Defenders Northwest News: Exposing Land Rover Fraud and Protecting Consumers
                     1 Alessandro G. Assanti, Esq. (SBN 181368) 
2  Suzan A. Colgan, Esq. (SBN 256841)
A.G. ASSANTI & ASSOCIATE, P.C.
3 33 Brookline St.
Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 
4  Tel: 949-540-0439
5 Fax: 949-540-0458
6 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Chad Ullery and Belmont Business Solutions, LLC
7
8
SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE CALIFORNIA
9
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER
10
11 BELMONT ASSET SOLUTIONS, LLC a ) CASE NO.:   
12 Wyoming limited liability company; and )
 Chad Ullery, an individual, ) Assigned for all purposes to:
13 ) Honorable ,
Plaintiffs, ) Dept.  
14 )
15 vs. ) Complaint Filed: 08/ /2022
) Trial Date: None Set
16 BRIAN HALL, an individual;  )
DEFENDERS NORTHWEST, LLC, a ) COMPLAINT FOR:
17 Washington Limited Liability Company; ) 1. BREACH OF WRITTEN 
18  MICHELE HALL, an individual;  )  CONTRACT;
SHAWN K. HARJU, an individual;  ) 2. NEGLIGENCE;  
19 CHRYSALIS SOLUTIONS, PLLC, a ) 3. ;
Washington Limited Liability Company; ) 4. FRAUD;
20
 AUTOHOME USA, INC., a Nevada ) 5. FRAUD;
21 Corporation; and DOES 1 through 25 inclusive. ) 6. CONSPIRACY;
) 7. CONVERSION;
22 ) 8. FRAUDULENT 
TRANSFER;
23
) 9. 
24 CONS1T0R. UPRCOTIMVIES SORY FRAUD;
FRAU1D1U. ILNETNETNTIONAL INFLICTION OF 
25 )  TERMAONTSIFOENRA; L DISTRESS;
) 12. NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF  
26
) EMOTIONAL DISTRESS; AND
27 ) 13. CONTRACTUAL INDEMNITY
) 14. EQUITABLE INDEMNITY
28 ) 15. ACCOUNTING
 )
)
-1)-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
)
1 )
2 ))
3
4 GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
5 1. Complainant, CHAD ULLERY, (hereinafter referred to as “ULLERY”) is an
6 individual residing in the county of Orange, State of California.
7 2.Complainant, BELMONT ASSET SOLUTIONS, LLC, (hereinafter referred to as  
8 “BELMONT”) is a Wyoming limited liability company in good standing and qualified to conduct  
9 business in the State of California, with its principal offices located in Anaheim, County of  
10 Orange.
11 3.At all times, ULLERY and BELMONT are collectively referred to as  “Complainants.”
12 4.At the time of the subject incident (hereinafter described below), which gave rise to
13 this complaint, any and all the acts committed upon Complainants occurred within the city of  
14 Irvine, County of Orange, California.
15 5.The Defendant, BRIAN HALL, (, hereinafter referred to as “Defendant Hall”) is an  
16 individual residing in the city of Gig Harbor, County of     , Washington. Hall jointly with  
17 other Defendants committed the acts against Complainants as herein complained of.
18
19 6.Complainants herein allege that the Defendant, MICHELE HALL, (hereinafter  referred to 
20 as “Defendant M. Hall”) is an individual believed to be a resident of the State of  Washington. 
21 Complainants reserve the right to amend this complaint when it is further ascertained  the city, state 
22 and county of her actual residence.
23 7.Defendant Defenders Northwest, LLC (hereinafter “Defenders Northwest”) is  believed to 
24 be a validly formed Washington Limited Liability Company and is alleged to have  committed each 
25 and all of the acts as herein complained at all times within the county of Orange.
26 8.Defendant, Autohome USA, Inc. (hereinafter “Autohome”) is alleged to be an  Nevada 
27 Corporation doing business from the same physical location in Gig Harbor, Washington as
28
-2-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 the other Defendants, and is alleged to have committed each and all of the acts as herein  
2 complained within the state of California, County of Orange.
3 9.       Defendant Shawn K. Harju, (hereinafter “Harju”) is a attorney and a consultant to  
4 Hall, M. Hall, and Defenders Northwest, and is alleged to have committed each and all of the acts  
5 as herein complained of at all times within the County of Orange.
6 10.Complainants herein allege that Defendant Chrysalis Solutions, PLLC (hereinafter  
7 “Defendant Chrysalis”), is a limited liability company located in Washington State, at the time 
8  each and all of the acts were committed as herein alleged.
9 11. The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate, or
10 otherwise, of the Cross-Defendants sued herein as DOES 1 to 25 hereinafter also referred to as the  “Fictitiously 
11
Named Cross-Defendants”, are currently unknown to Complainants who, therefore,  sues said 
12
Defendants by such fictitious names. Complainants are informed and believe, and based  upon such 
13
information and belief allege, that each of the Fictitiously Named Cross-Defendants are  responsible 
14
to Complainants in some manner for the acts, omissions, or other conduct as  hereinafter alleged, 
15
or is a necessary party for the relief sought herein, and is subject to the  jurisdiction of this court; 
16
and further are being sued in both their individual and official capacity.  Complainants will seek 
17
leave of court to amend this Cross Complaint to allege each of their true  names and capacities 
18
when same have been ascertained.
19
12.       Each  reference  to     “Cross-Defendant,”     “Cross-Defendants,”  “CROSS-
20
DEFENDANT” and/or “CROSS-DEFENDANTS” herein is intended to be a reference 
21
to all  Cross-Defendants named herein, including the Fictitiously Named Cross-Defendants, 
unless
23 13. Complainants are informed and believe, and based upon such information and  
24 be
2li2ef alleogthee, rwthisaet  eaxtp raelsls lyti mindeisc ahteedr eoirn t hree cleovntaenxtt,  oethaecrhw isoef  rethquei rCesr.oss-Defendants was and is the  
25 principal, agent, representative, supervisor, employee, servant, alter ego, partner, shareholder,  
26 director, officer, joint venturer, parent corporation, subsidiary corporation, co-conspirator, licensor,  
27 licensee, inviter, invitee, predecessor-in-interest, successor-in-interest, assignor and/or assignee  
28 (hereinafter referred to as an “Interrelationship”), as may be applicable, of each the other Cross-
-3-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 Defendants, and, in doing the things hereinafter alleged, was (a) acting in concert with all of the  
2 other Cross-Defendants; (b) under the direction, instruction, demand, requirement, and/or control  
3 of some or all of the other Cross-Defendants; (c) in furtherance of a common plan, scheme,  
4 enterprise and/or control of some or all of the other Cross-Defendants; (d) in furtherance of a  
5 common plan, scheme, enterprise and/or conspiracy with some or all of the Cross-Defendants;
6  and/or (e) with the knowledge, consent, acquiescence, and/or prior or subsequent ratification of  some or all of 
7
the other Cross-Defendants.
8 14.     Complainants further allege that each of said Cross-Defendants proximately caused  
9 the injuries and damages by reason of negligent, careless, deliberately indifferent, intentional,
10 willful or wanton misconduct, including the negligent, careless, deliberately indifferent,  intentional, willful 
11
or wanton misconduct in creating and otherwise causing the incidents,  conditions and 
12
circumstances hereinafter set forth, or by reason of the direct or imputed negligence  or vicarious 
13
fault or breach of duty arising out of the matters herein alleged.
14
15 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION FOR BREACH OF WRITTEN CONTRACT
16
17 A. COUNT 1, BREACH OF THE WRITTEN AGREEMENT DATED JANUARY 20, 2010 
18  AS TO BOLINGER AND BC, LLC , AND ROES 1 THROUGH 200, INCLUSIVE.
19 15. Complainants incorporate paragraphs 1 through 22 as though fully pled herein.
20 16. On or about January 20, 2010 Cross-Complainant, MAZZOTTA, as a managing
21 member of WEST JAM, entered into a written agreement with BOLINGER on behalf of himself
22 and as the managing member of BC, LLC. The subject agreement is incorporated fully herein,  and 
23
referred to as Exhibit 1.
24 17.    Exhibit 1 references WEST JAM and BC, LLC’s and its intention to lease the  
25 property located at 45 Oldfield Rd., Irvine, CA for a base rent of $30,000 per month beginning on  
26 February 1, 2010 and on the first of every month thereafter; but no later than the fifth of each  
27 month for a period of three years. (See paragraph 1.5 and 1.19 of Exhibit 1). Exhibit 1 also  
28 specified that there was to be a security deposit of $10,000, as well as monthly payments for
-4-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 Association fees of $1,900 and maintenance of property taxes in the amount of $5,000 each month 
2  or the actual yearly amount assessed by the taxing authority for a period of three years.
3 18.     Cross-Defendants were also to obtain, and keep in force, a commercial general  
4 liability insurance policy including garage insurance policy for any and all service or repair work  
5 protecting the parties, as well as, maintaining all general liability insurances and their extra riders,
6  as well as, workman’s compensation insurance coverage. (See paragraph 1.22 and 1.23 of Exhibit  1).
7
8 19.     Further, paragraph 1.26 of said agreement (Exhibit 1) called for Cross-Defendants  
9 as alleged herein were to indemnify all Complainants and hold them harmless of any and all
10 damages and liens or judgments, penalties attorneys and consulting fees, expenses and or liabilities  arising out of, 
11
involving, or in connection with, the use and/or occupancy of the premises by  lessee’s/Cross-
12
Defendants.
13 20.     As further consideration and the promises as contained in Exhibit 1, Complainants  
14 and Cross-Defendants agreed that MAZZOTTA (Lessor), would allow Cross-Defendants to use its  
15 Manheim Auto Finance line of credit, (hereinafter, “MAFS”) in the amount of $400,000. (See  
16 Paragraph 2 of Exhibit 1). Cross-Defendants, as herein alleged, also promised that they shall be  
17 responsible for all insurance coverage, interest payments, late fees and assessments for use of the  
18 MAFS line of credit and compensate lessor in the amounts which leave Complainants free and 
19  clear from any and all claims from MAFS.
20 21. In the agreement with Complainants, Cross-Defendants also agreed that they shall  
21 manage the existing service center located at 45 Oldfield Rd., Irvine, CA and pay Cross-
22 Complainant’s up to $25,000 per month and 50% of the net profits thereafter. (See paragraph 
23 3 of
24 Exhibit 1).
25 22. As a further promise on behalf of Complainants and the consideration as  
26 referenced in Exhibit 1 paragraph 4, MAZZOTTA as Autosport International Inc.’s (hereinafter  
27 “AUTOSPORT”) sole shareholder agreed to sell 100% of the outstanding shares of AUTOSPORT  
28 to BC, LLC for the amount of $20,000 in six equal monthly installments from February 1, 2010  
through June 1, 2010.
-5-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 23. As part of Cross-Defendants further obligations and consideration they were to  
2 assist in the orderly transfer of any and all the DMV licensing and bond obligations, as well as, the  
3 orderly transfer of all banking arrangements necessary to operate AUTOSPORT. (See paragraph
4 4.3 of Exhibit 1).
5 24.       Amongst other promises that were made by Cross-Defendants, and each 
of them,
67 were that they were to maintain certain personnel, place another $400,000 of additional vehicles  for sale on 
8 the premises, manage all aspects of sales service and additional revenue streams arising  from 
9 AUTOSPORT or any business occurring on and the premises, as well as, to establish and  maintain 
10 a profes2s5io.Cnarlo,s hs-oDnesfet nednavnirtos namlseon tp arto amlli steimd easn odf  alglr beeudsi ntehsast  othne tyh ew poreumldi spesu.rchase 100% of the  
11 outstanding stock of AUTOSPORT and that they would establish a Limited Liability Company to  
12 purchase the shares for the protection of Complainants and relieve them of any liabilities relating  
13 to the use and operation of the AUTOSPORT’s business.
14 26.Further, on or about January 20, 2010, as further consideration for each of the
15 promises, assurances and consideration, BOLINGER personally guaranteed each and all of the  
16 obligations contained in Exhibit 1 or as further as herein alleged in the event of breach.
17 27.Cross Complainants performed all promises, covenants and representations of  Exhibit 1 
18 and as to those promises, covenants and representations contained in the subject  agreement that 
19 were not performed, Cross Complaints were excused from said performance, if  any.
20 28. That prior to April 22, 2011, Cross-Defendants, and each of them, failed to perform
2221 on the promises as contained in Exhibit 1 and/or as herein alleged.
23 29. As a result of the Cross-Defendants’ breach, these complaining parties have been  
24 damaged in an amount that is in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limit to be proven at the time  
25 of trial.
26
27
28 B. COUNT 2, BREACH OF THE WRITTEN AGREEMENT DATED MARCH 1, 2010
-6-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 AS TO BC, LLC , AND ROES 1 THROUGH 200, INCLUSIVE.
2
3 30. Complainants incorporate paragraphs 1 through 37 as though fully pled herein.
4 31. On or about March 1, 2010, Cross-Defendant, ROSI who represented himself as a
5 managing member of BC, LLC with the authority to bind BC, LLC agreed, in writing, to amend
6   the original agreement (Exhibit 1) that increased the monthly lease amount from $30,000 a month  to $42,000 
7
month (See Exhibit 2) in exchange for valuable consideration on the part of  Complainants in the 
8
form of allowing them to operate and lease the entire premises including the  service area.
9
10 32.At all times, Complainants performed on each of the provisions of the contract,  except 
11 where performance was excused due to these Cross Defendants’ breach of the agreement.
12 33.Cross-Defendants breached the agreement by failing to pay the increased amount  and 
13 thereby has caused damages to Complainants in an amount in excess of the jurisdictional limit  to 
14 be proven at the time of trial.
15 ///
16 ///
17 ///
18 ///
19 ///
20 ///
21 C. COUNT 3, BREACH OF THE WRITTEN AGREEMENT DATED JUNE 21, 
22 2010,  OCTOBER 16, 2010, AND OCTOBER 30, 2010 AGREEMENTS;
23 AS TO ROSI, BC, LLC , AND ROES 1 THROUGH 200, INCLUSIVE.
24
25 34. Complainants incorporate paragraphs 1 through 41 as though fully pled herein.
26 35. On or about June 21, 2010, Cross-Defendant, ROSI on behalf of himself and as a
27 representative and managing member of BC, LLC assented and agreed to all of the terms of the  
28 original agreement, (Exhibit 1) except those amended pages as referenced in the last page of the
-7-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 amended agreement (See Exhibit 3); and further adopted its terms including a personal guarantee  
2 as shown in paragraph 30 of Exhibit 3.     Please see the amended agreement agreed to by the  
3 parties and incorporated fully herein as Exhibit 3.
4 36.     In terms of the amendments, ROSI on behalf of himself and as Managing Member  
5 of BC, LLC, ROSI modified the terms on Pages 12, 22 and 28 of the agreement, in that Cross-
6   Defendants agreed and promised (in addition to the other promises, representations and covenants  of the 
7
original agreement) that Cross-Defendants shall retain staff of their own choice, and be  responsible 
8
for management of the Manheim Auto Finance Systems line of credit, hereinafter  “MAFS” and 
9
that ROSI shall be personally obligated and liable for damages associated with any
10      breach of3 t7h.e  aOgreeme11 n or 
nta.bout October 16, 2010, Complainants entered into another agreement,  
12 hereinafter incorporated fully herein as Exhibit 4 to amend the terms of Exhibit 1, 2 and 3 which  
13 called for an extension in the original prior agreements, as well as, an increase of the monthly rent  
14 of the entire premises located at 45 Oldfield Rd., Irvine, CA from $30,000 a month to $42,000  
15 month. In addition, the agreement calls for the execution of a subsequent agreement, which will  
16 outline the fair market value of to AUTOSPORT’S service business and for the sale of  
17 SPECTRUM including its inventory and equipment at fair market value.
18 38.     Cross-Defendants, ROSI and BC, LLC made further promises to Complainants, in  
19 that they would immediately employ a staff to enter all business checks receipts, bills etc., into an  
20 accounting format and deliver to MAZZOTTA, immediately; which documents were to be used  
21 for tax and accounting purposes.
22 39.      Cross-Defendants, as alleged herein, made further promises that they will take,  
23 “every precaution to protect the assets of MAZZOTTA during the agreed-upon time frame of this  
24 agreement.”
25 40. On or about, October 30, 2010 ROSI, on behalf of BC, LLC, entered into a further  
26 agreement, (Exhibit 5) amending some of the terms of the original lease and buy sell agreement  
27 dated 1/20/2010 and previously amended 6/21/2010, Exhibits 1 and 3, respectively.
28
-8-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 41. As part of the promises, obligations and consideration for amending said  
2 agreements according to Exhibit 5, ROSI on behalf of BC, LLC, agreed to “increase its monthly  
3 payment to WEST JAM from $30,000 a month to $42,000 a month starting November 1, 2010  
4 until January 1, 2013; that BC, LLC will lease complete use of entire premises at 45 Oldfield Rd.,  
5 Irvine, CA 92618 and that these Complainants shall relinquish their interest in any monetary sums
6 gained by operation of the service center and that BC, LLC will assume complete ownership of  AUTOSPORT 
7
service and its expenses. It was also agreed that, WEST JAM will be compensated  directly for 
8
equipment listed on attached page titled, “WEST JAM service equipment,” including  but not 
9
limited to, the alignment rack, tire machine, air conditioning machine and assorted shop
1101   tools. BC, LLC, also agreed to acquire ownership of SPECTRUM, and that SPECTRUM would  be located 
12 on the premises of 45 Oldfield Rd., Irvine, CA 92618.
13 42. In return for the transfer of ownership of SPECTRUM, as referenced above, Cross-  
14 Defendants, as alleged herein, promised to assume the following obligations according to Exhibit 
15  5: a. current debt of $135,000 owed to do Ducati North America;
16 b. $90,000 in critically past-due sales tax obligations to the state of California 
17  Board of equalization;
18 c. $30,000 obligation to the Internal Revenue Service;
19 d. assorted parts suppliers obligations in the approximate amount of $12,966;
20 e. $5,200 to James Henderson;
21 f. $31,000 in non-paid customer payoffs;
22 g. $8,700 of past due debt to Dianese;
23 h. payroll in the amount of $36,253.90 a month;
24 i. an ongoing obligation to Blue Shield insurance for $6,005 a month including 
25  MAZZOTTA at $3,116 per month; and
26 j. credit line with GE capital in the amount of $250,000, which is secured by  
27 Jamie MAZZOTTA in the amount of $125,000.
28
-9-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 43.As a further guarantee of the agreement, as shown in Exhibit 5, ROSI on behalf of  
2 himself as personal guarantor and as managing member of BC, LLC agreed to assume the balance  
3 of the outstanding debt of SPECTRUM as stated above in the preceding paragraphs a through j,  
4 and that ROSI would guarantee the debt personally.
