Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old December 30th 08, 06:03 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,misc.legal,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Text of Complaint in USCF v. Polgar, Springfield IL, Case No.2008MR000751

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE SEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
SANGAMON COUNTY, ILLINOIS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CHESS )
FEDERATION, INC., an Illinois not for profit )
for profit ) Corporation, )
)
Plaintiff, ) Case No. 2008MR000751
)
V. )
)
SUSAN POLGAR, an individual, and )
HOAINHAN TRUONG, a/k/a )
PAUL TRUONG, an individual, )
)
Defendants. )

COMPLAINT

NOW COMES Plaintiff, United States of America Chess Federation, Inc.
(Plaintiff or "USCF"), by and through its attorneys, Giffin, Winning,
Cohen & Bodewes P.C., and hereby files its Complaint against Susan
Polgar ("Polgar") and Hoainhan Truong aka Paul Truong ("Truong")
(collectively, "Defendants"), and alleges as follows:

1. Plaintiff USCF is an Illinois not-for-profit corporation in good
standing, with its principal place of business in Crossville,
Tennessee,

2. The USCF is the official, not-for-profit United States membership
organization for chess players and chess supporters of all ages and
strengths, from beginners to Grandmasters.

3. The USCF is governed by a Board of Delegates, composed of a seven-
member Executive Board, Delegates at Large, and 125 Delegates
apportioned among U.S. States.

4. The seven-member Executive Board functions as a "board of
directors, tasked with managing the affairs of the USCF ("Executive
Board").

5. Defendants Polgar and Truong are individuals residing as husband
and wife in Lubbock, Texas. Defendants resided in the State of New
York prior to their move to Lubbock, Texas in 2007.

6. Defendant Truong and Defendant Polgar are members of the USCF
Executive Board, elected in June, 2007, and seated on or about August
5, 2007.

7. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendants because
Defendants have performed duties as directors of a corporation
organized under the laws of Illinois. 735 ILCS 5/2-209(a)(12).

8. None of the Defendants reside in Illinois, and therefore venue is
proper in this county pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-101.

COUNT I
DEFENDANT TRUONG
805 ILCS 105/108.35(d)

1-8. Plaintiff repeats, realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1-8 as
if fully set forth herein.

9. New York resident Sam Sloan was elected to the Executive Board in
July 2006.

[footnote 1: In the 2007 election, Sam Sloan was not re-elected to the
Executive Board.]

10. During and after the 2007 Executive Board election, Defendant
Truong impersonated Sam Sloan and others in over 2,500 separate
Internet postings (hereinafter, "Fake Sam Sloan" postings).

[footnote 2: 2 Starting on approximately June 28, 2005 and continuing
until approximately September 26, 2007, an individual posted over
2,500 messages into the Internet USENET service (accessible via
http://groups.google.com and many other providers of access to
Internet newsgroups) purporting to be Sam Sloan and several other
individuals in the chess community.]

11. The Fake Sam Sloan postings disparaged not only the purported
authors, but also present and former USCF presidents, officers,
committee members, employees, volunteers and sponsors, who were all
falsely depicted.

12. As a result of the 2,500 Fake Sam Sloan postings, Sam Sloan filed
an action in District Court for the Southern District of New York,
against, among others, Truong, Polgar and USCF (hereinafter the "New
York Litigation"). A copy of the New York Litigation is attached
hereto as Exhibit A.

13. A small sample of the Fake Sam Sloan postings is attached hereto
as Exhibit B.

14. While the author of the Fake Sam Sloan postings never revealed his
true identity online, Defendant Truong left digital footprints that
conclusively show that Truong was the author of such postings.

15. Truong continued authoring the Fake Same Sloan postings after
Truong was seated on the Executive Board on or about August 5, 2007.

16. For the thirty sample Fake Sam Sloan postings in Exhibit B, each
posting was made at a certain Internet access point (i.e. an Internet
protocol address, or IP address).

[Footnote 3: 3 An Internet access point, such as a desktop computer or
a laptop, allows access to the Internet using a unique numeric address
called an Internet Protocol (IP) address. An IP address used to access
the Internet must be unique, by definition and by function, or else
data - like information on web page - could not be delivered to the
particular computer requesting the information.]

17. The IP addresses for posts in Exhibit B are all owned by one
entity, XO Communications, Inc., located in Nashville, Tennessee.

18. XO Communications has stated that an account holder at United
Online, Inc., with the username, "chessspammer netzero.net," used its
IP addresses at the particular dates and times of the Fake Sam Sloan
postings. A copy of XO Communications' statement is attached as
Exhibit C.

19. United Online, Inc. owns the "dial-up" Internet service provider,
Netzero.

20. USCF requested information from United Online, Inc, about the
"dial-up" account that uses the "chessspammer" username, and United
Online,. Inc. responded by providing Defendant Truong's name and
contact information as its customer who uses this username (aka,
"Member ID"). Information provided by United Online, Inc. is attached
hereto as Exhibit D.

21. The account holder of the American Express card associated with
this United Online, Inc. account is, on information and belief,
Defendant Polgar, Defendant Truong's wife.

22. Further, independent of the Netzero evidence, an analysis of all
of the Fake Sam Sloan postings and all of Truong's logins and posts to
the USCF member Internet forum supports the conclusion that Truong is
the Fake Sam Sloan.

23. Specifically, Truong logged in to the USCF member Internet forum
numerous times, under his own name, freely commenting to the USCF
membership in his own name, and leaving behind a great number of
digital footprints in the form of the IP addresses he used.

24. These IP addresses provide reliable data with which to compare all
of the data (IP addresses, dates and times) related to the Fake Sam
Sloan posts.

25. Due to the reliability of IP address logs as evidence of identity,
one can use a "Matching Procedure" to determine the identity of
someone posting content to the Internet.

26, Using this IP Matching Procedure, the USCF was able to compare all
of the IP addresses, dates and times of all of Truong's logins and
postings to the USCF private forum, to all of the IP addresses, dates
and times of the Fake Sam Sloan posts.

27. This comparison revealed three IP addresses that match: an IP
address (24.90.223.35) associated with Truong's Roadrunner ISP account
in his former New York home, an IP address (75.111.199.177) associated
with Truong's Suddenlink ISP account in Texas, and another IP address
(75.111.194.9) associated with Truong's Suddenlink ISP account in
Texas.

28. Attached as Exhibit E is a report compiled by a technical vendor
to the USCF, Brian Mottershead (the "Mottershead Report"), explaining
in great detail all of the evidence proving that Defendant Truong is
the author of the Fake Sam Sloan postings.

29. Furthermore, attached as Exhibit F is an expert report by Robert
Jones, author of the book, "Internet Forensics," O'Reilly Series 2005,
confirming the methodology of the Mottershead Report (concluding, on
p. 11, "that user chesspromotion [Truong] is responsible for a subset
of the Usenet messages detailed here.")

30. Attached as Exhibit G is an expert report by Internet security
expert David Ulevitch, which has been relied upon by the New York
Times and supports the methodology of the Mottershead Report
(Ulevitch's report, at p. 2, states, "It's my belief that this
[Mottershead] report has been compiled in an accurate way that
deserves recognition for its comprehensive depth and detail.")

31. Because these Fake Sam Sloan allegations involved members of the
Executive Board, and because the allegations, if true, involved
conduct not conforming to the values of the USCF, the USCF launched an
investigation into the allegations against Truong and his wife,
Defendant Polgar.

32. As a result of the Fake Sam Sloan allegations and the New York
Litigation, counsel for the USCF sent a letter to Truong on November
29, 2007 (attached hereto as Exhibit H), demanding that Truong:

a. Formally admit or deny, in writing, whether he was involved in the
"Fake Sam Sloan" postings, or had knowledge of who made such postings;

b. Provide the IP address of all of his home and work Internet
connections since 2005, or provide consent for the Board to obtain and
cooperate in the Board obtaining such IP addresses from ISP's and
other entities;

c. Provide all information that would support his argument that he was
not located at his computer(s) at the time of alleged Fake Sam Sloan
postings, to include information relating to his travel;

d. Comply with the forgoing on or before December 7, 2007.

33. Truong refused to comply with the demands of USCF counsel, except
for faxing three pages to USCF's counsel, containing two of Truong's
pay stubs and a receipt for a Southwest Airlines ticket, all of which
are attached as Exhibit T.

34. Following the 2007 Executive Board election, USCF discovered that
Truong made numerous dishonest and misleading representations during
his Executive Board campaign, including that he had earned a PhD and
MBA and that he had held multiple high level marketing positions with
billion-dollar companies. See Exhibit J. All of these representations
are false.

35. Further, Truong failed to reveal that he was married to Defendant
Polgar, who was also running for the USCF Executive Board, after being
questioned about it by Brian Lafferty on the USCF Issues Forum prior
to the 2007 Executive Board election.

36. On information and belief, Truong engaged in bankruptcy fraud in
the State of New York, by swearing, under penalty of perjury, in his
bankruptcy petition that he was unemployed at the time of his filing
in June 21, 2007, when, in fact, he was employed by Texas Tech
University. See Exhibit K, Schedule I (compare to Exhibit I pay
stubs).

37. The actions of Truong, as detailed in this complaint, are
inconsistent with the values and the mission statement of the USCF,
which states, among other things, that the USCF shall promote the
study and knowledge of the game of chess "as a means for the
improvement of society."

38. The actions of Truong have had significant adverse consequences on
the ability of the USCF to operate efficiently and achieve its
corporate objectives.

39. Defendant Truong, a member of the USCF Executive Board,- has
engaged in . fraudulent conduct.

40. Defendant Truong, a member of the USCF Executive Board, has
engaged in dishonest conduct.

41. Removal of Defendant Truong from the USCF Executive Board is in
the best interest of the USCF.

42. Defendant Truong has refused to resign as member of the Executive
Board.

43. As a result, the USCF is forced to bring this removal action in
Illinois Circuit Court, as permitted by Illinois law, 805 ILCS
105/108.35(d).

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that this Court enter judgment in its favor
on the claims set forth above and award Plaintiff relief including,
but not limited to, the following:

a. A finding the Defendant Truong engaged in fraudulent conduct;

b. A finding the Defendant Truong engaged in dishonest conduct;

c. A finding that the removal of the Defendant Truong from the
Executive Board of the USCF is in the best interest of the USCF;

d. An Order removing Defendant Truong from the Executive Board of the
USCF;

e. An Order prohibiting Defendant Truong from running for reelection
to the Executive Board of the USCF;

An award of reasonable costs incurred by Plaintiff in connection
with this action; and

g. Such other further relief to which Plaintiff may be entitled as a
matter of law or equity, or which the Court determines to be just and
proper.

COUNT II
DEFENDANT POLGAR
805 ILCS 105/108.35(d)

1-43. Plaintiff repeats, realleges and incorporates each and every
allegation set forth in Paragraphs 1-43 as if fully set forth herein.

44. Due to the allegations surrounding the Fake Sam Sloan postings,
and because the allegations, if true, involved conduct not conforming
to the values of the USCF, the USCF launched an investigation into the
allegations against Truong and his wife, Defendant Polgar.

45. To effect this investigation, the Executive Board designated a
"Litigation Committee," which excluded Polgar and Truong, to permit
confidential communications about the investigation and about USCF's
legal options.

46. As part of the USCF's investigation, the USCF hired the law firm
of Kronenberger Burgoyne, LLP ("Kronenberger") to review and
investigate the allegations against Polgar and Truong.

47. From November 2007 through June 2008, Kronenberger performed a
significant review of the facts and law regarding the controversy, and
during this period, Kronenberger sent a significant number of e-mails
to the Litigation Committee, which included Executive Board member
Hough, providing the initial results of Kronenberger's investigation,
confidential summaries of the USCF's legal position vis-a-vis Polgar
and Truong, and outlines of the legal options available to the USCF
regarding Polgar and Truong.

48. All of the emails from Kronenberger -to the Litigation Committee
were clearly marked as from Kronenberger and contained the following
notice:

NOTICE: This email may contain material that is privileged,
confidential, and/or attorney-client work product for the sole use of
the intended recipient. Any review, reliance or distribution by others
or forwarding without express written permission is strictly
prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
sender at the above number and delete all copies. Inadvertent waiver
shall waive no privileges.

49. Polgar was aware at the time that the USCF had engaged
Kronenberger as counsel.

50. Between November 26, 2007 and June 24, 2008, with full knowledge
that Polgar.and her husband were under investigation by the USCF,
Polgar and an accomplice unlawfully accessed the e-mail account of
Executive Board member Randall Hough (hereinafter "Hough") at least
111 times.
51. Defendant Polgar read and unlawfully copied numerous confidential
communications regarding the investigation of her and her husband,
including highly sensitive attorney-client privileged communications.

52. Thereafter, Defendant Polgar and her accomplice distributed these
confidential and privileged communications to the public.

53. In hacking into Hough's e-mail account, Defendant Polgar violated
the federal Electronic Communications Privacy Act, the Computer Fraud
and Abuse Act, in addition to violating California computer crimes
laws.

54. These allegations are the subject of a pending federal action by
the USCF against Polgar in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California, originally filed in June 2008
(hereinafter, the "California Litigation"). A copy of the California
Litigation is attached hereto as Exhibit L.

55. When Polgar realized that her misconduct was about to be
discovered, she peremptorily sued the USCF, including all of its
remaining Executive Board members and several USCF members critical of
her misconduct, in the State of Texas for defamation and a variety of
other torts in August 2008 (hereinafter, the "Texas Litigation"), A
copy of the Texas Litigation is attached hereto as Exhibit M.

56. Polgar and her accomplice engaged in the following specific
misconduct to effect their overall plan of accessing, copying, and
publishing the USCF's confidential communications:

a. On information and belief, Polgar and her accomplice gained
unlawful access to the password for Hough's Yahoo! e-mail account.
Hough never provided his password to Polgar or her accomplice, and
Hough never consented to the use of his password by any third party.

b. Between November 26, 2007 and June 24, 2008, Polgar and her
accomplice used Hough's password to log into Hough's email account at
least 111 times.

c. During Polgar's and her accomplice's unauthorized access to Hough's
e-mail account, on information and belief, Polgar and her accomplice
viewed hundreds of emails sent by and between the Litigation.
Committee, as they were received by Hough.

d. Polgar has proffered a variety of "cover stories" to the Executive
Board to explain how she came into possession of these confidential
communications. For example, after Polgar provided the Executive Board
members excerpts from the confidential communications, Polgar claimed
to have obtained these excerpts as a result of a "leak" by one of the
Executive Board members. However, the truth is that Polgar and her
accomplice obtained these confidential communications by unlawfully
using Hough's email password and accessing Hough's email account.

e. After viewing and copying USCF's confidential communications,
Polgar and her accomplice created a blog with the Google-owned
service, Blogspot.com, entitled, USCF-Said.Blogspot.com (the "Blog").
Polgar and her accomplice published some of the confidential
communications taken from Hough's e-mail account -including USCF
attorney-client privileged communications- on this Blog for third
parties to view. At various times, Polgar has described the Blog as
her source of the confidential a=mails in an effort to hide the fact
that Polgar and her accomplice themselves stole and distributed these
e-mails.

f. Additionally, Polgar and her accomplice published some of the
confidential communications on a website entitled chessdiscussion.com,
which is owned by Polgar.

g. At no time did Polgar and her accomplice have any permission or
privilege to access Hough's e-mail account, to view any e-mails to or
from Hough, to copy any e-mails to or from Hough, or to distribute any
e-mails to or from Hough.

h. On information and belief, all of the e-mail communications that
were viewed, copied and distributed by Polgar and her accomplice were
e-mails that were sent or received by Hough in his capacity as an
Executive Board member for the USCF.

57. The actions of Polgar as detailed in this complaint are
inconsistent with the values and the mission statement of the USCF,
which states, among other things, that the USCF shall promote the
study and knowledge of the game of chess "as a means for the
improvement of society."

58. The actions of Polgar have had significant adverse consequences on
the ability of the USCF to operate efficiently and achieve its
corporate objectives.

59. Defendant Polgar, a member of the Executive Board, has engaged in
fraudulent conduct.

60. Defendant Polgar, a member of the Executive Board, has engaged in
dishonest conduct.

61. Removal of Defendant Polgar from the Executive Board is in the
best interest of the USCF.

62. Defendant Polgar has refused to resign as member of the Executive
Board.

63. As a result, the USCF is forced to bring this removal action in
Illinois Circuit Court, as permitted under Illinois law, 805 ILCS
105/108.35(d).

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that this Court enter judgment in its favor
on the claims set forth above and award Plaintiff relief including,
but not limited to, the following:

a. A finding the Defendant Polgar engaged in fraudulent conduct;

b. A finding the Defendant Polgar engaged in dishonest conduct;

c. A finding that the removal of the Defendant Polgar from the
Executive Board of the USCF is in the best interest of the USCF;

d. An Order removing Defendant Polgar from the Executive Board of the
USCF;

e. An Order prohibiting Defendant Polgar from running for reelection
to the Executive Board of the USCF;

f. An award of reasonable costs incurred by Plaintiff in connection
with this action; and

g. Such other further relief to which Plaintiff may be entitled as a
matter of law or equity, or which the Court determines to be just and
proper.


RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CHESS
FEDERATION, INC., Plaintiff


David A. Herman (Reg. No. 6211060)
Carolyn T. Grosboll (Reg. No. 6197530)
Melissa G. Steward (Reg. No. 6290847)
GIFFIN, WINNING, COHEN & BODEWES, P.C.
One West Old State Capitol Plaza Myers Building - Suite 600
Springfield, IL 62701
Phone: (217) 525-1571
Fax: (217) 525-1710
  #2   Report Post  
Old December 31st 08, 10:03 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,misc.legal,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,alt.chess
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default Text of Complaint in USCF v. Polgar, Springfield IL, Case No.2008MR000751

FROM THE USCF ISSUES FORUM

[quote="jjamesge1"]Actually, this is the forum this stuff needs to
posted in.

As far as Sam Sloan posting stuff like this... I politely decline to
state the obvious.

EDIT: To be more specific about this particual thread: Sam does
everybody a great service by actually being able to read the posted
legal papers, and filtering the stuff down to something the average
person can understand.

It basically makes this post more understandable: http://br / main.uschess.org/forum...e&f=5&p=121674[/
quote]

Thank you for saying something good about me, a rare occurrence here.

Do you realize that I am on "moderated status" and the moderators here
have been trying for at least a year to have me banned for one year.
It is on appeal.

Every post I make to this group has to await approval by the
moderators mosty of whom were selected specifically because they were
known to dislike me. Every post I make must wait at least 6 to 12
hours before it can be seen by the other members of this forum and
only about half of them make it through.

I can never tell which ones will make it through and which ones will
be disallowed and they no longer inform me when a post has not been
allowed to appear.

This particular posting giving the full text of the lawsuit the USCF
filed in Illinois State Court would have had no chance of being
allowed to appear here on the pretext that it makes "disparaging
comments about a person", except that about a month ago the USCF
Executive Board passed a motion stating that direct quotes from legal
court filings are allowed, after several similar postings by me had
not been allowed to appear here.

Sam Sloan
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Motion for Summary Judgment has been filed in Polgar vs. USCF samsloan rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 2 October 6th 08 02:49 PM
Motion for Summary Judgment has been filed in Polgar vs. USCF samsloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 3 October 6th 08 02:49 PM
Marinello Case: Affidavit in Support of Order to Show Cause [email protected] alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 6 March 4th 05 04:53 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:38 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017