Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 1 of 59
I KEVIN P. RODDY (SBN 128283) WILENTZ, GOLDMAN & SPITZER, P.A. 2 90 Woodbridge Center Drive, Suite 900 3 Woodbridge, NJ 07095 Telephone: (732) 636-8000 4 Facsimile: (732) 726-6686 E-mail: 5 [email protected]
6 TRACEY BUCK-WALSH (SBN 131254) LAW OFFICE OF TRACEY BUCK-WALSH 7 6 Reyes Court 8 Sacramento, CA 95831 Telephone: (916) 392-8990 9 Facsimile: (916) 393-1757 E-mail: 10 [email protected]
11 Attorneys for Plaintiffs
12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 13 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 14
15 ROB STUTZMAN and JONATHAN Case No. WHEELER, on behalf of themselves and all 16 others similarly situated, CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND 17 INJUNCTIVE, Plaintiffs EQUITABLE AND DECLARATORY 18 RELIEF BASED ON VIOLATIONS OF: vs. 1. Cal. Civ. Code 1750 et seq.; 19 2. Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17200 et seq.; 20 LANCE ARMSTRONG; PENGUIN 3. Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 17500 et seq.; GROUP (USA), INC.; G.P. PUTNAM'S 4. Negligent Misrepresentation; and 21 SONS; THE BERKLEY PUBLISHING 5. Fraud & Deceit. GROUP; RANDOM 22 HOUSE, INC.; BROADWAY BOOKS; CROWN JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 23 PUBLISHING GROUP; and DOES 1-50, inclusive, 24 1 25 II Defendants
26 #6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Page I 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 2 of 59
Plaintiffs, Rob Stutzman and Jonathan their counsel and for 2 Wheeler, by undersigned
3 I their Class Action Complaint (the "Complaint") against Defendants, Lance Armstrong,
4 I Penguin Group (USA), Inc., G.P. Putnam's Sons, The Berkley Publishing Group, Random 5 House, Inc., Broadway Books, Crown Publishing Group, and Does 1-50, inclusive, hereby 6
allege and say as follows. All made in this are based information 7 allegations Complaint upon
8 I and belief, except those allegations pertaining to Plaintiffs, which are based upon personal
9 I knowledge, and facts pertaining to this Court's subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiffs' 10 information and belief are based upon, inter alia, Plaintiffs' own investigation, review of 11
reliable media sources and the conducted Plaintiffs' counsel. 12 investigation by
13 II I. THE NATURE OF THIS CLASS ACTION
14 1. Alleging claims under California law, this class action seeks relief against 15 Defendants for monetary, injunctive, equitable and declaratory relief on behalf of Plaintiffs 16
and the statewide Class of California consumers seek to Plaintiffs sue on 17 they represent.
18 II behalf of themselves and other residents of the State of California who have been exposed to
19 I and victimized by Defendants' unlawful and/or wrongful business practices in violation of 20 (a) the Consumers Legal Remedies Act ("CLRA"), CAL. CIV. CODE 1750 et seq.; (b) the ?1
Unfair Law CAL. BUS. & PROF. CODE 17200 et the False 22 Competition ("UCL"), seq.; (c)
23 I Advertising Law ("FAL"), CAL. BUS. & PROF. CODE 17500 et seq.; (d) negligent
24 I misrepresentation; and (e) fraud and deceit. 25
26 #6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Page 2 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 3 of 59
2. This consumer protection class action arises from misrepresentations
contained in Lance Armstrong's books, IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO
LIFE and EVERY SECOND COUNTS, and advertisements and marketing for these books
(including the front and back cover and flyleafs of these books), as true and honest works of
nonfiction when, in fact, Defendants knew or should have known that these books were
works offiction. As alleged in this Complaint, Plaintiffs and the members of the Class were
misled by Defendants' statements and purchased Defendant Armstrong's books based upon
the false belief that they were true and honest works of nonfiction. Plaintiffs and Class
members would not have purchased the books had they known the true facts concerning
Armstrong's misconduct and his admitted involvement in a sports doping scandal that has
led to his recent and ignominious public exposure and fall from glory.
II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
3. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this class action pursuant to the
Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 ("CAFA"), 28 U.S.C. 1332(d)(2)(A), because the
proposed Class consists of more than 100 members, the matter in controversy exceeds the
sum or value of $5 million, exclusive of interest and costs, and this is a class action in which
Plaintiffs and the members of the Class are citizens and residents of a State different from
any of the Defendants.
4. Venue is properly laid in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(2)
because a substantial part of the events giving rise to the claims asserted by Plaintiffs on
46716116v I Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 90 Center Drive Page 3 Woodbridge Woodbridge, NJ 07095
I #6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 4 of 59
behalf of themselves and the members of the Class, namely, Defendants' marketing and
advertising efforts and consumers' purchases of the subject books, occurred in this District
and throughout the State of California.
5. This Court may properly exercise personal jurisdiction over the Defendants
because each of them does and conducts substantial business in the State of California. Each
of the Defendants has sufficient minimum contacts with the State of California and otherwise
intentionally avails himself, herself and/or itself of the laws and markets of the State of
California, through the promotion, sale, marketing and distribution of products and services
in the State of California, including, but not limited to, the books that are the subject of this
class action, so as to render the exercise of personal jurisdiction by this Court permissible,
under traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.
III. THE PARTIES
6. Plaintiff, Rob Stutzman ("Stutzman"), is a resident of the State of California
and the County of Sacramento who works as a public affairs consultant. Sometime between
2001 and 2003, Stutzman learned about the book, IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY
BACK TO LIFE, Defendant Armstrong's supposedly truthful and compelling story of
overcoming a life-threatening cancer and staging an inspiring comeback to win the Tour de
France bicycle race and become one of the best athletes in the world. Stutzman bought the
book in California and read it cover to cover. Although Stutzman does not buy or read many
books, he found Armstrong's book incredibly compelling and recommended the book to
#6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 90 Center Drive Page 4 Woodbridge Woodbridge, NJ 07095
I #6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 5 of 59
1 II several friends. In 2005, while working as Deputy Chief of Staff for Communications for
2 Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, Stutzman had the opportunity to privately meet 3 Armstrong. At that time, Stutzman thanked Defendant Armstrong for writing his book and 4
told him it was and that he had recommended it to friends who were 5 II very inspiring fighting
6 II cancer. In response, Armstrong thanked Stutzman.
7 7. Plaintiff, Jonathan Wheeler ("Wheeler"), is a resident of the State of California 8 and the County of Sacramento. Wheeler is a professional chef who, after a 20-year career 9
to Car and LeMans auto teams and movie 10 II catering Indy racing major studios, currently
11 II teaches culinary arts as a high school instructor through the County of Sacramento Office of
12 Education. Wheeler is a life-long, avid cycling enthusiast and bike racer. He began riding 13 bikes in his hometown of Cupertino, California, while in kindergarten and got his first ten- 14
a in the sixth he 15 II speed bike, Peuguot, grade whereupon immediately began riding long
16 II distances with his best friend. Soon he and his friend would ride over the mountains to Santa
17 Cruz and back. Wheeler began hanging out at the renowned Cupertino Bike Shop where he 18 became friendly with its owner, the legendary Spence Wolfe. Wheeler has competed in 19 and double rides. Wheeler followed Defendant 20 II century century Armstrong's early cycling
21 II career and his cancer diagnosis and treatment and, shortly after it was published Wheeler
22 purchased a copy of IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE after learning 23 through the media about Armstrong's supposedly truthful and inspiring account of his 24
return to dominate the world of after his bout with testicular 25 II triumphant cycling devastating
26 #6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 90 Center Drive Page 5 Woodbridge Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 6 of 59 cancer. Plaintiff Wheeler was so impressed with IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY
BACK TO LIFE that he bought Armstrong's follow-up book, EVERY SECOND COUNTS, published in January 2003, which chronicles Armstrong's life after his first Tour de France victory.
8. Defendant, Lance Armstrong ("Armstrong"), is a resident of Travis County,
Texas, whose address is 300 West 6th Street, Suite 2150, Austin, Texas. As set forth herein,
Armstrong was the principal author of IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO
LIFE and EVERY SECOND COUNTS.
9. Defendant, Penguin Group (USA) Inc. ("Penguin Group (USA)"), is the U.S. affiliate of Penguin Group, one of the largest English language book publishers in the world.
Penguin Group (USA)'s principal place of business is located at 375 Hudson Street, New
York, New York 10014. Penguin Group (USA) publishes under a wide range of imprints and trademarks, including G.P. Putnam's Sons ("Putnam"). As set forth herein, Defendants
Penguin Group (USA) and Putnam were the publishers of the hardcover edition of IT'S NOT
ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE, which was published in May 2000. Another division of Penguin Group (USA), Defendant, The Berkley Publishing Group ("Berkley"), published the paperback edition of IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE in September 2001. Both Putnam and Berkley maintain their principal places of business at
375 Hudson Street, New York, New York 10014.
#6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 90 Center Drive Page 6 Woodbridge Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 7 of 59
10. Defendant, Random House, Inc. ("Random House"), is the world's largest
English-language general trade book publisher. Random House's principal place of business is located at 1745 Broadway, New York, New York, 10019. Random House owns many publishing groups including Defendant, Crown Publishing Group ("Crown"), which publishes under a wide range of imprints and trademarks including that of Defendant,
Broadway Books ("Broadway"). As alleged herein, on January 1, 2003, Defendants Random
House, Broadway and Crown were the publishers of the hardcover edition of Armstrong's book EVERY SECOND COUNTS. As alleged herein, in or about June 2004, Defendants
Random House, Broadway and Crown were the publishers of the paperback edition of
Armstrong's book EVERY SECOND COUNTS. Both Broadway and Crown maintain their principal places of business at 1745 Broadway, New York, New York 10019.
11. The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate or otherwise of Defendants 1-50, inclusive, are unknown to Plaintiffs, who therefore sue said
Defendants by such fictitious names pursuant to CAL. CODE CIV. PROC. 474. Plaintiffs further allege that each of the said Defendants is in some manner responsible for the acts and occurrences alleged in this Complaint. Plaintiffs will seek leave to amend this Complaint to show their true names and capacities when same are ascertained, as well as the manner in which each of the fictitious Defendants is responsible.
IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
A. The Publication And Promotion Of Defendant Armstrong's Books
#6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. Page 7 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 8 of 59
1 12. On or about May 22, 2000, Defendant Putnam, a member of Defendant
2 Penguin Group (USA), published the hardcover edition of Armstrong's book entitled IT'S 3 NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE. In September 2001, Defendant Berkley, 4
a division of Defendant 5 Penguin Group (USA), published the paperback edition of this book.
6 13. On or about January 1, 2003, Defendant Broadway, a member of Defendants
7 Random House and Crown, published Defendant Armstrong's book entitled EVERY SECOND 8 COUNTS. In or about June 2004, these Defendants filed the paperback edition of EVERY 9 SECOND COUNTS. 10
11 14. Since the dates of publication, throughout the Class Period (as defined in this
12 Complaint) and continuing to the present date, Defendants Armstrong, Penguin Group 13 (USA), Putnam and Berkley have publicly and repeatedly represented Armstrong's book 14
entitled IT'S NOT ABOUT THE MY as a 15 BIKE: JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE "Biography and
16 Autobiography." Since the date of publication, throughout the Class Period and continuing
17 to the present date, Defendants Armstrong, Random House, Crown and Broadway have 18 publicly and repeatedly represented Armstrong's book entitled EVERY SECOND COUNTS as a 19 and 20 "Biography Autobiography." Throughout the Class Period, Defendants have advertised,
21 marketed and sold these books as a works of nonfiction. Such false and misleading
22 representations were made in the books, on the books' cover, on the books' jackets and 23 flyleafs, in media press kits, during television and newspaper interviews, on Internet websites 24
and at to 25 personal appearances made by Armstrong. Defendants' misrepresentations
26 #67l6lI6vl Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Page 8 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 9 of 59
consumers located throughout the State of California continue to the present day, long after
the time that Defendants Armstrong, Penguin Group (USA), Putnam, Berkley, Random
House, Broadway and/or Crown knew or should have known that such statements were and
are false and misleading.
15. IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE iS the supposed life
story of Defendant Armstrong, the world-famous cyclist, and his fight against cancer and
comeback to win his first Tour de France race title. In the book, he shares his journey
through triumph, tragedy, transformation and transcendence. It is the story of one of the most
talked-about and inspirational sports figures of all time, a world-famous cyclist and his fight
against cancer and the will to succeed despite overwhelming odds. Armstrong was named as
Sports Illustrated magazine's 2002 Sportsman of the Year and, after his record-shattering
string of Tour de France race victories, some proclaimed him as the greatest athlete of all
time.
16. Defendant Armstrong'S book, IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK
TO LIFE, spent many weeks on the The New York Times bestseller list and was advertised by
Defendants Penguin Group (USA) and Putnam as having "legs as strong as its author's."
17. Defendants Armstrong, Penguin Group (USA), and Putnam and Berkley have
profited handsomely from publication of both hardcover and paperback editions of IT'S NOT
ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE, reaping millions of dollars in sales and
profits. With his co-authors, Defendant Armstrong also wrote THE LANCE ARMSTRONG
#6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 90 Center Drive Page 9 Woodbridge Woodbridge, NJ 07095
I #6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 10 of 59
1 II PERFORMANCE PROGRAM, 7 WEEKS TO THE PERFECT RIDE, which was published on
2 September 1, 2000, and in which he sets forth a training program for success in bicycle 3 racing without using performance enhancing drugs. 4
18. Defendant the success of IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY 5 II Armstrong parlayed
6 II JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE into a subsequent book deal, which resulted in the publication in
7 January 2003 by Defendants Random House, Crown and Broadway of EVERY SECOND 8 COUNTS. This book was advertised by these Defendants as the follow-up story to the best- 9
book IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY 10 II selling BACK TO LIFE. EVERY SECOND
11 0 COUNTS was advertised by Defendants Random House, Crown and Broadway as addressing
12 the equally daunting challenge of living in the aftermath of winning the Tour de France race 13 after beating cancer and making the most of every breath of life, of Armstrong's prickly 14
with the French media and the accusations of within 1II5 relationship ultimately disproved doping
16 II his Tour de France cycling team, and an intimate glimpse into how almost dying taught him
17 to really live. Defendant Armstrong also wrote LANCE ARMSTRONG, IMAGES OF A 18 CHAMPION, published on August 8, 2006, and MY COMEBACK, UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL, 19 which chronicled his 20 record-breaking seventh Tour de France race win, accomplished after
21 II successfully battling the testicular cancer that very nearly killed him to his decision in
22 September 2008 to return to professional cycling for his eighth Tour de France race. 23 B. Misrepresentations Contained In Armstrong's Books 24
25
26 #6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Page 10 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 11 of 59
19. In his book, IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE,
Defendant Armstrong addressed the use of performance enhancing drugs that were and are
banned by the Union Cycliste Internationale ("UCI"), the governing body for sports cycling 4 II
which oversees international cycling events, their widespread use in the world of
professional cycling as well as the widespread suspicion that Armstrong's success was due to
his use of banned substances and practices such as blood transfusions. Throughout the book,
Defendant Armstrong repeatedly denies that he ever used banned substances before or during
his career. the use of 10 II professional cycling Lamenting drugs in cycling, Armstrong wrote in
11 IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE:
12 Doping is an unfortunate fact of life in cycling, or any other endurance sport 13 for matter. Inevitably, some teams and riders feel it's like nuclear weapons that they have to do it to stay competitive within the peloton. I never felt that 14 way, and certainly after chemo the idea of putting anything foreign in my body 15 was especially repulsive. Overall, I had extremely mixed feelings about the 1998 Tour [de France race]: I sympathized with the riders caught in the 16 firestorm, some of whom I knew well, but I also felt the Tour [de France race] would be a more fair event from then on. 17
18 20. Knowing that the mere claim that his success was due to superior physical
19 training, proper diet and an extraordinary spirit and drive to succeed was not enough to quell 20 suspicions and rumors that he doped, Defendant Armstrong wrote lengthy passages in IT'S 21
NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE that were intended to convince readers 22
23 and consumers including Plaintiffs and the members of the Class that the rumors of
24 Armstrong's doping were unfair and untrue because of the extensive drug-testing regime 25 employed by the UCI and the organizers of the Tour de France: 26 #6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, and Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Equitable Declaratory Page 11 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 12 of 59
1 I was making enemies in the Alps. My newly acquired climbing prowess aroused in the French still for blood after the scandal 2 suspicion press, sniffing of the previous summer. A whispering campaign began: "Armstrong must be 3 on something." Stories in L'Equipe and Le Monde insinuated, without saying it outright, that my comeback was a little too miraculous.
I knew there would be consequences for Sestriere it was almost a tradition that any rider who wore the yellow jersey was subject to drug speculation. But I was taken aback by the improbable nature of the charges in the French press: some reporters actually suggest that chemotherapy had been beneficial to my racing. They speculated that I had been given some mysterious drug during the treatments that was performance-enhancing. Any oncologist in the world, regardless of nationality, had to laugh himself silly at the suggestion.
I 10 didn't understand it. How could anybody think for a second that somehow the cancer treatments had helped me? Maybe no one but a cancer patient 11 understands the severity of the treatment. For three straight months I was some of the most toxic substances known to man, that 12 given poisons ravaged my body daily. I still felt poisoned and even now, three years after the fact, I 13 feel that my body isn't quite rid of it yet.
14 I had absolutely nothing to hide, and the drug tests proved it. It was no 15 coincidence that every time Tour [de France] officials chose a rider from our team for random drug testing, I was their man. Drug testing was the most 16 demeaning aspect of the Tour [de France]: right after I finished a stage I was whisked to an open tent, where I sat in a chair while a doctor a 17 wrapped piece of rubber tubing around my arm, jabbed me with a needle, and drew blood. As 18 I lay there, a battery of photographers flashed their cameras at me. We called the doctors the Vampires. 'Here come the Vampires.' we'd say. But the drug 19 tests became my best friend, because they proved I was clean. I had been 20 tested and checked, and retested.
21 In front of the media, I said, "My life and my illness and my career are open." As far as I was concerned, that should have been the end of it. There was 22 nothing mysterious about my ride at Sestriere: I had worked for it. I was lean, 23 motivated and prepared. Sestriere was a good climb for me. The gradient suited me, and so did the conditions cold, wet, and rainy. If there was 24 something unusual in my performance that day, it was the sense of out-of- 25 body effortlessness I rode with and that I attributed to sheer exultation in
26 #6716H6v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Declaratory Page 12 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 13 of 59
being alive to make the climb. But the press didn't back off, and I decided to take a couple of days off from talking to them.
My fellow riders tested me on the bike every single day. I was tested off the bike, too, as the scrutiny I underwent in the press intensified.
6 I decided to address the charges outright, and held a press conference in Saint- Gaudens. "I have been on deathbed, and I am not I said. 7 my stupid, Everyone knew that use of EPO and steroids by healthy people can cause 8 blood disorders and strokes. What's more, I told the press, it wasn't so shocking that I won Sestriere; I was an established former world champion. 9
"I can not 10 emphatically say I am on drugs, I said. "I thought a rider with my history and my health situation wouldn't be such a surprise. I'm not a new 11 rider. I know there's been looking, and prying, and digging, but you've not to find There's to find and once has 12 going anything. nothing everyone done their due diligence and realizes they need to be professional and can't 13 print a lot of crap, they'll realize they're dealing with a clean guy."
14
15 Not long after I cross the finish line, a French TV journalist confronted me: 16 there were reports that I had tested positive for a banned substance. The report was wrong, of course. I returned to the team and a 17 hotel, pushed through throng of clamoring media, and called another press conference. All I could 18 do was assert my innocence each time there was a new wave of speculation in the papers and there was one every three or four days. 19
Le 20 Monde had published a story stating that a drug test had turned up minute traces of corticosteroid in my urine. I was using a cortisone cream to treat a 21 case of saddle sore and I had cleared the cream with the Tour [de France] authorities before the race ever started. Tour 22 Immediately, [de France] authorities issued a statement affirming my innocence. "Le Monde was 23 looking for a drug story, and they got one on skin cream, I said.
24 I was hurt and demoralized by the constant barrage from the press. I put forth such 25 effort, and had paid such a high price to tide again, and now that effort
26 #6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Declaratory Page 13 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 14 of 59
was being devalued. I tried to deal with the reports honestly and straightforwardly, but it didn't seem to do any good.
3 I began to notice something. The people who whispered and wrote that I was using drugs were the very same ones who, when I was sick, had said, "He's 4 finished. He'll never race again." They were the same ones who, when I wanted to come to 5 back, said, "No, we don't want give him a chance. He'll never amount to anything." 6 Now that I was in the lead of the Tour de France, wearing the yellow jersey, and looking more and more like the eventual winner, the very same people sent the very same message. "It's not possible, they said. "Can't be done. He can't do it. What's going on here? There must be another explanation, something suspicious." They were consistent, the naysayers. 10 It's a good thing I didn't listen to them when I was sick.
It hurt me, too, that the French in the were so 12 journalists particular suspicious of me. I live in France, and I loved the country. After the previous year's 13 problems during the Tour [de France], a number of top riders had stayed away from France in '99, but not me. While other riders were afraid of being 14 harassed by the police or investigated by the governmental authorities, I trained 15 there every day. France was the most severe place in the world to be caught using a performance enhancer, but I did all of my springtime racing in 16 France, and conducted my entire Tour [de France] preparation there. Under French law, the local could have raided house whenever 17 police my they wanted. They didn't have to ask, or know. They could have sorted through 18 my drawers, rifled my pockets, search my car, whatever they wanted, without a warrant or any sort of notice. 19
I said to "I 20 the press, live in France. I spent the entire months of May and June in France, racing and training. If I was trying to hide something, I'd have been 21 in another country."
22 But they didn't write that, or print that. 23
24 I 25 cycled through the stage finish and dismounted, thoroughly exhausted but please to have protected my lead. But after five hours on the bike, I now had 26 #6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Page 14 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 15 of 59
1 to face another two-hour press conference. I was beginning to feel that the press was to break me because the other riders couldn't do it 2 trying mentally, physically. The media had become as much of an obstacle as the terrain itself. 3 That day, the International Cycling Union released all of my drug tests, which 4 were, in fact, clean. What's more, I had received a wonderful vote of confidence from the race 5 organizer, Jean-Marie Leblanc. "Armstrong beating his illness is a sign that the Tour [de France] can beat its own illness, he said. 6 Somehow, we had fended off all the attacks, both on the bike and off, and 7 kept the yellow jersey on my back. 8
9
I wanted to win time I to a statement on 10 the trial. wanted make final the bike, to show the press and cycling rumormongers that I didn't care what they said 11 about me. I was through with press conferences (although not with drug tests; I was random-tested after stage 12 again 17).
13 II
14 I was near the end of the journey. But there had been two journeys, really: the to to the 15 journey get Tour [de France], and then the journey of the Tour [de France] itself In the beginning there was the Prologue and the emotional 16 high, and that first week, uneventful but safe. Then there were the strange out- at Metz and Sestriere, followed the 17 of-body experiences by demoralizing attacks by the press. Now to finish with a victory gave me a sweet sense of 18 justification. I was going to Paris wearing the maillot jaune.
19 21. In his follow-up book, EVERY SECOND COUNTS, Armstrong again confronts his 20 critics who suspect he used banned substances. Again, Armstrong denied every 21 repeatedly
22 I doping accusation and repeatedly recited the fact that because he never tested positive for a
23 I banned substance during his racing career, he raced "clean" and that the attacks on his 24 character were baseless and without merit. Armstrong again wrote at length about the 25 doping investigation in the 2000-2001 racing season, devoting almost the entire third chapter 26 #6716116vl Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Page 15 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 16 of 59
of this book to the topic, including the following passages intended to impress the reader
2 with his "clean" history and the legitimacy of his victories: 3
4 That year saw the beginning of a long, hard defense of my character. I'm surely the most drug-tested man on the planet. I'm tested anywhere from 30 to 5 40 times a year, both in and out of competition, and I welcome it, because 6 frankly, it's the only proof I have of my innocence.
7
8 I've never once failed a test. Not one. Nor do I intend to, ever. You know why? Because the only thing you'll find evidence of is hard work, and there's 9 no test for that.
10 But no matter how many tests I took, there were still those who considered me 11 guilty, a doper-mastermind who outwitted scientific communities across the globe, and the suspicion reach a height in 2000-2001. 12
13 On Thanksgiving Day of 2000, after I got back from the 14 shortly Olympics, French authorities announced I was under criminal investigation for doping. 15 I was dumfounded. I wasn't just being called a cheat, I was being called a 16 felon, under formal investigation.
17 II
18 What happened was this: during the Tour [de France], someone two of our medical staff as threw a 19 surreptitiously videotaped they away couple of trash bags. The tape was sent anonymously to a government 20 prosecutor, as well as to the France 3 television station. Now the station was airing the tape while sensationally reporting our "suspicious behavior" as we 21 disposed of "medical waste." 22 French authorities had responded by launching a full-scale judicial inquiry. 23
24 The "medical waste consisted of some wrappers and cotton swabs and empty 25 boxes, nothing more.
26 #6716116vI Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Page 16 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, N.I 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 17 of 59
2 I immediately issued an angry denial through our [U.S. Postal Service cycling Dan Our team had "zero tolerance" for form 3 team] spokesman, Osipow. any of doping, we said. It sounded like a clichéd statement, but we meant it. We 4 were absolutely innocent.
6 At first, I tried not to take it personally, and to understand the motives behind the When an athlete the and 7 investigation. doped, competitors, spectators, journalists were defrauded. International cycling had recently been through a 8 drug scandal, and the French were protective of the integrity of the Tour [de France], which was more than just a race, it was a national symbol, and they 9 didn't want it junked up by needles and vials. But I didn't like being accused 10 on no evidence.
12 Suspicion was the permanent state of affairs in the sport, and with reason. Unfortunately, cycling had a long history of doping. It had happened time and 13 again: athletes had lied, had cheated, had stolen. In the 1998 Tour [de 14 France], which I missed while recovering from illness, a drug scandal resulted in multiple arrests and suspensions when a team car was found to be carrying 15 large amounts of the blood-doping agent erythropoietin (EPO). Since then, Tour officials had worked with the International Union to 16 [de France] Cycling develop new drug tests, and to restore public confidence in the race. 17 Drug inspectors arrived at each team hotel between 7 and 9 A.M. on the day 18 that the Tour [de France] started and drew blood from the crooks of our arms. After that, there were surprise drug tests—you never knew when someone 19 would bang on your hotel-room door and ask for blood. There were also daily 20 urine tests in a mobile trailer after each stage....
21 Even out of season, I was, and am, tested by the United States Anti-Doping Agency. It's a moment of wearying familiarity: I'm sitting in my kitchen 22 early one Texas morning in the off-season, sipping coffee and whispering so 23 as not to wake assorted children, when there's a loud ringing at the doorbell. Standing on the front step of my home is a representative from USADA, 24 coming on like John Wayne, holding out a piece of paper like a warrant and me to take a or risk banned from 25 telling drug test, being my sport.
26 #6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Center Drive Page 17 90 Woodbridge Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 18 of 59
The drug testers in Austin were the same people every time, a husband and wife. I didn't know their names, and wasn't especially cordial with them, because they were never cordial with me. They would ring the bell, I'd open the door, and they would announce, "Random drug control." And hand me a piece of paper instructing me on my rights. Or lack thereof: if I declined the test it was considered an automatic positive, and I would be banned.
The head of the French Sports Ministry, Marie-George Buffet, announced that all of our [U.S. Postal Service cycling] team's urine samples from the 2000 Tour would be turned over to the French judicial investigators and submitted to forensic testing by law enforcement, and so would the garbage that we had thrown away during the 2000 Tour [de France].
10 That was actually good news. I wanted all the tests, because I knew they would come back pure. They were my only means of vindication. "It's the 11 best news in a long time, I said. "Because I know I'm clean."
12 More good news came when the International Cycling Union announced it would conduct its own tests. The ICU had to 91 13 quietly decided preserve frozen urine samples taken from the 2000 race, without the cyclists' 14 knowledge, in the hopes of eventually submitting them to a brand-new test for EPO. 15
16 II who I would four of chemo to risk 17 Anyone thought go through cycles just my life by taking EPO was crazy. It was one thing to seek to maximize 18 performance, or explore a pharmacological gray zone. It was another to court death. 19
I more natural to and that was to 20 practiced another, way oxygenate my blood, train or live at altitude. I stressed altitude training----it was a big part of my 21 regimen, and it was safe, but it was no fun. It was lung-searing, and dizzying, and inconvenient, but it was legal and it worked. 22
23
Meanwhile, the threatened to mess with my 24 I investigation seriously reputation.
26 #6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 90 Center Drive Page 18 Woodbridge Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 19 of 59
1 We wrote in anti-drug out-clause in our contracts: if I tested positive, I'd give the money back. 2
3
and with what to news. We 4 Finally, April came, it, seemed be good heard via a reporter from Reuters that all of our tests were clean—exactly as we had 5 insisted all along.
6 In Chapter 7 of this book, Armstrong wrote:
7 Here are just a few things that happened after the summer of 2002. On the French was 8 September 2, 2002, doping investigation finally, officially closed....After 21 months of inquiry, investigators admitted they'd found not a 9 shred of proof, and they issued just a small discourteous announcement from the prosecutor's office. The case was for lack of evidence. 10 dropped
11 22. Putnam's and 12 Despite Armstrong's, Penguin Group (USA)'s, Berkley's repeated
13 public representations that Armstrong's cycling comeback and successes were due to his
14. innate talent and athletic gifts, training, diet and his extraordinary will to succeed, and not 15 banned performance enhancing drugs, as detailed in IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY 16
JOURNEY BACK TO and Random and 17 LIFE, despite House's, Crown's, Broadway's repeated
18 public representations that Armstrong's cycling comeback and successes were due to his
19. innate talent and athletic gifts, training, diet and his extraordinary will to succeed and not 20 banned performance enhancing drugs, as detailed in EVERY SECOND COUNTS, both books 21
have now been as frauds. In as now 22 exposed fact, Armstrong admits, he and his entire U.S.
23 Postal Service ("USPS") cycling team used banned substances. Armstrong now admits that
24 without his use of banned performance enhancing drugs beginning in the mid-1990's, he 25
26 N6716116vI Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 90 Center Drive Page 19 Woodbridge Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 20 of 59
1 would not have won and continued to win cycling races, including seven consecutive Tour
2 de France races. 3
4 C. The Revelation Of Certain Facts Concerning Defendant Armstrong's Wrongdoing Bring Forth His Steadfast Denials, Attacks Upon Others 5 And Repeated Attempts To Hide The Truth 6 23. Suspicions that Armstrong used banned performance enhancing drugs in the Tour 7 de France, which were first mentioned by the French media in 1999, re-emerged in June 8
2004 with the start 9 appearance, right before the of the Tour de France race, of a book entitled
10 I "L.A. Confidentiel, co-authored by David Walsh and Pierre Ballester ("Walsh and
11 Ballester"). In this book, which was never published in the United States, Walsh and 12 Ballester reported that when Armstrong met with his doctors after being diagnosed with 13 testicular he admitted that he had taken banned 14 I cancer, previously performance enhancing
15 I drugs. This book also revealed that one of Armstrong's former assistants was asked to
16 remove several used syringes and that Armstrong had asked to borrow her makeup in order 17 to cover up needle marks on his skin. During this time, Armstrong vehemently denied any 18
of Later that won his sixth Tour de France race. 19 II charges doping. summer, Armstrong cycling
20 24. As detailed in Armstrong's book, EVERY SECOND COUNTS, one month after 21
his first Tour de France race, was accused of for 22 11 winning Armstrong testing positive
23 II erythropoietin ("EPO") by L'Equipe, the French sports publication. This French paper
24 reported that there was indisputable evidence of Armstrong's guilt from drug tests performed 25 on six urine samples taken, and later frozen was later testing, during the 1999 Tour de France 26 #6716116vI Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Page 20 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 21 of 59
1 I race. On his Internet website, Armstrong denied that he had ever taken performance
2 enhancing drugs. Television network CNN reported that Armstrong had been "dogged by a 3 whispering campaign that his remarkable cycling achievements were aided by drugs despite 4
never a test." four full to this 5 failing doping Despite L'Equipe devoting pages Armstrong
6 doping scandal, Armstrong described it as a "witch hunt."
7 25. sued the authors of "L.A. Confidentiel" and The Times 8 Armstrong Sunday of
9 London for £1,000,000 after the newspaper reprinted claims from the "L.A. Confidentiel"
10 book that Armstrong took performance enhancing drugs. Also named in Armstrong's suit 11 was Emma O'Reilly ("O'Reilly"), Armstrong's former masseuse and a major source of 12 information for the authors of "L.A. Confidentiel." The Times London settled the 13 I Sunday of
14 I case in 2006, paying Armstrong £300,000. O'Reilly settled with Armstrong after enduring
15 two and one-half years of litigation. Armstrong reportedly went on a litigation spree against 16 his critics and those who sought to uncover the truth about his doping, boasting in 2006: "I 17 think we're 10-0 in lawsuits now." 18 I right
19 26. In April 2009, after being accused by France's anti-doping agency of not 20 cooperating with a drug tester, denied any Nevertheless, 21 Armstrong again wrongdoing.
22 I Armstrong was subsequently cited for not remaining "under the direct and permanent
23 I observation" of those administering the drug test, pursuant to the established rules. A 20- 24 minute delay in administering the drug test occurred when Armstrong declared that he had 25
26 #6716116vI Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 90 Center Drive Page 21 Woodbridge Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 22 of 59
been given permission to shower following a race. While he was showering, Armstrong's
assistants checked the credentials of the drug tester.
27. In June 2009, Walsh and Ballester wrote a second book entitled "le sale tour."
They have stated that they purposely did not put the title of their in capital letters because of
their disgust with what had happened with the sport of cycling. When asked why he was
always "after" Armstrong, Walsh explained, "If he doped to win the Tour de France, which I
believe he did, he's not a genuine champion."
