(HERE IS THE ENTIRE COURT PROCEEDING AND ALL PETTITIONS AND DOCUMENTS)
NOTICE OF HEARING
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the undersigned will call up for hearing Defendant's
Motion For Temporary Restraining Order in the Circuit Court of Lafayette County
on February 14, 2007 at 11:45 a.m. or as soon thereafter as the same may be heard
IN THE CIRCUlT COURT OF LAFAYETTE COUNTY, MlSSOURI
MAURICE AND NANCY GASH.
Plaintiffs,
vs.
FARM BUREAU TOWN &. COUNTRY INSURANCE COMPANY OF MISSOURI
Defendant.
Case No. OSLF-CV01310
DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER,
COMES NOW defendant, Farm Bureau Town & Country Insurance Company of
Missouri (hereinafter )”Farm Bureau” pursuant to Rule 92.01 (a) of the Missouri Rules of Civil
Procedure, for its Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, states as follows;
1, On November 8, 2006 the parties appeared before this Court for trial setting in
the instant case. Plaintiffs appeared in person and through their attorney, Defendant appeared through its corporate representative, Gene Parton, and through undersigned counsel.
2. On November 8. 2006, the parties reached a compromise settlement of all claims and causes of action set forth in the instant lawsuit.
3. Since that time, plaintiffs have refused to honor the settlement agreement.
Plaintiffs counsel has advised this Court and undersigned counsel that plaintiffs have "settler's remorse" & that they are unwilling to honor the settlement agreement.
4. It has now come to the attention of Farm Bureau that on or about January 20.
2007, plaintiffs created a website entitled farmbureaulies.com. (See registration.com WHOIS Results attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein as Exhibit A) Excerpts from website, attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein as exhibit B; and Affidavit of Gene Parton, attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein as exhibit C),
5. In addition to the malicious and deflamatory statement made in the title of the
website, the following malicious and deflamatory statements are contained on the website:
"This site hopes to inform Farm Bureau insurance policyholders and others of Farm Bureaus recent and deceptive actions."
"Farm Bureau tactics include "Delay, confuse and Intimidate policyholders."
"Our goal is to inform people buying insurance of some of tactics that may be used against them " (See Exhibits B and C).
6. The website is rife with other false, malicious and defamatory statements. (See Exhibit B).
7, The website also notes that "Billboards on 1•70 coming soon," (See Exhibits B and E).
8. Farm Bureau has a valid business expectancy that individuals seeking to purchase
various types of insurance will apply for. And obtain, insurance through Farm Bureau. (See Exhibit C).
9. Based on the statements made by plaintiffs on their website. lt is undisputed that plaintiffs are well aware of Farm Bureau's valid business expectancy as referenced In Paragraph 7 above. (See Exhibits B and C).
10. Plaintiffs' creation of the website, and the deflamatory statements made therein, demonstrate a clear intent on their part to interfere with Farm Bureau's valid business expectancy referenced in paragraph 7 above. (See exhibits B and C).
11. Plaintiffs have absolutely no justification for making the deflamatory statements in
that all claims and causcs of action in the instant lawsuit have been resolved through a mutual settlement agreement. In addition, there has never been any finding by any court, jury or regulatory agency that Farm Bureau has ever”lied” or engaged in "deceptive" actions. Nor has
there ever been any finding that Farm Bureaus tactics" are to "delay, confuse, and intimidate
policyholders" (See Exhibit C).
12. Plaintiffs creation of the website, and the defamatory statements made therein,
has already resulted in damage to Farm Bureau in that Farm Bureau has lost the benefit of at least one prospective business relationship. (See Exhibit C; and see January 24. 200'7 e-mail from Randy Stone to Farm Bureau, attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein as Exhibit D) .
.
13. Farm Bureau has a reasonable belief that the existence of a website entitled farmbureaulies.com and the malicious and defamatory statements contained therein, which are readily accessible on the worldwide web to anyone with an internet connection, will cause Farm Bureau to lose the benefit of multiple business relationships. (See Exhibit C).
14. It Is clear that the sole purpose of plaintiffs' website Is to terminate as many of Farm Bureau's existing business relationships as possible, and to interfere with the formation of any new such relationships. The threatened billboards would obviously be put in place for the
exact same improper purposes.
15. Farm Bureau is prepared to issue a bond in whatever amount this Court may deem appropriate. However Farm Bureau respectfully suggests that no bond is necessary in that the requested relief will not result in any form of pecuniary loss to plaintiffs.
WHEREFORE, defendant prays that this Court enter a Temporary Restraining Order directing plaintiffs and their service provider, Microsoft Office Live. to immediately remove farmbureaulies.com from the worldwide web, and enjoining plaintiffs from posting any billboards relating to Farm Bureau along 1-70, pending a full and fair hearing on the merits.
Robart L. Brady, #47522 BROWN & JAMES, P .C. Attorneys for Defendant
1010 Market Street. 20th Floor St. Louis, MO 63101
314-421-3400
314.421.3128 FAX
2/21/07
(Farm Bureau files a specific list of exactly whats wrong with the website to the court)
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF LAFAYETTE COUNTY STATE 0F MISSOURI
FARM BUREAU TOWN & COUNTRY INSURANCE COMPANY OF MISSOURI.
Plaintiff.
Vs.
MAURICE L. GASH,
Defendant
C88c No. 07-Lf-CV - OO180
COMES NOW plaintiff, Farm Bureau Town & Country Insurance Company of Missouri, Pursuant to the Courts request from the bench on February 2O, 2007, and provides the following special designation of those portions of defendant's website which are improper and unlawful, and which plaintiff respectfully request the Court to enjoin. Farm Bureau is specifically reserving its objection to the entire website for the Reasons stated in the Petition for Temporary Restraining Order.
The text of the website appears to change almost daily. The specific portions as of 8:45 am.
on February 21, 2007, which plaintiff asks this Court to enjoin are as follows:
1) The domain name of the website - farmbureaulies.com.
2) On the Home Page, the statement Farm Bureau has not paid the $125,000.00 they agreed to in court for us to drop the lawsuit. This is a false statement and is contradicted by Mr Gash himself just a few lines down.
3) The entire my plea to FB section of the web site. This section is premised on the statement that ''we have an unresolved fire loss claim" with Farm Bureau and a "plea for help." This is entirely untrue. The claim is resolved in that the parties reached compromise settlement agreement on November 8, 2006. Mr. and Ms. Gash have signed a full release, and Farm Bureau has paid the $125,0 00.00 agreed upon settlement amount.
4) Paragraphs 11 and 12 of the My Position section of the website. These are direct accusations of fraud and deceit against Mr. Patron and Farm Bureau, and there has been no such finding by this Court or the Missouri Department of insurance As such These are false, Defamatory, and malicious statements,
5) Paragraph 30 of the "My Position" section of the website. All of the statements contained therein are false and defamatory there has been no such finding by this court or the Missouri Department of Insurance.
6) The entire "Farm Bureau Tactics" section of the website. This section is rife with
false and malicious statements, to wit '
General tactics, - Delay, confuse and intimidate Policyholders
General tactics, -Involve their attorneys early in the claim process
General tactics, Create as little of a Paper Trail as Possible
General tactics, - Offer Low ball Settlement figures early to entice Settlement by Policyholders who are financially burdened.
General tactics, - Everyday They Delay earns them interest on your money
There is no evidence in the record that any of those statements are true with respect to the Gash claim, or any other claim. In addition, these statements are not specific to the Gash claim. Rather, They purport to be statements of fact that Farm Bureau uses such tactics on all claims.
In addition to the foregoing, the Farm Bureau Tactics section of the website also contains the following defamatory statements, which should be enjoined.
Brown and James lawyers have authored a book on legal tactics to defend insurance companies, or better stated how to deny policyholder claims. (This is simply false, and there is no evidence in the record to support this blatant lie).
Most Farm Bureau policyholders can not afford such a delay in payment of their loss and are forced to accept a low settlement offer because of that delay. (This is simply false. and there is no evidence in the record to support this blatant lie.) In addition, here Mr. Gash purports to speak for most Farm Bureau policyholders without any support, substantiation, or foundation. In short, Mr. Gash has zero basis to make this malicious accusation.
As long as these settlements are low enough for Brown and James to get their fee and Farm Bureau can pay out less money to the policyholders, everyone but the policyholder wins. (Same problem here).
WHEREFORE. Plaintiff prays that this Court enter its Temporary Restraining Order enjoining defendant's website farmbureaulies.com and order defendant and his service provider to take the website down pending a full and fair hearing on the merits. Alternatively, plaintiff requests that the above-referenced specific portions of the website be enjoined and taken down pending a full and fair hearing on the merits.
Robert L. Brady #47522 Brown & James. P.C. Attorneys for Plaintiff
1010 Market Street 201h Floor St.Louis, MO 63101
2/23/2007
( Temporary Restraining Order Denied )
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF LAFAYETTE COUNTY, MISSOURI AT LEXINGTON
CIRCUIT DIVISION
FARM BUREAU TOWN & COUNTRY INSURANCE COMPANY OF MISSOURI,
Plaintiff
VS
MAURICE L GASH,
Defendant
Case # 07LP-CVOO 1 80 )
JUDGEMENT DENYING TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
Be it remembered that on the 20th day of February, 2007, this Court took up for hearing, Plaintiffs motion for Temporary Restraining Order and after hearing evidence, took the matter under advisement;
Now on this 23rd day of February 2007 The Court having reviewed the evidence sugestions and motions presented, finds that there are procedural irregularities with regard to the pleadings and notice provisions as required by Rule 92 of the Missouri Rules of Civil Procedure.
The Court further finds that there has not been sufficient evidence of a willful, malicious, continuing and irreparable injury to Plaintiff’s property rights, at least prior to a full hearing on the truth or falsity of Defendants representations. To issue a Temporary Restraining Order, infringing on Defendants rights guaranteed by Article.I, Section 8 of he Missouri Constitution.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERD, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Plaintiffs request for a Temporary Restraining Order be and
hereby is DENIED.
Dated: February 23, 2007
R. W. Shackelford
Associate Circuit Judge