocki Trust,
(2) Equitable Performance Favors the Plaintiffs: the Plaintiffs have
performed equitably and fairly more than their original obligations under said
contract (Exhibits A-C), and have so far acted to accede to all of Nicklas Arthur
Hoffmans demands, and those of his attorney Robert J. Fletcher, as to tip the
balance of equity lopsidedly in their favor, even to the point of Plaintiff paying
Defendants electricity bill entirely, by his own admission, since June 2005, with
no contribution from the Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman whatsoever,
(3) Defendants approach this Court with unclean hands: In addition to the
pattern of continuous harassment with repeated assault, battery, conversion of
property, robbery, burglary, theft, and intentional infliction of emotional distressIn re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
26
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
27/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
described above, Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman and his attorney Robert J.
Fletcher have behaved so inequitably and unfairly, with such deceit and even
perjury in the California Superior Courts, that they cannot possibly approach this
court with clean hands and are therefore not entitled to any judgment in their
favor as a matter of equity,
(4) Original Contract vitiated by Defendants Fraud and Tortious Abuse:
Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman and his attorney Robert J. Fletcher have jointly
and severally acted to with malicious intent to defraud the Plaintiffs Courtney and
Melody Gillespie of all their right, title, and interest in and to the subject property
at 1831 North Lime Street, Porterville, California 93257, and the damages owingfrom the Defendant Hoffman to Plaintiffs for his intentional torts of assault,
battery, conversion, embezzlement, intentional infliction of emotional distress, etc.,
described above make the Plaintiffs the Defendants creditor in tort or delict, which
debts could only be partially extinguished by quiet title,
(5) Ambiguous Instrument should be construed against the Drafter to create
a Constructive Trust: the hopelessly incomplete and partial written memorandum
(or memoranda) supporting the sale of property from Nicklas Arthur Hoffman to
Courtney Gillespie (Exhibit A) should be uniformly construed against the
Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman drafter, as a joint assumption of trust between
these two parties, with Melody Ann Gillespie as the only possible or probably
intended beneficiary the grantor and grantee, especially in light of the testimony
and Tulare County Superior Courts Orders shown in Exhibits B-C.
(6) Ambiguous Instrument should be construed in favor of less sophisticated
party who has paid and suffered more: all ambiguities in the written instruments
(see Exhibit A, and live testimony given in Tulare County California Superior
Court, see Transcript in Exhibit B, and Courts Order Exhibit C) should be
construed in favor of the less sophisticated party, namely in favor of PlaintiffIn re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
27
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
28/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Courtney Gillespie, who has paid more than the original cash price and been
subject to massive tortious abuse including assault, battery, conversion, intentional
infliction of emotional distress, etc., as described above,
(7) No Legal merit to Defendants Claims: Defendant Nicklas Arthur
Hoffmans demands to the sole possession of these ten acres of real estate or title
to this property in his favor have no basis in law or equity,
(8) Accounting for Actual or Constructive Fiduciary Trust favors Gillespies:
to the degree that the written memoranda supporting the agreement between
Courtney Gillespie and Nicklas Arthur Hoffman can be construed as an agreement
to acquire and administer the 10 acres as a common trust property between thePlaintiff Courtney and Defendant Nicklas as trustees, Defendant Nicklas Arthur
Hoffman has never provided an accounting but only demanded more, more, and
still more cash and labor from Plaintiff Courtney Gillespie and his wife Melody,
and accordingly, this Court should declare and adjudge that the trust relationship
should be extinguished on account of Defendants breach of fiduciary duty to the
Gillespie Plaintiffs, in addition to his assaultive behavior on all plaintiff, (9)
Accounting for actual or constructive partnership requires dissolution and
distribution of all partnership assets to the Gillespies: to the degree that the
written memorandum or memoranda (Exhibit A) supporting the agreement
between Courtney Gillespie and Nicklas Arthur Hoffman could be construed as a
partnership or joint tenancy, the partnership should be dissolved and all equities
accounted for on Courtney Gillespies side to make Courtney and Melody
Gillespie the sole owners of the property.
93. Wherefore, pursuant to any one or any combination of the nine theories
enumerated in paragraph 83 above, this Court ought to award all right, title, and
interest in all ten acres located at and more commonly known as 1831 North Lime
Street, Porterville, California 93257 to Plaintiffs Courtney and Melody Gillespie.In re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
28
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
29/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION: DECLARATORY JUDGMENT TO
CONSTRUE AGREEMENT & PARTITION OF JOINT TENANCY
94. Plaintiffs reallege 1-92 of this their Original Complaint and incorporate
the same by reference as if fully copied and restated herein below.