5 44. A further agreement was entered into on or about November 4, 2010 between
6   Complainants and Cross-Defendants, which is incorporated fully herein as Exhibit 6.   As part of  the 
7
agreement ROSI was to sell one alignment rack, one 2010 Ford Ranger pickup truck, and
8
$55,261 for motorcycle inventory purchased by MAZZOTTA. Payment was to be made on or  before 
9
March 30, 2011.
10 45.A final agreement was entered into on or about November 4, 2010, which  incorporated 
11 fully here in as Exhibit 7. The agreement between MAZZOTTA and ROSI was for  the sale of 
12 WEST JAM auto service equipment to ROSI for use in SPECTRUM, which included  one tire 
13 machine, one air conditioning machine, one transit jack and one support stand.
14 46.At all times Complainants performed all of their duties, promises and obligations
15 under each of the contracts referenced here in as Exhibits 1 through 7, except for those obligations  
16 where Cross-Defendants, and each of them, were already in violation of said agreements and  
17 Complainants had no duty to perform or performance was excused.
18 47.That prior to April 22, 2011 Cross-Defendants and each of them failed to perform  their 
19 obligations and duties under each of the agreements in Exhibits 1 through 7.
20 48.     More specifically, with regards to Exhibits 1 through 7; Cross-Defendants and each  
21 of them assumed all agreements and the covenants and representations, therein, and failed to honor
22 their obligations of the lease term and amended lease term and monthly payments, and at present  are in 
23
breach of said agreements of unpaid lease amounts in excess of $882,000, plus interest to be  
24
proven at the time of trial.
25 49.   Cross-Defendants are also in breach of each of the obligations and terms as agreed  
26 upon between the parties of all unpaid property taxes, payroll withholding taxes, California State  
27 Board of Equalization taxes, Internal Revenue taxes and other applicable taxes in an amount in  
28 excess of $500,000 to be proven at the time of trial.
-10-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 50.Cross-Defendants, as alleged herein, are also in breach of each and all of the  obligations 
2 and terms agreed upon between the parties of failing to provide and keep “in effect,”  workers 
3 compensation insurance coverage, general liability insurance coverage, health insurance  coverage 
4 and garage policy coverages.
5 51. Cross-Defendants, as further alleged herein, are also in breach of each and every
6  obligations and terms agreed upon between the parties to properly manage, pay off and guarantee  any and all 
7
sums for use of the MAFS, line of credit, as well as, any and all GE capital lines of  credit and 
8
personal guarantees by Cross-Complainant JAMEY MAZZOTTA and his wife Deborah  Mazzotta 
9
(herein after “Debi Mazzotta”) of a total indebtedness of over $800,000 to be proven at
10     the time o5f2 t11 .
r iaFl.urthermore, Cross-Defendants are further in breach of each, and all, of the  
12 agreements and amendments thereto as herein is referenced in Exhibit 1 through 7, in that BC,  
13 LLC, ROSI and/or BOLINGER were to purchase AUTOSPORT for the amount of $20,000  
14 beginning on February 1, 2010 and continuing for the next six months, in equal payments of
15 $3,333 for said interest in AUTOSPORT. As further promises and guarantees for the 
16 transfer of  AUTOSPORT interest, Cross-Defendants, and each of them, so promised that they 
17 would transfer  any and all DMV licensing and bond obligations, as well as, transferring any and all 
18 banking  arrangements over to BC, LLC, ROSI and BOLINGER for the orderly and legal operation 
19 of  AUTOSPORT.
20 53. Cross-Defendants, and each of them, so breached each and all of the agreements as  
21 referenced in Exhibits 1 through 7 in that they failed to pay the agreed upon consideration for
22 transfer of AUTOSPORT and further failed to apply or obtain any DMV licensing or bond  obligations as called 
23
for in the agreement to legally operate AUTOSPORT.
24
54.   Cross-Defendants further failed to transfer the banking arrangements called for in  
25
the agreement or maintain any of the required or agreed-upon insurance coverages as herein  
26
alleged.
27
28
-11-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 55. Finally, Cross-Defendants are in further breach of any and all of the agreements as  
2 referenced to Exhibits 1 through 7, in that BC, LLC, BOLINGER and/or ROSI failed to assume  
3 and properly pay for all obligations in consideration of the transfer of SPECTRUM.
4 56. On or about April 14, 2011 a letter was sent to Cross-Defendants notifying them of 
5  their breach and of their illegal activity in the operation of said business, which is 
incorporated
7 57.     Cross-Defendants failed to cure any breach of the agreements as herein alleged; and  
6 fully herein as Exhibit 8.
8 on Friday, April 22, 2011, Cross-Defendants and each of them abandoned said businesses, which  
9 includes AUTOSPORT and SPECTRUM and each and all of their obligations under the
10     agreements.
11 58. As result of Cross-Defendants’ breach of terms of the agreements and the  
12 amendments thereto as herein identified, Complainants have suffered extensive and severe  
13 damages in an amount of at least $3 million or more to be proven at the time of trial.  
14 Complainants reserve the right to amend this Cross-Complaint upon their complete discovery of  
15 damages caused by Cross-Defendants according to proof.
16
17 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE
18
19 A. COUNT 1, AGAINST DANIEL BOLINGER, MICHAEL ROSI, BLUESTONE
20 CALIFORNIA, LLC, AND ROES 1 THROUGH 200, INCLUSIVE
21 59. Complainants incorporate paragraphs 1 through 66 as though fully pled herein.
22 60. On or about January of 2010 and continuing until present, Cross-Defendants, as
23 herein alleged, promised Cross-Complaints and further owed Cross Complainants a duty to operate  
24 AUTOSPORT and SPECTRUM in accordance with all California laws, including but not limited  
25 to maintaining proper bond and DMV licensing so as to protect Complainants against any and all  
26 criminal and civil violations or indebtedness and as further specified in 4.3 of the agreement in  
27 Exhibit 1.
28
-12-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 61. At the time of entering into the agreement, on January of 2010 and each time  
2 agreements were entered into and/or modified, Cross-Defendants, and each of them knew that  
3 ROSI was going to manage and operate the businesses, and at such time, each and all defendants  
4 knew that ROSI must obtain a valid license to sell and purchase vehicles from the State of  
5 California, Department of Motor Vehicles.
6 62. Cross-Defendants and each of them were also aware that at the time of entering into  
7 said agreements that ROSI had on two prior occasions convicted of felonies involving financial  
8 crimes where he served prison sentences (the last one involving a financial crimes connected with  
9 the purchase and sale of motor vehicles); and as a result would not qualify or be eligible to obtain a
10 sales license with the State of California, Department of Motor Vehicles, and thereby not able to  operate said 
11
businesses as they so represented to these Cross-Defendants that they would in fact  operate 
12
businesses lawfully.
13 63.Cross-Defendants and each of them had a duty to disclose these facts and that Cross  
14 Defendants could not possibly operate said business legally; however each and all of the cross  
15 defendants failed to disclose this fact, despite it being known to them that they could not qualify to  
16 operate said businesses.
17 64.As a result of this failure to disclose ROSI’s prior felony criminal convictions,  
18 Complainants entered into said agreement with these Cross-Defendants, wherein Cross-Defendants  
19 made no effort or attempt to apply for said Licenses with the DMV and continued to operate the  
20 business under Cross-Complainant, Jamey Mazzotta’s license exposing him to liability.
21 65. Owners and operators of a business which sells motor vehicles had a duty to make
22     sure that they transferred the license out of Mazzotta and into either ROSI and/or BOLINGER so  that BC,LLC 
23
could operate the business lawfully.
24
66.Cross-Defendants, and each of them, negligently failed to apply or procure the  proper 
25
DMV licensing or bond obligations to legally operate AUTOSPORT or SPECTRUM, or to  
26
transfer said license from Cross-Complainant to BC, LLC, BOLLINGER or ROSI.
27
67.As a result of Cross-Defendants negligence, as herein described, and their further  failure 
28
to properly transfer said licenses or bond obligations out of Cross-Complainant’s name and
-13-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 into Cross-Defendants names and interest, each and all of the Cross-Defendants, as alleged herein,  
2 have caused and continue to cause Complainants injury and damage in the form of exposure to  
3 criminal and civil liability and costs therein.
4 68. Cross-Defendants and each of them breached this duty of care by not transferring  
5 said licenses, which therein caused these cross complainants damages in an amount that is in
6 excess of the minimum jurisdictional limit of this court to be proven at the time of trial.
7
8 B. COUNT 2, AGAINST DANIEL BOLINGER, MICHAEL ROSI, BLUESTONE 
9  CALIFORNIA, LLC, AND ROES 1 THROUGH 200, INCLUSIVE
10 69. Complainants incorporate paragraphs 1 through 76 as though fully pled herein.
11 70. As a further ongoing duty and obligation, Cross-Defendants also had a duty to
12 maintain adequate insurance, including but not limited to general building liability, workers  
13 compensation insurance, health insurance and garage operations insurance coverage.
14 71.   As a further ongoing duty and obligation of Cross-Defendants, each and all of them,  
15 had a duty to properly operate said businesses at 45 Oldfield Rd., Irvine California so that they  
16 would not expose Complainants to personal liability with regards to the personal lines of credit, to  
17 customers of AUTOSPORT or SPECTRUM, to encumber said businesses or to engage in illegal  
18 transactions with third parties or fail to remit sums due to the State and Federal taxing and revenue  
19 agencies, which includes but not limited to the State of California Board of Equalization, and  
20 Department of Motor Vehicles.
21 72. As a result of Cross-Defendants’ breach of their obligations and 
duties of care the
223 Complainants suffered and continue to suffer harm in an amount that exceeds the minimum  jurisdiction of 
24 this court to be proven at the time of trial.
