Is This Defamation?

FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
COUNTY OF SANTA FE
STATE OF NEW MEXICO

Karen Marie Kline,
Plaintiff

v.
Christopher Alba,
Environetics Incorporated,
The Santa Fe New Mexican,
Defendants.

Plaintiff, Karen Marie Kline, pro se, complains and alleges a cause of action as
follows:

1.        Plaintiff, Karen Marie Kline, is an individual and resides at 729 W.
Manhattan, Condo #3, City of Santa Fe, County of Santa Fe, State of New Mexico.
At all times pertinent hereto, Plaintiff has been engaged in being a land lady to
provide the income she lives on.

2.        Defendant, Christopher Alba, is an architect, licensed contractor and
columnist who styles himself “Forensic Architect” when he authors a monthly
column published by The Santa Fe New Mexican in its Santa Fe Real Estate Guide.
He has worked in Santa Fe at all times pertinent hereto.

3.        Defendant, Environetics Incorporated, is Christopher Alba’s business
organized as a corporation under the laws of New Mexico and registered with the
Corporation Commission. It’s principal place of business has been at 468 W. Water
Street, City of Santa Fe, State of New Mexico at all times pertinent hereto. It’s
name is given at the bottom of the defamatory column and is given in bold print, the
appearance being that the corporation backs the defamatory statements written and
given for publication by Christopher Alba.

4.        Defendant, The Santa Fe New Mexican, a newspaper corporation, is
organized under the laws of the state of New Mexico, and has had its principal place
of business at 202 E. Marcy Street, City of Santa Fe, County of Santa Fe, State of
New Mexico at all times pertinent hereto. Defendant newspaper publishes its Santa
Fe Real Estate Guide on the first Sunday of each month as a large sized insert with a
full color glossy cover.

5.        On or about July 6, 2003, which is the first Sunday of July, Defendant
newspaper published several statements by Christopher Alba in the Guide’s
“Forensic Architect” column which that month was titled, “On the consequences of
ignoring expert aid,” defaming Plaintiff, injuring Plaintiff's business, injuring her
ability to collect

the right and proper shares of the costs of excavating an old outhouse pit that was in
the common area owned by all of the condominium owners in common, injuring
Plaintiff’s reputation, and causing Plaintiff severe distress and emotional suffering. A
copy of the column is attached hereto and is incorporated by reference herein.

6.        Defendant newspaper published the defamatory statements with actual
knowledge that they were false, or with reckless disregard as to their truth or falsity,
or negligently.

7.        Plaintiff is not a public figure and is not involved in any public controversy in
connection with her profession, trade, or business. Defendant's defamatory
statements do not involve a matter of public concern.

8.        Defendant Alba doing business as Environetics Incorporated intentionally
provided for publication defamatory statements in his/the newspaper’s “Forensic
Architect” column appearing in Santa Fe Real Estate Guide, which statements were
known to be false, were malicious in both the legal and the dictionary senses, and
without investigating the veracity of the statements.

9.        Defendant newspaper intentionally published Defendant Alba’s defamatory
statements in it’s Santa Fe Real Estate Guide’s “Forensic Architect” column, which
statements were known to be false, or without investigating the veracity of the
column writer's statements.

10.        The statements of Defendant Alba, the column writer, were false and
injured the plaintiff in her business and in her contractual relations as protected by
the Condominium Act.

11.        The plaintiff suffered emotional distress and a severe blow to her business
and contractual relations with the Condominium Association as a result of the
defamatory statements published by the defendant due to the fact that the
Condominium Association relied on Defendant Alba’s statement that the real
problem was a broken sewer pipe and bilge from it which might extend 15 feet deep.
See column.

12.        As a result of Defendant Alba’s statement, the Condominium Association
copied to Plaintiff the part of the Condominium Act which says sewer pipes are not
common elements, and that therefore all the costs were Plaintiff’s. Exhibit A, second
paragraph.

13.        In fact, the outhouse pit extended 10 feet deep, and contained many
different old bottles, none of which could have been flushed down a toilet, and
which type of bottles are commonly held to be evidence of an outhouse pit. In fact
the excavation of the pit was never 8 feet wide as Christopher Alba wrote and had
published.

