Jamie E. Frank v. Cary Weiss Document 12: Complaint Amended

Supreme Court of the State of New York, Nassau County
Case No. 609677/2016
Filed July 16, 2017

Includes Exhibits A-D

BackBack to Jamie E. Frank v. Cary Weiss

Tags No tags have been applied so far. Sign in to add some.

  Formatted Text Tab Overlap Raw Text Right End
Page 1 INDEX NO. 609677/
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 07/16/2017 02:58 PM
NYSCEF DOC. NO.
RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/16/
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NASSAU
X
JAMIE E. FRANK
Plaintiff,
-againstCARY WEISS and MICHAEL H. DONNELLY
Defendants.
AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT
INDEX NUMBER: 609677/
X
DATE OF ORIGINAL FILING: 12/26/
CARY WEISS and INFINITE PERSONNEL
SERVICES, INC.
Counterclaim Plaintiffs,
-againstJAMIE E. FRANK
Counterclaim Defendant
X
To the above-named Defendants:
Plaintiff, JAMIE E. FRANK, Pro-se as and for his Amended Verified Complaint in this action against Defendants
CARY WEISS and MICHAEL H. DONNELLY hereby alleges as follows:
NATURE OF THE CLAIMS
1.
This action is for COMPENSATORY MONEY DAMAGES, PUNITIVE DAMAGES and INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF to redress acts of defamation, to wit: slander and libel per se committed by the Defendants against the
Plaintiff.
2.
Defendants’ unlawful conduct was knowing, malicious, willful and wanton, which has caused, and continues
to cause, the Plaintiff disgrace, humiliation and shame throughout the world, permanent harm to his
professional and personal reputations, and severe mental anguish and emotional distress.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
3.
This court has jurisdiction over the Defendant CARY WEISS (hereinafter “Weiss”) pursuant to CPLR
section 301 in that he resides and/or conducts business within and the acts committed were directed
against the Plaintiff with the intent of causing damage in the State of New York.
4.
This court has jurisdiction over the Defendant MICHAEL H. DONNELLY (hereinafter “Donnelly”)
pursuant to CPLR section 301 in that he resides and/or conducts business within and the acts committed
were directed against the Plaintiff with the intent of causing damage in the State of New York.
5.
Venue is proper in Nassau County because the Plaintiff resides in the County of Nassau.
6.
The Supreme Court is the trial court of unlimited original jurisdiction and the amount sought exceeds the
jurisdiction of the other trial courts.
PARTIES
7.
Plaintiff Jamie E. Frank is a resident of the County of Nassau, an attorney in good standing in the State of New
1 of 20
Page 2 INDEX NO. 609677/
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 07/16/2017 02:58 PM
NYSCEF DOC. NO.
RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/16/
York and resides and conducts and owns businesses at 8 Haven Lane, Levittown, NY 11756.
8.
Weiss is a resident of the State of New York residing at 2 West 16th Street, Apt 1F, New York, NY 10011.
9.
Upon information and belief Weiss maintains an office and conducts and owns businesses in the State of New
York.
10. Upon information and belief, Weiss is a resident of the State of Florida, residing at 9195 Collins Avenue,
Surfside, Florida, 33154.
11. Upon information and belief, Defendant Weiss is a resident of the State of Florida, residing at Biscayne Boulevard, Aventura, North Miami Beach, Florida, 33160.
12. Upon information and belief, Donnelly is a resident of the State of New York; residing at 17 Serpentine Trail,
Larchmont, NY 10538-2618.
13. Upon information and belief Donnelly is an attorney in good standing in the State of New York.
14. Donnelly maintains an office and conducts business in the County of New York, State of New York, to wit: Park Avenue, Suite 300, New York, NY 10016.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
15. Beginning on May 25th, 2010 and through June 30th, 2013 plaintiff performed various legal services on behalf
of Weiss and his corporation Infinite Personnel Services, Inc. These services included: evaluation of offers
for the sale of the business, drafting of letters of intent and term sheets, defend against suits and potential
suits by former employees and vendors, review of documents prepared by and negotiations with two banks,
analysis concerning the valuation of the business, recommend the hiring of a new CPA and working with that
new CPA, review of lis pendens, negotiation and the writing of a purchase agreement and closing for the sale
of the assets of the business.
16. All services performed by Plaintiff for Weiss and his company were conducted using the highest levels of
ethical conduct, performed to the highest level of quality, with significant knowledge and capability for the
tasks conducted; and all were to the complete satisfaction of the Defendant at that time.
17. Donnelly represented Maurice Paleschuck in an estate matter in which he took an adversarial position to Jamie
E Frank, executor of the estate of Rita F. Paleschuck and Trustee of the Rita F. Paleschuck and Maurice and
Rita F. Paleschuck trusts, said matter commencing on or about December 15th, 2015.
18. In response to a motion made by Jamie E. Frank, Donnelly was subsequently disqualified from representation
of Maurice Paleschuck by the order of Surrogate Court Judge Margaret C. Reilly dated December 20th, 2016.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
LIBEL PER SE AGAINST WEISS
19. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 18 as if set forth at length.
20. On December 15th, 2015 Weiss published a false and defamatory post on “Ripoff Report”, a website
(www.ripoffreport.com) regarding the Plaintiff. A copy of that post is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
2 of 20
Page 3 FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 07/16/2017 02:58 PM
NYSCEF DOC. NO.
INDEX NO. 609677/RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/16/
21. Upon information and belief, on December 26th, 2015 Defendant Weiss published the identical false and
defamatory post on “Outscam” a website (www.outscam.com) regarding the Plaintiff. A copy of that post is
attached hereto as part of Exhibit B.
22. Alternatively, as a direct result of the December 15th, 2015 post by Weiss on Ripoff Report, the post was
republished by Outscam on December 26th, 2015.
23. If the Outscam post was not directly published by Weiss, Weiss is still responsible for the publication because it
would not have been available for re-publication on Outscam had Weiss not made the initial December 15th, post on Ripoff Report.
24. Upon information and belief, after communicating with Donnelly on August 3rd, 2016 Weiss published another
false and defamatory posts on Outscam regarding the Plaintiff. A copy of that post is attached hereto as part of
Exhibit B.
25. Upon information and belief on August 3rd, 2016 Weiss also published a false and defamatory post on
“LawyerRatingZ”, a website (www.lawyerratingz.com) regarding the Plaintiff. A copy of that post is attached
hereto as Exhibit C.
26. On November 7, 2016 Weiss published a false and defamatory post on “Dirtyscam”, a website
(www.dirtyscam.com) regarding the Plaintiff. A copy of that post is attached hereto as part of Exhibit D.
27. Upon information and belief, on January 15th, 2017, posing as a dissatisfied client of the Plaintiff, Weiss also
published a false and defamatory post on “Dirty Scam (www.dirtyscam.com) regarding the Plaintiff. A copy of
that post is attached hereto as part of Exhibit D.
28. Weiss knew that the published statements were false before each was published.
29. These statements were both defamatory and untrue in that they falsely reported the Plaintiff’s character, morals,
ethics, capabilities, knowledge, and actions in his business, and Weiss knew that such statements were false.
30. Weiss posted these defamatory statements knowing they would be viewed by the general public, and by clients,
potential clients, customers and potential customers of the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s various businesses and
Plaintiff’s family and personal acquaintances, in order to injure the Plaintiff in his business and personal life.
31. Weiss maliciously published these statements intentionally maligning, defaming, and libeling the Plaintiff in his
business.
32. Weiss published these statements causing willful and deliberate injury to the good name and reputation of the
Plaintiff in his personal life and business.
33. These defamatory and libelous statements described above have had a devastating effect on the Plaintiff’s
personal and professional reputations and have caused the Plaintiff great monetary harm and emotional
distress.
34. These statements constitute libel per se because they falsely portray how the Plaintiff conducts his business,
falsely impugn the Plaintiff’s honesty, integrity, trustworthiness, dependability, and professional fitness and
abilities charging him with improper, unethical conduct in his trade or business as an attorney and business
person.
35. These false and defamatory statements have caused the Plaintiff embarrassment, humiliation, emotional injury
and loss of business revenue.
3 of 20
Page 4 FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 07/16/2017 02:58 PM
NYSCEF DOC. NO.
INDEX NO. 609677/RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/16/
36. Upon information and belief, the Defendant continues to publish libelous statements defaming the Plaintiff in
other media, other websites, and on paper; these additional publications are currently unknown to the Plaintiff.
37. These publications constitute libel per se against the Plaintiff.
38. As a result of said libel per se the Plaintiff continues to suffer from humiliation, loss of standing in the
community, loss of self-esteem, public disgrace, severe and extreme emotional distress and loss of business.
