IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE THIRTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

IN AND FOR HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA

CIVIL DIVISION

WILLIAM J. BREWER &

ABEER BREWER,
Plaintiffs, CASE NO: 09-CA-026383
vs. DIVISION: C
DAVID GRIFFIN, SELINA GRIFFIN,
WORLD OF PHONES, INC, BAY2BAY AREA HOLDINGS, INC;
and PAT FRANK as CLERK OF THE COURT,
and LARAE PERTUIS as
DEPUTY CLERK OF THE COURT;
and Robert Cato III and MRC Solutions LLC,
Defendants.
_____________________________________/

AMENDED COMPLAINT

Plaintiffs WILLIAM J. BREWER and ABEER BREWER, husband and wife, through

himself in pro per files this Amended Complaint against Defendants DAVID GRIFFIN & SELINA

GRIFFIN; WORLD OF PHONES, INC. BAY2BAY AREA HOLDINGS, INC.; and PAT FRANK,

AS CLERK OF THE COURT, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA, and Deputy Clerk of

Court LARAE PERTUIS; and Robert Cato III and MRC Solutions LLC, and alleges:

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

1. This action is for Declaratory Judgment supplementary relief; this Court has

jurisdiction pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 86.011, which grants the Court jurisdiction to declare rights,

status, and other equitable or legal relations, and the power to construe under § 86.021 1 where

Plaintiffs are in doubt about their rights under a deed, will, contract, including declaring certain

documents counterfeit, incomplete, forged, and therefore void ab initio and to remove any

1
86.021 Power to construe -- Any person claiming to be interested or who may be in
doubt about his or her rights under a deed, will, contract, or other article, memorandum, or
instrument in writing or whose rights, status, or other equitable or legal relations are
affected by a statute, or any regulation made under statutory authority, or by municipal
ordinance, contract, deed, will, franchise, or other article, memorandum, or instrument in
writing may have determined any question of construction or validity arising under such
statute, regulation, municipal ordinance, contract, deed, will, franchise, or other article,
memorandum, or instrument in writing, or any part thereof, and obtain a declaration of
rights, status, or other equitable or legal relations there under.

Amended Complaint
Page 1 of 30
clouds such documents may have cause to the title to real property; for Breach of Contract and

Eviction/Removal of holdover tenant and Past Due Rents and damages to personal property;

Ejectment; Fraud in the Inducement; Fraud in Performance; Fraudulent Misrepresentation;

Slander of Title; Quiet Title; Conversion; Civil Theft; Unjust Enrichment; Rescission; Damages;

Punitive Damages; Identity Theft, exceeding $15,000, and costs and accumulated attorney fees,

Exhibit A.

2. At the time of filing and at all times material to this action, all parties were

residents, a business, or a governmental entity operating in HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY,

FLORIDA.

3. At all times material to this action, Plaintiffs WILLIAM AND ABEER BREWER

owned as tenancies by the entireties their homestead property (hereafter referred to as

(“Property”), located at 5835 MARINER ST., TAMPA, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA

33609; and also known by the Hillsborough County Property Appraiser as PARCEL ID

NUMBER 112610.0000, and more particularly described as:

LOT 23, MARINER ESTATES SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE

MAP OF PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 38, PAGE 61,
OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA.

4. At all times material to this complaint, Plaintiffs WILLIAM and ABEER BREWER

were married (Marriage Date: May 18, 1996) and living as husband and wife.

5. At all times material to this complaint, Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER was head of

household responsible for supporting Plaintiff ABEER BREWER and the Parties’ two minor

children.

6. At all times material to this complaint, Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER was employed

as an engineer for the U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS (“USACE”), a Federal/Department

of Defense Agency, including working several classified projects overseas and/or in the United

States.

Amended Complaint
Page 2 of 30
 7. At all times material to this complaint, Plaintiff ABEER BREWER was temporarily

outside the United States tending to her ill mother.

8. At all times material to this complaint, Plaintiffs had the continuous and consistent

intent to maintain the Property as their protected homestead, including listing the Property as

their home address on their federal (IRS) income tax returns; in addition, Plaintiffs kept their

personal property at the Property, used the Property as their residential homestead (Exhibit B1),

and listed the Property as their home address on Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER’S driver license,

car registration, and voter registration.

9. At all times material to this complaint, Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN

knew Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER was married to Plaintiff ABEER BREWER and the Property

was Plaintiffs’ homestead, Exhibit B2.

10. At all times material to this cause of action, after taking possession based on a

lease option contract, specifically beginning around June 6, 2009 and continuing through the

date of filing of this Amended Complaint, Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN have had

temporary exclusive residential use, possession, and occupancy of the Plaintiffs’

aforementioned Property.

11. At all times material to this complaint, Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN

paid no security deposit for leasing Plaintiffs’ home; and paid no consideration for the alleged

option to purchase the aforementioned Property, and never exercised an alleged option to

purchase Plaintiffs’ Property, which option existed, if it existed at all, during January 15, 2010

through March 15, 2010.

12. At all times material to this complaint, Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER has had

continuous and uninterrupted possession of all “original” versions of all documents Defendants

DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN unilaterally caused (copies) to be recorded on the public record, and

with respect to such recordation, Plaintiffs had no knowledge of, and did not assent to,

Amended Complaint
Page 3 of 30
Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN recordation of any documents related to Plaintiffs’

Property.

FACTS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS

13. On or around June 9, 2003, Plaintiffs acquired the Property, homesteaded under

Florida Constitution Article X § 4; the transaction was recorded on the public record in BOOK

12762, PAGE 1476 (See Exhibit B3).

14. On June 24, 2003, the Warranty Deed conveying the Property to Plaintiffs was

recorded.

15. Thereafter, having established the Property as their homestead under Florida

Constitution’s Article X § 4, Article VII § 6, pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 196.031.

16. The Plaintiffs obtained a Mortgage in May 2003 and a Security Instrument for the

Property was recorded.

17. Sometime during late 2007 and early 2008, Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER was

working at an overseas assignment and Plaintiff ABEER BREWER was overseas tending to her

ailing mother, Plaintiffs’ insurance company notified them that the insurance would be canceled

if Plaintiffs left the Property temporarily unoccupied while Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER’S worked

overseas and Plaintiff ABEER BREWER was away tending to her ailing mother.

18. To comply with the insurance company’s requirement that the Property must be

occupied, Plaintiffs rented the Property until they could return to live at the Property, causing

them to lose their ad valorem homestead tax exemption for 2008; Plaintiffs still considered the

Property their homestead under the Florida Constitution’s Article X § 4.

19. In September 2008, after their renter moved out, Plaintiffs recorded a Declaration

of Domicile in their quest to reestablish their ad valorem tax exemption for their Property, and

Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER returned to live at the Property after completing his assignment

Amended Complaint
Page 4 of 30
overseas. Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER lived at the Property until approximately the first week in

June of 2009, thus qualifying for the 2009 ad valorem homestead tax exemption.

20. In May of 2009, Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER met Defendants DAVID & SELINA

GRIFFIN while patronizing Defendant WORLD OF PHONES INC., at which time Defendants

DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN informed Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER that they were the owners of

WORLD OF PHONES INC., and that business was currently very profitable.

21. In subsequent phone and face-to-face conversations between the Parties during

May 2009, Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN continued telling Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER

that Defendant WORLD OF PHONES INC. was very successful and highly profitable;

Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN further promised Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER that he

could also make substantial profits if he became partners with them in their business, and

promised that he would make so much money the could quit his engineering position with the

USACE.

22. Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER reasonably relied on Defendants DAVID & SELINA

GRIFFIN’S material representations regarding the financial condition and success of

Defendants’ cell phone business (See Exhibit C1), and in reliance on their representations and

promises, on May 26, 2009, Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER gave Defendants a $7,500 check

written out to Defendant WORLD OF PHONES, INC., which Defendants cashed on May 28,

2009 (See Exhibit C2).

23. Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER told Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN he

would be leaving for an assignment in California and was looking for a temporary tenant to

comply with the insurance requirements that the Property be occupied; Defendants DAVID &

SELINA GRIFFIN made various representations that they would pay the mortgage amount, the

property insurance and taxes, and utilities, to persuade Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER to allow

them to move into the Property; Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN indicated they wanted

Amended Complaint
Page 5 of 30
to buy the Property and drafted a land trust (9 pages), a lease-option contract (5 pages), a

warranty deed (2-pages), and a resignation of trustee document (1 page). (See Exhibit D for

copies of the originals).

24. Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER was unsure of these proposals and told Defendants

DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN that he could not make any commitments unless his wife Plaintiff

ABEER BREWER agreed and signed the corresponding documents; thereafter Plaintiff ABEER

BREWER refused to sign any of the documents (See Exhibit E).

25. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN knew the Property was Plaintiffs

WILLIAM & ABEER BREWER’S homestead requiring their mutual consent; Defendants DAVID

& SELINA GRIFFIN drafted various documents specifically referencing Plaintiff WILLIAM

BREWER “joined by his wife” Plaintiff ABEER BREWER, and containing coinciding signature

blocks for both Plaintiffs WILLIAM & ABEER BREWER’S signatures (See Exhibit B emails &

Warranty Deed, Exhibit D).

26. Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER remained living at the Property until Defendants

DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN moved in on June 5, 2009, after promising to pay $2350 monthly

rent plus taxes, insurance, and utilities, beginning on June 6, 2009, and thereafter paying on the

first day of each month for seven (7) months; Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER temporarily relocated

for a work assignment in California and Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN moved into the

Property but failed to pay the first month’s rent and other expenses on June 6, 2009 as

promised and subsequent months they failed to pay any rent or expenses amounting to

$77,649.71 thorough November 2010 (See Exhibit F).

27. On or around June 12, 2009, a week and a half after Defendants cashed

Plaintiff’s $7500 check, Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER notified Defendants DAVID & SELINA

GRIFFIN that all the proposed dealings between the parties were canceled because Defendants

already breached the lease agreement by failing to pay rent and expenses on June 6 as

Amended Complaint
Page 6 of 30
promised, and that the only existing contractual relationship they had was the lease with option

to buy the Property (See Exhibit G); Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER became suspicious of

Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN’S claims about their alleged business success, and

again canceled the business deal and asked Defendants to return his $7,500; Defendants

DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN ignored Plaintiff’s demands, did not pay rent, and did not return

Plaintiffs’ $7,500.

28. On June 15, 2009, unbeknownst to Plaintiffs and in violation of the parties’

agreement that none of the documents would be recorded until Plaintiff ABEER BREWER

agreed to the transaction, signed the documents, and Defendants exercised the option to

purchase the Property; and, notwithstanding Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER’S June 12-15, 2009

emails (See Exhibit G) and phone calls articulating that the deal was off because Defendants

DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN had already breached the agreement by failing to make the first rent

payment as promised, Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN unilaterally proceeded to record

in Hillsborough County public records certain documents relating to the Property, including a

purposely altered partial copy of the Warranty Deed whereby Defendants DAVID & SELINA

GRIFFIN recorded a copy of the first page of the two-page document –purposely omitting the

second page because it contained unsigned signature block for Plaintiff ABEER BREWER, who

refused to sign the original Warranty Deed

(See Exhibit E). The first paragraph of the Warranty Deed, drafted by Defendants DAVID &

SELINA GRIFFIN, is confusing insofar as deciphering the intended grantor and grantee; the first

paragraph reads in its entirety:

THIS INDENTURE, made this 20th day of May, 2009, between William
J. Brewer joined by his spouse Abeer Brewer, of the County of
Hillsborough, State of Florida, whose address is 5835 Mariner Street;
Tampa, FL 33609, grantor to William J. Brewer, as Trustee of the
Mariner Street Family Trust #5835 dated May 20th, 2009 whose
address is 5835 Mariner Street; Tampa, FL 33609 to Grantee.

(See Exhibit D).

Amended Complaint
Page 7 of 30
 29. Moreover, the documents Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN recorded were

photocopies rather than originals. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN unilaterally and

purposely altered the Warranty Deed and Resignation of Trustee by recording page one of the

two-page Warranty Deed (See Exhibit H1), a cut and paste of the Resignation of Trustee,

Exhibit H2 (the original has no witness signature blocks, Exhibit D) and the Clerk failed to

inspect the Warranty Deed, which was facially flawed because it failed to comply with the Clerk’s

own requirements, lacking the following requirements posted on the Clerk’s website:

2. The name and address of each person signing an instrument

affecting real property

3. The name and address of each person receiving property on

all documents conveying an interest in real property

5. The signed and typed names are in agreement

9. Name and address of the natural person who prepared the

instrument or under whose supervision it was prepared (See
Exhibit B – Plaintiff’s General Warranty Deed dated 9 Jun 2003).

11. Name of each person who executed, witnessed and

acknowledged documents affecting real property shall be legibly
printed, typewritten or stamped on each document

13. Florida Statue requires two witnesses on deeds.

(See Exhibit I Clerk’s Website)

30. On June 26, 2009, Plaintiffs retained an attorney to evict Defendants, and the

attorney posted a 3-day eviction notice on the Property (See Exhibit J); on July 2, 2009,

Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN finally paid the June, 2009 rent -almost a month late -

but did not pay the taxes, insurance, utility expenses, etc.

31. Again on July 1, 2009, Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN failed to pay rent

and, again, on July 14, 2009, Plaintiffs’ attorney posted a 3-day eviction notice on the Property

(See Exhibit J ) and a demand letter for the return of the $7,500; on July 23, 2009, Defendants

Amended Complaint
Page 8 of 30
DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN paid July, 2009 rent but did not pay the taxes, insurance, or utility

expenses.

32. Again on August 1, 2009, Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN failed to pay

rent and, again, on August 6, 2009, Plaintiffs’ attorney posted a 3-day eviction notice on the

Property (See Exhibit J); on August 6, 2009, Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN paid

August 2009 rent, but did not pay the taxes, insurance, or utility expenses.

33. Again on September 1, 2009, Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN failed to

pay rent and, again, on September 13, 2009, Plaintiffs’ attorney posted a 3-day eviction notice

on the Property (See Exhibit J), and yet another demand letter for the return of the $7,500; on

September 29, 2009, Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN made a partial payment of

September 2009 rent, but did not pay the taxes, insurance, or utility expenses, and have paid

nothing since then.

34. On October 16, 2009, Plaintiffs served Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN

with a lawsuit for eviction, past due rents, fraud, and breach of contract and, on October 27,

2009, Defendants were served with Plaintiffs’ Motion for Default.

35. On November 4, 2009, again unbeknownst to Plaintiffs and apparently in an

attempt to change the Property’s ownership from Plaintiffs’ name into Defendant’s name,

Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN caused to be recorded a counterfeit document bearing

the forged signature of Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER, and also the first page of the two-page

Warranty Deed previously recorded on June 15, 2009, Plaintiff ABEER BREWER’S signature

block was contained on page two (2), which page Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN

omitted from recordation.

36. Page one (1) of the two-page Warranty Deed is also attached and labeled as

EXHIBIT H1 to the document titled “AGREEMENT AND DECLARATION OF TRUST” (See

Amended Complaint
Page 9 of 30
Exhibit H3) which Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN drafted and recorded.

The first paragraph of TRUST reads as follows:

THIS AGREEMENT AND DECLARATION OF TRUST is made and entered

into this May 20, 2009 by and between William J. Brewer and Abeer
Brewer whether one or more, which designation shall include all
successors in interest of any beneficiary), William J. Brewer as TRUSTEE
and not personally of the Mariner Street Family Trust #5835 dated May
20th, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as the “Trustee”, which designation shall
all successor trustees). [sic] IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
37. Although the AGREEMENT AND DECLARATION OF TRUST is “made and

entered … by and between William J. Brewer and Abeer Brewer,” there is no signature line,

space, or block for Plaintiff ABEER BREWER’S signature in the document Defendants DAVID &

SELINA GRIFFIN recorded.

38. Paragraph 3 of the AGREEMENT AND DECLARATION OF TRUST states in full:

“3. Beneficiaries. The persons named in the attached “Exhibit “B” are
the Beneficiaries of this Trust, and as such, shall be entitled to all
earnings, avails and proceeds of the Trust Property according to their
interests set opposite their respective names.”

39. However, the label “Exhibit B” is hand written at top center of the falsified

Warranty Deed – [and is stamped as Bk 19550 Pg 812 (issue date November 4, 2009) and as

Bk 19307 Pgs 1224 – 1233 (issue date June 15, 2009) by the Clerk of the Court] - is attached to

the AGREEMENT AND DECLARATION OF TRUST is page one (1) of the two-page Warranty

Deed made “between William J. Brewer joined by his spouse Abeer Brewer … Grantor to

William J. Brewer, as Trustee of the Mariner Street Family Trust …” Thus, the Agreement and

Declaration of Trust contains no statement identifying any beneficiaries or any specific

beneficiary interest (See Exhibit H3).

40. Moreover, the Parties agreed, and the AGREEMENT AND DECLARATION OF

TRUST by its own terms, was not supposed to be recorded; Paragraph 14 states in its entirety

as follows:

Recording of Agreement. This Agreement shall not be placed on record

in the county in which the Trust Property is situated, or elsewhere, but if it

Amended Complaint
Page 10 of 30
 is so recorded, that recording shall not be considered as notice of the
rights of any person under this Agreement derogatory to the title or
powers of the Trustee.
See Exhibit H3.

41. The AGREEMENT AND DECLARATION OF TRUST has yet more facial defects

of missing sentences and paragraphs. For example, Paragraph 5 has parts of it deleted, going

from 5 a to 5 (8) on the next page, and the Paragraph 5 (9) ends that particular paragraph, with

5 a (1) through (7) missing. Similarly, Paragraphs 5, 7, 11, 15 are missing entirely, the document

skipping from Paragraph 14 to 17.

42. On November 4, 2009, just weeks after Defendants were served with Plaintiffs’

eviction complaint on September 13, 2009, Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN caused to

be recorded in the public records of Hillsborough County a counterfeit document they created

titled “Resignation of Trustee.” The document purports to be Plaintiff’s resignation as the Trustee

of the MARINER STREET FAMILY TRUST #5835, but it bears a forged signature in Plaintiff’

WILLIAM BREWER’S signature block. (See Exhibit H2 versus Exhibit D copy of the original).

43. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN manufactured this counterfeit

Resignation of Trustee by duplicating Plaintiff’s signature block and a notary block from another

document and applying them to the Resignation of Trustee document. Even though it was not

the original version of the Resignation of Trustee document as required by Fla. Statute, Plaintiffs

then recorded the forged Resignation of Trustee by inserting it as an exhibit into another

document titled AGREEMENT AND DECLARATION OF TRUST (See above para. No 39).

44. Having recorded the counterfeit Resignation of Trustee document and self-

appointing Defendant DAVID GRIFFIN as successor Trustee, Defendants DAVID & SELINA

GRIFFIN next submitted the counterfeit Resignation of Trustee to the Hillsborough County

Property Appraiser as the basis to transfer title to the Property out of Plaintiffs’ name and into

the MARINER STREET FAMILY TRUST #5835 with David Griffin as Trustee.

Amended Complaint
Page 11 of 30
 45. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN also began contacting Plaintiffs’

mortgage company and impersonating Plaintiffs under their names and under MRC Solutions

and under Bay-to-Bay Holdings (all with the same address as the Griffin’s cell phone store, 3434

W. Columbus Ave., Ste 201, Tampa), using Plaintiffs’ social security number, changing Plaintiffs’

mailing address to Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN’S address, and began negotiations

for a short sale of the Property with the mortgage company, all without Plaintiffs’ knowledge or

permission (See Exhibit K). Moreover, Defendants’ David and Selina Griffin and Robert Cato III

and MRC Solutions have no mortgage modification business permit from the State of Florida (as

required by law beginning January 1, 2009).

46. Upon recording the counterfeit forged document and other documents,

Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN then caused the Hillsborough County Property

Appraiser records to reflect that Defendant DAVID GRIFFIN Trustee, was the Property owner.

In other words, the effect of this fraudulent recordation was that Defendants DAVID & SELINA

GRIFFIN literally stole Plaintiffs’ Property from them while all the prior years shows the property

owner as William J Brewer (See Exhibit L).

47. With the house now in his name, Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN next

forged Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER’S name on a listing agreement and other documents, and

thorough various companies namely: a) Bay2Bay Area Holdings LLC (David Griffin is

owner/principal), b) MRC Solutions (Robert Cato II and David Griffin are owners/principals), c)

Tailwind Funding LLC, and d) Mark-It Realty (See Exhibit M) and placed the house on the

market for sale; forged letters from the Plaintiff in an attempt at selling the property to Bay-to-

Bay Holdings, attempting to sell the property for $200,000 thorough a short sale, forged

hardship letters to the loan company Aurora Loan Services, used Plaintiffs’ social security

number/tax returns to fake a closing and obtain loans, even though the only interest Defendants

DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN had was a lease for a term of seven (7) months beginning June 1,

Amended Complaint
Page 12 of 30
2009 through December 31, 2009. With the lease expiring at least eleven (11) months ago,

Defendants refuse to vacate the premises and, since September 29, 2009, have failed to pay

the monthly lease payments, taxes, insurance, utility expenses, or tender any monies at all.

Defendant David Griffin is a principal/owner at Bay2Bay Area Holdings Group LLC, World of

Phones Inc. (David Griffin is owner/principal), and for MRC Solutions (See Exhibit M).

48. As a result of Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN successful attempts to

create and record copies rather than originals of the aforementioned counterfeit, forged,

incomplete, defective documents, and Defendant Clerk of Court’s failure to properly screen

those documents for compliance with Florida Statutes and the Clerk’s own posted recordation

requirements, Plaintiffs have suffered damages, their Property’s title has been slandered, and as

a result the property is being foreclosed (See Exhibit N).

49. Plaintiffs have performed all conditions and terms precedent to be performed by

the Plaintiffs, or the conditions and terms have already occurred.

COUNT I: BREACH OF CONTRACT

RESIDENTIAL EVICTION – HOLDOVER TENANT – PAST DUE RENTS – DAMAGES

50. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 49 as if fully set forth

herein.

51. This is an action for tenant eviction and removal from real property located in

HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, Florida.

52. Plaintiffs own the RESIDENTIAL real property and single family house located at

5835 MARINER ST., TAMPA FL 33609.

53. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN have possession of the Property under a

written agreement requiring Defendants to pay Plaintiff rent of $2350, plus the total amount of

the Property’s insurance and taxes, payable on the first day of every month, for seven (7)

Amended Complaint
Page 13 of 30
months beginning June 1, 2009 and expiring seven months later on December 31, 2009. See

Exhibit D.

54. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN failed to pay the rent due on September

1, 2009, October 1, 2009, November, 2009, December, 2009, January, 2010, February 2010,

March, 2010, April, 2010, May 2010, June 2010, July 2010, August 2010, September 2010,

October 2010, and November 2010; and further failed to pay flood insurance, hazard insurance,

property taxes, and utilities pursuant to the Agreement and Addendum set forth in Exhibit D,

thus breaching the Parties’ contract causing foreclosure filing (See Exhibit N) and causing year

2009 tax lien certificate sale on the property (See Exhibit O).

55. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN created a document attached to the

lease option contract (“Addendum”) giving them an alleged option to purchase the Property,

which sale “shall be commenced between January 15 and March 15, 2010.” See Exhibit D

Plaintiff ABEER BREWER did not agree to this option and did not sign this contract.

56. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN did not exercise the alleged option, and it

is expired as of March 15, 2010.

57. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN now occupy the Property as holdover

tenants; therefore, Plaintiffs are entitled to rent payments in the amount of double, or $4,700, for

the months of Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN holdover tenancy of January 2010

through the time they vacate the Property.

58. As of the date of the filing of this Amended Complaint, Defendants DAVID &

SELINA GRIFFIN owe Plaintiffs $83,348 which does not include interest & penalties on the tax

certificate lien (See Exhibit F).

59. Plaintiffs have performed all conditions and terms precedent to be performed by

the Plaintiffs, or the conditions and terms have already occurred.

Amended Complaint
Page 14 of 30
 60. The Property at issue does not involve a mobile home and/or is not in a mobile

home park.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand immediate possession of their Property and judgment

against Defendant for past due rents, flood insurance, property taxes and penalties, hazard

insurance, utilities, including double rent for the period of time Defendants DAVID & SELINA

GRIFFIN have been holdover tenants; and for all rents accruing and interest thereon since this

action was filed; for any damages to the Property or to Plaintiffs’ personal property situated

therein; and for an award of all costs and attorneys fees Plaintiffs incurred in bringing this suit,

and any other damages or remedy the Court finds appropriate.

COUNT II. DECLARATORY JUDGMENT

61. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 49 as if fully set forth
herein.

62. This is an action for Declaratory Judgment pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 86.011

wherein Plaintiffs are unsure of their various rights under contract or law, and require the Court’s

declaratory judgment on the issues hereafter.

63. On October 16, 2009, Plaintiff filed suit against Defendants DAVID & SELINA

GRIFFIN for, among other things, tenant eviction and past due rents from a residential lease

option to buy See Exhibit D and “Addendum to Lease Option Contract” containing the “General

and Specific Conditions Addendum”.

64. Under the terms of the Addendum in Exhibit D, Defendants DAVID & SELINA

GRIFFIN have a mandatory duty that they “shall pay [Plaintiffs] $2350.00 per month to occupy

the Trust Property.”

65 Under the terms of the Addendum in Exhibit D, Defendants DAVID & SELINA

GRIFFIN “had the option to buy Plaintiffs’ Property at 5835 MARINER STREET, TAMPA, FL,

33609 (hereafter referred to as the “Property”), upon Defendants’ DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN

“payment of $20,000.00 to Trustee (Plaintiff) and any fee’s (sic) associated with the transfer of

Amended Complaint
Page 15 of 30
the property,” and that Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN exercise of that option “shall be

commenced between January 15th and March 15, 2010.”

66. As of the filing of this Amended Complaint in December 2010, Defendants DAVID

& SELINA GRIFFIN have never exercised their alleged option to buy the Property, and now the

alleged option is expired; Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN no longer have an alleged

option to purchase the Property where the alleged option expired by its own self-executing terms

when Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN failed to tender the requisite $20,000 “between

January 15th and March 15, 2010.” See Exhibit D.

67. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN have lived in Plaintiffs’ residence since

June 2009 and, since the time of Plaintiffs’ filing of the tenant eviction on October 16, 2010,

Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN have continued to occupy the Property but have paid no

rent or monies of any kind to Plaintiff, as the Addendum mandates (See Exhibit D, ¶4), nor have

Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN deposited any monies into the Court’s Registry, or

anywhere else.

68. As such, Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN have paid no consideration for

the right to exercise the option to buy the Property, and no consideration for their occupancy and

use of the Property for the past eighteen (18) months, including the months October, November,

and December of 2009, and January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August,

September, October, November, and December of 2010.

69. Plaintiffs have performed all conditions and terms precedent to be performed by

the Plaintiffs, or the conditions and terms have already occurred.

AS TO DEFENDANTS DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN:

A. THAT THE “RESIGNATION OF TRUSTEE” DEFENDANT(S) RECORDED IS
COUNTERFEIT BECAUSE PLANITIFF’S SIGNATURE IS FORGED AND, AS SUCH, THE
RESIGNATION IS VOID AB INITIO AND HAS NO EFFECT

Amended Complaint
Page 16 of 30
 70. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 49 as if fully set forth

herein.

71. Since the time Plaintiffs filed their initial tenant eviction action on October 16,

2009, Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN initiated and caused the Hillsborough County

Property Appraiser to change its records regarding the name of the Property owner; Defendants

DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN caused Plaintiffs to be removed as the Property owner of record and

caused DAVID GRIFFIN TRUSTEE to be listed as the new owner of record. See Exhibit P.

72. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN made alteration to, and then recorded in

the public record, the Warranty Deed in Exhibit H. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN

never paid document stamp fees or other taxes required by the Clerk of Court upon the transfer

of ownership interests in real property and recordation of same, and that there is no evidence of

any such payments on the face of the document.

73. On November 4, 2009, after Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN were served

with Plaintiff’s eviction complaint on 27 October 2009 (See Exhibit Q) Defendants DAVID &

SELINA GRIFFIN caused to be recorded on the public records of Hillsborough County, a

document bearing the title of “Resignation of Trustee,” which is attached hereto, and also re-

recorded certain other documents at that time, including a Warranty Deed dated May 20, 2009.

See Exhibit H.

74. Based on the face of the documents contained in Exhibit H (“Resignation of

Trustee”) and Exhibit D (“Warranty Deed”), the two documents bear identical information and

signatures in the witness and notary signature blocks, such that no expert analysis is necessary

when an average person can perceive, recognize, notice, and conclude the relevant portion of

the two document are literally exact copies of the same thing.

75. Pursuant to Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER’S Affidavit set forth in Exhibit R, Plaintiff

WILLIAM BREWER has had continuous and uninterrupted possession of the true and correct

Amended Complaint
Page 17 of 30
original versions of the documents set forth as Exhibits D and H and, as such, Defendants

DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN could not have recorded the originals, and furthermore, Plaintiffs

have never delivered the documents to Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN.

76. Pursuant to Plaintiff’s Affidavit set forth in Exhibit R, Plaintiff has studied Exhibits

D and H and concluded that the witness and notary signature portion of the “Warranty Deed”

(See Exhibit D) was duplicated and/or affixed to the “Resignation of Trustee” (See Exhibit H),

which Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN then recorded and used as the vehicle to remove

Plaintiff as Trustee and appoint Defendant DAVID GRIFFIN as Successor Trustee, and further

causing change of ownership of the Property to indicate Defendant David Griffin, Trustee, as the

owner.

77. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN never told Plaintiff they were recording

any of the above described documents related to the Property, and never told Plaintiffs they

were causing the name of the Property to be changed to Defendant DAVID GRIFFIN, Trustee.

78. After Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN caused the Property Appraiser to

change the owner name for the Property from Plaintiffs’ name to Defendant DAVID GRIFFIN,

Trustee, Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN are now attempting to sell Plaintiff’s Property to

a third party. See Exhibit M.

79. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN never notified Plaintiffs of the actions

they are taking in furtherance of their attempts to appropriate ownership of Plaintiffs’ homestead

Property, and Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN never notified Plaintiffs they were listing

the Property with a realtor as a “short sale” for $599,000, which is less then Plaintiffs’ mortgage

and will have substantial present and future negative repercussions on Plaintiffs.

80. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN have paid no taxes on the Property, and

the 2009 taxes are paid by a tax lien company known as “First American Tax Services”, See

Amended Complaint
Page 18 of 30
Exhibit O, and has caused further expense to the property since a tax lien is charged at 18%

interest per annum.

81. Plaintiffs discovered that on several occasions over the last twelve months,

Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN unilaterally contacted Plaintiffs’ mortgage company

without Plaintiffs’ knowledge or permission, and impersonated Plaintiffs, apparently in order to

unilaterally engage in negotiations regarding the existing mortgage and the options for a short

sale. See Exhibit K.

WHEREFORE Plaintiffs demand judgment declaring the rights of the Parties, that the

Resignation of Trustee is a counterfeit and/or forged document and, as such, having no effect in

transferring title, and for supplementary relief.

AS TO DEFENDANTS DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN:

B. THAT THE PROPERTY IS PLAINTIFFS’ PROTECTED HOMESTEAD UNDER
FLORIDA CONSTITUTION’S ARTICLE X §4, AND A TENANCY BY THE ENTIRETIES
REQUIRING BOTH SPOUSES’ SIGNATURES FOR CONVEYANCE

82. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 49 as if fully set forth

herein.

83. On several occasions during May 2009, Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER told

Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN that he was married to Plaintiff ABEER BREWER, and

that the Property was their homestead.

84. On or around May 20, 2009, Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN drafted, or

caused to be drafted, all documents regarding the Property at issue and the case at bar.

85. Specifically, Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN drafted, or caused to be

drafted, the documents titled AGREEMENT AND DECLARATION OF TRUST (See Exhibit D),

and the document titled WARRANTY DEED.

86. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN knew the Property was Plaintiffs’

homestead and that Plaintiff ABEER BREWER would have to agree to any transaction related to

Amended Complaint
Page 19 of 30
the Property, as evidenced by the AGREEMENT AND DECLARATION OF TRUST; the

signature block for Plaintiff ABEER BREWER on the WARRANTY DEED, See Exhibit D; and

Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN purposeful omission of page two (2) of the WARRANTY

DEED.

WHEREFORE Plaintiffs demand judgment declaring the rights of the Parties, that the

Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN have no legitimate ownership interest in Plaintiffs’

homestead Property, and for supplementary relief.

COUNT III – EJECTMENT & POSSESSION OF PREMISES

87. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 49 as if fully set forth

herein.

88. This is an action to recover possession of the real property located at 5835

MARINER ST., TAMPA, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA 33609.

89. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN are in possession of the aforementioned

property, also known by the Hillsborough County Property Appraiser as PARCEL ID NUMBER

112610.0000, and more particularly described as:

LOT 23, MARINER ESTATES SUBDIVISION, ACCORDING TO THE MAP

OF PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 38, PAGE 61, OF THE
PUBLIC RECORDS OF HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY, FLORIDA.

90. Plaintiffs WILLIAM & ABEER BREWER claim title to the Property notwith-

standing Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN have created and recorded forged and/or

counterfeit documents on the public record in their attempt to steal the Property from Plaintiffs.

See County Appraisers listing of ownership attached hereto as Exhibit L.

91. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN refuse to deliver possession of the

Property to Plaintiffs or pay Plaintiffs the rents and profits from it.

Amended Complaint
Page 20 of 30
 WHEREFORE Plaintiffs demand judgment for possession of the Property and damages

against Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN.

COUNT IV –
CLERK OF COURT NEGLIGENT RECORDATION OF REAL PROPERTY

92. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 49 as if fully set forth

herein.

93. This is an action for damages exceeding $15,000.

94. On June 15, 2009 and again on November 4, 2009, Defendants DAVID &

SELINA GRIFFIN caused to be recorded in the public record of Hillsborough County, FL the

WARRANTY DEED set forth in Exhibit H.

95. The Clerk of the Court is required to accurately and appropriately record and

index in the public record documents related to real property.

96. The Clerk has a statutory duty to Plaintiffs to properly handle, record, and index

or, alternatively, to refuse to record improper, inadequate, insufficient documents not in

compliance with Fla. Stat.

97. The WARRANTY DEED Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN lacked the

following statutory requirements:

1. The name and address of each person signing an instrument

affecting real property

2. The name and address of each person receiving property on all

documents conveying an interest in real property

3. The signed and typed names are in agreement

4. Name and address of the natural person who prepared the

instrument or under whose supervision it was prepared

5. Name of each person who executed, witnessed and

acknowledged documents affecting real property shall be legibly
printed, typewritten or stamped on each document

6. Florida Statue requires two witnesses on deeds.

Amended Complaint
Page 21 of 30
 98. Notwithstanding the aforementioned statutory deficiencies, the

Defendants’ Clerk of Court and Deputy Clerk recorded the WARRANTY DEED.

COUNT VII – FRAUD – FRAUD IN THE INDUCEMENT-

FRAUDULENT MISREPRESENTATION - RECISSION -
Defendants David Griffin & Selina Griffin & World of Phones, Inc. $7500

99. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate Paragraph 1 through 49 as if fully set forth

herein.

100. This is an action for fraud, fraud in the inducement, and fraudulent

misrepresentation with damages of $7500, and all parties reside in Hillsborough County, Florida.

101. On or around May 2nd, 2009, Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER visited Defendant

WORLD OF PHONES, INC., a cellular phone BUSINESS. While there, the owners of the store,

Defendants DAVID GRIFFIN and SELINA GRIFFIN told Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER about their

lucrative cellular business, Defendant WORLD OF PHONES, INC.

102. During the initial and in subsequent conversations, Defendants DAVID GRIFFIN

and SELINA GRIFFIN made statements, representations, and promises to Plaintiff WILLIAM

BREWER about the stable financial success of Defendant WORLD OF PHONES, INC., and

promised the substantial financial success Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER would enjoy by investing

with Defendants DAVID GRIFFIN and SELINA GRIFFIN.

103. Defendants DAVID GRIFFIN and SELINA GRIFFIN intended to induce Plaintiff

WILLIAM BREWER by promising to set up a franchise if Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER gave them

a $7,500 down payment, wherein Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER would receive a substantial share

in lucrative profits and monetary distributions; Defendants’ DAVID GRIFFIN & SELINA GRIFFIN

promised benefits, including advising Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER to “forget about looking for

another job” because the cellular phone business is so lucrative he would need no other job.

104. Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER relied on the aforementioned promises and

representations Defendants’ DAVID GRIFFIN & SELINA GRIFFIN made, and on May 26, 2009,

Amended Complaint
Page 22 of 30
gave a $7500 down payment to Defendants’ DAVID GRIFFIN & SELINA GRIFFIN and made

payable to Defendant WORLD OF PHONES. INC. (See Exhibit C); Defendants DAVID GRIFFIN

and SELINA GRIFFIN accepted Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER’S check and deposited it on May

28, 3009.

105. In fact, Defendants’ DAVID GRIFFIN & SELINA GRIFFIN knew Defendant

WORLD OF PHONES. INC. was not financially successful and became the subject of eviction

(See Exhibit S) within months of Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER allowing Defendants DAVID

GRIFFIN and SELINA GRIFFIN to move into the Property and giving them $7,500 for a

business partnership.

106. Defendants DAVID GRIFFIN and SELINA GRIFFIN’ misrepresentations were

made for the sole purpose of inducing Plaintiff to give Defendants DAVID GRIFFIN and SELINA

GRIFFIN money and to further induce Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER to allow Defendants DAVID

GRIFFIN and SELINA GRIFFIN to move into Plaintiffs’ Property. Defendants DAVID GRIFFIN

and SELINA GRIFFIN took Plaintiff’s $7,500 and subsequently duped Plaintiff WILLIAM

BREWER by promising to pay rent and certain expenses, but failed to fulfill those promises, too,

as set forth in Counts I and II.

107. Defendants DAVID GRIFFIN & SELINA GRIFFIN’S representations were false,

and they knew they were false at the time they made the representations, because WORLD OF

PHONES, INC. was not profitable as Defendants DAVID GRIFFIN and SELINA GRIFFIN

represented to Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER; Defendants DAVID GRIFFIN and SELINA GRIFFIN

and WORLD OF PHONES, INC., are unable to perform as promised and lack the financial

acumen and business resources to open a business they promised Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER

to induce him to give them $7,500.

108. Defendants DAVID GRIFFIN and SELINA GRIFFIN misrepresented the financial

success of Defendant WORLD OF PHONES, INC., and have never complied with state or

Amended Complaint
Page 23 of 30
federal requirements for selling corporate stock, and Defendants DAVID GRIFFIN and SELINA

GRIFFIN materially misrepresented their business acumen and financial resources to fulfill their

promises to open a business for Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER, as evidenced by the subsequent

eviction of Defendant WORLD OF PHONES, INC. from 3434 W. Columbus Avenue, Ste. 201,

Tampa, FL (See Exhibit T), and their failure to even fulfill the financial obligations of their

residential lease of Plaintiffs’ Property and as evidenced by the prior eviction from a residential

lease only three months prior to entering a lease with the Plaintiff (See Exhibit T).

109. Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER tendered $7,500, and Defendants DAVID GRIFFIN

and SELINA GRIFFIN accepted and deposited the $7,500 check.

110. Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER has suffered damages as a result of Defendants

DAVID GRIFFIN & SELINA GRIFFIN’S fraud and misrepresentations.

111. Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER has made numerous demands of Defendants DAVID

GRIFFIN & SELINA GRIFFIN to return his $7,500, to no avail.

112. Defendants DAVID GRIFFIN and SELINA GRIFFIN knew their representations

were false and that their business, Defendant WORLD OF PHONES, INC. was not generating

the income they represented to Plaintiff.

113. Defendants DAVID GRIFFIN & SELINA GRIFFIN’S representations induced

Plaintiff to give them a check for $7,500 on May 26, 2009.

114. Defendants DAVID GRIFFIN & SELINA GRIFFIN knew they have failed to

perform as promised in return for Plaintiff’s $7,500 and, instead, simply pocketed Plaintiff’s

money; Plaintiff has never received anything as promised in return for his $7,500. When Plaintiff

attempted to make inquires as to why Defendants DAVID GRIFFIN and SELINA GRIFFIN failed

to fulfill their promises, Defendants DAVID GRIFFIN and SELINA GRIFFIN did not answer

Plaintiff’s calls or return his messages.

Amended Complaint
Page 24 of 30
 115. Plaintiff was forced to retain counsel to recoup Plaintiff’s $7500 from the

Defendants.

116. Plaintiff’s counsel served two (2) demand letters (See EXHIBIT Q) to Defendants

DAVID GRIFFIN and SELINA GRIFFIN, but Defendants have so far refused to return Plaintiff’s

$7500.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands a jury trial, and a judgment for treble damages

including interest against the Defendants DAVID GRIFFIN and SELINA GRIFFIN, and costs and

fees incurred in bringing this suit, and any other relief this Court deems appropriate.

COUNT VIII
NEGLIGENT RECORDATION OF LAND DOCUMENT
CLERK OF COURT AND DEPUTY CLERK LARUE PERTUIS

117. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 49 as if fully set forth

herein.

118. On June 15, 2009, and again on November 4, 2009, Defendants caused to be

recorded in the public record the documents set forth in Exhibit H.

119. In both instances of recordation, Defendants tendered, and the Clerk recorded,

documents that were copies, not originals.

120. In both instances of recordation, Defendants tendered, and the Clerk recorded, a

copy rather than the original version of the Warranty Deed set forth in Exhibit D.

121. Moreover, on November 4, 2009, the Clerk certified a copy of the

Warranty Deed set forth in Exhibit H. The Warranty Deed lacks the following requirements

posted on the Clerk’s own website:

“Before recording documents, please check the following:

1. Date

2. The name and address of each person signing an

instrument affecting real property

Amended Complaint
Page 25 of 30
 3. The name and address of each person receiving property
on all documents conveying an interest in real property

4. Description of property

5. The signed and typed names are in agreement

6. Acknowledgement

7. Notary Public seal and expiration date

8. Corporate seal if applicable

9. Name and address of the natural person who prepared

the instrument or under whose supervision it was
prepared

10. A 3 inch square at the top right-hand corner on first page

and a 1x3 inch space at top right-hand corner on each
subsequent page for use by the Clerk (on all documents).

11. Name of each person who executed, witnessed and

acknowledged documents affecting real property shall be
legibly printed, typewritten or stamped on each document

12. To assist us in recording your documents, please submit

he Recording Transmittal form with all transactions.

13. Florida Statue requires two witnesses on deeds.

121. In both instances of recordation, Defendants tendered, and the Clerk recorded, a

copy of the Warranty Deed missing various mandatory information required by the Clerk, as set

forth above.

122. As a result of Defendant Clerk’s recordation, Defendants DAVID & SELINA

GRIFFIN were able to change the ownership of Plaintiffs’ Property.

123. The Defendant Clerk has a duty to ensure that all documents recorded are

originals not copies.

124. The Defendant Clerk has a duty to ensure that all documents it records pertaining

to real property contain all elements set forth and required by Fla. Stat. 689.01.

Amended Complaint
Page 26 of 30
 125. The Defendant Clerk owes a duty to Plaintiffs to ensure the proper recordation of

all documents and instruments related to Plaintiffs’ Property.

126. The Defendant Clerk breached its duty to Plaintiffs by improperly recording

copies rather than originals.

127. The Defendant Clerk breached its duty to Plaintiffs by improperly recording

documents that failed to meet the statutory criteria set forth in Fla. Stat. 689.01 and articulated

on the Clerk’s own website, such documents lacking the mandatory information identified in

paragraph 121 above.

128. As a result of Defendant Clerk’s breach, Plaintiffs have suffered damages when

Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN were able to steal Plaintiffs’ Property, slander its title,

force Plaintiffs to incur attorney fees and costs in bringing this suit.

129. Plaintiff WILLIAM BREWER took with him to California the aforementioned

original documents Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN drafted, and has maintained

continuous, uninterrupted possession of those original documents.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs have suffered damages, incurred costs and attorney fees, and

demands judgment against Defendant Clerk and Deputy Clerk for $650,000, and an award of all

costs and attorneys fees Plaintiff has incurred in bringing this suit.

COUNT IX – SLANDER OF TITLE

130. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 49 as if fully set

forth herein.

131. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN drafted certain documents disparaging

Plaintiffs’ title to the Property and communicated them to a third party by recording them in the

public record of the Clerk of Court of Hillsborough County, FL.

Amended Complaint
Page 27 of 30
 132. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN published and caused to be recorded

false representations of ownership of Plaintiffs’ homestead Property, and further caused the

ownership of the Property to be falsely changed to Defendant DAVID GRIFFIN as Trustee.

133. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN’S publication and recording of untrue

statements about Plaintiffs’ Property have caused Plaintiffs’ to suffer and incur actual pecuniary

damages and losses, including attorney fees and costs.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand monetary damages against Defendants DAVID &

SELINA GRIFFIN for slander of title, quiet title and remove any clouds created by Defendants

DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN’S fraudulent and improper publication and recording of instruments

affecting title to Plaintiffs’ Property, and such other relief as this Court deems just and proper.

COUNT X – INDENTITY THEFT

David and Selina Griffin, Bay2Bay Holdings Inc.; Robert Cato III, MRC SolutionsLLC

134. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate Paragraphs 1 through 49 as if fully set

forth herein.

135. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN drafted certain documents disparaging

Plaintiffs’ title to the Property and communicated them to a third party by recording them in the

public record of the Clerk of Court of Hillsborough County, FL.

136. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN published and caused to be recorded

false representations of ownership of Plaintiffs’ homestead Property, and further caused the

ownership of the Property to be falsely changed to Defendant DAVID GRIFFIN as Trustee.

137. Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN’S publication and recording of untrue

statements about Plaintiffs’ Property have caused Plaintiffs’ to suffer and incur actual pecuniary

damages and losses, including attorney fees and costs and have violated Fla. Sta. 817.02 and

817.03.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand monetary damages against Defendants DAVID and

SELINA GRIFFIN and BAY2BAY HOLDINGS INC.; and ROBERT CATO III AND MRC

Amended Complaint
Page 28 of 30
SOLUTIONS LLC, for identity theft created by Defendants DAVID & SELINA GRIFFIN’S and

ROBERT CATO III AND MRC SOLUTIONS fraudulent and improper publication and recording

of instruments affecting title to Plaintiffs’ Property, causing damages to Plaintiffs’ credit rating

due to foreclosure by Plaintiffs’ creditors, causing other related court and legal proceedings in

the default of Plaintiffs’ mortgages and security, and such other relief as this Court deems just

and proper.

EXHIBIT LIST

Exhibit A Accumulated Attorney’s Fees

Exhibit B1 Plaintiff’s 2008 Homestead Declaration

Exhibit B2 Emails from Defendant Recognizing Plaintiffs’ Homestead

Exhibit B3 Plaintiffs’ Purchase by Warranty Deed dated 9 June 2003

Exhibit C1 Offer from Defendants for Cell Phone Business

Exhibit C2 Check as Down Payment for Cell Phone Business

Exhibit D Original Copies of: a) Warranty Deed; b) Resignation of Trustee; c) Agreement

and Declaration of Trust; d) Lease Option Contract and Addendum to Lease
Option Contract written by Defendants

Exhibit E Plaintiff Abeer Brewer Affidavit

Exhibit F Past Due Rent and Expenses

Exhibit G Emails by Plaintiff to Defendants Asking for Remedy

Exhibit H1 Warranty Deed Defendants Created and Recorded

Exhibit H2 Resignation of Trustee Defendants Created and Recorded

Exhibit H3 Agreement & Declaration of Trust Deed Defendants Created and Recorded

Exhibit I Website for Clerk of the Court Document Recording Requirements

Exhibit J Notices to Defendants from Attorney

Exhibit K Letters to/from Plaintiff and Loan Servicer re Address Changes and Short Sale
Approval; Defendants’ License Status

Exhibit L Property Appraiser and Tax Collector Records 2003 - 2010

Amended Complaint
Page 29 of 30
Exhibit M Defendants’ Documents used to List and Short Sale Property; Defendants’
Record of Ownership of Corporations

Exhibit N Loan Servicer Notice of Lis Pendens Dated 20 November 2009

Exhibit O Record of Tax Certificate Lien on Plaintiffs’ Property

Exhibit P Property Appraiser Document Showing Defendant as Owner

Exhibit Q Court Docket and Record of Case Filing

Exhibit R Plaintiff William Brewer Affidavit

Exhibit S Court Docket and Record of Case Filing Eviction of Plaintiffs’- World of Phones,
Inc.

Exhibit T Court Docket and Judgment for Eviction of Plaintiffs’ – Residential Property

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I CERTIFY I have provided a true copy of the foregoing Complaint via US Mail to David and
Selina Griffin, 5835 Mariner St., Tampa, FL 33609; Clerk of the Circuit Court, 800 Twiggs St.
Tampa, FL 33602; and Robert Cato III, 601 S. Falkenburg Rd Ste. 14-2, Tampa, FL 33619 on
December 1, 2010. 8gs Street
Tampa, FL 33602 00 Twiggs
___________________________
William Brewer
848 N. Rainbow Blvd. #1083
Las Vegas, Nevada 89107
(813) 944-2222 (phone)
Cheops2@verizon.net (email)

Amended Complaint
Page 30 of 30