Conspiratorial Actions to Defame and Harass Don Juravin

From a Florida Bar Complaint Filed by Don Juravin Against Marc Randazza

In violation of Rule Florida Bar Rule 4- 4.4, Mr. Randazza has taken deliberate actions to conspire against Don Juravin by enlisting the help of Solomon and Cynthia Koroll to persecute Mr. Juravin. He has committed his resources to advertise against Don Juravin. He has rallied the media and FTC in desperate attempt to cast fast light on Mr. Juravin and his companies [Exhibit C, D]. He has taken personal interest in attending all proceedings against Mr. Juravin and his companies.

On several occasions, Mr. Randazza, conspired with his friends in the online media and caused select webzines/online media sites to encourage the publishing of disparaging articles regarding Roca Labs and Don Juravin. He has also used Tracy Coenen, an accountant and colleague, to publish an article entitled “Roca Labs Weight Loss Scam” to embarrass and humiliate Mr. Juravin. Furthermore, Mr. Randazza stalks and balks at Mr. Juravin’s activities on the internet and makes a mockery thereof. [Exhibit E] Mr. Juravin has suffered irreparable damage to his reputation on account of Mr. Randazza’s repeated efforts to harass and defame his good name and reputation.

The act of filing a fraudulent claim in the personal bankruptcy proceeding of Mr. Juravin was a deliberate act taken to harass him. Harass means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person which causes substantial emotional distress to that person and serves no legitimate purpose (Florida State Statute 784.048). This is evidenced by the following facts : (1) There was no good faith basis for filing the proof of claim; (2) the claim was filed in Mr. Juravin’s personal bankruptcy proceeding and not that of Roca Labs, the entity who was partied to the lawsuit; (3) Mr. Randazza signed the claim personally instead of his client to indicate bis eagerness personal vendetta against Mr. Juravin.

All of the aforementioned misconduct encompasses numerous instances pertaining to both defamation and harassment-related violations in violations of ethical ruled 4-4.4 and 4-8.4 (d). The State Bar of Florida has been very decisive and swift in its disposition of cases where sanctions were imposed for rule violations solely related to conduct limited to discovery-related ethical violations and Mr. Juravin believes that Mr. Randazza’s actions warrants an inquisition as to his improper motives and bias as it relates to Mr. Juravin.

Marc Randazza Grievous and Repeated Violations of Florida Bar Ethical Rules and Nevada State Bar Probation Violations

Don Juravin files this Complaint against Marc Randazza based upon egregious misconduct under the ethical rules and personal persecution of Don Juravin under the guise of the law. His improper actions were not authorized or sanctioned by the law and are in direct violation of the Florida Bar Ethical Rules. “The commission by a lawyer of any act that is unlawful or contrary to honesty and justice, whether the act is committed in the course of the attorney's relations as an attorney or otherwise may constitute cause for discipline.” (Florida Bar Rule 3-4.3)

Applicable Florida Bar Rules

4–3.3(a) (“A lawyer shall not knowingly: (1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal; (2) fail to disclose a material fact to a tribunal when disclosure is necessary to avoid assisting a criminal or fraudulent act by the client; (3) fail to disclose to the tribunal legal authority in the controlling jurisdiction known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel; or (4) permit any witness, including a criminal defendant, to offer testimony or other evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. A lawyer may not offer testimony that the lawyer knows to be false in the form of a narrative unless so ordered by the tribunal. If a lawyer has offered material evidence and thereafter comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures.”).

4 4–3.4(a) (a lawyer shall not unlawfully obstruct another party's access to evidence);

4–3.4(b) (a lawyer shall not fabricate evidence); 4–3.4(c) (a lawyer shall not knowingly disobey an obligation under the rules of a tribunal); 4–3.4(d) (a lawyer shall not make a frivolous discovery request or intentionally fail to comply with a legally proper discovery request);

4–8.4(c) (a lawyer shall not engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation); and 4–8.4(d) (a lawyer shall not engage in conduct in connection with the practice of law that is prejudicial to the administration of justice).

4-4.4 (a) In representing a client, a lawyer may not use means that have no substantial purpose other than to embarrass, delay, or burden a third person or knowingly use methods of obtaining evidence that violate the legal rights of such a person.

Rule 4-8.4 (a-b) A Lawyer shall not: (a) violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another; (b) commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness, or fitness as a lawyer in other respects.

Rule 4-8.4(d) A lawyer shall not. engage in conduct in connection with the practice of law that is prejudicial to the administration of justice, including to knowingly, or through callous indifference, disparage, humiliate, or discriminate against litigants, jurors, witnesses, court personnel, or other lawyers on any basis, including, but not limited to, on account of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, national origin, disability, marital status, sexual orientation, age, socioeconomic status, employment, or physical characteristic.

Rule 4-1.5 An attorney shall not enter into an agreement for, charge, or collect an illegal, prohibited, or clearly excessive fee or cost, or a fee generated by employment that was obtained through advertising or solicitation not in compliance with the Rules Regulating The Florida Bar. A fee or cost is clearly excessive when: (1) after a review of the facts, a lawyer of ordinary prudence would be left with a definite and firm conviction that the fee or the cost exceeds a reasonable fee or cost for services provided to such a degree as to constitute clear overreaching or an unconscionable demand by the attorney; or (2) the fee or cost is sought or secured by the attorney by means of intentional misrepresentation or fraud upon the client.

Rule 4-3.1(A lawyer shall not bring or defend a proceeding, or assert or controvert an issue therein, unless there is a basis in law and fact for doing so that is not frivolous, which includes a good faith argument for an extension, modification, or reversal of existing law.