14.        There is a structural engineer’s report identifying the outhouse pit as such,
see page 4, paragraph numbered 5. Exhibit B.

15.        The soil analyzing (Geo-Test) company’s report says the soil from the
location of the pit was such that the structural engineer could say that there was on
old outhouse pit. Exhibit C.

16.        Without the proper payments from the Condominium Association, Plaintiff
could not pay her mortgages because she had used all her available money to
excavate the outhouse pit. She needed the other owners of the condominium
common area land where the outhouse pit was located to pay their shares. The other
shares together are 80% of the costs, which is about $10,000, with Plaintiff’s share
being 20%, which is about $2,500; totaling $12,500 (this figure may be too low as
all of the bills have not yet been added together). Plaintiff has already paid about
$6,000 and is desperately impoverished and terrified and suffering from emotional
distress as a result of not being paid the amounts owed by the Condominium
Association because the Association is relying on Christopher Alba who published
the statement “the real culprit: a nearby broken sewer pipe.”

17.        Plaintiff had known that in August she would not have rent from one of her
tenants who would be leaving and who had paid first and last month’s rent at the
beginning of the lease. So, Plaintiff had gotten in May an equity loan to cover
August so that her mortgages would not fall into arrears. Now, all of the equity loan
has had to be used to remedy the old out house pit which was a health hazard not
only to Plaintiff but also to neighbors. As a result of using the equity loan for the old
privy pit excavation, which was in fact a common area problem, Plaintiff’s
mortgages are all falling into arrears and Plaintiff is in fear and distress that her
properties will be foreclosed and that her credit report is being ruined.

18.        Without being able to make her mortgage payments, Plaintiff is in fear of
and may actually lose her property which is two rental units which support her
(giving her $300 a month after payments of the mortgages) and her home. These
properties are valued at over $500,000. If forced to sell one or more of them, the
loss of future appreciation will far exceed $500,000.

19.        If forced to sell, Plaintiff will also lose all rental income for any sold
property and she should be reimbursed for that loss.

20.        Last month Plaintiff had to get an expensive short term loan to pay one of
her mortgages. The cost of that loan was about $320.

21.        The damages listed above are the responsibility of not only Alba, but also
his corporation under which name he does business, and The Santa Fe New
Mexican which publishes the Santa Fe Real Estate Guide which published
Christopher Alba’s defamatory and libelous statements. These costs would not be
Defendants

responsibility but for the fact that by writing and publishing defamatory and false
statements the Defendants stopped the Manhattan Condominium Association for
paying their proper shares of the costs of common area problem resolutions and
remedies.

22.        Other defamatory statements include several statements equating Plaintiff’s
health problem of trouble breathing as being her negative reaction to costs.

23.        Plaintiff will produce doctor’s reports that Plaintiff’s trouble breathing was
related to swelling around her sternum caused by the hydrogen sulfide, and that the
swelling would be reduced by taking Celebrex, which was in fact the case.

24.        Other defamatory statements include writing and publishing that to save
money Plaintiff hired a couple of immigrant laborers.

25.        Plaintiff will provide evidence that she paid them what the non-immigrant
backhoe operator had asked, except the backhoe operator’s verbal quote was “to
start” and included the statement that Plaintiff’s wisteria (decades old) would not be
able to be saved.

26.        Other defamatory statements include writing and publishing that Plaintiff
was “forced to take refuge in a posh Santa Fe hotel to save her health.”

27.        Plaintiff will provide evidence that the hotel to which she went gave her a
large discount, allowed her to have her cat, provided breakfast, was close – which
was very important due to a medical problem Plaintiff has as a result of her B12
malabsorption illness, and allowed her to check in immediately, which none of the
hotels on Cerrillos Rd. which Plaintiff called would allow her to do, saying she had
to wait until the proper check in time, which was many hours later, and Plaintiff at
the time was feeling very sick and her cat was dragging herself and throwing up.

28.        Other defamatory statements include writing and publishing that the
plumber’s “quote made her breathing even worse.”

29.        Plaintiff will provide evidence that she hired the plumber and paid what was
asked without appearing to the plumber to have difficulty breathing.

30.        Other false statements include writing and publishing that Alba’s plan was
to follow a plan of “least cost” whereas in fact, when his plan was emailed to
Plaintiff it said it would cost 4,200 plus, though the actual numbers in the email
showed the amount as forty-two thousand dollars plus; to get permits (permits were
already in place and evidence of this will be provided), safety barricades (which
were scheduled); shoring (because he wanted to hand fill and hand tamp every eight
inches, the ten foot excavated pit) whereas the structural engineer

had suggested flow fill (see Engineers Inc. report, Doug McLeod’s hand written part
on page 4) which could be poured in minutes and cost around $600; plumbing repair
(which was already scheduled with the original plumber. Alba’s plan was totally
devoid of the most important immediate action which Plaintiff had requested, which
was to seal the sewer pipes so that hydrogen sulfide from the city sewer would stop
coming out right there and creating a highly toxic environment. In fact Plaintiff had
the pipes sealed on Monday by a friend, following Alba’s visit on that Saturday.

31.        Although Defendant Alba did not use Plaintiff’s name, his description was
clearly of Plaintiff and was clearly recognizable to anyone who lives near Plaintiff
and could see the ten foot hole, to the Condominium Association, to all the
numerous people Plaintiff had told about the outhouse pit problem, to all the people
who had worked here, and to anyone in the future to whom Plaintiff might speak
about the horrible problem this outhouse pit has been and who remembered Alba’s
article.

32.        Defendant Alba’s statement, “It was her compulsion to control every event
and person she came into contact with that would get her in the end,” is not only
defamatory it sounds like a threat for not hiring him; now that the Condominium
Association relies on Alba’s statements that the “real culprit” was the broken sewer
pipe, and refuses to pay any of the excavation costs that Kline has already covered,
it appears that Alba is making his threat real: he is getting me.

33.        The Defendant newspaper published all of the above defamatory
statements which it knew to be false or failed to verify.

34.        On or about July 19, 2003, though the letter is undated, Manhattan
Condominium Association wrote, “There is no evidence that the land under your
unit was previously used as a privy,” Exhibit A, and they offered only $1,500 to be
paid to Plaintiff’s contractor when it was patently evident that Plaintiff had not ever
had a contractor because she barely had the money to remedy the extreme health
problem without the added cost of a contractor.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against Defendants as follows:

1. Damages in the amount of $10,000, or a higher amount if such proves accurate,
as compensation for injury to Plaintiff's contractual relationship with the Manhattan
Condominium Association, as protected by the Condominium Act, wherein the costs
to remedy the outhouse pit problem which involved serious health hazards not only
for Plaintiff but also for neighbors, was a common expense because the outhouse pit
was in the common area.

2. Damages in the amount of $320 for the high price loan Plaintiff had to get to pay
her mortgages last month (September, 2003).

3. Damages in the amount of $2,000 for Plaintiff’s health care necessitated by the
hydrogen sulfide and the extreme emotional distress.

4. Damages in the amount of $250,000 for Plaintiff’s future health care necessitated
by the hydrogen sulfide, and if Plaintiff’s problems with balance which have been
causing her to bump into things and to fall make it clear that in the future she will
have to reside in a full care residence for older people who are sickly, then a much
higher amount, to be determined at trial.

5. Damages in the amount of $500,000 for the loss of Plaintiff’s property through
foreclosure, if during the course of this litigation foreclosure takes place; if only one
property were foreclosed then the value of that property as determined by the
highest appraisal, would be paid to the Plaintiff.

6. Damages in the amount of $500,000 for injury and damage to Plaintiff’s
reputation.

7. Damages in the amount of $500,000 for Plaintiff's emotional suffering.

8. If number 1 and number 2 should be called “Special damages” then this
paragraph is meant to identify them as such.

9. Punitive damages in the amount of $1,500,000

10. The remedy of canceling the “Forensic Architect” column so as not to continue
to imply that Christopher Alba is a highly reputable person in terms of what he
writes.

11. Costs and such other relief as this Court may deem proper.

Respectfully Submitted
Karen Mare Kline, August 26, 2003
729 W. Manhattan #3, Santa Fe, NM   (505) 820-6656

Subscribed and sworn to before me this        day of August, 2003
My Commission expires: