ANCHOR BIOS | WEB EXCLUSIVES | COMMUNITY | HOME

Presidio County Deputy Sues Evi Quaid: Court Documents 10/14/09

Elaine Adams
CBS 7 News
October 14, 2009

CBS 7 News has obtained the following court document in regards to the suit filed by a Presidio County Deputy against Evi Quaid:

James Davis, Plaintiff
v.
Evi Quaid, Defendant

In the District Court of Presidio County, Texas
349th Judicial District

Plaintiff’s Original Petition with Jury Demand and Request for Disclosure

TO THE HONORABLE COURT:
Now comes James Davis as Plaintiff complaining of Evi Quaid, Defendant, and for cause of action would show the court as follows:

STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Plaintiff James Davis, a Deputy Sheriff for Presidio County, Texas, has faithfully served in law enforcement for the past thirty-two (32) years. During this time, Deputy Davis has earned a reputation as an honest and honorable public servant. Recently, however, Defendant Evi Quaid has unjustly tarnished Deputy Davis’ good name by maliciously publishing false and defamatory statements about Deputy Davis.

Defendant Evi Quaid is the wife of the successful and talented film, television and stage actor Randy Quaid. Mr. Quaid is a native-born Texan.

Unfortunate for all involved, Defendant Evi Quaid appears to have used her husband’s status and celebrity to bring harm upon Deputy Davis. With this lawsuit, Deputy Davis seeks to defend his reputation, to demonstrate the patent falsity of Defendant Evi Quaid’s statements against him, and with the hope of preventing Defendant Evi Quaid from further impugning his character and integrity.

PARTIES
1. Plaintiff James Davis is a resident of Brewster County, Texas.
2. Defendant Evi Quaid is a resident of Presidio County, Texas. Defendant may be served at her residence located at ***, Marfa, Texas 79843, or wherever she may be found.

DISCOVERY
3. Plaintiff intends to conduct discovery under Level Two (2) pursuant to Rule 190.3 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.

JURISDICTION
4. Plaintiff seeks damages and relief under the common law and statutory laws of the State of Texas, and the amount in controversy is within the subject matter and monetary jurisdiction of the District Courts of Presidio County, Texas.

VENUE
5. Venue is proper and mandatory in Presidio County, Texas pursuant to Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code 15.017 because Defendant’s residence is in Presidio County, Texas as of the filing of this lawsuit.

CONDITIONS PRECEDENT
6. Plaintiff would show that all conditions precedent have been performed of have been waived.

FACTS
7. On or about September 24, 2009, the Presidio County Sheriff’s Office received arrest warrants for Defendant Evi Quaid and her husband, Randy Quaid (the “Quaids”). The warrants originated from the County of Santa Barbara, California and indicated that the State of California believed that probable cause existed to arrest the Quaids for “Defrauding an Innkeeper[,]… Burglary [and] Conspiracy.”
8. On or about the afternoon of September 24, 2009, Deputy Davis was dispatched with the order to arrest the Quaids, who had been seen driving near Marfa, Texas. Deputy Davis stopped the Quaids while they were driving and placed the Quaids under arrest. Though Randy Quaid peacefully and calmly complied with Deputy Davis’s orders, Defendant Evi Quaid struggled and defied all of Deputy Davis’ attempts to peacefully perform his duties. Back-up was called. Thereafter, Deputy Davis and other members of the Presidio County Sheriff’s Department successfully placed the Quaids under arrest. The Quaids were escorted to the Presidio County Sheriff’s Office for booking, but not before Randy Quaid was permitted to drop off the Quaids’ pet dog at the Quaids’ place of residence on Highland Avenue in Marfa, Texas. The Quaids were released after posting $40,000.00 bail ($20,000.00 per Quaid) the same day.
9. On or about the morning of September 25, 2009, Defendant Evi Quaid entered the office of the Presidio County Sheriff and accused Deputy Davis of being a “crooked, corrupt cop.” Also during the morning of September 25th, Defendant Evi Quaid submitted a handwritten statement to the Marfa Police Department accusing Deputy Davis of “fraudulently arrang[ing]” the Quaids’ arrest, in order to “receive money from Bob Boyett, IOTST The Stagehands Union & our former Business Manager Mickey Segal who are attempting to acquire our assets illegally by creating false evidence.”
10. Defendant Evi Quaid’s statement continues, alleging that Deputy Davis “organized this against tax payers best interest… [and] planned to extort money.”
11. Worse, on or about the afternoon of Septenber 25, 2009. Defendant Evi Quaid painted a large sign taped to the side of a large, white truck. The sign read, “DEPUTY JAMES DAVIS TAKES PAYMENT$ CALL 911 & MAKE OFFERS.” This truck was parked on Highland Avenue – Marfa’s “Main Street” – presumably, in order to prominently display the sign on the main thoroughfare of Marfa, Texas.
12. The sign remained in plain view on Highland Avenue for several days. The Quaids’ arrest and the subsequent developments, including Defendant’s painting and displaying of her sign, became a national news story. As a result, Defendant’s sign has been published to the citizens of, and travelers through, Marfa, Texas who saw the sign directly, and to the rest of the world on television, in newspapers and on the Internet.
13. The statements contained in Defendant Evi Quaid’s sign were and are entirely false. Deputy Davis is not involved in any conspiracy to fraudulently arrest the Quaids in order to receive payments, nor is Deputy Davis aware of any such conspiracy. Deputy Davis has not taken bribes and does not take bribes. Deputy Davis is not acquainted with any of the individuals (excluding Randy Quaid and Defendant Evi Quaid).

PLAINTIFF’S CAUSES OF ACTION – Statutory Libel; Common-Law Libel
14. Under the Texas Civil Practices & Remedies Code, “[a] libel is a defamation expressed in written or other graphic form that tend to…injure a living person’s reputation and thereby expose the person to public hatred, contempt or ridicule, or financial injury or to impeach any person’s honesty, integrity, virtue, or reputation or to publish the natural defects of anyone and thereby expose the person to public hatred, ridicule, or financial injury” Clearly, Defendant Evi Quaid’s sign and its message is within the ambit of Texas’ libel statue.
15. Defendant Evi Quaid’s creation and prominent display of her sign has injured Deputy Davis’s reputation, impeached Deputy Davis’s honesty, integrity and virtue, end exposed Deputy Davis to public hatred, contempt, ridicule and, possibly, financial injury.
16. Defendant published her libelous sign to persons other that Plaintiff. It is very likely that few people in Marfa, Texas failed to see the sign while it was posted. Further, Defendant Evi Quaid’s sign was republished in newspapers, on television and over the Internet. Because Defendant’s sign constituted libel per se (as explained herein) and because the manner in which the sign was displayed made the repetition of the statement a “natural and probable consequence of the original publication,” Defendant is liable for all republications of the statement.
17. Defendant Evi Quaid’s sign is defamatory per se. An ordinary and prudent person would conclude that Defendant Evi Quaid’s sign accuses Deputy Davis of the criminal activity of taking bribes.
18. Moreover, Defendant Evi Quaid’s libelous statement was published with actual malice because Defendant Evi Quaid published the statement with either actual knowledge that the statement was untrue, or with reckless disregard as to the statement’s truth.
19. Alternatively, Defendant Evi Quaid acted intentionally and/or recklessly when creating her malicious sign for the entire world to see. As a result, Plaintiff was caused to suffer severe emotional distress. There is no doubt that an ordinary and prudent person would describe Defendant Evi Quaid’s conduct as extreme and outrageous.

DAMAGES
20. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant Evi Quaid’s false and libelous statements and extreme and outrageous conduct, Plaintiff has endured shame, embarrassment, humiliation, and mental pain and anguish. Additionally, Plaintiff has and will in the future be seriously injured in his professional reputation, good name, standing in the community, and will be exposed to the contempt and ridicule of the public in general as well as of his professional associates, friends, and relatives. Consequently, Plaintiff seeks damages in a sum within the jurisdictional limits of this court.
21. Defendant Evi Quaid acted with malice toward Plaintiff, with a specific intent to cause substantial injury (emotionally and to Plaintiff’s reputation). Defendant Evi Quaid further engaged in acts or omissions that involved a high degree of risk of harm to Plaintiff, where Defendant Evi Quaid had actual subjective awareness of those risks, but proceeded with conscious indifference to the rights, safety and welfare of Plaintiff. Plaintiff sues for the maximum amount of punitive damages possible from a jury in light of all relevant factors considered in determining such an award.

REQUEST FOR DISCLOSURE
22. Plaintiff requests that the Defendant disclose, within 50 days of the service of this petition and request, the information o material described in Rules 194.2 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.

JURY DEMAND
23. Plaintiff demands a trial by jury and tenders the appropriate fee herewith.

PRAYER
24. For these reasons, Plaintiff asks that Defendant be cited to appear and, on final trial, that Plaintiff have judgment against Evi Quaid for:
i. All actual end exemplary damages sustained by Plaintiff as detailed in Paragraph 20-21 above;
ii. Prejudgment interest on all amounts awarded to Plaintiff;
iii. Post-judgment interest on all amounts awarded to Plaintiff;
iv. All costs of court and other and further relief, general and special, legal and equitable, to which Plaintiff’s justly entitled.

Respectfully submitted,
THE SNELL LAW FIRM, PLLC

---