IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA GENERAL JURISDICTION

DIVISION CASE NO. 11 20527 CA 21

LTA LOGISTICS, INC. LESTER TRIMINO, et al;

Plaintiff,

THE ORIGINAL
MAY 2 4 2013

V>

IN THE OFFICE OF CIRCUIT COURT DADE CO., FL

Enrique Varona, Defendant,

DEFENDANT'S OBJECTION TO PLAINTIFF MOTION FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO AMEND COMPLAINT HERE COMES THE DEFENDANT, Enrique Varona, who is Sui Juris acting Pro-se, who objects to the Plaintiff motion for leave of

court to amend the complaint on the basis that the amended complaint as proposed by counsel contains numerous statements and conclusions of law that are false, libelous, and shows this court the following;

NEW ATTORNEYS / NEW COMPLAINT / NEW MISREPRESENTATIONS The Defendant has cataloged a number of misrepresentations in the Plaintiff counsel proposed amended complaint. 1. On paragraph 5_ of the amended complaint, Plaintiff counsel

incorrectly states that this Circuit Court is the proper venue for this action. As per contract terms between Plaintiff and Defendant (see

Page 3, Section 10 of the contract) the proper "venue of any action brought (is) exclusively in the circuit court of Henrico, Virginia or the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.'1' Defendant has not agreed to waive any provision of his employment agreement with the Plaintiff including section 10, venue and choice of law . 2. On paragraph 8 of the amended complaint, Plaintiff counsel states

that Defendant was hired by Plaintiff to maintain and service certain of their "high degree of cultivated and well developed customer relationships'". Plaintiff never provided Defendant with any

"customers" to service or maintain during his employment. Defendant an independent contractor, owned his own portfolio of clients which predated his employment agreement with the Plaintiff and these were the only customers he serviced while employed by the Plaintiff, (see

IRS form 1099, contractor). 3.

tax year 2009,

exhibit 1 proof of Independent

On paragraph 9 of the amended complaint, Defendant and Plaintiff

Plaintiff counsel entered into an Mr. Scott

fraudulently states that

employment "Agreement" dated November 5, 2009.

Egelston P.A. previous counsel for Plaintiff entered into the courts records the only legitimate employment "agreement" between Plaintiff and Defendant which is dated June 9, 2009 (see, PLAINTIFF

RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S REQUEST TO PRODUCE, February 26, 2013 answer to interrogatory no. 1). 4. On paragraph 13 of the amended complaint, Plaintiff counsel

fraudulently states that the load posted by Defendant on getloaded.com on June 24, 2010 was from a Plaintiff customer. of UNIVERSAL FREIGHT BROKERS, INC. 5. On paragraph 23. and Paragraph 43 of the amended complaint, See sworn affidavit

Plaintiff counsel falsely states that Defendant published on the internet at a blog called "Blacklist.org" the following defamatory message:
"Lester Trimino, SOE Asshole in Miami who screws everyone, got an extensive rap sheet. This blog is intended for all victims of Lester Trimino and LTA LOGISTICS, INC. I believe the Customers should know the truth behind the company."

The Defendant has never published anything at "Blacklist.org" the Defendant considers such a preposterous allegation made by the Plaintiff counsel as libelous. The Defendant strongly suggests the plaintiff

counsel inquire with "Blacklist.org" who was the person(s) responsible for publishing the blog they refer to before falsely accusing the

Defendant of being the publisher of such an unprofessional, offensive, and disrespectful statement. 6. On paragraph 48 of the amended complaint, the Plaintiff counsel

states that "LTA has suffered damages totaling $11,300.00 in payments to third parties for assistance in removing Defendant's internet materials from internet results." used for these "services" defamatory

The company the Plaintiff of

was NATIONAL POSITIONS SOE,

California and this company through its manager denies ever offering these types of services to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff has been served

with a subpoena regarding the invoices it claims to have paid for these services. However, the Plaintiff did successfully remove some of the defendant's video postings from YouTube.com by filling over 100 fraudulent "Copyright infringement notices" copyright, a violation of federal law (see, on a non existent

title 17 sec 5(c)) each

fraudulent copyright infringement notice is a second degree felony.

THE YOUTUBE.COM VIDEOS ISSUE 7. On paragraphs 24, 25, 44, 45, of the amended complaint,

Plaintiff counsel makes deceitful, incomplete, and impartial reference to the YouTube.com video postings on the internet by the defendant between February through April 2011. Videos posted on the

defendant's private YouTube.com channel such as "Liar, Liar, Pants on fire" ... "Deception form LTA LOGISTICS, INC"...and "LTA LOGISTICS a true or false quiz you decide.... 8. These videos were posted in response to Plaintiff own

YouTube.com video postings and advertising campaigns were Plaintiff fraudulently advertised to the public at large that their transportation services consisted of their "ownership" and "management" of 225

blue trucks and trailers. The fact of the matter was/ is that the Plaintiff is not licensed as a motor carrier, Plaintiff does not own any trucks or trailers, Plaintiff is a broker who is a third party logistics company who arranges transport of goods between a carrier and a shipper and makes a commission for doing so. It is against federal law to misrepresent

broker services for those of a motor carrier. It is against state law to misrepresent the facts in any advertising campaign.

9.