25 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENCE
26 (Against Michael Rosi, Daniel Bolinger, Bluestone California, LLC., Terrie Neptune, and ROES 1 
27  through 200, Inclusive)
28 73. Complainants incorporate paragraphs 1 through 80 as though fully pled 
herein.
-14-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 74.On or about March of 2010, Cross-Defendant TERRIE NEPTUNE was appointed  by 
2 Cross-Defendants ROSI, BOLINGER, and BC, LLC to serve as AUTOSPORT’S accountant.
3 75. At the time, each and all of the Cross-Defendants, as herein named, had access and
4 control of the financial records and each and all business banking accounts. More 
5 importantly,  TERRIE NEPTUNE was given signatory control to execute and write checks against 
the business
7 76.       At some time during 2010, TERRIE NEPTUNE served in a fiduciary capacity,  
6 accounts for AUTOSPORT and SPECTRUM.
8 which was being managed by ROSI, BOLLINGER and BC, LLC. Each and all of the Cross-  
9 Defendants alleged herein failed to oversee and properly withhold and pay employee payroll
10      withholding taxes, sales taxes, tire taxes other applicable operational taxes and fees.
11 77.    At the time that TERRIE NEPTUNE served as fiduciary over the accounts, who  
12 was being managed by ROSI, BOLLINGER and BC, LLC, each and all of them had a duty to  
13 properly direct and withhold income and funds that were owned by either employees to the state of  
14 California and pay such sums in a timely manner so as not to expose Complainants to liability.
15 78.Rather than paying the proper payroll withholding tax, and/or directing TERRIE  
16 NEPTUNE to properly pay the payroll said fees and taxes each and all of Cross-Defendants so  
17 negligently, purposely, and maliciously continued to use said funds for their own self-interested  
18 personal and/or business means to the detriment of Complainants.
19 79.As a further and ongoing duty of each and all of the Cross-Defendants, as herein
20 named, they so had a duty to serve as fiduciaries over any and all funds paid by customers  
21 purchasing motor vehicles, where there was a lien on said vehicle, or said vehicle was consigned
22 by a third-party; and to properly direct such funds in accordance with all California Department of  Motor Vehicle 
23
(“DMV”) laws and regulations, including but not limited to paying lienholders and  consignors of 
24
said vehicles.
25 80. As a result of the negligence of each and all parties named herein; customers,  
26 lienholders, consignors, and Complainants have been injured in an amount unknown but believe to  
27 be in excess of $300,000 to be proven at the time of trial. Complainants herein reserve the right to
28
-15-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 amend this Cross Complaint according to proof at the time information is obtained ascertaining the 
2  Complainants’ true losses.
3 81. Further, each and all of the named Cross-Defendants, had a duty to properly  
4 execute any and all DMV paperwork perform smog checks or other duties according to state and  
5 federal law to properly complete any and all motor vehicle transactions.
6 82. As a result of each and all of Cross-Defendants negligent, malicious and purposeful  
7 acts, they so failed to properly complete motor vehicle transactions according to state and federal  
8 law which has further exposed Complainants to liability, injury and damages in an amount  
9 unknown but believed to be in excess of $500,000. Complainants herein reserved the right to
10      amend this cross complaint according to proof when such information is ascertained.
11
12 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY
13 (Against Michael Rosi, Daniel Bolinger, Bluestone California, LLC., Terrie Neptune, 
14  Thomas Neptune and ROES 1 through 200, Inclusive.)
15 83. Complainants incorporate paragraphs 1 through 90 as though fully pled herein.
16 84. On or about March of 2010, BC, LLC, ROSI, BOLINGER and DOES 1 through
17 200, Inclusive, retained and appointed TERRIE NEPTUNE and later THOMAS NEPTUNE to  
18 serve as accountants for AUTOSPORT and SPECTRUM and to oversee the deposit of money,  
19 payments to vendors, payments to lien holders on motor vehicle transactions, payments to  
20 consignors on motor vehicle transactions, as well as, prompt and timely payments for any and all  
21 payroll withholding taxes and applicable business taxes, fees and vendor accounts.
22 85.       At the time of said appointment of TERRI NEPTUNE, and THOMAS NEPTUNE  
23 by Cross-Defendants and during the course of business from March of 2010 up and until April 22,  
24 2011, there existed a fiduciary relationship between Cross-Complainant MAZZOTTA and each  
25 and all Cross-Defendants as named herein, in that they have a duty to Complainants to disclose,  
26 lawfully operate said business and properly segregate any pay taxes, fees, lienholders, lines of  
27 credit and to immediately report all transactions at all times up to and including those times when
28
-16-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 lienholders and/or consignors were not paid when said vehicles were sold to third parties at the 
2  time when said transactions took place under MAZZOTTA’S DMV retail or wholesale license.
3 86. More specifically, TERRI NEPTUNE and THOMAS NEPTUNE were retained by  
4 Cross-Defendants to serve as fiduciaries to Mazzotta, as called for in the June 2010 amendment  
5 Exhibit 3, Paragraph 6.2 of the Agreement, which called for the Office Manager(s) who turned out
6 to be TERRI NEPTUNE and THOMAS NEPTUNE.
7 87.       Both were required to manage the MAFS credit line that Mazzotta was a personal
8 guarantor and make reports as needed and supply information as needed according to the  
9 agreement. Both were also required to Execute DMV Paperwork, Manage Bank Payoffs and
10 accounts, watch over Mazzotta’s financial interests, Receive and pay all Bills, Invoices and  Expenses and 
11
Manage Payroll.
12
88. In addition, each and all Cross-Defendants had a fiduciary relationship with  
13
Complainants, in that MAZZOTTA and Debi Mazzotta had personally guaranteed lines of credit  
14
for flooring and inventory of motor vehicles and parts for the businesses located at 45 Oldfield  
15
Rd., Irvine, CA. Each and all Cross-Defendants made representations that they would so protect  
16
Complainants from any and all financial harm with regards to the use and operation of said lines of  
17
credit.
18 89. That during the course of the Cross-Defendants’ custody management  
19 representations perceived ownership and control of the businesses located at 45 Oldfield Rd.,  
20 Irvine, CA, each and all Cross-Defendants had a duty to fully disclose any and all transactions that  
21 could pose financial harm to these complaining parties.
22 90.The Cross Defendants and each of them breached their fiduciary duties to these  
23 complaining Cross Complaints, in that they so maliciously and intentionally failed to fully disclose  
24 the misuse of funds related to transactions involving motor vehicles; and further misused said 
25  funds instead of promptly paying all operational, taxes, fees, lienholders, third parties and  
26 consignors or to properly turn over titles of said vehicles, or further encumber said businesses.
27 91.They further breached their duties of care that were contracted to serve and assist  
28 Mazzotta in the financial aspects of the business during the turn over of the business as specified in
-17-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 Exhibit 3, Paragraph 6.2 and failed on each account to manage said credit lines, to provide reports  
2 despite Cross Complainants requesting said information, which breach caused severe damages to  
3 Mazzotta.
4 92. Further breaches of each and all cross-defendants’ fiduciary duties were the failure  
5 to Manage Bank Payoffs and accounts of vehicle transactions, watch over Complainants’ financial
6 interests and pay all bills, invoices and expenses.
7 93.       Finally and most egregious, each and all of the Cross-Defendants named herein,  
8 were supposed to properly manage the payroll according to Exhibit 3, in that they were to properly  
9 withhold payroll taxes, deductions and child support deductions when ordered, which they did, and
10   remit them to the proper state and federal authorities, as they had a fiduciary duty to Mazzotta to  make sure this 
11
was done so as not to cause harm to Complainants.
12 94.      The true facts are is that despite withholding such sums required from employees  
13 pay, they so maliciously and purposefully took said withheld sums for themselves and failed to  
14 remit payment to the correct authorities, thus causing severe and damaging harm to these Cross  
15 Complaints.
16 95. Had the Cross-Defendants fully disclosed the nature of any and all improper,  
17 malicious intentional, illegal financial transactions, Complainants would not have approved said  
18 transactions or the continued operation of said businesses.
19 96.      As a result of Cross-Defendants’ breach of the fiduciary duties as herein described  
20 and failure to do all of the facts of said ongoing alleged transactions, Complainants have suffered  
21 and continue to suffer great harm in an amount to be proven at the time of trial but in excess of the
22      minimum jurisdiction of this court.
23
24 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR FRAUD
25 (Against Daniel Bolinger, Michael Rosi, Bluestone California, LLC, and ROES 1 through 200, 
26  Inclusive)
27 97. Complainants incorporate paragraphs 1 through 104 as though fully pled 
herein.
28
-18-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 98. On or about January 20, 2010 Cross-Defendants BOLINGER and BC, LLC made  
2 representations as herein alleged and specified in Exhibit 1. More specifically, each and all Cross-  
3 Defendants made affirmative representations that they would purchase AUTOSPORT, transfer any  
4 and all DMV licenses and bonds, maintain the proper insurances to safely and legally operate said  
5 business, and to pay all obligations including but not limited to taxes rent and vendors. It was
6 during this time, that Cross-Complaints believed that BOLINGER was to run the businesses and  be 
7
responsible for each of the obligations, as BOLINGER signed a personal guarantee.
8 99.       It was also during this time, that MAZZOTTA the principal of AUTOSPORT and  
9 the managing member of WEST JAM, LLC, was previously diagnosed with stage 4 multiple
10 myeloma cancer, very deadly form of cancer. He was undergoing cancer treatment in Little Rock,  Arkansas and 
11
in Newport Beach, California which included extensive chemotherapy and stem cell  transplants (2 
12
of them) which made him extremely sick, and vulnerable in his business dealings  with the 
13
Cross Defendants.
14
100.During Mazzotta’s fragile condition, and on or about March of 2010, and further in
15
June of 2010, September, October of 2010 and November of 2010, ROSI assented to all terms of  
16
the agreements as shown in Exhibits 1 through 7, and further agreed to purchase SPECTRUM  
17
for the assumption of obligations as specified in writing in each and all of the Exhibits referenced  
18
herein. At no time did Complainants ever believe know or have any knowledge that ROSI was a  
19
two time convicted felon and was incapable of obtaining the proper licensing to operate  
20
AUTOSPORT and SPECTRUM.
21
101. The true facts are is that Rosi represented himself as a Christian man who had
2223 experience in the successful operation of dealerships and business interests. In fact ROSI had been  assisting 
24 AUTOSPORT’s previous general manager and no one ever suspected knew or told  Mazzotta that 
25 ROSI w1a0s2 a.  c  o  nRvOicSteId a fcetleodn .as if he was an honest law abiding person, by holding prayer vigils at  
26 the beginning of each business day and forbidding any bad language at the business during the  
27 initial months of operation so as to trick Complainants into believing that ROSI was someone who
28
-19-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 could be trusted and thereby enter into said agreements with Michael ROSI as shown in Exhibits 1
2 through 7.
3 103. More specifically throughout March of 2010 through November of 2010 and during  
4 each and all negotiations surrounding the written contracts as referenced herein, each and all  Cross-
5 Defendants represented that they would transfer any and all DMV licenses and bond
6 obligations, as well as, maintain the appropriate insurance coverages to legally operate the  businesses located 
7
at 45 Oldfield Rd., Irvine, CA. As further material misrepresentations, each  and all of the Cross-
8
Defendants as named herein promised to personally obligate themselves to  protect Complainants 
9
from any and all financial harm as well as maintenance of all taxes, property
10      taxes, ren1t0 a4n.d  Eveancdho ra allc croeupnrtes sseon atas not to damage Comp11 tions including tho
lasinea nmtsa.de in writing in Exhibits 1 through 7  
12 and said representations that they could and would legally operate said business were essential and  
13 the material representations made to Complainants.
14 105. Complainants reasonably relied upon each and all representations made by Cross-  
15 Defendants; and had no reason to know that ROSI and Cross-Defendants had no intention to  
16 perform on said agreements. At the time each and all representations were made by Cross-  
17 Defendants, Complainants believed them to be true.
18 106. Each and all representations made by Cross-Defendants were knowingly false and  
19 made without any promise to perform upon the representations as herein alleged and those made in  
20 writing and those Exhibits 1 through 7 referenced herein. Cross-Defendants could not complete  
21 the necessary DMV license transfers due to Cross-Defendant ROSI’S past criminal convictions.
22 See Exhibit 9. Cross-Defendants knew of this impossibility yet led Complainants to believe they  could complete 
23
all necessary transfers of necessary licenses.
24
107. As a result of each and all of the false representations made herein as alleged,  
25
Complainants have suffered special and general damages in excess of the jurisdictional limit to be  
26
proven at the time of trial.
27
28
-20-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 108. The conduct of each and all of the Cross-Defendants as alleged herein was  
2 oppressive, malicious and intentional to justify imposition of punitive damages pursuant to  
3 California Civil Code§ 3294, which also was a substantial factor in causing Complainants’ harm.
4
5 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR FRAUD
6 (Against Michael Rosi, Bluestone California, LLC, Daniel Bolinger, Terri Neptune and ROES 1 
7  through 200, Inclusive)
8 109. Complainants incorporate paragraphs 1 through 116 as though fully pled herein.
9 110. That on or about March of 2010, Cross-Defendants, and each of them, made
10 material representations that they would honestly and competently conduct business and oversee  all financial 
11
transactions and dispense with those transactions in a matter so as not to violate any  laws or cause 
12
financial hardship to or harm to Complainants.
13 111. At the time that each and all of the representations were made, as herein alleged,  
14 Cross-Defendants made such representations knowing that they were false, without any intention  
15 of performing on those promises and with specific intent to induce reliance of Complainants to  
16 allow each and all Cross-Defendants to conduct business and to maintain their presence at 45  
17 Oldfield Rd., Irvine, CA.
18 112. At the time that each and all of the representations were made, Complainants had  
19 no knowledge that said representations were false, or that Cross-Defendants made such  
20 representations without any intention to perform; and therefore Complainants reliance was  
21 justifiable.
22 113.As a result of Complainants’ justifiable reliance upon each and all representations  of 
23 Cross-Defendants, Complainants have suffered great injury and damages which includes but not  
24 limited to financial hardship, loss of rental income, exposure to civil and criminal liability, special  
25 damages in an amount unknown but exceeding $2 million, and extreme emotional distress.
26 114.The conduct of each and all of the Cross-Defendants as alleged herein was  oppressive, 
27 malicious and intentional to justify imposition of punitive damages pursuant to
28
-21-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 California Civil Code§ 3294, which also was a substantial factor in causing Cross-Complainant’s 
2  harm.
3
4 SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR FRAUD
5 (Against Michael, Thomas Neptune, Bluestone California, LLC., Bluestone, Valentine One, LLC., 
6  Bluestone Motorsports, LLC. and ROES 1 through 200, Inclusive)
7 115. Complainants incorporate paragraphs 1 through 122 as though fully pled herein.
8 116. That prior to April 5, 2011 Cross-Defendants ROSI, BOLINGER, and BC, LLC
9 were in breach of each and all agreements as herein referenced in Exhibits 1 through 7.
10 117. That prior to April 5, 2011, Cross-Defendants ROSI, BC, LLC, THOMAS  
11 NEPTUNE on behalf of himself, and VALENTINE ONE, LLC and BLUESTONE  
12 MOTORSPORTS, LLC., and ROES 1 through 200, inclusive made representations that they were  
13 gathering business and financial records of AUTOSPORT and SPECTRUM so that they could  
14 support their claims that AUTOSPORT and SPECTRUM could not sustain the obligations that  
15 Cross-Defendants ROSI, BOLLINGER and BC, LLC had made pursuant to the contracts as herein  
16 alleged; and that a reduced rate of rent for a period of time would assist them in keeping  
17 AUTOSPORT and SPECTRUM viable with the assistance of new ownership from THOMAS  
18 NEPTUNE, VALENTINE ONE, LLC and BLUESTONE MOTORSPORTS, LLC.
19 118.     More specifically, Cross-Defendants and each of them made the representations on  
20 or about April 5, 2011 that they would be gathering financial records in order to present to  
21 Complainants a full accounting of all income, expenses, assets and liabilities incurred from
22 January 10, 2010 through April 1, 2011 pursuant to demands made upon Cross-Defendants by  Complainants and 
23
also as referenced previously in Exhibit 6 so as to show that the business model  could continue on 
24
with a small amount of reduction of the rent.
25 119. It was also further represented by Cross-Defendants that many of the bills that were  
26 alleged to be in arrears, such as the taxes for 2010 and car transactions were in fact paid. ROSI  
27 and NEPTUNE on behalf of themselves presented copies of checks that were cancelled showing
28
-22-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 payment, and further represented that they would in fact obtain copies for Cross-Complainant for 
2  his records.
3 120. The true facts are that Cross-Defendants and each of them never prepared or  
4 attempted to gather any such documents as alleged herein in order to present them to Complainants  
5 to structure a new agreement, but instead, proceeded to loot Complainants of their assets during
6 the month of April of 2011, so Cross-Defendants could establish a new dealership under the Cross-  Defendants 
7
VALENTINE ONE, LLC and BLUESTONE MOTORSPORTS, LLC., and those  unknown 
8
entities, persons, and individuals hereinafter ROES 1 through 200, inclusive.
9
121.     Each of the representations that were made by Cross-Defendants as herein alleged
1101 were knowingly false at the time they were made, and made with specific intent to induce reliance  upon 
12 Complainants, so that Complainants would not initiate legal proceedings to oust Cross-  Defendants 
13 from the premises and sue for breach of the agreements as alleged; and continue to  operate an 
14 illegal and fraudulent enterprise, loot the business and assets from these Complainants  which 
15 involved initiating DMV and customer transactions with third parties in order to embezzle  monies 
16 from Co1m22p.l aiAnat ntthse d etitmrime eonft  teoa cthhe iarn fdu rathlle rr edperterismenetnatt.ions made by Cross-Defendants as herein  
17 alleged, Complainants had no reason to believe that the representations they were making were in  
18 fact false and made with the specific intent to induce reliance by Complainants and forestall legal  
19 action and ousting Cross-Defendants from the premises located at 45 Oldfield Rd., Irvine, CA.
20 123. As a result of each and all of the representations made as herein alleged,  
21 Complainants suffered further and excessive injury  in that there were transactions conducted
22 during the month of April where lien holders were not paid, and further vehicles and property were  taken by 
23
Cross-Defendants for which this excessive damage that was the direct result of the  intentional, 
24
oppressive, malicious and fraudulent misrepresentations of each and all Cross-  Defendants named 
25
herein amount to in excess of $200,000.00, and herein reserved the right to  amend this Cross-
26
Complaint upon further proof of damages at the time of trial.
27
28
-23-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 124. The conduct of each and all of the Cross-Defendants as alleged herein was  
2 oppressive, malicious and intentional to justify imposition of punitive damages pursuant to  
3 California Civil Code§ 3294, which also was a substantial factor in causing Complainants harm.
4
5 EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR CONVERSION
6 (Against Michael Rosi, Daniel Bolinger, Bluestone California, LLC., Bluestone, Valentine One, 
7  LLC., Bluestone Motorsports, LLC., Terri Neptune, Thomas Neptune, Leonardo Beltran, Eric  
8 Beltran, and ROES 1 through 200, Inclusive)
9 125. Complainants incorporate paragraphs 1 through 132 as though fully pled herein.
10 126. From January of 2010 through April 22, 2011, Cross-Defendants and each of them
11 intentionally took and embezzled cash, electronic and check receipts of AUTOSPORT and  
12 SPECTRUM wherein Complainants became personally liable for the repayment of those debts  
13 which include but are not limited to lines of credit from GE financing, farmers and merchants  
14 Bank, American Express, MAFS, and other unknown entities to be proven at the time of trial.
15 127. At this time Complainants are informed and believe that Cross-Defendants took two  
16 Chevrolet Silverados, a 2010 Chevrolet Silverado vehicle identification number (vin)  
17 3GCXCTE23AG285789, and a 2011 Chevrolet Silverado vin 1GC4C1C81BF175129; a 2008  
18 Ducati 848 Motorcycle vin unknown; a 2007 MV Agusta; a 1990 Ferrari Testarossa vin unknown; 
19  a 20 foot tandem axle trailer vin unknown; and three (3) business computers. Additionally, it is  
20 believed Cross-Defendants took from the business over $75,000.00 in cash, in addition to the  
21 vehicles and property.
22 128.It is also alleged that during the same time January 2010 up until April 22, 2011,  
23 Cross-Defendants and each of them intentionally exercised dominion and control over personal  
24 property, vehicles and computers, business records, other unknown items to be proven at the time 
25  of trial; which were personally guaranteed and or owned by Complainants.
26 129.It is also alleged that Cross-Defendants and each of them at some time during the
27 month of April 2011 and more specifically in the late evening of April 21, 2011 up into the early  
28 morning of April 22, 2011 caused substantial damages when Cross-Defendants intentionally and
-24-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 maliciously and oppressively destroyed Complainants’ electronic business information, all  
2 business records and therein exercised dominion and control by stealing computers, documents  
3 evidencing DMV transactions so as to cover up their ongoing, fraudulent, criminal activity and  
4 injury to Complainants.
5 130.     Complainants did not consent or authorize Cross-Defendants taking of their
6 property, which exceeds a monetary amount exceeding $2 million, and to be proven at the time of  trial.
7
8 131.    Such unauthorized taking and exercised dominion and control over said property,  
9 theft of funds and embezzlement is a direct and proximate result of Complainants’ substantial
10      monetary damage which exceeds that is not limited to $2 million or in an amount to be proven at  the time of 
11
trial.
12
132. The conduct of each and all of the Cross-Defendants as alleged herein was  
13
oppressive, malicious and intentional to justify imposition of punitive damages pursuant to  
14
California Civil Code §3294 which also was a substantial factor in causing Cross-Complainant’s  
15
harm.
16
17 NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR FRAUDULENT TRANSFER
18 (Against Michael Rosi, Daniel Bolinger, Bluestone California, LLC., Bluestone, Valentine One,  
19 LLC., Bluestone Motorsports, LLC., Thomas Neptune, Terri Neptune, and ROES 1 through 200, 
20  Inclusive)
21 133. Complainants incorporate paragraphs 1 through 138 as though fully pled herein.
22 134. That at all times, each of these cross defendants are creditors of the complaining
23 cross complaints as alleged herein.
24 135. On or about February of 2010 up through April of 2011 the Cross-
Defendants and
25 each of them entered into a series of financial transactions involving certain motor vehicles that  
26 were placed at the premises of 45 Oldfield Rd., Irvine, CA through lines of credit that were  
27 personally guaranteed by Complainants.
28
-25-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 136. Cross Complainants at this time are not in possession of documents that could  
2 specifically identify the vehicles by their vehicle identification numbers, and year of manufacturer  
3 due to the fact that ROSI and others purposefully took records to cover up his fraud and based on  
4 Complainants’ present information and belief they are informed and believe that the vehicles  
5 fraudulently transferred were as follows:
6 a. One Ducati 848 Motorcycle,
7 b. One Chevrolet 3500 pickup truck,
8 c. One Chevrolet 1500 pickup truck,
9 d. One MV Agusta Motorcycle,
10 e. One Ferrari Testarosa,
11 f. One 1996 Porsche Turbo that is currently in the possession of Jonathan  
12 Michaels,
13 g. One 1992 Porsche Targa, that was previously owned by Jonathan Michaels 
14  and given credit for said Porsche described in (f) above, and fraudulently
15 transferred to BC,LLC and sold to Phillips Auto of Newport Beach, California, 
16  and
17 h. One Mercedes Benz CLK.
18
19 137.At present the Complainants are unaware of the true gravity of the theft and transfer  
20 and hereby reserve their right to seek leave to amend when additional information is obtained.
21 138. For each transaction, Cross Complaints allege that these Cross Defendants would
22   obtain vehicles owned by AUTOSPORT and would use these vehicles as credit for trade in credit  on other 
23
vehicles obtained from other dealerships. At the time said AUTOSPORT vehicles were  traded in, 
24
the new vehicle obtained with this credit would then be placed not in the name of  AUTOSPORT, 
25
but would be placed in the name of the cross defendants, who would then either  keep the vehicle or 
26
pledge this new title for cash from Robert Guild or John Dekker, which would  then be tantamount 
27
to a theft and fraudulent transfer committed upon AUTOSPORT, or which
28
-26-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 these cross-complaints were guarantors of the financing company who initially provided the  
2 flooring for said transferred vehicle that was traded in.
3 139.     It was also during this time, the Cross-Defendants and each of them as alleged  
4 herein, knew that these certain vehicles were placed at 45 Oldfield Rd., Irvine, CA as result of  
5 those lines of credit that were personally guaranteed by Complainants.
6 140.   Each and all Cross-Defendants, as alleged herein, transferred certain vehicles into  
7 their own names or entities operated by Cross-Defendants in such a manner with the specific intent  
8 to hinder, delay or defraud Complainants at the time the vehicles were transferred out of  
9 AUTOSPORT’S name, which was personally guaranteed by Complainants.
10 141. It is further alleged that each and all Cross-Defendants named herein, operated and  
11 conducted themselves illegally, in that they did not have proper authorization from the state of  
12 California to involve themselves in motor vehicle transactions, and did so incurring a known  
13 liability on behalf of Complainants for their own personal and financial gain to the detriment of  
14 Complainants.
15 142. In all times during the alleged transactions that were conducted by each and all of  
16 the Cross-Defendants there was a specific intent to defraud and/or to provide inadequate  
17 consideration to Complainants.
18 143.As a direct result of the intentional, malicious and oppressive acts as herein alleged,  
19 Complainants have been damaged in an amount that is in excess of the minimum jurisdictional  
20 limit of this court to be proven at the time of trial.
21 144. The conduct as  alleged  herein  by each  and  all of the Cross-Defendants was  a
22   substantial factor in causing Complainants harm, which was oppressive malicious and intentional  so as to 
23
justify an award punitive damages against them pursuant to California Civil Code § 3294.
24
25 TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR CONSTRUCTIVELY FRAUDULENT TRANSFER
26 (Against Michael Rosi, Daniel Bolinger, Bluestone California, LLC., Bluestone, Valentine One,
27 LLC., Bluestone Motorsports, LLC., Thomas Neptune, Terri Neptune, and ROES 1 through 200, 
28  Inclusive)
-27-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 145. Complainants incorporate paragraphs 1 through 150 as though fully pled herein.
2 146. That at all times, each and all of the alleged cross-defendants have now become
3 creditors to these complaining parties by the results of their own actions as alleged herein.
4 147.     That on or about February of 2010 through April of 2011, Cross-Defendants and  
5 each of them, as alleged herein, engaged in or were about to engage in vehicle transactions, for
6 vehicles known to have been personally guaranteed by Complainants, said vehicles (the assets)  were 
7
transferred for value, which was unreasonably small in relation to the encumbrances and  claimed 
8
rights of Complainants as incorporated herein.
9 148.     Cross-Defendants and each of them specifically intended to incur, believed or
10 reasonably believed a transfer for value that was unconscionable, unfair and unreasonably small in  relation to the 
11
property that Cross-Defendants were acquiring, was known to be converted property  guaranteed by 
12
Complainants and wrongfully appropriated for each and all of the Cross-  Defendants’ personal and 
13
financial gain.
14 149. Complainants have a right to repayment, attachment, return or injunctive relief from  
15 said Cross-Defendants in an amount that substantially exceeds the minimum jurisdiction of this  
16 court to be proven at the time of trial.
17
18 ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR QUIET TITLE
19 (Against Michael Rosi, Daniel Bolinger, Bluestone California, LLC., Bluestone, Valentine One,
20 LLC., Bluestone Motorsports, LLC., Terri Neptune, Thomas Neptune, and ROES 1 through 200, 
21  Inclusive)
22 150. Complainants incorporate paragraphs 1 through 155 as though fully pled herein.
23 151. Complainants are informed and believe that Cross-Defendants and each of them
24 have gained possession to certain vehicles and property for which Complainants are the rightful 
25  and lawful owners.
26 152. The tangible personal property for which Complainants are personal guarantors of 
27  said vehicles are as follows:
28
-28-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 a. One Ducati 848 Motorcycle, believed to be in possession of Michael ROSI,
2 b. One Chevrolet 3500 pickup truck that was fraudulently sold to Car Max of 
3  Irvine, California, and believed to be in their possession,
4 c. One Chevrolet 1500 pickup truck believed to be in possession of Michael
5 ROSI,
6 d. One MV Agusta Motorcycle believed to be in possession of Michael ROSI,
7 e. One Ferrari Testarosa believed to be in possession of Michael ROSI,
8 f. One 1996 Porsche Turbo that is currently in the possession of Jonathan  
9 Michaels,
10 g. One 1992 Porsche Targa, that was previously owned by Jonathan Michaels  
11 and given credit for said Porsche described in (f) above, and fraudulently  
12 transferred to BC,LLC and sold to Phillips Auto of Newport Beach, California,  
13 and
14 h. One Mercedes Benz CLK believed to be in the possession of John DEKKER.
15
16 153.At present the Complainants are unaware of the true gravity of the theft and transfer  
17 and hereby reserve their right to seek leave to amend when additional information is obtained.
18 154.Complainants herein allege that the rights and interest have been violated and they  
19 have been damaged by such wrongful possession by Cross-Defendants.
20 155. At this time, Complainants are aware of the dispute as to the ownership rights and  
21 interest in said vehicles and property and request that an order be granted quieting title to the
22     vehicles and property to Complainants and as against Cross-Defendants and any persons known to  be claiming 
23
legal and or equitable right, title, interest or otherwise state a lien or interest in said  property and 
24
vehicles.
25 156.   At this time, Complainants are informed and believe that the subject vehicles are in  
26 the possession of these named Cross-Defendants and further reserves the right to seek attachment  
27 possession and or orders of this Court preventing the sale disposition and or further injury of  
28 Complainants in amount to be proven at the time of any motion and or trial.
-29-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 ///
2 ///
3 ///
4 ///
5 TWELFTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL 
6  DISTRESS
7 (As to Jamey Mazzotta, only against Daniel Bolinger, Michael Rosi, Bluestone California, LLC,
8 Bluestone, Valentine One, LLC., Bluestone Motorsports, LLC., Eric Beltran, Leo Beltran, Thomas  
9 Neptune, Terri Neptune and ROES 1 through 200, Inclusive)
10 157.Complainants JAMEY MAZZOTTA incorporates paragraphs 1 through 162 as  though 
11 fully pled herein.
12 158.From a period beginning on or about January of 2010 up until April 22, 2011,  Cross-
13 Defendants, and each of them, were aware that Cross-Complainant, MAZZOTTA had  contracted a 
14 serious and deadly form of cancer for which he was undergoing extensive  chemotherapy 
15 treatments and stem cell transplants.
16 159.That at all times Cross-Complainant, DEBIE MAZZOTTA was also personally  
17 responsible for lines of credit, as well as, caring for Cross-Complainant, JAMEY MAZZOTTA in
18      his weakened condition.
19 160. Cross-Defendants and each of them also knew that during this 
time that Cross-
20 Complainant’s health was compromised and fragile and that any stress could result in further
21 complications to his health and his cancer treatment, and recovery and therefore made written and  
22
oral promises that their insurance would be maintained so as not to risk MAZZOTTA’S LIFE.
23
161. At all times, Cross-Defendants and each of them so knowingly and 
intentionally
24 and maliciously and oppressively engaged in outrageous conduct, which was an abuse of their
25 relationship with Cross-Complainant, and abuse of their position, which gave them power to
27
26 damage the Cross-Complainant’s financial and personal health as they made representations that  
28 his life insurances were being timely paid, all to find out that Cross-Defendants intentionally
-30-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 deceived MAZZOTTA and failed to make payments which resulted in his coverage cancelling at  
2 a time when he desperately needed cancer treatment therapy to sustain his life.
3 162. Cross-Defendants further engaged in a pattern of conduct by alleging and  
4 representing that all bills, taxes and lines of credit were satisfactorily being paid and the business  
5 was being run appropriately and that the DMV license applications were submitted and that they
6 were waiting back for approval, all the while Cross Defendants were looting, stealing,  misappropriating and 
7
transferring assets, tax receipts, child support receipts from employees and  customers and failing to 
8
pay lines of credit where MAZZOTTA was a personal guarantor,  knowing that it would 
9
ultimately cause severe harm to MAZZOTTA due to his fragile condition.
10
163.In fact, many employees personally witnessed ROSI tell them that MAZZOTTA  would 
11
die soon and the entire business would be his.
12
164.At all times, Cross-Defendants engaged in the acts as so herein complained of; that  
13
each and all of them knew, or with certainty or with reckless disregard of knowing that said  
14
conduct would and or could cause Cross-Complainant severe emotional distress.
15 165.More specifically, each and all of the Cross-Defendants continued on a scheme to  
16 embezzle money personal, goods and automobiles and cause damage to AUTSPORT and  
17 SPECTRUM for which, Cross-Complainant would be personally liable and incur substantial and  
18 ongoing severe emotional distress.
19 166.In addition each and all of the Cross-Defendants were responsible to pay
20 Complainants’ health insurance so as MAZZOTTA could continue to maintain coverage and seek  
21 life-sustaining and expensive chemotherapy stem cell transplants and medical treatment.
22 167.Each and all of the Cross-Defendants also continued to represent to Complainants  that 
23 they were eligible and were attempting to operate said business legally and were conducting  
24 financial transactions in accordance with state laws so as not to harm Complainants.
25 168.Each and all of these representations were knowingly false at the time they were  made 
26 and further Cross-Defendants knew or were substantially certain that said  misrepresentations, 
27 would result in financial harm to Cross-Complainant, or with reckless
28
-31-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 disregard knew that such misrepresentations and subsequent acts, as herein alleged, were  
2 substantially certain to cause; and did cause Complainants severe emotional distress.
3 169. The true facts are that each and all of the Cross-Defendants, never transferred any  
4 DMV licenses or bonds, never maintained proper insurance is to operate said business, allowed  
5 Complainants’ health insurance to lapse, engaged in fraudulent transactions where Complainants
6 were personally liable, fraudulently and knowingly encumbered property that was personally  guaranteed by 
7
Complainants, so as to cause extreme and ongoing emotional distress.
8 170. As a further and continuing damage, to DEBI MAZZOTTA, each and all of the  Cross-
9 Defendants knew that the acts that are complained of herein were outrageous and done with
10 the specific intent to cause or with reckless disregard of causing severe emotional distress to DEBI  MAZZOTTA 
11
AND this cross-complaint, JAMEY MAZZOTTA.
12
171.    As a further and ongoing harm DEBI MAZZOTTA AND JAMEY MAZZOTTA  
13
has suffered extensive and severe emotional distress as a direct result of each and all the actions  
14
complained of herein.
15 172. Each of the Complainants’ injuries and damages are substantial and in an amount in  
16 excess of the minimum jurisdiction of this court and seek right to prove said damages at the time 
17  of trial.
18 173. The conduct of each and all of the Cross-Defendants as herein alleged was  
19 oppressive reckless intentional and or malicious and seek an imposition of an award of punitive  
20 damages against said Cross-Defendants pursuant to civil code §3294.
21
22 THIRTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL
23 DISTRESS
24 (Jamey Mazzotta, Against Daniel Bolinger, Michael Rosi, Bluestone California, LLC, Bluestone, 
25  Valentine One, LLC., Bluestone Motorsports, LLC., Eric Beltran, Leo Beltran, Thomas 
26 Neptune,  Terri Neptune and ROES 1 through 200, Inclusive)
27 174. Cross-Complainant, JAMEY MAZZOTTA incorporates paragraphs 1 through 179 
28  as though fully pled herein.
-32-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 175. At all times, Cross-Defendants and each of them made representations and promises  
2 that they would so carefully operate the businesses located at 45 Oldfield Rd., Irvine, CA in a legal  
3 and respectful manner, transfer DMV licenses and bond obligations, operate said business and  
4 banking accounts, maintain all insurances, rent and taxes including health insurance coverage for  
5 Complainants so as not to injure or damage Complainants’ financial and physical health.
6 176.At all times during the operation of said businesses and execution of each and all of  the 
7 Cross-Defendants duties, Cross-Defendants had a specific relationship and duty toward  
8 Complainants, as herein alleged, and as further referenced throughout this complaint.
9 177. The true facts are that each and all of the Cross-Defendants named herein
10 negligently discharged their duties by failing to honor the promises and obligations to  Complainants, which 
11
resulted in Complainants’ financial harm, as well as, cancellation of their  health insurance during 
12
the time when Cross-Complainant, MAZZOTTA, depended on this  coverage for life-sustaining 
13
cancer treatment and therapy.
14
178.     As a direct and proximate cause of the negligence as herein alleged Complainants
15
and each of them suffered severe and ongoing emotional distress, which is in excess of the  
16
minimum jurisdiction of this court to be proven at the time of trial.
17
18 FOURTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR CONTRACTUAL INDEMNITY
19 (Against Michael Rosi, Daniel Bolinger, Bluestone California, LLC., and ROES 1 through 200, 
20  Inclusive.)
21 179. Cross-Complaints incorporate paragraphs 1 through 184 as though 
fully pled
22 herein.
23 180. That at all times, the Defendants, ROSI, BOLINGER, BLUESTONE,  
24 CALIFORNIA, LLC and ROES entered into said agreements as herein described and referenced in  
25 Exhibits 1 through 7.
26 181. That Cross-Complaints, herein allege, that these Cross-Defendants entered into one  
27 or more of the agreements as herein alleged, and agreed to personally and contractually obligate
28
-33-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 themselves for the liabilities incurred by the business both post contract and those prior in  
2 exchange for the ownership of each and all of the business located at 45 Oldfield Rd.
3 182.     Complainants deny any wrongdoing, or negligence or other conduct giving rise to  
4 any liability of the complaining parties named as Plaintiffs in the Complaint in chief or other third  
5 parties, and so incorporate that Complaint herein by reference.