39. The libel per se acts committed against the Plaintiff by Weiss were intentional, willful, wanton, malicious and
oppressive and were made without regard to the truth, and with the sole intent of injuring the Plaintiff, and as a
result thereof Plaintiff is entitled to an award of punitive damages.
40. Weiss is liable to the Plaintiff for libel per se in an amount to be determined by this Court but no less than five
million dollars plus five million dollars in punitive damages.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
SLANDER AGAINST WEISS
41. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 41 as if set forth at length.
42. Upon information and belief, at various times, places and to people unknown to Plaintiff, Weiss has repeated
oral statements similar in nature and content to those he published online to one or more individuals either in
person or by telephone.
43. On August 25th, 2016 upon information and belief Donnelly posted anonymously on Outscam.com below the
Weiss Ripoff Report post that he “would like to speak with the person who submitted this complaint”.
44. Upon information and belief Donnelly made that post in order to attempt to get negative information (without
regard to the truth) about the Plaintiff to be able to use same as leverage against the Plaintiff in order to gain
advantage in the Surrogate Court proceeding.
45. Upon information and belief, following that post, Weiss had one or more conversations with Donnelly and in
those conversations Weiss repeated oral statements similar in nature and content to those he published online.
46. Weiss knew that the spoken statements were false before each was made.
47. These statements were both defamatory and untrue in that they falsely reported the Plaintiff’s character, morals,
ethics, capabilities, knowledge, and actions in his business, and the Defendant knew that such statements were
false.
48. Defendant made these statements knowing they would be heard by one or more people who could in turn repeat
them to potential clients, customers and potential customers of the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s various businesses
in order to injure the Plaintiff in his business and personal life.
49. Weiss maliciously made these statements intentionally maligning, defaming, and slandering the Plaintiff in his
personal life and his business.
50. Weiss made these statements causing willful and deliberate injury to the good name and reputation of the
Plaintiff in his personal life and business.
51. These defamatory and slanderous statements described above have had a devastating effect on the Plaintiff’s
personal and professional reputations and have caused the Plaintiff great monetary harm and emotional distress.
4 of 20
Page 5 INDEX NO. 609677/
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 07/16/2017 02:58 PM
NYSCEF DOC. NO.
RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/16/
52. These statements constitute slander because they falsely portray how the Plaintiff conducts his business, falsely
impugn the Plaintiff’s honesty, integrity, trustworthiness, dependability, and professional fitness and abilities
charging him with improper, unethical conduct in his trade or business as an attorney and business person.
53. These false and defamatory statements have caused the Plaintiff embarrassment, humiliation, emotional injury
and loss of business revenue.
54. Upon information and belief, Weiss continues to make slanderous statements defaming the Plaintiff to other
recipients currently unknown to the Plaintiff.
55. As a result of said slander the Plaintiff continues to suffer from humiliation, loss of standing in the
community, loss of self-esteem, public disgrace, severe and extreme emotional distress and loss of business.
56. The slanderous acts committed against the Plaintiff by Weiss were intentional, willful, wanton, malicious and
oppressive and were made without regard to the truth, and with the sole intent of injuring the Plaintiff, and as a
result thereof Plaintiff is entitled to an award of punitive damages.
57. Weiss is liable to the Plaintiff for slander in an amount to be determined by this Court but no less than five
million dollars plus five million dollars in punitive damages.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
LIBEL PER SE AGAINST DONNELLY
58. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 57 as if set forth at length.
59. Upon information and belief on August 3rd, 2016 Donnelly published a false and defamatory posts on “Outscam”
a website (www.outscam.com) regarding the Plaintiff. A copy of that post is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
60. Upon information and belief, alternatively, as a result of a conversation with Weiss, Donnelly caused Weiss to
publish a false and defamatory posts on “Outscam” a website (www.outscam.com) regarding the Plaintiff. A
copy of that post is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
61. Upon information and belief, on August 3rd, 2016 Donnelly also published a false and defamatory post on
“LawyerRatingZ” (www.lawyerratingz.com) regarding the Plaintiff. A copy of that post is attached hereto as
Exhibit C.
62. Upon information and belief, alternatively, as a result of a conversation with Weiss, Donnelly caused Weiss to
publish a false and defamatory posts on “LawyerRatingZ” (www.lawyerratingz.com) regarding the Plaintiff. A
copy of that post is attached hereto as Exhibit C.
63. Upon information and belief only days after being disqualified by the Surrogate Court order, on January 15th,
2017, in order to seek retribution against the Plaintiff, posing as a dissatisfied client of the Plaintiff in order to
disguise his identity, Donnelly also published a false and defamatory post on “Dirty Scam (www.dirtyscam.com)
regarding the Plaintiff. A copy of that post is attached hereto as part of Exhibit D.
64. Donnelly knew that the published statements were false before each was published.
65. These statements were both defamatory and untrue in that they falsely reported the Plaintiff’s character, morals,
ethics, capabilities, knowledge, and actions in his business, and the Defendant knew that such statements were
false.
66. Donnelly posted these defamatory statements knowing they would be viewed by the general public, and by
5 of 20
Page 6 FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 07/16/2017 02:58 PM
NYSCEF DOC. NO.
INDEX NO. 609677/RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/16/
clients, potential clients, customers and potential customers of the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s various businesses,
and Plaintiff’s family and personal acquaintances, in order to injure the Plaintiff in his business and personal life.
67. Donnelly maliciously published these statements intentionally maligning, defaming, and libeling the Plaintiff in
his business.
68. Donnelly published these statements causing willful and deliberate injury to the good name and reputation of the
Plaintiff in his personal life and business.
69. These defamatory and libelous statements described above have had a devastating effect on the Plaintiff’s
personal and professional reputations and have caused the Plaintiff great monetary harm and emotional distress.
70. These statements constitute libel per se because they falsely portray how the Plaintiff conducts his business,
falsely impugn the Plaintiff’s honesty, integrity, trustworthiness, dependability, and professional fitness and
abilities charging him with improper, unethical conduct in his trade or business as an attorney and business
person.
71. These false and defamatory statements have caused the Plaintiff embarrassment, humiliation, emotional injury
and loss of business revenue.
72. Upon information and belief, Donnelly has and continues to publish libelous statements defaming the Plaintiff in
other media, other websites, and on paper; these additional publications are currently unknown to the Plaintiff.
73. These publications online constitute libel per se against the Plaintiff.
74. As a result of said libel per se the Plaintiff continues to suffer from humiliation, loss of standing in the
community, loss of self-esteem, public disgrace, severe and extreme emotional distress and loss of business.
75. The libel per se acts committed against the Plaintiff by Donnelly were intentional, willful, wanton, malicious and
oppressive and were made without regard to the truth, and with the sole intent of injuring the Plaintiff, and as a
result thereof Plaintiff is entitled to an award of punitive damages.
76. Donnelly is liable to the Plaintiff for libel per se in an amount to be determined by this Court but no less than five
million dollars plus five million dollars in punitive damages.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
SLANDER AGAINST DONNELLY
77. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 76 as if set forth at length.
78. Upon information and belief, at various times, places and to people unknown to Plaintiff, Donnelly has repeated
oral statements similar in nature and content to those he published online to one or more individuals either in
person or by telephone.
79. On August 25th, 2016 upon information and belief Donnelly posted anonymously on Outscam.com below the
Weiss post that he, Donnelly “would like to speak with the person who submitted this complaint? Thank you”.
80. Upon information and belief Donnelly made that post in order to attempt to get negative information (without
regard to the truth) about the Plaintiff to be able to use same as leverage against the Plaintiff in order to gain
advantage in the Surrogate Court proceeding.
6 of 20
Page 7 INDEX NO. 609677/
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 07/16/2017 02:58 PM
NYSCEF DOC. NO.
RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/16/
81. Upon information and belief, following that post, Donnelly had one or more conversations with Weiss and in
those conversations Donnelly repeated oral statements similar in nature and content to those he and Weiss
published online.
82. Donnelly knew that the spoken statements were false before each was made.
83. These statements were both defamatory and untrue in that they falsely reported the Plaintiff’s character, morals,
ethics, capabilities, knowledge, and actions in his business, and Donnelly knew that such statements were false.
84. Donnelly made these statements knowing they would be heard by one or more people who could in turn repeat
them to potential clients, customers and potential customers of the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s various businesses
in order to injure the Plaintiff in his business and personal life.
85. Donnelly maliciously made these statements intentionally maligning, defaming, and slandering the Plaintiff in
his personal life and his business.
86. Donnelly made these statements causing willful and deliberate injury to the good name and reputation of the
Plaintiff in his personal life and business.
87. These defamatory and slanderous statements described above have had a devastating effect on the Plaintiff’s
personal and professional reputations and have caused the Plaintiff great monetary harm and emotional distress.
88. These statements constitute slander because they falsely portray how the Plaintiff conducts his business, falsely
impugn the Plaintiff’s honesty, integrity, trustworthiness, dependability, and professional fitness and abilities
charging him with improper, unethical conduct in his trade or business as an attorney and business person.
89. These false and defamatory statements have caused the Plaintiff embarrassment, humiliation, emotional injury
and loss of business revenue.
90. Upon information and belief, Donnelly continues to make slanderous statements defaming the Plaintiff to other
recipients currently unknown to the Plaintiff.
91. As a result of said slander the Plaintiff continues to suffer from humiliation, loss of standing in the
community, loss of self-esteem, public disgrace, severe and extreme emotional distress and loss of business.
92. The slanderous acts committed against the Plaintiff by Donnelly were intentional, willful, wanton, malicious
and oppressive and were made without regard to the truth, and with the sole intent of injuring the Plaintiff, and
as a result thereof Plaintiff is entitled to an award of punitive damages.
93. Donnelly is liable to the Plaintiff for slander in an amount to be determined by this Court but no less than five
million dollars plus five million dollars in punitive damages.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AGAINST WEISS AND DONNELLY
94. Plaintiff repeats and realleges the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 93 as if set forth at length.
95. Existing and future defamatory publications by Donnelly and Weiss will continue to injure the Plaintiff in the
future causing irreparable and immeasurable damage.
96. Future slanderous statements by Donnelly and Weiss will continue to injure the Plaintiff in the future causing
irreparable and immeasurable damage.
97. Plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law.
7 of 20
Page 8 INDEX NO. 609677/
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 07/16/2017 02:58 PM
NYSCEF DOC. NO.
RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/16/
98. Issuing an injunction will not cause Donnelly and Weiss harm.
99. Plaintiff has a likelihood of success in this matter.
100. It is in the public’s interest that the Donnelly’s and Weiss’ acts be enjoined.
101. Accordingly, this court should permanently enjoin the Donnelly and Weiss from further publications or
slanderous statements that defame the Plaintiff.
102. Further, this Court should issue an injunctive order requiring that Donnelly and Weiss each individually,
permanently rescind, revoke, withdraw and remove all such libel per se publications and slanderous remarks at their
respective costs and to admit in writing that the statements were untrue.
103. Further, this Court should issue an order requiring the search engines (Google, Bing Yahoo and others) to delist
any defamatory posts against the Plaintiff from search results.
JURY DEMAND
104. Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury of all issues of fact and damages stated herein.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff JAMIE E. FRANK prays that the Court enter judgment in his favor and against the
Defendants CARY WEISS and MICHAEL H. DONNELLY, for the following relief:
A.
On the First Cause of action against Weiss: An award of damages in an amount to be determined by
the Court but no less than five million dollars, to compensate the Plaintiff for all monetary and economic
harm to his business and reputation, plus five million dollars in punitive damages, plus prejudgment
interest from the time of the original occurrence.
B.
On the Second Cause of Action against Weiss: An award of damages in an amount to be determined by
the Court but no less than five million dollars, to compensate the Plaintiff for all monetary and economic
harm to his business and reputation, plus five million dollars in punitive damages, plus prejudgment
interest from the time of the original occurrence.
C.
On the Third Cause of action against Donnelly: An award of damages in an amount to be determined
by the Court but no less than five million dollars to compensate the Plaintiff for all monetary and
economic harm to his business and reputation, plus five million dollars in punitive damages plus
prejudgment interest from the time of the original occurrence.
D.
On the Fourth Cause of Action against Donnelly: An award of damages in an amount to be determined
by the Court but no less than five million dollars to compensate the Plaintiff for all monetary and
economic harm to his business and reputation, plus five million dollars in punitive damages, plus
prejudgment interest from the time of the original occurrence.
E.
On the Fifth Cause of Action against Donnelly and Weiss: (1) injunctive relief consisting of an order
permanently restraining Donnelly and Weiss from engaging in such defamatory, slanderous and libel
per se conduct in the future; and (2) injunctive relief consisting of an order for Donnelly and Weiss to
permanently rescind, revoke, withdraw and remove all such libel per se publications and slanderous
remarks at their respective costs; and to admit in writing that the statements were untrue; and (3)
8 of 20
Page 9 INDEX NO. 609677/
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 07/16/2017 02:58 PM
NYSCEF DOC. NO.
RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/16/
injunctive relief consisting of an order requiring the search engines (Google, Bing, Yahoo and others)
to delist all defamatory posts against Plaintiff from search results.
Plus, the costs and disbursements of this action and any and all additional relief this Court deems just and proper
under the circumstances.
Dated: Levittown, New York
July 6, Respectfully submitted,
By: Jamie E Frank
Plaintiff, Pro-se
8 Haven Lane,
Levittown, NY Phone: (516) 908-Fax: (206) 339-Email: mail@JamieEFrank.com
9 of 20
Page 10 INDEX NO. 609677/
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 07/16/2017 02:58 PM
NYSCEF DOC. NO.
RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/16/
Ripoff Report | Complaints Reviews Scams Lawsuits Frauds Reported. File your review. Consumers educating consumers.™
By consumers, for consumers...
FILE A REPORT
SEARCH
Company Name or Report #
Review Latest Reports
Don't let them get away with it!® Let the truth be known!™
Total Visits since 1998: 8,820,000,
Estimated money Consumers saved since 1998: $15,449,000,000.
Advanced Search
Browse Categories
Reports filed: 2,040,
Update
Programs &
Help &
Consumer
Verified Business
Legal
Consumers Say
In the
Ripoff Report
Repair your reputation the right way
a Report
Services
FAQs
Resources
Directory
Directory
Thank You
Media
Investigates
Corporate Advocacy Program
Ripoff Report protects consumers first amendment right to free speech
Report: #
Complaint Review: Jamie Frank Attorney at Law
Related Reports
Bernie's Toasted Tees NO
products received, NO tracking at
link, NO email replies! Internet
The Residence at La Vista Took
$2800 for Beyond Experience
Membership Cabo San Lucas
Submitted: Fri, December 25, Updated: Fri, December 25, Reported By: Lost lawyer sold me up the river — surfside Florida USA
Jamie Frank Attorney at Law
8 haven lane
levittown, New York
USA
Phone:
Web: www.jamiefranklaw.com
Category: Lawyers
Sandra Echevarria The Law
Offices of Sandra Echevarria
Lawyer Sandra Echevarria Florida
Spark Whitening Bella at Home
Possible Dual Ripoff Sparks
Nevada Internet
TMP Worldwide tmp.com
italtmp.com venezuela.tmp Frode
Fraud New York , New York
allpro assets solutions Jamie and
Bob Voskovitch do not trun work
orders completed and when you
quit Jamie try to hold pay till you
can't lean properties...
glen allen towing & recovery. i
called them for a tow 4:22 pm.the
truck showed up at 5:00 thats minutes later .the driver hooked
up tow me 3 miles...
Five Brothers Default
Management Demanded I Break
the Law in Order to Get Paid
Warren Michigan
Vitier Eye Serum­Vitier Skin Cream
Vitier I order a trial of Vitier Eye
serum online on a facebook
Ad..for $4.99 at this time Vitier
said it was my lucky...
Ripoff Reports
The Hartford
Financial
Services, Inc.
The Hartford
uses AARP to
exploit its
members by
charging grossly excessive rates
far beyond market rate Hartford...
Jamie Frank Attorney at Law Jamie Frank
Do not engage this Attorney to handle the
sale of your Business levittown New York
Like

Recommend this on Google
Tweet
REBUTTAL BOX™ | Respond to this Report!
Add Rebuttal to this Report
Aribitrate & Set Record Straight
File New Report
Repair Your Reputation
I used this sole practice 'Attorney' for the Sale of my multi
million dollar business. Three years later I have not seen
a penny. He created an Agreement and Contract that I
actually paid him to create that destroyed my entire life.
He solicited business from the Company he represented
me to sell to. He has no experience, no knowledge and
absolutely ripped me off. He offered no help, nothing but
bad advice, coerced me into horrible decisions, colluded
with a Broker to cheat me.If you come across Jamie
Frank Attorney at Law excuse yourself from this con man,
← Is this
Ripoff Report
About you?
Ripoff Report
A business' first
line of defense
10 of EXHIBIT A
Register or
Login
Page 11 FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 07/16/2017 02:58 PM
NYSCEF DOC. NO. TowerPoint
Capital
TRUSTED
BUSINESS
REVIEW:
TowerPoint
Capital clients
express gratitude for the firm's
commitment to transparency and
best in class execution....
RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/16/do yourself a favor and walk away. I ruined my life
engaging him, plese do not allow this to happen to you...
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..
Does your business have a bad
reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™
National
Collector’s Mint
TRUSTED
SEO Reputation
BUSINESS REVIEW: National
Collector's Mint, Inc. nationally
recognized coin and collectibles
company. National Collector's...
Amanda
Richardson
Offered Me A
Car To Buy
Through
Amazon
Payments.
(which Is Illegal) Internet
Skin
Optics/Eye
Essentials Skin
and Eye care
products
Management at its best!
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 12/25/2015 08:06 AM and is a permanent record located
here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/Jamie­Frank­Attorney­at­Law/levittown­New­York­11776/Jamie­Frank­
Attorney­at­Law­Jamie­Frank­Do­not­engage­this­Attorney­to­handle­the­sale­of­1276203. The posting
time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be
Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.
Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of
Ripoff Report.
Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on Jamie Frank Attorney at Law
Search for additional reports
If you would like to see more Rip­off Reports on this company/individual, search here:
Internet
ubuyfurniture­
inc Casual
brown vinyl
glider recliner
with ottoman
Dominic
Colbert, Sales
and Margin,
Sales and
Margin
Onnemedia
LLC Scammed
out of money, fraudulent business
deals, dishonesty, poor ethics
Washington...
INDEX NO. 609677/
Jamie Frank Attorney at Law
Search
Search Tips
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this
report!
File a Rebuttal
Also a victim?
File a Report
Repair Your
Reputation!
Get Started
Arbitrate
Remove Reports?
No! Better yet! Arbitrate to set the record straight!
UBER
TECHNOLOGIE SAN FRANCISCO
CA LYFT *TEMP AUT SAN
FRANCISCO CA Uber Technologie
Fraudulent debit charges San
Francisco Nationwide
Family Raised
English Bull
Dogs Wiggles
English Bull
Dogsother
website by
same
people:http://familyraisedenglishbulldogs.pw/index­
2.html Claims to be...
Kathleen
Rejniak
Kathleen Rita
Rejniak, Kathy
Rejniak
Hateful,
miserable sad
person Fullerton California
The Premier
Mystery
Shopping
Compnay
Joshua Brian
Dennis Culley
Sent me a check for 2,880.Minneapolis Minneapolis
CHEAP &
CLEAN AUTO
SALES INC,
STEVE
WILLIAMS,
ZAYNA
WILLIAMS
SCAMMER: SELL CAR AND
KEEP TITTLE AND BORROW
MONEY OFF TITTLE Pompano
Beach Florida
Wix.com Wix
BEWARE of
WIX SELLING
& FALSE
11 of 20
Page 12 FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 07/16/2017 02:58 PM
NYSCEF DOC. NO.
INDEX NO. 609677/RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/16/
Your voice has a chance to be heard
now! Outscam.com ­ we bring
REPORT SCAM
changes together.
Jamie E. Frank PC
Created: Dec 24, Like
Tweet
Country
United States
State
New York
City
Levittown
Address
8 Haven Ln
Phone
516­ 908­
Website
http://jamieefrank.com/
Map data ©2016 Google
Report a map error
Jamie E. Frank PC Reviews
EXHIBIT B
12 of 20
Page 13 FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 07/16/2017 02:58 PM
NYSCEF DOC. NO.
INDEX NO. 609677/RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/16/Most Useful Comment
Dec 26,
I used this sole practice 'Attorney' for the Sale of my multi million dollar business. Three years
later I have not seen a penny. He created an Agreement and Contract that I actually paid him to
create that destroyed my entire life. He solicited business from the Company he represented me
to sell to. He has no experience, no knowledge and absolutely ripped me off. He offered no help,
nothing but bad advice, coerced me into horrible decisions, colluded with a Broker to cheat me.If
you come across Jamie Frank Attorney at Law excuse yourself from this con man, do yourself a
favor and walk away. I ruined my life engaging him, plese do not allow this to happen to you...
Marked as Useful [6 votes]
Post Reply
Aug 25,
I would like to speak with the person who
submitted this complaint?
I would like to speak with the person who submitted this compliant. Thank you.
Mark as Useful [2 votes]
Aug 3,
JAMIE E FRANK (attorney At Law) IS A CON MAN
Jamie E Frank, Attorney At Law is a total fraud. His website makes claims and states
accomplishments that are totally false or at least half true. He's being brought up for review for
contempt of court and criminal behavior. Stay away from this con­artist ­ or better yet, call the BBB
or your local Law Bar and make a complaint.
Mark as Useful [2 votes]
Post Reply
Write a Review about Jamie E. Frank PC
13 of 20
Page 14 INDEX NO. 609677/
FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 07/16/2017 02:58 PM
NYSCEF DOC. NO.
RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/16/
LawyerRating
Like
LOGIN
Find, rate and review Attorneys and Lawyers
HOME
SEARCH
BROWSE
RATE
BEST
ARTICLES
REGISTER
HELP / FAQ
EMAIL LIST
FORUM
CONTACT
Jamie E. Frank attorney reviews
Jamie E. Frank
Attorney
MAP & INFO
Top
Levittown, NY
Practice Area: General Practice
Profile updated: 3/12/
Submit profile update
Subscribe to profile updates
Rating: 1.0 out of 5 based on 1 reviews.
Free Consult. Low
Fees - From $450.
Serving Nassau &
Suffolk Counties.
Attorney Jamie E. Frank has a poor overall rating on
LawyerRatingz.com.
The following postings have not been substantiated by LawyerRatingz.com.
divorcelawyerlongisland.com
Questions and answers about this attorney
Have a PUBLIC question about this attorney? Ask here
Submit a news article about this attorney
Add a picture of this attorney
Post
Save this listing
Search again
Rate this attorney
KEY
Date
K
N
O
W
L
E
D
G
E
C
O
M
M
U
N
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
T
E
N
A
C
I
T
Y
8/3/

W
O
R
K
Q
U
A
L
I
T
Y
V
A
L
U
E

Comments
Nothing but disservice, trouble, lies and scams from Jamie E. Frank,
Attorney at Law, Levittown, NY
Registered users can respond publicly to this rating
Rate this attorney
Add these ratings to your own website
Best Rated Attorneys in NY
Michael S. Lamonsoff ­ New York, NY
Deborah G. Fiss ­ New York, NY
Ilona Dzhamgarova ­ New York, NY
The Ratingz Network ­ Local Ratings and Reviews
Copyright © 2016, Ratingz Inc. • Privacy • Contact Ratingz • Web Design by LunaGraphica
EXHIBIT C
14 of 20
Page 15 FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 07/16/2017 02:58 PM
NYSCEF DOC. NO.
INDEX NO. 609677/RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/16/
EXHIBIT D
15 of 20
Page 16 FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 07/16/2017 02:58 PM
NYSCEF DOC. NO.
INDEX NO. 609677/RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/16/
16 of 20
Page 17 FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 07/16/2017 02:58 PM
NYSCEF DOC. NO.
INDEX NO. 609677/RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/16/
17 of 20
Page 18 FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 07/16/2017 02:58 PM
NYSCEF DOC. NO.
INDEX NO. 609677/RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/16/
18 of 20
Page 19 FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 07/16/2017 02:58 PM
NYSCEF DOC. NO.
INDEX NO. 609677/RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/16/
19 of 20
Page 20 FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 07/16/2017 02:58 PM
NYSCEF DOC. NO.
INDEX NO. 609677/RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/16/
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NASSAU
X
JAMIE E. FRANK
Plaintiff,
-againstCARY WEISS and MICHAEL H. DONNELLY
Defendants.
INDEX NUMBER: 609677/
X
CARY WEISS and INFINITE PERSONNEL
SERVICES, INC.
Counterclaim Plaintiffs,
-againstJAMIE E. FRANK
Counterclaim Defendant.
X
AMENDED VERIFIED COMPLAINT
Filed by:
JAMIE E. FRANK
Plaintiff Pro se
8 Haven Lane,
Levittown, NY Tel: (516) 908-Fax:(206) 339-E-mail: mail@jamieefrank.com
20 of
Space
Issues Laws Cases Pro Articles Firms Entities
Issues Laws Cases Pro Articles Firms Entities
 
PlainSite
Sign Up
Need Password Help?