As a result of an agreement between the Plaintiff previous counsel both parties agreed to stop

Mr. Scott Egleston P.A., and Defendant, posting videos on YouTube.com

(1) provided the Plaintiff stooped

posting false advertising misrepresenting his companies services and claiming to own 225 trucks on the internet in exchange for (2)

Defendant agreeing to stop posting videos

exposing the Plaintiffs

fraud. This agreement has been in place since April 2011 to this day, for a total of over 2 years. On information and belief both parties have uphold their agreement to this date.

THE DEFENDANT'S POSTINGS ON SCRIBD 10. raises On paragraph 46 of the amended complaint, Plaintiff counsel "defamatory"

an issue with what she claims are alleged posted

statements against the Plaintiff

by defendant on his Scrib

website account. Scribd is a free website were people post documents such as legal papers, books, and any written material they so please. The "offending" postings consist of most of the papers which are public court records pertaining to this case, of 25 postings the defendant has the Plaintiff counsel has issues with posting 1, posting 2, and posting 7.

11.

The Plaintiff who at all times has retained legal counsel in this

litigation failed to rebut or contest the Defendants affidavits stating that he was and how he was in violation of both federal and state RICO statutes which makes him by definition a racketeer. (See,

DEFENDANT' S NOTICE OF FELONY, December 12, 2012). Also

see,
a) Non Rebutted Affidavits are "Prima Facie Evidence in the Case,"United States vs. Kis, 658 F.2d, 526, 536337(7 th Cir. 1981); b) Cert Denied, 50 U.S. L.W. 2169; S.Ct. March 22, 1982. "Indeed, no more than (Affidavits) make the Prima Facie Case." c) Seitzer v. Seitzer, 80 Cal. Rptr. 688 "Uncontested Affidavit taken as true in support of Summary Judgment." is necessary to

12.

The Plaintiff by claiming to own and operate 225 trucks in his

video advertising is perpetrating a scam and a fraud against the shipping public. In addition, the Plaintiff conduct in this case is an example of

malicious, abusive, and criminally negligent behavior by failing to answer two requests of production, deceitfully answering two request

of admissions, defaulting on two court order to compel production of documents, ignoring subpoenas for relevant records, egregious acts of malfeasance and corruption against the court, against the defendant and against due process of law. AND NOW, the Plaintiff has an issue with the Defendant calling the cattle black. 13. 14. The biggest problem for this Plaintiff appears to be the truth. Defendant believes that he is free to express his "opinions" as a

private citizen on the internet, and while the defendant believes he enjoys first amendment protection for his freedom of speech, he is also an accommodating person. The Defendant has edited these 3 postings (1,2,7) to remove the alleged "offending" words even though they are truthful and legally accurate descriptions of the Plaintiff and his behavior. In addition the Defendant would remind this court that Court records, pleadings, motions and so forth are public documents available to the public at large. 15. The only reason the Plaintiff should feel embarrassed is for his

own conduct and behavior during this litigation. Issues the Plaintiff has to resolve within himself and not through the Defendant. Is clear that this Plaintiff needs mental and emotional professional counseling. I hope he gets it.

CONCLUSION The Plaintiff counsel has asked this court for leave to amend the complaint with a proposed new lengthy complaint that contains 86 paragraphs of statements most of which are false representations of the facts, conclusions of law, and hearsay . It claims actions for Breach of contract, Tortious Interference with business relationship (damages), asks for Permanent Injunctive relief, and defamation against LTA LOGISTICS (against a fiction of law), and for Defamation against LESTER TRIMINO. The reason they request this leave to amend complaint is (1) to establish a "contract" with the defendant through fraudulent inducement, false considerations and (2) in the so called interest of justice and (3) to clean the pleadings. The Defendant

opposes this request by the Plaintiff counsel for the following reasons: (a) of 86 statements only statements 1, 2, 3, 6, 40 are true (b) 13 statements misrepresentations of the facts (c) 31 statements are predicated on the applicability of the terms contained on a fraudulent contract dated November 5, 2010. A contract that has expired 2 years age (d) 24 statements are mere conclusions of law and hearsay made by the counsel (e) 9 statements deal with TRIMINOS unbalanced

psychotic personality and marital problems brought about by his own

actions and that are irrelevant to the legal issues at hand (f) In two years of litigation the Plaintiff has failed to identity one customer of his the defendant interfered with (g) In two years of litigation Plaintiff has failed to identify any monetary damages except for the bogus $11,300 which services they refuse to provide invoices for (h) enforce an employment Pretends to

contract that expired 3 years ago (i) and

complain about videos from YouTube.com that were removed two years ago and have not been posted ever since. In the interest of justice, time, the rule of law, common sense, and basic human decency, the Plaintiff should not be allowed to file an amended frivolous complaint he does not intend to prosecute or provide any evidence in support of his claims. Instead this court should dismiss the Plaintiff SLAPP complaint with prejudice and the defendants

counterclaim should be scheduled for trial as soon as the court sees fit. >uld be justice. Rqspectmilly suomitt&d by, < L>

nriqAe\Varona, Sui Juris acting Pro-se 14823ysV- 125 Court Miami, Florida 33186 enriquevarona@ymail.com

4_x_v_y J QrYN>->^__,

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the forgoing was mailed by US certified mail number. # on May WARREN GAJVflLL & ASSOCIATES, P.A. at I/O ,2013 to

Suite 1050,

Courthouse Tower 44 West Flagler Street, Miami, Florida 33130.

ctfully, inricpe Varona, Sui Juris acting Pro-se 25J.W. 125 Court Miami, Florida 33186