95. Pleading in the alternative, but without waiving the Plaintiffs to all ten acres
located at and known by the name 1831 North Lime Street, Plaintiffs, via this
Courts Exercise of Supplemental and Bankruptcy-Related To jurisdiction
invoke as the source of an alternative remedy California Civil Code 682 which
states that The ownership of property by several persons is either:
1. Of joint interest;
2. Of partnership interests;
3. Of interests in common;
4. Of community interest of husband and wife.
96. The ambiguous memorandum or memoranda (Exhibits A-C) supporting the
agreement between Plaintiff Courtney Gillespie and Defendant Nicklas Arthur
Hoffman, as noted above, is not susceptible to classification as to any of these
categories, except that under no circumstances whatsoever were Courtney
Gillespie and Nicklas Arthur Hoffman ever husband and wife with a community
property interest.
97. As summarized under the heading Seven Cause of Action: Quiet Title
above, the written memoranda supporting the agreement are ambiguous: these
memoranda are attached as Exhibit A to this Original Complaint, which must be
construed and understood in light of Exhibits B & C (Transcript of March 23, 2010
proceedings in Unlawful Detainer/Forcible Eviction Act and Tulare Count
Superior Courts Order entered at the conclusion of that hearing, 3-23-10).
98. Pursuant to the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. 2201-2202
Plaintiffs Courtney & Melody Gillespie move and pray for a declaratory judgment
In re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
29
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
30/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
from this Court in their favor, either for quiet title to the entire property as
specified in their Seventh Cause of Action Above or to declare Joint Tenancy, a
Tenancy-in-Common, or as a Partnership, and effect a partition of the property
together with a cash judgment against all Defendants for the several torts and
pattern of racketeering described above.
NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION: ACTUAL OR CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD
99. Plaintiffs reallege 1-98 of this their Original Complaint and incorporate
the same by reference as if fully copied and restated herein below.
100. Plaintiffs allege that Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman both originally
intended to defraud Plaintiff Courtney Gillespie at the time of the making of theMemoranda shown in Exhibit A and that Defendant subsequently tried further and
additionally to defraud the Plaintiffs in the interpretation, construction, and
application of the contract over the next six years.
101. Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffmans attempted fraud on the Court in
claiming that the Plaintiffs were mere renters was rejected by the Tulare County
California Superior Court on March 23, 2010, when Defendant sought to maintain
an action for Unlawful Detainer/Forcible Eviction against the Plaintiffs.
102. Plaintiffs allege that Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffmans Daughter,
Defenant Nickol D. Gerritsma, individually and as Trustee for the H.M. Wysocki
Trust, either passively participated in actual fraud as a co-conspirator or actively
engaged in constructive or negligent misrepresentation or fraud by delegating her
responsibilities as Trustee for the H.M. Wysocki Trust to Nicklas Arthur Hoffman
and Robert J. Fletcher.
103. Plaintiffs Courtney and Melody Ann Gillespie pray for their full damages
resulting from Defendants fraud in the minimum amount of $720,000.00.
TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION: BREACH OF CONTRACT
104. Plaintiffs reallege 1-103 of this their Original Complaint and incorporateIn re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
30
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
31/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
the same by reference as if fully copied and restated herein below.
105. Plaintiffs are naturalpersons at all relevant times in direct privity of contract
with Nicklas Arthur Hoffman; and Plaintiffs are such natural persons who, acting
at all times as laborers, within the meaning of California Civil Code 3089, were
self-employed employees or independently contracting self-employed persons,
who performed labor upon or bestowed skill or other necessary services on many
works of improvement and/or maintenance of the real property and structures
subject of this litigation, located at 1831 North Lime Street in Porterville
California (which work and labor projects are partially listed in Exhibit D: Notice
of Claim of Lien) by one or more direct contracts and agreements, with certainterms both express and implied, with Nicklas Arthur Hoffman for which
performance by labor was rendered continually between June 1, 2004 and October
11, 2011, the date of the Notice of Claim of Lien.
106. Courtney Ray Gillespie as a land or stationary engineer (journeyman
certified in plumbing, electrical, painting, welding, & carpentry) especially well-
qualified to do all the work and labor described in Exhibit D, the Notice of Lien,
attached to this complaint.
106. Plaintiffs are natural persons who also, acting as materialmen, within the
meaning of California Civil Code 3090, who furnished materials or supplies to be
used or consumed in many works of improvement and/or maintenance of the real
property and structures, subject of the present litigation, continuously between
June 1, 2004 and October 11, 2011, the date of filing the attached Notice of Lien.
107. No Notice of Cessation has ever been filed or requested by any party to
this litigation pursuant to California Civil Code 3092, and in fact labor has never
ceased on the subject property for any period of 30 consecutive calendar days since
June 1, 2004.
108. All work performed, labor carried out, and material provided has beenIn re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
31
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
32/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
conducted on the ten acres subject of this real estate, to wit:
LOT 10 of Hermosa Orange Colony, County of Tulare, State ofCalifornia, according to the Map thereof in Book 2, Page 131 of
Maps, Tulare County Records, with A.P.N. 255-230-004, morecommonly known as 1831 North Lime Street in Porterville, CA
109. All work performed, labor carried out, and material provided has been
provided or carried out pursuant to one or more express and/or implied complex
contracts for the complete and comprehensive development of these ten acres of
land, the sole actively negotiating parties to such single long-term complex
contract or series of contracts, with multiple terms, whether express or implied,
were Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Courtney Ray Gillespie, and Melody Ann Gillespie.
110. Plaintiffs have performed all conditions and covenants to be performed on
its part under the agreement.
111. The labor, services, equipment, and materials furnished by plaintiff had
and have an approximately but reasonably and conservatively estimated total
market and/or replacement value of $724,002.00 exclusive of interest, which
Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman either expressly or impliedly agreed to pay,
and of which labor and material which the Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman has
claimed and received and continues to possess and enjoy all the benefits, except for
the small amount of land in which the Plaintiffs are allowed to continue to live, in
fear of their lives, and in constant fear of the Defendants irrational actions and
illegally abusive and assaultive conduct, from which Defendant Nicklas Arthur
Hoffman seeks to drive the Plaintiffs by constant harassment and intimidation, thus
reducing the Plaintiffs to a condition nearly approximating true debt peonage
within the meaning of United States statutes implementing the 13th
Amendment to
the Constitution adopted in 1865.
112. Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman breached the agreement, in that he has
In re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
32
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
33/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
never paid the Plaintiffs for any of their labor or materials, and there is now due
owing, the full estimated and approximate but utterly unpaid the sum of
$724,002.00, to which interest at the legal rate should be added on some amounts
since August 4, 2009, the first date of clear and obvious repudiation or breach, and
since October 11, 2011 on all remaining amounts.
113. If this Court should find that the terms and conditions of these Plaintiffs
contract with Defendant Nicklas Arthur Hoffman cannot be determined with
requisite legal certainty to grant damages for breach of contract as a matter of law,
the Court should allow the Plaintiffs to recover for their workin quantum meruitat
a rate which utilizes Courtney Ray Gillespies actual salary for similar work withSunMaid Raisins and to Melody Ann Gillespie for her actual cash investment in
goods, services, and the rental and acquisition of work supplies, material, and
equipment, including 7 prefabricated pinewood structures, all as described in the
attached Exhibit D: Notice of Claim of Lien.
ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION: TO FORECLOSE MECHANICS LIEN
114. Plaintiffs reallege 1-113 and incorporate the same as if fully copied and
restated herein.
115. Because Plaintiffs contracted directly with Nicklas Hoffman and served his
attorney Robert J. Fletcher with a preliminary version of this Complaint on August
8, 2011, no demand is necessary, or an additional formal demand would be
redundant, pursuant to California Civil Code 3097.
116. On October 11, 2011, plaintiffs duly recorded a verified Mechanics' Lien
Claim, describing the building parcel and the labor, services, equipment, and
materials to be furnished on the work of improvement, in the official records of
Tulare County California, in accordance with the provisions of Civil Code
3084 & 8416.
117. The cost of recording the Mechanics' Lien Claim was $__________, noIn re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
33
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Complaint in Adversarial Action Filed Pursuant to 18 USC
34/49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
28
27
part of which has been repaid.
118. Each of the Defendants (except for Robert J. Fletcher and Brett Thompson)
named in this complaint claims or has been alleged to have some right, title, or
interest in or to the building parcel, each of which claim is junior and inferior
to plaintiff's claim by operation of Article XIV, 3 of the Constitution of the State
of California and all statutory law implementing the same.
WHEREFORE, as to this their Eleventh Count for Foreclosure of their
Mechanics Lien, Plaintiffs demand judgment against all of the Defendants, except
for Fletcher & Thompson, jointly and severally, for the following:
(1) The sum of $724,002.00, together with interest according to law asdamages;
(2) The sum of $__________ in costs incurred in recording the verified
Mechanics' Lien Claim;
(3) The total sum of $__________, together with attorney fees and interest, be
ordered as a lien against the building parcel, senior and superior to any claim of
right, title or interest in or to the real property of any Defendants, and that the
real property be ordered sold by the Sheriff of Tulare County, California
according to law, and that all proceeds of sale be applied to plaintiff's claim and
to the cost of these proceedings and the sale of the real property;
(4) Reasonable costs of litigation as allowed under the Civil Code section
3148; and
(5) Any and all such other and further relief as the court shall deem or consider
proper as a matter of law or in equity.
TWELFTH CAUSE OF ACTION: CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE 1714.10 IS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL
120 Plaintiffs reallege (1)-(119) as if fully recopied and restated herein below.In re Debtor---Melody Ann Castillo Gillespie: Original Complaint in Core Adversarial Action
Gillespie & Gillespie v. Nicklas Arthur Hoffman, Nickol D. Gerritsma, H.M. Wysocki Trust, et al.
34
8/3/2019 10-11-2011 Courtney Ray & Melody Ann Gillespie Original Comp