6 183. To the extent that there is a finding, either at law or fact, against these complaining  
7 parties on the complaint in chief; Complainants herein allege that such negligence or conduct is  
8 passive, if any, and Cross-Defendants and each of them should be held primarily liable according  
9 to their obligations in said agreements, Exhibits 1 through 7.
10 184. By reason of the foregoing, and because each Cross-Defendant so contracted to be  
11 responsible for any such liability including those acts alleged herein, Complainants should be  
12 entitled to a full indemnification from those Cross-Defendants as herein alleged that they become  
13 obligated to pay Plaintiff, and other unknown third parties.
14
15 FIFTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR EQUITABLE INDEMNITY
16 (Against Michael Rosi, Daniel Bolinger, Bluestone California, LLC., Bluestone, Valentine One, 
17  LLC., Bluestone Motorsports, LLC., Terri Neptune, Thomas Neptune, Michael Alabrando and  
18 ROES 1 through 200, Inclusive.)
19 185. Cross-Complaints incorporate paragraphs 1 through 190 as though 
fully pled
20 herein.
21 186. Complainants herein allege that each and all of the Cross-
Defendants MICHAEL
223 ROSI, DANIEL BOLINGER, JOHN DEKKER, BLUESTONE CALIFORNIA, LLC.,  BLUESTONE, 
24 VALENTINE ONE, LLC., BLUESTONE MOTORSPORTS, LLC., TERRI  NEPTUNE, 
25 THOMAS NEPTUNE, MICHAEL ALABRANDO and unknown Cross-Defendants  herein named 
26 as ROES 1 through 200, Inclusive, by the actions as herein alleged, were actively  negligent, 
27 intentio1n8al7,. malAicsi oau sr easnudlt/ oor fo psepvreesrsailv ev.ehicle transactions that were personally conducted,  
28 authorized overseen and transacted by these Cross-Defendants, Complainants as well as Cross-
-34-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 Defendants have become liable to those parties injured thereby when Cross-Defendants failed to  
2 pay lines of credit, loans and lienholders of vehicles that were sold on consignment or through the  
3 MAFS lines of credit. As a result of the active and ongoing liability of Cross-Defendants, these  
4 Complainants have become jointly liable.
5 188.     Complainants deny any active wrongdoing, negligence or actionable conduct giving
6 rise to the those injured persons that have alleged damages and thereby seek indemnity for such  passive liability 
7
against Cross-Defendants.
8 189. To the extent that a finding is made in favor of Plaintiffs, DEKKER, against these 
9  Defendants/Cross-Complaints, any such damages were actually and proximately caused by the
10 wrongdoing, negligence, or other actionable conduct of each of those Cross-Defendants as herein  alleged.
11
190. By reason of the foregoing, these Defendants/Complainants should 
12 be entitled to
13 equitable indemnity against all Cross-Defendants as herein alleged according to their comparative  
14 fault
15 191.
16 SIXTEENTH CAUSE OF ACTION FOR ACCOUNTING
17 (Against Michael Rosi, Daniel Bolinger, Bluestone California, LLC., and ROES 1 through 200, 
18  Inclusive)
19 192. Complainants incorporate paragraphs 1 through 197 as though fully pled herein.
20 193. The Cross-Defendants and each of them have received monies from Complainants.
21 194. The amount of  money due from the Cross-Defendants, and each of them, are
22 unknown and cannot be ascertained without an investigation and accounting of the whereabouts, of  such funds, 
23
the receipts of said moneys and the disbursements if any made. Complainants are  informed and 
24
believe that the amounts wrongfully taken and kept including the interest therein  exceeds the 
25
minimum jurisdictional limit of the Court.
26
195.     Each and all Cross-Defendants, as alleged herein, were so involved with ROSI,
27
BOLINGER, and BC, LLC, as well as, the relationship the contracting parties had with  
28
Complainants, in that they owed a duty of care to Complainants, so as not to engage in illegal
-35-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 vehicle transactions, take actions that could harm Complainants’ financial interests that were tied  
2 to the Agreements, herein alleged and incorporated in Exhibits 1 through 7, and not take actions  
3 that could injure Complainants, which include failing to segregate monies to pay lienholders,  
4 consignors of vehicles, or delivering titles to purchasers of vehicles and prompt payment of  
5 operational taxes and fees.
6 196.Each and all of the transactions involved in by Cross-Defendants could not have  taken 
7 place without any direct negative effect on the contracting parties’ ability to pay for their  
8 obligations under Exhibits 1 through 7.
9 197. As a direct result of the negligent, illegal, oppressive, fraudulent and false
10 representations, Complainants were harmed and Cross-Defendants, and each of them, were  unjustly 
11
enriched.
12
198. Cross-Complaints are entitled to accounting of all business dealings, business  
13
transactions, books of operations and business operations of Cross-Defendants, MICHAEL ROSI,
14 DANIEL BOLINGER, BLUESTONE CALIFORNIA, LLC., TERRI NEPTUNE, 
T15HOMAS
16 NEPTUNE, and unknown Cross Defendants hereinafter named as ROES 1 through 200, 
Inclusive.
17
199.   Each and all parties owed a fiduciary duty to Complainants, as herein alleged, and  
18
19 have breached said fiduciary duties entitling them to an accounting of their operations, which so  
20 damaged Cross Complaint as herein, alleged, in order to trace and recover money and property  
21 they have wrongfully taken from this cross-complaint.DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL FOR DETERMINATION OF ALL CAUSES OF
22 ACTION
23 Complainants hereby demand trial by jury for determination as to all causes of action as herein 
24  alleged.
25
26 WHEREFORE, Complainants pray for judgment against Cross-Defendants as follows:
27 1. For any and all economic damages according to proof;
28 2. For general damages in an amount to be determined according to proof at trial;
-36-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 3. For costs of suit incurred herein;
2 4. For any and all prejudgment interest, post judgment interest according to proof;
3 5. For attorneys’ fees and costs in pursuit of the recovery of property and damages pursuant to
4 California Civil Code §3336;
5 6. For punitive damages against each and all Cross-Defendants in an amount to be determined
6 according to proof at trial, where applicable;
7 7. For an accounting
8 8. For a constructive trust
9 9. For attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to contract;
10 10. For any and all contractual and equitable relief allowed by law; and
11 11. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
12
13 DATED: November 23, 2011 A.G. ASSANTI & ASSOCIATE, P.C.
14
15
By:  Alessandro G. Assanti, Esq.
16 Suzan A. Colgan, Esq.
Attorney for Complainants, Jamey Mazzotta,  West 
17 Jam Enterprises, LLC, Spectrum  
18 Motorsports, Inc.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-37-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 VERIFICATION
2
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
3
) )ss. BLUESTONE CALIFORNIA v. MAZZOTTA et al.
4 COUNTY OF ORANGE OCSC Case Number: 30-2011-00470289
)
5
I have read the foregoing COMPLAINANTS’ FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT, and
6
know its contents. I am informed and believe and on that ground allege that the matters stated in  
7
the foregoing document, I believe them to be true.
8
Executed this 23rd day of November, 2011 at  (city),  California.
9
I declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California 
10 that the
11 foregoing is true and correct.
12
13
14 Jamey Mazzotta
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-38-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 PROOF OF SERVICE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
2
) )ss. BLUESTONE v. MAZZOTTA, et al.
3 COUNTY OF ORANGE OCSC, Case No. 30-2011-00470289
)
4 I, the undersigned, do declare as follows: I am employed in the County of Orange, State 
 of California and am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action. My business address  
5
is 33 Brookline St., Aliso Viejo, CA 92656.
6
On November 23, 2011, I served the foregoing document described as  
7 COMPLAINANTS’ FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT on the interested parties in this action 
 by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope as addressed below:
8
9 SEE SERVICE LIST
10 ( X ) BY MAIL: I caused a true copy of each document, placed in a sealed envelope with
11 postage fully paid, to be placed in the United States mail at Aliso Viejo, California. I am
“readily familiar” with this firm’s business practice for collection and processing of mail, that in  
12 the ordinary course of business said document(s) would be deposited with the U.S. Postal  
Service on that same day. I understand that the service shall be presumed invalid if the postal  
13 cancellation date or postage meter date on the envelope is more than one (1) day after the date of 
14  deposit for mailing contained in this affidavit.
15 ( X ) BY EXPRESS MAIL: I caused a true copy of each document, placed in a sealed  
envelope with postage fully paid, with United Parcel Services, to perfect deliver by close of 
16  business next business day.  TO MICHAEL’S LAW GROUP
17
( ) BY FACSIMILE: By use of facsimile machine number as indicated above, I served a
18 copy of the within document(s) on the above interested parties at the facsimile numbers listed
above. The transmission was reported as complete and without error. The transmission report  
19 was property issued by the transmitting facsimile machine.
20
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the 
21  foregoing is true and correct.
22 Executed on November 23, 2011 at Aliso Viejo, California.
23
24
Briana Perez
25
26
27
28
-39-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
SERVICE LIST  
1 BLUESTONE v. MAZZOTTA, et al. 
2  OCSC, Case No. 30-2011-00470289
3
Jonathan A. Michaels Attorneys for: Michael Rosi, Daniel  
4
 Ivan U. Cisneros Bolinger, Bluestone California, LLC, ,  
5 MICHAELS LAW Bluestone, LLC, Bluestone Motorsports,  
GROUP, APLC Terri Neptune, Thomas Neptune, Valentine 
6 2801 W. Coast Highway, Suite 370  One, Leonardo Beltran, and Eric Beltran
 Newport Beach, CA 92663
7 Tel: (949) 581-6900
8 Fax: (949) 581-6908
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-40-
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES