Page 1 SUPREME COURT of the STATE of NEW YORK
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CAUTION: THIS DOCUMENT HAS NOT YET BEEN REVIEWED BY THE COUNTY CLERK. (See below.) INDEX NO. UNASSIGNED NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/04/2021 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ) ) SMARTMATIC USA CORP., SMARTMATIC ) INDEX NO: INTERNATIONAL HOLDING B.V., and SGO ) CORPORATION LIMITED, ) ) SUMMONS Plaintiffs, ) ) -against- ) ) Plaintiffs designate New York FOX CORPORATION, FOX NEWS NETWORK ) County as the place of trial LLC, LOU DOBBS, MARIA BARTIROMO, ) Venue is proper pursuant to CPLR JEANINE PIRRO, RUDOLPH GIULIANI, and ) § 503. SIDNEY POWELL, ) Defendants. ) ) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ) YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED to answer the Complaint in this action and to serve a copy of your answer, or, if the complaint is not served with this summons, to serve a notice of appearance, on the Plaintiffs’ attorneys within 20 days after the service of this summons, exclusive of the day of service (or within 30 days after the service is complete if this summons is not personally delivered to you within the State of New York); and in case of your failure to appear or answer, judgment will be taken against you by default for the relief demanded in the complaint. Dated: February 4, 2021 Respectfully Submitted By, __________________________ Edward C. Wipper Kishner Miller Himes, P.C. 40 Fulton Street, 12th Floor New York, NY 10038 Telephone: (212) 585-3425 Email: [email protected] This is a copy of a pleading filed electronically pursuantPage to New 1 York State court rules (22 NYCRR §202.5-b(d)(3)(i)) which, at the time of its printout from the court system's electronic website, had not yet been reviewed and approved by the County Clerk. Because court rules (22 NYCRR §202.5[d]) authorize the County Clerk to reject filings for various reasons, readers should be aware that documents bearing this legend may not have been accepted for filing by the County Clerk. 1 of 285 CAUTION: THIS DOCUMENT HAS NOT YET BEEN REVIEWED BY THE COUNTY CLERK. (See below.) INDEX NO. UNASSIGNED NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/04/2021 J. Erik Connolly (pro hac vice forthcoming) Nicole E. Wrigley (pro hac vice forthcoming) Benesch, Friedlander, Coplan & Aronoff LLP 71 South Wacker Drive, Suite 1600 Chicago, IL 60606 Telephone: (312) 212-4949 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Attorneys for the Plaintiffs TO: FOX CORPORATION 1211 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York 10036 FOX NEWS NETWORK, LLC 1211 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York 10036 LOU DOBBS 1211 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York 10036 MARIA BARTIROMO 1211 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York 10036 JEANINE PIRRO 1211 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York 10036 This is a copy of a pleading filed electronically pursuantPage to New 2 York State court rules (22 NYCRR §202.5-b(d)(3)(i)) which, at the time of its printout from the court system's electronic website, had not yet been reviewed and approved by the County Clerk. Because court rules (22 NYCRR §202.5[d]) authorize the County Clerk to reject filings for various reasons, readers should be aware that documents bearing this legend may not have been accepted for filing by the County Clerk. 2 of 285 CAUTION: THIS DOCUMENT HAS NOT YET BEEN REVIEWED BY THE COUNTY CLERK. (See below.) INDEX NO. UNASSIGNED NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/04/2021 RUDOLPH GIULIANI SIDNEY POWELL This is a copy of a pleading filed electronically pursuantPage to New 3 York State court rules (22 NYCRR §202.5-b(d)(3)(i)) which, at the time of its printout from the court system's electronic website, had not yet been reviewed and approved by the County Clerk. Because court rules (22 NYCRR §202.5[d]) authorize the County Clerk to reject filings for various reasons, readers should be aware that documents bearing this legend may not have been accepted for filing by the County Clerk. 3 of 285 CAUTION: THIS DOCUMENT HAS NOT YET BEEN REVIEWED BY THE COUNTY CLERK. (See below.) INDEX NO. UNASSIGNED NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/04/2021 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ) ) SMARTMATIC USA CORP., SMARTMATIC ) INTERNATIONAL HOLDING B.V., and SGO ) COMPLAINT CORPORATION LIMITED, ) ) Index No. ______________ Plaintiffs, ) ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED -against- ) ) FOX CORPORATION, FOX NEWS NETWORK ) LLC, LOU DOBBS, MARIA BARTIROMO, ) JEANINE PIRRO, RUDOLPH GIULIANI, and ) SIDNEY POWELL, ) Defendants. ) ) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - This is a copy of a pleading filed electronically pursuant to New York State court rules (22 NYCRR §202.5-b(d)(3)(i)) which, at the time of its printout from the court system's electronic website, had not yet been reviewed and approved by the County Clerk. Because court rules (22 NYCRR §202.5[d]) authorize the County Clerk to reject filings for various reasons, readers should be aware that documents bearing this legend may not have been accepted for filing by the County Clerk. 4 of 285 CAUTION: THIS DOCUMENT HAS NOT YET BEEN REVIEWED BY THE COUNTY CLERK. (See below.) INDEX NO. UNASSIGNED NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/04/2021 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1 PARTIES ........................................................................................................................................ 4 JURISDICTION & VENUE ........................................................................................................... 9 FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS ....................................................................................................... 12 I. Smartmatic’s Role as an Election Technology Company ..................................................... 13 A. Smartmatic grew from a small start-up into a successful multi-billion-dollar enterprise. ....................................................................................................................... 14 B. Smartmatic’s success was built on its reputation for secure, reliable, and auditable election technology and software. .................................................................................. 18 C. Smartmatic had a relatively small, non-controversial role in the 2020 U.S. election. ... 19 1. Los Angeles County introduced a new Voting Solutions for All People initiative for the 2020 U.S. election. ............................................................................................... 19 2. Los Angeles County selected Smartmatic to contribute election technology and software to the Voting Solutions for All People initiative. ....................................... 22 3. Smartmatic’s involvement with Los Angeles County was a success. ....................... 23 D. Smartmatic quietly celebrated its success in Los Angeles without knowing what was coming from Defendants. ............................................................................................... 25 II. Defendants’ Disinformation Campaign Against Smartmatic ................................................ 27 A. Mr. Giuliani and Ms. Powell created a story about Smartmatic. ................................... 30 B. Fox Defendants joined the conspiracy to defame and disparage Smartmatic and its election technology and software. .................................................................................. 32 C. Defendants engaged in a widespread disinformation campaign against Smartmatic and its election technology and software. ............................................................................. 34 D. Defendants used multiple platforms to spread disinformation ....................................... 57 E. Defendants presented their statements about Smartmatic as facts, not opinions ........... 67 III. Defendants’ False Statements and Implications About Smartmatic ...................................... 78 i This is a copy of a pleading filed electronically pursuant to New York State court rules (22 NYCRR §202.5-b(d)(3)(i)) which, at the time of its printout from the court system's electronic website, had not yet been reviewed and approved by the County Clerk. Because court rules (22 NYCRR §202.5[d]) authorize the County Clerk to reject filings for various reasons, readers should be aware that documents bearing this legend may not have been accepted for filing by the County Clerk. 5 of 285 CAUTION: THIS DOCUMENT HAS NOT YET BEEN REVIEWED BY THE COUNTY CLERK. (See below.) INDEX NO. UNASSIGNED NYSCEF DOC. NO. 1 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/04/2021 A. Defendants falsely stated and implied that Smartmatic’s election technology and software were widely used in the 2020 U.S. election ..................................................... 79 B. Defendants falsely stated and implied that Dominion used Smartmatic’s election technology and software during the 2020 U.S. election ................................................. 84 C. Defendants falsely stated and implied that Smartmatic fixed, rigged, and stole the 2020 U.S. election for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. ............................................................. 92 D. Defendants falsely stated and implied that Smartmatic sent votes to foreign countries for tabulation during the 2020 U.S. election. ..............................................................