28. On May 20, 2010, The New York Times reported that Armstrong and other
team members of the USPS cycling team had been accused of using banned performance
enhancing drugs by former team member Floyd Landis ("Landis"). Landis sent this
information to cycling officials via electronic mail ("e-mail"). Because Landis had spent the
previous four years vehemently denying these very same charges, his admission came as a
surprise. One cycling official confirmed that the information provided by Landis was
detailed. Landis revealed that his own doping had begun in 2002, the first year he became a
teammate of Defendant Armstrong. In response to these revelations, Armstrong vehemently
and publicly denied teammate Landis's assertions.
29. On September 10, 2010, Betsy Andreu ("Andreu"), the wife of former
Armstrong cycling teammate Frankie Andreu, advised that she spoke to federal agents
regarding the use of banned performance enhancing drugs in professional cycling. Andreu
#6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 90 Center Drive Page 22 Woodbridge Woodbridge, NJ 07095
I #6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 23 of 59
1 11 stated that while Armstrong was battling cancer, he told her that he had used performance
2 enhancing drugs, including EPO, human growth hormone, steroids and testosterone. Andreu 3 told federal agents that Armstrong was in his hospital room when he made this revelation. 4
On it was revealed that Andreu had received several 5 II September 11, 2010, threatening
6 II telephone voicemail messages left by an Armstrong friend and it was stated that those
7 voicemail recordings would be used as evidence in a federal investigation into Armstrong's 8 activities. 9
10 30. On January 24, 2011, Sports Illustrated magazine reported that in 1995 11 Armstrong cycling teammate Stephen Swart had called Armstrong "the instigator, and that 12
his teammates to use EPO, which is a banned 13 II Armstrong encouraged cycling performance
14 11 enhancing drug. In response, Armstrong's lawyer publicly denied these accusations. The
15 Sports Illustrated article explicated many of the prior doping accusations made against 16 Armstrong. Most importantly, Sports Illustrated pointed out that because the cycling team 17
was the USPS and involved the use of resources, a federal 18 II sponsored by government
19 II investigation into such wrongdoing would be necessary.
20 31. On 23, 2011, the CBS television network aired the show "60 Minutes, 21 May
22 which investigated the allegations surrounding Armstrong and included an interview with
23 II former Armstrong cycling teammate Tyler Hamilton ("Hamilton"). During the broadcast, 24 Hamilton asserted that he and Armstrong had taken EPO during 1999-2001. The television 25 show also reported that two other teammates had observed EPO. Hamilton 26 Armstrong using #6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Page 23 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 24 of 59
I stated that he saw the drug in the refrigerator, that he and other teammates saw Armstrong
2 use the drug. 3
4 D. The USADA Brings Charges Against Armstrong And Publishes Its Report Detailing Armstrong's Wrongdoing 5
32. On June 12, 2012, was with and the of 6 Armstrong charged doping trafficking
7 drugs by the United States Anti-Doping Agency ("USADA"). At the same time, Armstrong
8 was suspended from competing in any cycling-related events. Armstrong was also banned 9 from participating in triathlons. The 15-page letter sent to Armstrong by the USADA alleged 10 that his blood samples from 2009 and 2010 were "fully consistent with blood manipulation,
12 including EPO use and/or blood transfusions."
13 33. On July 9, 2012, Armstrong responded to the USADA's letter by filing a 14
15 lawsuit against the USADA and its Chief Executive Officer, Travis Tygart, in the U.S.
16 District Court for the Western District of Texas, entitled Lance Armstrong v. U.S. Anti-
17 Doping Agency, Case No. A-12-CA-606-SS. That same day, Judge Sam Sparks issued an 18 Order dismissing Armstrong's complaint and motion for temporary restraining order against 19
20 the USADA. In the Order, Judge Sparks stated that "[t]his Court is not inclined to indulge
21 Armstrong's desire for publicity, self-aggrandizement, or vilification of [the USADA]." Dkt.
22 No. 17 at 2-3. Armstrong responded to Judge Sparks' Order by filing an amended complaint 23 on July 10, 2012. In his filings, Armstrong asserted that the USADA did not have the ability 24
25 tO file charges against him because his contracts were with the UCI. On August 20, 2012,
26 116716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Page 24 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 25 of 59
1 II Armstrong's lawsuit against the USADA and Tygart was again dismissed, leaving Armstrong
2 three days to decide if he wished to arbitrate his case in accordance with USADA rules. Dkt. 3 Nos. 56-57. On August 23, 2012, Armstrong declined to arbitrate the USADA's charges, 4
on his LIVESTRONG Internet "There comes a in 5 II stating personal webpage: point every
6 II man's life when he has to say, 'Enough is enough." However, Armstrong continued to
7 publicly deny any doping charges, claiming that he was weary of dealing with such 8 accusations. By avoiding USADA arbitration, Armstrong knew he would be banned for life 9
from the of and of all of his race 10 II sport cycling stripped wins.
34. On August 24, 2012, the USADA imposed a lifetime ban on Armstrong and 12
him of all his Tour de France race medals, all of 13 II stripped thereby eliminating Armstrong's
14 II achievements from the record books.
15 35. On October 12, 2012, the USADA forwarded to the UCI, the World Anti- 16 and the World Triathlon its edited 17 Doping Agency (WADA), Corporation (WTC) 202-page
18 version of a report entitled "Reasoned Decision of the United States Anti-Doping Agency on
19 Disqualification and Ineligibility" (the "USADA Report"). The USADA Report concluded 20 that Armstrong had engaged in a sophisticated doping conspiracy "designed in large part to 21 benefit and that took various 22 Armstrong, Armstrong performance enhancing drugs during
23 all of his Tour de France race victories.
24 36. The USADA Report provided a year-by-year breakdown of Defendant 25 Armstrong's doping, starting in 1998, in a race in Spain where Armstrong's teammate, 26 #6716116v I Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Page 25 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 26 of 59
1 II Jonathan Vaughters ("Vaughters"), alleged that Armstrong injected himself with EPO in
2 front of him and was open about his performance enhancing drug use. According to the 3 USADA Report, seven witnesses (including four riders and a team employee) testified about 4
use on USPS the use of 5 performance enhancing drug Armstrong's cycling team, including
6 EPO, testosterone, human growth hormone and cortisone.
7 37. According to the USADA Report, in 1999 Armstrong's USPS cycling team 8 II ousted the team Pedro because he "had not been for 9 11 doctor, Celaya, aggressive enough
10 II Armstrong in providing banned products." That same year, according to the USADA
i Report, Armstrong "got serious" with Italian doping doctor Michele Ferrari ("Dr. Ferrari"). 12 In one instance, according to Andreu (the wife of USPS cycling team rider Frankie Andreu), 13
she, and then-wife met Dr. Ferrari on the side of the road outside 14 II Armstrong Armstrong's
15 II Milan, Italy, and that on that occasion, Armstrong met alone with Dr. Ferrari for an hour.
16 Hamilton, Armstrong's training partner in 1999, told the USADA that Dr. Ferrari had 17 injected him with EPO that year. During the 1999 Tour de France race, Armstrong tested 18
for a cortisone that he didn't have medical authorization to use. A 19 II positive cover-up
20 II allegedly ensued; in the words of the USADA report:
21
Emma was in the room a when 22 O'Reilly giving Armstrong massage Armstrong and team officials fabricated a story to cover the positive test. 23 Armstrong and the team officials agreed to have Dr. del Moral backdate a prescription for cortisone cream for Armstrong which they would claim had 24 been prescribed in advance of the Tour to treat a saddle sore. O'Reilly 25 understood from Armstrong, however, that the positive had not come from a topical cream but had really come about from a cortisone injection Armstrong 26 #6716116vI Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Drive Page 26 90 Woodbridge Center Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 27 of 59
received around the time of the Route du Sud a few weeks earlier. After the meeting between Armstrong and the team officials concluded, told 2 Armstrong O'Reilly, 'Now, Emma, you know enough to bring me down." 3 38. The USADA Report alleges that the USPS cycling team was delivered EPO 4 during the 1999 Tour de France race by a skilled, drug-smuggling motorcyclist that the team 5
6 I members called "Motoman." Hamilton states that riders also took testosterone in 1999 via an
7 I olive oil based solution that was sprayed in their mouths. However, as Defendant Armstrong
8 wrote in his books, IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE, MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE and EVERY 9 SECOND COUNTS, he attributed the above-referenced positive drug test to an approved 10
II cortisone skin cream used for saddle soreness.
12 39. In 2000, when the organizers of the Tour de France race started testing for 13
Hamilton asserts that the USPS team moved on to blood Hamilton 14 II EPO, cycling doping.
15 states that he, Armstrong and teammate Livingston went to Valencia, Spain, and had blood
16 extracted and later re-infused to boost their performance. Another Armstrong teammate, 17 George Hincapie ("Hincapie"), asserts that Armstrong also used testosterone in 2000, and 18
that out of a race 19 Armstrong dropped cycling in Spain after Hincapie warned him that there
20 would be drug testing. Hamilton states that USPS cycling team riders were re-infused with
21 blood during the 2000 Tour de France race at a hotel room, and that they joked about whose 22 body was absorbing the blood the fastest. 23
24 40. Hincapie states that Dr. Ferrari visited the USPS team training camp at the 25 beginning of 2001 and his services were offered to any rider who wanted them for $15, 000. 26 #6716ll6v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 90 Center Drive Page 27 Woodbridge Woodbridge, NJ 07095
I #6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 28 of 59
Also in 2001, Vaughters reports that he went out on a bike ride with Armstrong where
Armstrong "demonstrated a detailed knowledge of the EPO test, and told him how to skirt a
positive drug test. Armstrong told Vaughters that he had sources in the testing world who
I told him how it works.
41. During the 2001 Tour du Suisse race, Armstrong informed his teammates that
he had tested positive for EPO; however, after having a conversation with UCI officials,
Armstrong told his teammates "everything was going to be okay." Cycling teammate Landis
stated that Armstrong told him he (Armstrong) had made a "financial agreement" with UCI
officials to keep the results from the positive drug test hidden.
42. During 2002, the USADA Report states that Armstrong become good friends
and training partners with cycling teammate Landis, who asserts that he and Armstrong
shared doping advice and drugs. According to the USADA Report, "Armstrong also
describe[d] how much he enjoyed Landis' boyish antics, gregarious personality and love for
the American rock band ZZ Top." Landis had keys to Armstrong's apartment. The USADA
Report states that the agency has evidence that $150,000 was paid by Armstrong to Dr.
Ferrari during 2002, even though Dr. Ferrari was then under investigation for doping.
43. After the 2002 Tour de France race, USPS team member Christan Vande
Velde ("Vande Velde") states that Armstrong threatened to kick him off the team if he didn't
step up his doping program; as the USADA report states: "Armstrong told Vande Velde that
#6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. Drive Page 28 90 Woodbridge Center Woodbridge, NJ 07095
I #6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 29 of 59
1 11 if he wanted to continue to ride for the [USPS cycling] team he 'would have to use what Dr.
2 Ferrari had been telling [Vande Velde] to use and would have to follow Dr. Ferrari's 3 program to the letter." According to the USADA Report, Vande Velde stated that "the 4
conversation left me with no that I was in the and that the 5 1 question doghouse only way
6 forward with Armstrong's team was to get fully on Dr. Ferrari's doping program." Vande
7 Velde acquiesced to Armstrong's demand. 8
9 44. According to records uncovered by the USADA, during 2003 Armstrong paid
10 Dr. Ferrari the sum of $475,000. Cycling teammate Landis was hurt during 2003, but when 11 Armstrong went out of town he asked Landis to stay at his apartment and keep an eye on his 12
"Landis to the blood, the USADA says. 13 I blood-doping equipment. agreed babysit Report
14 Ii Both Landis and Hincapie state that Aimstrong blood-doped in 2003, and during every other
15 Tour de France race held from 2001 to 2005. Landis states that Armstrong gave him a box 16 of six pre-measured syringes of EPO after he (Armstrong) got two liters of blood extracted in 17 2003. 18
19 45. During 2004, Armstrong continued to work with Dr. Ferrari and, on the day 20 before the 2004 Tour de France race, wire transferred $100,000 to Dr. Ferrari. 21 Armstrong
22 II Cycling teammate Landis states that he saw Armstrong on a massage table with a
23 I testosterone patch on his shoulder. During the 2004 Tour de France race, both Landis and 24 Hincapie assert that the entire USPS cycling team got blood transfusions on the team bus 25 after a stage of the race. In late 2004, Dr. Ferrari was convicted of fraud for 26 sporting #6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Drive Page 29 90 Woodbridge Center Woodbridge, NJ 07095
I #6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 30 of 59 advising a group of Italian riders about EPO and other drugs. According to the USADA report, it was only at that point that Armstrong publicly broke off his relationship with Dr.
Ferrari.
46. In 2005, Hincapie asserts that Armstrong gave him EPO following the latter's seventh-straight Tour de France race win. Also in 2005, the USADA Report states that
Armstrong's supposedly-finished relationship with Dr. Ferrari was "business as usual."
Armstrong and Dr. Ferrari met in Italy and Armstrong wire transferred $100,000 to Dr.
Ferrari.
47. During 2009, the USADA Report states that Armstrong retained a professional relationship with Dr. Ferrari by soliciting advice from him through Dr. Ferrari's son, Stefano.
Here is an example of an e-mail exchange between Armstrong, Dr. Ferrari and Stefano
("Schumi" is Ferrari): On November 4, 2009, Stefano inquires: "Schumi asks if you'd like
[t]o continue the cooperation for next year too if so, then it [w]ould be good to start thinking about some specifics already (gym + [s]ome bike)." On November 15, 2009, when
Armstrong is looking ahead to the next year's Tour de France race, he writes: "Yes, let's continue what we have started. I'm curious to know what Schumi [t]hinks for 2010 and what we need to do differently in terms of training...." Stefano responds, "Great! Schumi says it's obviously a [T]our for light climbers...." The USADA Report states that the chances that Armstrong's blood levels during the 2009 Tour de France occurred naturally were "less than one in a million." 46716116v] Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 90 Center Drive Page 30 Woodbridge Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 31 of 59
48. According to the USADA Report, Armstrong avoided positive drug tests by engaging in a variety of deceptive activities, including:
(a) Avoiding the testers. Cycling teammate Hamilton states that they would take the EPO injections at night and never answer the door when the testers came by. Teams commonly had lookouts to inform a rider when a tester was approaching, according to an independent review of the 2010 Tour de France. The USADA Report states that the USPS cycling team also seemed to have inside information on when the tests would come.
(b) Using undetectable drugs. From 1998-2005, cycling authorities could not test for blood doping or HGH. In addition, EPO is hard to test for and wasn't even testable until 2000. Testosterone is notoriously hard to detect as well.
(c) Next-level methods. The USADA Report states that the USPS cycling team had an understanding of how testing worked, and that team members used methods that would result in negative tests. These included methods like testosterone patches and injecting EPO directly into the vein. The USADA report states that the team "literally smuggled" saline solution into camp in 1998 to water down test results.
49. As the USADA Report concluded: "The evidence is overwhelming that Lance
Armstrong did not just use performance enhancing drugs, he supplied them to his teammates.
He did not merely go alone to Dr. Michele Ferrari for doping advice, he expected that others would follow. It was not enough that his teammates give maximum effort on the bike, he
#6716116vI Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. Page 31 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 32 of 59
1 also required that they adhere to the doping program outlined for them or be replaced. He
2 was not just a part of the doping culture on his team, he enforced and re-enforced it. 3 Armstrong's use of drugs was extensive, and the doping program on his team, designed in 4
to benefit was 5 large part Armstrong, massive and pervasive."
6 E. Armstrong's Admissions During His Televised Interview With Oprah 7 Winfrey 8 50. On January 17, 2013, Defendant Armstrong admitted to well-known television
9 personality Oprah Winfrey ("Winfrey"), in an interview which was broadcast nationwide on 10 The Oprah Network, that he began using banned performance enhancing drugs in the mid- i i
1990's, before he was with cancer, and used them his career, 12 diagnosed throughout cycling
13 including during each of his seven Tour de France race victories. Armstrong admitted to
14 Winfrey that his story "was so perfect for so long, that the "myth" of his perfect story was 15 "not true, and that "a lot of people helped paint that (untrue) picture." Armstrong admitted 16 that his cocktail of banned and consisted of "EPO, 17 performance enhancing drugs procedures
18 transfusions and testosterone, and that he was not afraid of getting caught despite the testing
19 program because of the testing protocols and because the UCI did not test for EPO until 20 2006. Armstrong stated that until 2005, cyclists were tested only at or during the races at 21
which time the banned were no detectable because most 22 performance enhancing drugs longer
23 of the use of banned performance enhancing drugs occurred during the off-competition
24 training season. Armstrong admitted to Winfrey that he was a "ruthless, relentless, 'win-at- 25 all-costs' bully" who hid the truth in order to "perpetuate the story" and in order to win. 26 #6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Page 32 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 33 of 59
I II 51. Armstrong admitted in his televised interview with Winfrey that the positive
2 EPO tests from samples of his 1999 blood were, in fact, accurate, despite his prior denials, 3 which had been repeatedly stated both publicly and in his books. Armstrong also admitted 4
that in 1999 he had convinced a doctor to back-date a for a cortisone cream in 5 II prescription
6 II order to explain his positive test result for steroids. During the interview, Armstrong
7 admitted that the "Motoman" story was true. 8 F. Plaintiffs' Lack Of Knowledge Concerning Armstrong's Fraud And Their 9 Efforts To Learn The Truth
10 52. Plaintiff Stutzman remembers seeing news reports shortly after May 2010 11 teammate Landis's For the first time, Plaintiff Stutzman 12 regarding Armstrong allegations.
13 II began to seriously wonder if Armstrong had lied about never using banned substances. But
14 II Armstrong's continued and vehement protests that he was innocent, the fact that it was 15 widely reported that Armstrong had never tested positive for a banned substance, and the fact 16 that Armstrong had sued accusers for defamation, led Plaintiff Stutzman to 17 successfully
18 a believe that Armstrong was telling the truth. It was not until August to October 2012, when
19 II Armstrong was stripped of all seven of his Tour de France race titles and the USADA Report 20 was issued, that Plaintiff Stutzman felt certain that Armstrong had lied all along. When 21
confessed to the interview broadcast on television on 22 Armstrong doping Winfrey during
23 II January 17-18, 2013, Plaintiff Stutzman felt duped, cheated and betrayed.
24 II 53. Plaintiff Wheeler, who had followed Armstrong's cycling career from the 25 beginning, was convinced of Armstrong's veracity because he supposedly continued to test 26 #6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Page 33 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 34 of 59 1 II "clean" for drugs. After all, Plaintiff Wheeler believed that given the fact of widespread
2 testing for banned substances, if other cyclists were testing "dirty, getting caught and 3 disciplined by cycling authorities, and Armstrong was not, then surely Armstrong was 4
II "clean." Plaintiff Wheeler even 5 formed the opinion that Greg LeMond ("LeMond"), a three-
6 II time winner of the Tour de France race (and the only previous American winner), was a
7 "whiner" when LeMond suggested in 2001 that Armstrong was one of the greatest "frauds" 8 in the history of cycling. Plaintiff Wheeler was so proud of Armstrong's first Tour de France 9
race win that he a 2000 "maillot the race 10 II purchased jaune" (yellow jersey) symbolizing
11 II winner. Plaintiff Wheeler came to believe that Armstrong was probably lying when, during
12 August-October 2012, the USADA Report was issued and Armstrong was stripped of his 13 seven Tour de France titles. The disappointed Wheeler felt cheated and betrayed. 14
15 V. ADDITIONAL FACTS REGARDING DEFENDANTS' UNLAWFUL CONDUCT 16 54. the Class Period, Defendant 17 Throughout Armstrong fraudulently represented
18 II his books, IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE and EVERY SECOND
19 II COUNTS, to be a true and honest works of nonfiction during personal appearances, in print, 20 on the Internet and on television. 21 55. From 2000 to the Defendants 22 May present, Armstrong, Penguin Group (USA),
23 II Putnam and Berkley fraudulently and/or negligently represented and promoted the book, IT'S
24 II NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE, to be a true and honest work of 25 nonfiction, on the book's front and back covers, on the flyleafs, through press kits, 26 #67l6ll6vl Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Page 34 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 35 of 59
promotions, press releases and communications made via various other media channels
including, but not limited to, The New York Times, USA Today, Amazon, Borders Books and
Barnes & Noble. Such promotional and marketing efforts continued after January 2011, by
which point Defendants Penguin Group (USA), Putnam and Berkley knew or should have
known that Armstrong's book was not an honest work of nonfiction.
56. From January 2003 to the present, Defendants Armstrong, Random House,
Broadway and Crown fraudulently and/or negligently represented and promoted the book,
EVERY SECOND COUNTS, to be a true and honest work of nonfiction, on the book's front and
back covers, on the flyleafs, through press kits, promotions, press releases and
communications made by various other media channels including, but not limited to, The
New York Times, USA Today, Amazon, Borders Books and Barnes & Noble. Such
promotional and marketing efforts continued after January 2011, by which point Defendants
Random House, Broadway and Crown knew or should have known that Armstrong's book
was not an honest work of nonfiction.
57. Throughout the Class Period, Defendant Armstrong actively and fraudulently
I concealed the material fact that he used banned performance enhancing drugs in his cycling
I career. Armstrong carried out this concealment and deception by various means, including
I holding press conferences to declare that he had never failed a drug test and by suing his
I detractors for defamation and other torts.
VI. CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
#6716Il6v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. Page 35 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
I #6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 36 of 59
58. Under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiffs bring this
action, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, as a class action. The Class
(or subclasses) which Plaintiffs seek to represent is (are) defined as follows: (a) All
consumers residing in the State of California who purchased the book, IT'S NOT ABOUT THE
BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE from its initial publication date in May 2000 through the present, and (b) all consumers residing in the State of California who purchased the book
EVERY SECOND COUNTS from its initial publication date in January 2003 through the present
(the "Class" and the "Class Period").
59. Excluded from the Class are each of the Defendants identified in this
Complaint, any entity in which Defendants have a controlling interest, any officers or directors of Defendants, their legal representatives, heirs, successors and assigns, and any judicial officer assigned to this case.
60. Plaintiffs reserve the right, upon completion of discovery with respect to the scope of the Class and the Class Period, to amend the definitions set forth above.
61. The members of the Class are so numerous and geographically diverse that joinder of all of them is impracticable. Plaintiffs allege that there are thousands of members in the Class who reside throughout the State of California.
62. Plaintiffs, who are members of the Class, have suffered monetary injury, are committed to prosecute this case, and have retained competent counsel who are experienced in class action litigation. Accordingly, Plaintiffs are adequate representatives of the Class
#6716116vI Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. Page 36 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 37 of 59
because they have the same interests as the members of the Class, their claims are typical of
the claims of Class members, and they will fairly and adequately protect the interests of
Class members.
63. There are questions of law or fact common to members of the Class that
I predominate over any questions affecting individual members including, but not limited to:
(a) Whether Defendants' false and/or misleading statements of fact and
I concealment of material facts to Plaintiffs and Class members were likely to deceive them;
(b) Whether Defendants, by their conduct alleged in this Complaint, have
I engaged in unfair, deceptive, untrue and/or misleading statements about the truthfulness of
IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE and/or EVERY SECOND COUNTS;
(c) Whether Defendants' conduct caused damages to Plaintiffs and the
members of the Class for which Defendants may be held liable under California law; and
(d) Whether, as a result of Defendants' misconduct, Plaintiffs and the
members of the Class are entitled to recover compensatory damages, restitution, injunctive,
equitable and/or other types of relief, and the amount and nature of such relief.
64. The likelihood that individual members of the Class will prosecute separate
and individual actions is remote due to the relatively small albeit substantial in the
aggregate actual and potential damages sustained by each Class member, when compared
to the losses suffered by the Class as a whole compared to the burden and expense of
#6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. Page 37 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 38 of 59
I II prosecuting litigation of this nature and magnitude. Thus, a class action is superior to other
2 available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of this controversy. 3 VII. DELAYED DISCOVERY AND/OR FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT 4
65. Plaintiffs' causes of action as in 5 II against Defendants, alleged Part VIII of this
6 II Complaint infra, did not accrue until Plaintiffs discovered, or had reason to discover, each
7 such cause of action. As set forth herein, until at least August 2012, when the USADA 8 imposed a lifetime ban on Defendant Armstrong and stripped him of all his Tour de France 9 and/or October when 10 II medals, 2012, the USADA Report was published, and/or January 2013,
I I II when Armstrong made his televised disclosures to Winfrey, Plaintiffs did not have
12 knowledge of the causes of action against Armstrong and the other Defendants. Until those 13 public disclosures made during 2012-2013, Plaintiffs lacked means of obtaining such 14
that in the exercise of reasonable not 15 II knowledge; is, diligence, Plaintiffs could have
16 II uncovered the truth about Armstrong's wrongdoing at an earlier date. As alleged in this
17 Complaint, until at least August 2012, Plaintiffs were unable to discover the fraudulent 18 scheme carried out by Armstrong and the other Defendants. 19
66. As in this from at 20 II alleged Complaint, least May 2000 to January 2013,
21 II Armstrong fraudulently concealed the truth from the American public, including Plaintiffs 22 and the members of the Class. As alleged in this Complaint, Plaintiffs did not discover the 23 truth about Armstrong's fraudulent scheme until July 2012, at the earliest or January 2013, at 24
the latest. Plaintiffs discovered the truth 25 II gradually when, in August 2012, the USADA
26 #6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Page 38 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095 1
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 39 of 59 imposed a lifetime ban on Defendant Armstrong and stripped him of all his Tour de France medals, and/or in October 2012, when the USADA Report was published, and/or January
2013, when Armstrong made his televised disclosures to Winfrey. Prior to this series of public disclosures, Plaintiffs had no actual or presumptive knowledge of facts sufficient to put them on inquiry.
VIII. CAUSES OF ACTION
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
(Violations of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act Injunctive Relief Only As To Defendants Armstrong, Penguin Group (USA), Putnam And Berkley)
67. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference all previous paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set forth and further alleges as follows. This cause of action, which alleges violations of the CLRA, is brought against Defendants Armstrong, Penguin Group (USA), Putnam and
Berkley.
68. The CLRA, CAL. CIV. CODE 1750 et seq., provides California consumers with a comprehensive procedure for redressing Defendants' violations of various statutory rights.
69. Defendants' misrepresentations of IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY
BACK TO LIFE, which is a "good" under Section 1761(a), as a true and honest work of non- fiction has violated, and continues to violate, the CLRA in at least the following respects:
(a) In violation of Section 1770(a)(2) of the CLRA, Defendants have misrepresented the sponsorship, approval, or certification of the goods in question; #6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. Page 39 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 40 of 59
1 (b) In violation of Section 1770(a)(5) of the CLRA, Defendants' acts and
2 practices constitute representations that the goods in question have approval, characteristics, 3 uses, or benefits which they do not have or that a person has sponsorship, approval, status, 4
or not 5 affiliation, connection which he or she does have;
6 (c) In violation of Section 1770(a)(7) of the CLRA, Defendants' acts and
7 practices constitute representations that the goods in question are of a particular standard, 8 quality or grade, when they are not; 9
In 10 (d) violation of Section 1770(a)(9) of the CLRA, Defendants' acts and
11 practices constitute the advertisement of goods in questions without the intent to sell them as
12 advertised; 13 (e) In violation of Section 1770(a)(16) of the CLRA, Defendants' acts and 14
15 practices constitute representations that the subject of the transaction has been supplied in
16 accordance with previous representations when it has not.
17 70. By reason of the foregoing, Plaintiffs and Class members have been 18 irreparably harmed, entitling them to both injunctive relief and restitution. 19
71. to 20 Pursuant Section 1782 of the CLRA, Plaintiffs have notified Defendants in
21 writing of the particular violations of Section 1770 of the CLRA. Plaintiffs demanded that
22 Defendants rectify the actions described above by providing complete monetary relief, 23 agreeing to be bound by their legal obligations and give notice to all affected customers of 24
25
")6 #6716l16vl Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Declaratory Page 40 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 41 of 59
their intent to do so. Plaintiffs sent this notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, to
2 Defendants' residence and/or principal places of business. 3 72. If Defendants fail to respond to Plaintiffs' demand within 30 days of the letter 4 I pursuant to Section 1782 of the CLRA, Plaintiffs will amend this Complaint to add claims
I for actual, punitive and statutory damages. Plaintiffs are already entitled to the relief set
I forth above, along with costs, attorneys' fees and any other relief which the Court deems
I proper.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
(Violations of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act Injunctive Relief Only As To Defendants Armstrong, Random House, Broadway And Crown)
73. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference all previous paragraphs of this Complaint as
if fully set forth and further alleges as follows. This cause of action, which alleges violations
of the CLRA, is brought against Defendants Armstrong, Random House, Broadway and
Crown.
74. The CLRA, CAL. CIV. CODE 1750 et seq., provides California consumers
with a comprehensive procedure for redressing Defendants' violations of various statutory
rights.
75. Defendants' misrepresentations of EVERY SECOND COUNTS, which is a "good"
under Section 1761(a), as a true and honest work of non-fiction has violated, and continues
to violate, the CLRA in at least the following respects:
#6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. Page 41 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 42 of 59
(a) In violation of Section 1770(a)(2) of the CLRA, Defendants have
2 misrepresented the sponsorship, approval, or certification of the goods in question; 3 (b) In violation of Section 1770(a)(5) of the CLRA, Defendants' acts and 4 constitute 5 practices representations that the goods in question have approval, characteristics,
6 uses, or benefits which they do not have or that a person has sponsorship, approval, status,
7 affiliation, or connection which he or she does not have; 8 (c) In violation of Section 1770(a)(7) of the CLRA, Defendants' acts and 9 constitute 10 practices representations that the goods in question are of a particular standard,
11 quality or grade, when they are not;
19 (d) In violation of Section 1770(a)(9) of the CLRA, Defendants' acts and 13 practices constitute the advertisement of goods in questions without the intent to sell them as 14
15 advertised;
16 (e) In violation of Section 1770(a)(16) of the CLRA, Defendants' acts and
17 practices constitute representations that the subject of the transaction has been supplied in 18 accordance with previous representations when it has not. 19
76. reason 20 By of the foregoing, Plaintiffs and Class members have been
21 irreparably harmed, entitling them to both injunctive relief and restitution.
22 77. Pursuant to Section 1782 of the CLRA, Plaintiffs have notified Defendants in 23 writing of the particular violations of Section 1770 of the CLRA. Plaintiffs demanded that 24 Defendants 25 rectify the actions described above by providing complete monetary relief,
26 #6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Declaratory Page 42 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 43 of 59
agreeing to be bound by their legal obligations and give notice to all affected customers of
their intent to do so. Plaintiffs sent this notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, to
Defendants' residence and/or principal places of business.
78. If Defendants fail to respond to Plaintiffs' demand within 30 days of the letter
I pursuant to Section 1782 of the CLRA, Plaintiffs will amend this Complaint to add claims
I for actual, punitive and statutory damages. Plaintiffs are already entitled to the relief set
I forth above, along with costs, attorneys' fees and any other relief which the Court deems
I proper.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
(Violations of the Unfair Competition Law Defendants Armstrong, Penguin Group (USA), Putnam And Berkley)
79. Plaintiffs' incorporate by reference all previous paragraphs of this Complaint
as if fully set forth, and further alleges as follows. This cause of action, which asserts
violations of the UCL, is brought against Defendants Armstrong, Penguin Group (USA),
Putnam and Berkley.
80. Plaintiffs assert this claim against Defendants for unlawful practices pursuant
to the UCL, Bus. & PROF. CODE 17200 et seq., which prohibits all unlawful or unfair
business practices and/or acts.
81. Plaintiffs assert their claim as a member of an aggrieved Class of persons who
have expended funds that Defendants should be required to reimburse under the
restitutionary remedy specified in Section 17203 of the UCL.
#6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. Page 43 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 44 of 59
1 82. Defendants represented IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO
2 LIFE, to be a true and honest work of non-fiction, which it is not, rendering Defendants' 3 representations unfair, untrue, misleading and/or likely to deceive Plaintiffs and the members 4 of the Class. 5
6 83. Defendants' practices deceived consumers who trusted Defendants'
7 representations that IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE, is a true a 8 honest work of non-fiction, which it is not. As such, Defendants' representations are 9
and an 10 unlawful constitute "unfair business practice."
11 84. By acting as alleged herein, Defendant employed unconscionable commercial
12 practices, deception, false advertising, false promises and misrepresentations to lure 13 consumers to purchase IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE. 14 85. The 15 practices of the Defendants have injured Plaintiffs and the members of the
16 Class by causing them to spend money on a book they otherwise would not have purchased
17 and/or, in the alternative, by decreasing the value and enjoyment of the purchased book. 18 86. The unlawful acts and practices of Defendant as alleged above constitute 19 unlawful 20 business practices within the meaning of Section 17200.
21 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
22 (Violations of the Unfair Competition Law 23 Defendants Armstrong, Random House, Broadway And Crown)
24 87. Plaintiffs' incorporate by reference all previous paragraphs of this Complaint 25 as if fully set forth, and further alleges as follows. This cause of action, which asserts 26 #6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Declaratory Page 44 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 45 of 59 violations of the UCL, is brought against Defendants Armstrong, Random House, Broadway and Crown.
88. Plaintiffs assert this claim against Defendants for unlawful practices pursuant to the UCL, Bus. & PROF. CODE 17200 et seq., which prohibits all unlawful or unfair business practices and/or acts.
89. Plaintiffs assert their claim as a member of an aggrieved Class of persons who have expended funds that Defendants should be required to reimburse under the restitutionary remedy specified in Section 17203 of the UCL.
90. Defendants represented EVERY SECOND COUNTS to be a true and honest work of non-fiction, which it is not, rendering Defendants' representations unfair, untrue, misleading and/or likely to deceive Plaintiffs and the members of the Class.
91. Defendants' practices deceived consumers who trusted Defendants' representations that EVERY SECOND COUNTS is a true a honest work of non-fiction, which it is not. As such, Defendants' representations are unlawful and constitute an "unfair business practice."
92. By acting as alleged herein, Defendant employed unconscionable commercial practices, deception, false advertising, false promises and misrepresentations to lure consumers to purchase EVERY SECOND COUNTS.
46716II6v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. Page 45 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 46 of 59 93. The practices of the Defendants have injured Plaintiffs and members of the
Class by causing them to spend money on a book they otherwise would not have purchased and/or, in the alternative, by decreasing the value and enjoyment of the purchased book.
94. The unlawful acts and practices of Defendant as alleged above constitute unlawful business practices within the meaning of Section 17200.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Violations of the False Advertising Law Defendants Armstrong, Penguin Group (USA), Putnam And Berkley)
95. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference all previous paragraphs of the Complaint as if fully set forth, and further alleges as follows. This cause of action, which alleges violations of the FAL, is brought against Defendants Armstrong, Penguin Group (USA) and
Berkley.
96. During the Class Period, Defendants have committed acts of untrue and misleading advertising, as defined in the FAL, CAL. BUS. & PROF. CODE 17500, by engaging in acts and practices with intent to induce consumers to purchase IT'S NOT ABOUT
THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE. The following acts and practices, among others, created a likelihood of confusion and misunderstanding in connection with the sale of IT'S
NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE:
(a) Defendant Armstrong fraudulently represented his book IT'S NOT
ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE to be a true and honest work of non-fiction at personal appearances, in print and on television; and
#6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 90 Center Drive Page 46 Woodbridge Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 47 of 59
(b) Defendants Penguin Group (USA), Putnam and Berkley represented
and promoted the book IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE to be to be a
true and honest work of non-fiction on the book's covers and flyleafs, through press kits,
promotions, press releases and various other media channels. These Defendants have
continued to advertise, market and sell the subject book as a work of nonfiction even after
they knew or should have known that Armstrong's book contained false and misleading
statements.
97. Plaintiffs and other members of the Class relied on and were deceived by
Defendants' false and deceptive advertisements and practices as set forth above, and as a
direct and proximate result of the afore-mentioned acts, Defendants received and continue to
hold ill-gotten gains belonging to Plaintiffs and members of the Class.
98. In addition to the relief requested in the Prayer for Relief, Plaintiffs seek the
imposition of a constructive trust over, and restitution and disgorgement of, the monies
collected and profits realized by Defendants, and each of them, as well as injunctive relief,
including an order requiring them to cease from false and misleading advertising of IT'S NOT
ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE.
SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Violations of the False Advertising Law Defendants Armstrong, Random House, Broadway And Crown)
99. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference all previous paragraphs of the Complaint as
if fully set forth, and further alleges as follows. This cause of action, which alleges
#67161I6v I Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, PA. 90 Center Drive Page 47 Woodbridge Woodbridge, NJ 07095
I #6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 48 of 59
I violations of the FAL, is brought against Defendants Armstrong, Random House, Broadway
I and Crown.
100. During the Class Period, Defendants have committed acts of untrue and
misleading advertising, as defined in the FAL, CAL. BUS. & PROF. CODE 17500, by
I engaging in acts and practices with intent to induce consumers to purchase EVERY SECOND
COUNTS. The following acts and practices, among others, created a likelihood of confusion
I and misunderstanding in connection with the sale of EVERY SECOND COUNTS.
(a) Defendant Armstrong fraudulently represented his book EVERY
SECOND COUNTS to be a true and honest work of non-fiction at personal appearances, in print
I and on television; and
(b) Defendants Random House, Broadway and Crown represented and
promoted the book EVERY SECOND COUNTS to be to be a true and honest work of non-fiction
on the book's covers and flyleafs, through press kits, promotions, press releases and various
other media channels. These Defendants have continued to advertise, market and sell the
subject book as a work of nonfiction even after they knew or should have known that
Armstrong's book contained false and misleading statements.
101. Plaintiffs and other members of the Class relied on and were deceived by
Defendants' false and deceptive advertisements and practices as set forth above, and as a
direct and proximate result of the aforementioned acts, Defendants received and continue to
hold ill-gotten gains belonging to Plaintiffs and members of the Class.
#6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, PA. Page 48 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 49 of 59
102. In addition to the relief requested in the Prayer for Relief, Plaintiffs seek the
imposition of a constructive trust over, and restitution and disgorgement of, the monies
I collected and profits realized by Defendants, and each of them, as well as injunctive relief,
I including an order requiring them to cease from false and misleading advertising of EVERY
I SECOND COUNTS.
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Negligent Misrepresentation Defendants Armstrong, Penguin Group (USA), Putnam And Berkley)
103. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference all previous paragraphs of this Complaint as
if fully set forth, and further alleges as follows. This cause of action, which asserts a claim
for negligent misrepresentation, is brought against Defendants Armstrong, Penguin Group
(USA), Putnam and Berkley.
104. Defendants recklessly or negligently misrepresented or concealed facts
relating to the fictional nature of IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE
and represented it as a true and honest work of nonfiction.
105. The facts misrepresented or omitted by Defendants were and are material.
106. Plaintiffs and the members of the Class, believing Defendants' representations
that IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE was a true and honest work of
nonfiction, and without means to know otherwise, reasonably relied upon Defendants'
misrepresentations, omissions and other practices, directly or indirectly, and purchased said
book.
#6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. Page 49 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 50 of 59
107. Plaintiffs and the members of the Class have thereby been damaged, the exact amount of which is presently unknown, but is capable of being ascertained.
108. As a result of Defendants' practices as set forth herein, Defendants are liable to Plaintiffs and the members of the Class for compensatory damages, interest and costs.
EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Negligent Misrepresentation Defendants Armstrong, Random House, Broadway And Crown)
109. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference all previous paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set forth, and further alleges as follows. This cause of action, which asserts a claim for negligent misrepresentation, is brought against Defendants Armstrong, Random House,
Broadway and Crown.
110. Defendants recklessly or negligently misrepresented or concealed facts relating to the fictional nature of EVERY SECOND COUNTS and represented it as a true and honest work of nonfiction.
111. The facts misrepresented or omitted by Defendants were and are material.
112. Plaintiffs and the members of the Class, believing Defendants' representations that EVERY SECOND COUNTS was a true and honest work of nonfiction, and without means to know otherwise, reasonably relied upon Defendants' misrepresentations, omissions and other practices, directly or indirectly, and purchased said book.
113. Plaintiffs and the members of the Class have thereby been damaged, the exact amount of which is presently unknown, but is capable of being ascertained.
467161160 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. Page 50 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 51 of 59
114. As a result of Defendants' practices as set forth herein, Defendants are liable
to Plaintiffs and the members of the Class for compensatory damages, interest and costs.
NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Fraud and Deceit Defendants Armstrong, Penguin Group (USA), Putnam And Berkley)
115. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference all previous paragraphs of this Complaint as
if fully set forth, and further alleges as follows. This cause of action, which asserts a claim
for fraud and deceit, is brought against Defendants Armstrong, Penguin Group (USA),
Putnam and Berkley. As set forth herein, this cause of action for fraud and deceit seeks to
recover compensatory damages and punitive damages against Defendant Armstrong only; as
to Defendants Penguin Group (USA), Putnam and Berkley, which Plaintiffs allege to have
aided and abetted Armstrong's fraud and deceit, Plaintiffs seek to recover compensatory
damages only.
116. Defendant Armstrong carried out a fraudulent scheme in which he made
representations that IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE was a true and
honest work of nonfiction including, but not limited to, through the media.
117. When Armstrong made such representations he knew them to be false and
misleading.
118. When Armstrong made these false representations he made them with the
intention to induce consumers, including Plaintiffs and the members of the Class, to act in
reliance on the representations made, or with the expectation that they would so act.
#6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 90 Center Drive Page 51 Woodbridge Woodbridge, NJ 07095
I #6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 52 of 59
119. Plaintiffs and the members of the Class purchased IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE:
MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE based upon Defendant Armstrong's representations it was a true
and honest work of nonfiction. As such, Armstrong's representations were material.
120. Defendant Armstrong had exclusive knowledge of material facts not known to
I the Plaintiffs or the members of the Class.
121. Plaintiffs and the members of the Class were ignorant of the falsity of
Defendant Armstrong's representations and believed them to be true. In reliance of these
representations, Plaintiffs and Class members were induced to and did purchase IT'S NOT
ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE. Had Plaintiffs and the members of the Class
known the actual facts, they would not have purchased the book. Plaintiffs' and Class
members' reliance on Armstrong's representations was justified because Armstrong, aided
and abetted by Defendants Penguin Group (USA), Putnam and Berkley, continued his
fraudulent scheme of misrepresenting the true nature of IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY
JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE throughout the Class Period. As early as January 2011 and certainly
not later than June 2012, Defendants Penguin Group (USA), Putnam and Berkley knew that
Defendant Armstrong was engaged in fraudulent activities and violations of California law,
yet continued to give him substantial assistance or encouragement by continuing to publish,
market, promote and/or sell IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE: MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE.
#6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 90 Center Drive Page 52 Woodbridge Woodbridge, NJ 07095
I #6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 53 of 59
1 122. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' fraudulent conduct, Plaintiffs
2 and the members of the Class have suffered damages and economic loss in an amount to be 3 proven at trial. 4 123. In 5 perpetrating the fraud alleged herein, Defendant Armstrong acted in a
6 willful, wanton and malicious manner, in callous, conscious and intentional disregard for the
7. rights of Plaintiffs and members of the Class, and with knowledge that his actions and 8 conduct were substantially likely to vex, annoy and injure Plaintiffs and the members of the 9
Class. As a 10 result thereof, Plaintiffs and members of the Class are entitled to an award of
11 punitive and exemplary damages against Defendant Armstrong, pursuant to CAL. CIV. CODE
12 3294, in an amount according to proof at trial. 13 TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION 14
15 (Fraud and Deceit Defendants Armstrong, Random House, Broadway And Crown) 16
124. Plaintiffs reference all of this as 17 incorporate by previous paragraphs Complaint
18 if fully set forth, and further alleges as follows. This cause of action, which asserts a claim
19 for fraud and deceit, is brought against Defendants Armstrong, Random House, Broadway 20 and Crown. As set forth herein, this cause of action for fraud and deceit seeks to recover 21
compensatory and Defendant as to 22 damages punitive damages against Armstrong only;
23 Defendants Random House, Broadway and Crown, which Plaintiffs allege to have aided and
24 abetted Defendant Armstrong's fraud and deceit, Plaintiffs seek to recover compensatory 25 damages only. 26 #6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 27 Page 53 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 54 of 59
125. Defendant Armstrong carried out a fraudulent scheme in which he made
I representations that EVERY SECOND COUNTS WAS a true and honest work of nonfiction
I including, but not limited to, through the media.
126. When Armstrong made such representations he knew them to be false and
I misleading.
127. When Armstrong made these false representations he made them with the
I intention to induce consumers, including Plaintiffs and the members of the Class, to act in
I reliance on the representations made, or with the expectation that they would so act.
128. Plaintiffs and the members of the Class purchased EVERY SECOND COUNTS
I based upon Defendant Aimstrong's representations it was a true and honest work of
I nonfiction. As such, Armstrong's representations were material.
129. Defendant Armstrong had exclusive knowledge of material facts not known to
I the Plaintiffs or the members of the Class.
130. Plaintiffs and the members of the Class were ignorant of the falsity of
Defendant Armstrong's representations and believed them to be true. In reliance of these
representations, Plaintiffs and Class members were induced to and did purchase EVERY
SECOND COUNTS. Had Plaintiffs and the members of the Class known the actual facts, they
would not have purchased the book. Plaintiffs' and Class members' reliance on Defendant
Armstrong's representations was justified because Armstrong, aided and abetted by
Defendants Random House, Broadway and Crown, continued his fraudulent scheme of
#6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. Page 54 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 55 of 59
misrepresenting the true nature of EVERY SECOND COUNTS throughout the Class Period. As
early as January 2011 and certainly not later than June 2012, Defendants Random House,
Broadway and Crown knew that Defendant Armstrong was engaged in fraudulent activities
and violations of California law, yet continued to give him substantial assistance or
encouragement by continuing to publish, market, promote and/or sell EVERY SECOND
COUNTS.
131. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' fraudulent conduct, Plaintiffs
I and the members of the Class have suffered damages and economic loss in an amount to be
I proven at trial.
132. In perpetrating the fraud alleged herein, Defendant Armstrong acted in a
willful, wanton and malicious manner, in callous, conscious and intentional disregard for the
rights of Plaintiffs and members of the Class, and with knowledge that his actions and
conduct were substantially likely to vex, annoy and injure Plaintiffs and members of the
Class. As a result thereof, Plaintiffs and members of the Class are entitled to an award of
punitive and exemplary damages against Defendant Armstrong, pursuant to CAL. CIV. CODE
3294, in an amount according to proof at trial.
IX. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
149. WHEREFORE, on behalf of themselves and the members of the Class,
Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendants, and each of them as follows:
#67l6l16v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. Page 55 90 Woodbridge Center Drive Woodbridge, NJ 07095
#6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 56 of 59
A. Ordering that this action be maintained as a class action, certifying the Class,
I and appointing Plaintiffs and their undersigned counsel of record and any additional Class
I representatives necessary to adequately represent the Class;
B. Restoring and awarding Plaintiffs and Class members all ascertainable
I amounts, losses, refunds, including the purchase price paid for IT'S NOT ABOUT THE BIKE:
I MY JOURNEY BACK TO LIFE and EVERY SECOND COUNTS, any statutorily permissible
I damages, attorneys' fees, expenses and costs;
C. Mandating Defendants to disgorge and then restore and/or make restitution of
I any money to Plaintiffs and to the members of the Class which may have been acquired by
I Defendants by means of its unlawful conduct alleged in this Complaint;
D. Enjoining Defendants from engaging in similar unlawful acts or practices in
1 the future.
E. Awarding Plaintiffs and the members of the Class damages in an amount
I necessary to compensate them fully for their losses, together with interest;
F. For an award of attorneys' fees and costs of suit; and
G. For such other and further relief which the Court deems necessary, just and
I proper.
X. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all claims so triable.
#6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, PA. 90 Center Drive Page 56 Woodbridge Woodbridge, NJ 07095
I #6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 57 of 59
DATED: January 22, 2013 WILENTZ, GOLDMAN & SPITZER, P.A.
By /s/ Kevin P. Roddy KEVIN P. RODDY (SBN 128283)
90 Woodbridge Center Drive, Suite 900 Woodbridge, NJ 07095 Telephone: (732) 636-8000 Facsimile: (732) 726-6686 E-mail: [email protected]
TRACEY BUCK-WALSH (SBN 131254) LAW OFFICE OF TRACEY BUCK-WALSH 6 Reyes Court Sacramento, CA 95831 Telephone: (916) 392-8990 Facsimile: (916) 393-1757 E-mail: [email protected]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
#6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive, Equitable and Declaratory Relief Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A. 90 Center Drive Page 57 Woodbridge Woodbridge, NJ 07095
I #6716116.1(144084.002) Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 58 of 59
A FFIDA V1T OF ROB STIJTZMAN
Rob Stutzrnan, hereby declare as follows based upon personal knowledge. If called as a witness, I could and would testify as follows:
am a Plaintiff in this class action.
2, En accordance with Section 1780(d) of the California Consumers Legal
Remedies Act, I commenced this action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
California, located in the County of Sacramento, because the Defendants against whom I
this action do in bring business the County of Sacramento, or the transaction(s) at issue or a substantial of the portion transaction(s) at issue took place in the County of Sacramento, or at
!cast some members of the Class reside in the County of Sacramento.
Executed this the ;2, day of January, 2013.
Af Rob Stut:..-,,ati Case 2:13-cv-00116-MCE-KJN Document 1 Filed 01/22/13 Page 59 of 59
I AFFIDAVIT OF JONATHAN WHEELER
2 L Jonathan Wheeler, hereby declare as follows based upon personal knowledge. If 3 called as a witness, I could and would testify as follows: 4
1. I am a 5 Plaintiff in this class action.
6 2. In accordance with Section 1780(d) of the California Consumers Legal
7 Remedies Act, I commenced this action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of 8 California, located in the County of Sacramento, because the Defendants against whom I 9
do or the at a 10 bring this action business in the County of Sacramento. transaction(s) issue or
I I substantial portion of the transaction(s) at issue took place in the County of Sacramento, or at
12 least some members of the Class reside in the County of Sacramento. 13 Executed this the e- day of January, 2013. 14
15 t 16, 1. Li', Jonathan Wheeler y.,,,,, i
19
20 on
22
23
24
25
26
27 #6716116v1 Class Action Complaint for Damages and Injunctive. Equnable and Declaratory Relief Witentz, Goldman & Spitzer, PA. 90 Woodbridge Center Drive PaIge Woodbridge, NJ 07095 JS 44 (Rev. 12/12) CIVIL COVER SHEET
The JS 44 civil cover sheePAlq giblaTigtggilellUMINkice ad RiAcYdripircidik?or RAW/ 21-euired by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial ConferencePrgrigrattikillgof the nited States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ONNEXTPAGE OF THIS FORM.) I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS Rob Stutzman and Jonathan Wheeler, on behalf of themselves and all others Lance Armstrong, Penguin Group (USA), Inc., G.P. Putnam's Sons, The Berkley similarly situated, Publishing Group, Random House, Inc., Broadway Books, Crown Publishing Group and Does 1-50, inclusive,
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff Sacramento County, CA County of Residence ofFirst Listed Defendant Travis County, TX (EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN us. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY) NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (IKnown) Kevin P. Roddy (SBN 128283), Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A., 90 Unknown at this time Woodbridge Center Drive, Suite 900, Woodbridge, NJ 07095, Telephone: (732) 636-8000
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an "X" in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES alace an "X" in One BoxforPlaintiff (For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant) O 1 U.S. Government 03 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State El 1 0 1 Incorporated or Principal Place 0 4 04 ofBusiness In This State
02 U.S. Government 0 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State 0 2 122 2 Incorporated and Principal Place 0 5 0 5 Defendant (/ndicate Citizenship ofParties in Item III) ofBusiness In Another State
Citizen or Subject of a 03 0 3 Foreign Nation 0 6 06 Foreign Country
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an "X" in One Box Only) EITORTSW ASTO ROM& MTMRI'MC4tU1,T ILF sassi 0 110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY 0625 Drug Related Seizure 0 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 0 375 False Claims Act 0 120 Marine 0 310 Airplane 0 365 Personal Injury of Property 21 USC 881 0 423 Withdrawal 0 400 State Reapportionment O 130 Miller Act 0 315 Airplane Product Product Liability 0 690 Other 28 USC 157 0 410 Antitrust 0 140 Negotiable Instrument Liability 0 367 Health Care/ 0 430 Banks and Banking 0 150 Recovery of Overpayment 0 320 Assault, Libel & Pharmaceutical Y :PROVMVIVJUditIVAIIN El 450 Commerce & Enforcement ofJudgment Slander Personal Injury 0 820 Copyrights 0 460 Deportation 0 151 Medicare Act 0 330 Federal Employers' Product Liability 0 830 Patent 0 470 Racketeer Influenced and El 152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability 0 368 Asbestos Personal 0 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations Student Loans 0 340 Marine Injury Product 0 480 Consumer Credit (Excludes Veterans) 0 345 Marine Product Liability JNSSSSNMNA:lfOTIMRMArllttiMtfSEMttttVSEPJ-A El 490 Cable/Sat TV O 153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY 0710 Fair Labor Standards 0 861 HIA (1395ff) 0 850 Securities/Commodities/ of Veteran's Benefits 0 350 Motor Vehicle 0 370 Other Fraud Act 0 862 Black Lung (923) Exchange 0 160 Stockholders' Suits 0 355 Motor Vehicle 0 371 Truth in Lending 0720 Labor/Management 0 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) 0 890 Other Statutory Actions O 190 Other Contract Product Liability 0 380 Other Personal Relations 0 864 SSID Title XVI 0 891 Agricultural Acts El 195 Contract Product Liability 0 360 Other Personal Property Damage 0740 Railway Labor Act 0 865 RSI (405(g)) 0 893 Environmental Matters 0 196 Franchise Injury 0 385 Property Damage 0751 Family and Medical 0 895 Freedom of Information 0 362 Personal Injury Product Liability Leave Act Act Medical Malpractice 0790 Other Labor Litigation 0 896 Arbitration 899 Administrative Procedure ENISM A,,T. A f w--.4m nth A: Lt= x, '1 %mu p.„., .1 A 7', °A', 0 7',i1 0 791 Employee Retirement KM-FEDERAWAXtSUITSf.,A 0 0 210 Land Condemnation 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: Income Security Act 0 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff Act/Review or Appeal of 0 220 Foreclosure 0 441 Voting 0 463 Alien Detainee or Defendant) Agency Decision 0 230 Rent Lease & Ejectment 0 442 Employment 0 510 Motions to Vacate 0 871 IRS—Third Party 0 950 Constitutionality of O 240 Torts to Land 0 443 Housing/ Sentence 26 USC 7609 State Statutes 0 245 Tort Product Liability Accommodations 0 530 General 0 290 All Other Real Property 0 445 Amer, w/Disabilities 0 535 Death Penalty Jzie-wAuvEVIIGRaloNazoni Employment Other: 0462 Naturalization Application 0 446 Amer. w/Disabilities 0 540 Mandamus & Other 0465 Other Immigration Other 0 550 Civil Rights Actions El 448 Education 0 555 Prison Condition 0 560 Civil Detainee Conditions of Confinement
V. ORIGEN (Place an "X" in One Box Only) O 1 Original 0 2 Removed from 0 3 Remanded from 04 Reinstated or 0 5 Transferred from 0 6 Multidistrict Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened Another District Litigation (specify)
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not citejurisdictional statutes unless diversity): VI. CAUSE OF 28 U.S.C. sec. 1332(d) (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) ACTION Brief description of cause: Consumer protection class action alleging violations of Calif. CLRA, UCL and FAL statutes, negligent misrepresentation and fraud. if in VII. REQUESTED IN 0 CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND N/A CHECK YES only demanded complaint: COMPLAINT: UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P. JURY DEMAND: 0 Yes 0 No VIII. RELATED CASE(S) (See instructions): IF ANY JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER
DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD 01/22/2013 Kevin P. Roddy (SBN 128283) totela FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
RECEIPT AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE