Case: 3:10-cv-00054-DCR Doc #: 3 Filed: 08/16/10 Page: 1 of 5 - Page ID#: 6

United States District Court

Eutern District of Kentucky
(Frankfort Division)

Micbael Dean Vaughan

Plaintiff Judge:

Vi.
COMPLAINTWlTH
Rodney Hayes
DEMAND FOR JlJItY TRIAL
Defendant

COMPLAINT WITH DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff Michael Dean Vaughan alleges against Defendant Rodney Hayes in his individual
capacity rCOl Hayes") alleges as follows:

Nature of Action

1. This is an action for Defamation, including Defamation per se, Invasion of Privacy, False light,
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, and for Punitive Damages. Plaintiff seeks
compensatory damages, costs, and permanent injunctive relief.

I. THE PARTIES

2. Plaintiff Vaughan is a citizen of the Commonwealth of Kentucky and a resident of Campbell

County, Kentucky.

3. Defendant Hayes is a National Guard Bureau (NGB) Federal Technician. Currently, and at all
times relevant to this Complaint, Hayes is a resident of Franklin County, Kentucky.

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. This action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and at least the Fourth and Fourteenth
Amendments to the United States Constitution. The jurisdiction of this Court is predicated on 28
U.S.C. §§ 1343 and 1331 and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff further invokes the pendant jurisdiction
of this Court to consider claims arising under state law.

III. STATEMENT OF THE CASE

5. On August 18th, 2009, Plaintiff attended a meeting held by Rodney Hayes ("COL Hayes")
regarding a complaint from a woman by the name of Mary E. Kounovsky (KY E.D. 3:10-CV-5)
regarding the Plaintiff Michael Vaughan.

6. At this meeting, Plaintiff was advised that Mary Elizabeth Kounovsky (AKA: Mary E.
Brigham/Goad) ("Mary"), had directly contacted COL Rodney Hayes. COL Hayes advised that he
had conducted an 'investigation' and had determined and stated as fact that the Plaintiff Vaughan
had:
 Case: 3:10-cv-00054-DCR Doc #: 3 Filed: 08/16/10 Page: 2 of 5 - Page ID#: 7

a. Posted pornographic material purporting to be of Mary Kounovsky on the Internet,

b. Contacted "peers within Mary Kounovsky's workspace in order to harass Marv",
c. Created separate online persona's in order to harass Mary Kounovsky.
d. engaged in an extramarital sexual relationship with Mary Kounovsky

7. COL Hayes also advised that the Plaintiff was not allowed to rebut this invasion of his privacy
and publication of private facts or rebut the defamatory statements made by Mary Kounovsky
during this meeting.

8. COL Hayes made these statements of fact in the presence of a number of individuals at this
meeting.

9. Vaughan never consented nor wanted Hayes's actions in causing the Incident.

10. As a result of the above alleged conduct. Plaintiff Michael Vaughan sustained deprivations to his
civil rights, suffered and will continue to suffer from mental distress with resulting physical
manifestations, humiliation, embarrassment, and defamation of his character and reputation for
which Plaintiff is entitled to monetary relief.

11. At the time of the Incident, Hayes was an employee of the Commonwealth of Kentucky as an
NGB Federal Technician ("NGB Technician-) and was not acting within the scope of his
employment at the time of the Incident.

12. At the time of the Incident, Plaintiff Vaughan was an employee of R.AM. (Research Analysis &
Maintenance) and working on behalf of the Kentucky National Guard as a Contracted Computer
SpecialiSt.

13. At no time was Plaintiffs Employment with RA M. related to his Military Duties nor was the
position conditional on his Military Status.

14. At no time while Plaintiff worked for RAM was the Defendant Hayes in the Plaintiff's chain of
command in his military status.

15. Hayes acted intentionally in maliciously Defaming, and violating the constitutionally protected
Privacy Rights of the Plaintiff.

16. The Commonwealth of Kentucky has a one year statute of limitations for most personal injury
causes of action.

17. Vaughan is required to file suit against Hayes on his causes of action by August 18th, 2010.

IV. CAUSES OF ACTION

Count One (Defamation PER SE, Including Slander Per Se & Libel Per Se)

18. Plaintiff Vaughan realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1-17 as though fully set forth herein.

19. Defendanfs statements of fact that Plaintiff had ...

 Case: 3:10-cv-00054-DCR Doc #: 3 Filed: 08/16/10 Page: 3 of 5 - Page ID#: 8

a. Posted pornographic material purporting to be of Mary Kounovsky on the Internet.

b. Contacted "peers within Mary Kounovsky's workspace in order to harass Mary".
c. Created separate online persona's in order to harass Mary Kounovsky.

... are false and defamatory and made with common law malice-spite and ill will. It is also
made with actual malice-reckless disregard of the truth and/or knowing falsity. Defendant
knows the statements to be false because he lacks facts necessary to it Defendanfs
accusations were made with the intent to discredit, disgrace, and to defame Plaintiff
Vaughan.

20. Defendanfs statements of fact that Plaintiff had ...

a. engaged in an extramarital sexual relationship with Mary Kounovsky

... are an unconstitutional invasion of the Plaintiffs privacy and a publication of private
facts completely unrelated to his job duties and made with common law malice-spite and
ill will.

21. Defendant's false statements constitute defamation per se under all applicable laws, by falsely
accusing the Plaintiff Vaughan of committing crimes, and by prejudicing the Plaintiff Vaughan In
his profession as an Information Security Engineer and as an Army National Guard Engineer
Officer.

22. Defendanfs false statements have damaged the Plaintiff In both his profeSSional and personal
life, by interfering with the Plaintiffs business relationships, by damaging Plaintiffs reputation in
the community, and by interfering in Plaintiffs personal relationships with persons afraid that
some of the false statements might be true.

23. The action or inaction of the Defendant as described herein was malicious, intentional, reckless,
and/or done with a deliberate indifference as to Plaintiffs rights.

24. As a result of the above alleged conduct, Plaintiff Michael Vaughan sustained deprivations to his
civil rights, suffered and will continue to suffer from mental distress with resulting physical
manifestations, humiliation, embarrassment, and defamation of his character and reputation for
which Plaintiff is entitled to monetary relief. Plaintiffs damages are directly and proximately
caused by the conduct of Defendant as alleged herein and will be proved at trial, but are in
excess of $25,000.

Count Two (Invasion of Privacy)

25. Plaintiff realleges the statements made in paragraphs 1 through 17 above.

26. Defendanfs conduct as described herein constitutes a violatiOn of Plaintiff Vaughan's civil rights
by including, but limited to, a violation of his privacy rights, due process under the law.
Defendanfs conduct as described herein constitutes a violation of Plaintiff Vaughan's civil rights
by including, but limited to, a violation of his privacy rights and due process under the law. said
conduct was such which reasonable individuals would know to be in violation of Plaintiffs clearly
established Constitutional rights.

27. The action or inaction of the Defendant as described herein was malicious, intentional, reckless,
and/or done with a deliberate indifference as to the Plaintiffs rights.

28. As a result of the above alleged conduct, Plaintiff Michael Vaughan sustained deprivations to his
civil rights, suffered and will continue to suffer from mental distress with resulting physical
manifestations, humiliation, embarrassment, and defamation of his character and reputation for
which Plaintiff is entitted to monetary relief. Plaintiffs damages are directly and proximately
 Case: 3:10-cv-00054-DCR Doc #: 3 Filed: 08/16/10 Page: 4 of 5 - Page ID#: 9

caused by the conduct of Defendant as alleged herein and will be proved at trial, but are in
excess of $25,000.

29. The conduct of Defendant as described herein further constitutes an invasion to the seclusion
and privacy of Plaintiff Vaughan, which constitutes a recognized tort upon Plaintiffs privacy and
seclusion. Said invasion by the Defendant was done maliciously and with no rational
governmental or proprietary purpose, and Plaintiff was further injured by said conduct.

Count Three (False Light:)

30. Plaintiff Vaughan realleges and incorporates paragraphs 1-17 as though fully set forth herein.

31. Defendant Rodney Hayes has made the false light statements detailed above, and yet other false
statements, regarding the Plaintiff.

32. Defend$nt's false statements are highly offensive to reasonable persons.

33. Defendant published these false statements with actual malice toward the Plaintiff, as illustrated
by the malicious tone of the statements, the clearly false nature of the statements, and the intent
to harm the Plaintiff through the false nature of the statements.

34. As a result of the above alleged conduct, Plaintiff Michael Vaughan sustained deprivations to his
civil rights, suffered and will continue to suffer from mental distress with resulting physical
manifestations, humiliation, embarrassment, and defamation of his character and reputation for
which Plaintiff is entitled to monetary relief. Plaintiffs damages are directly and proximately
caused by the conduct of Defendant as alleged herein and will be proved at trial, but are in
excess of $25,000.

Count Four (Intentional Infliction of Emotional Dlatre8sl0utrage)

35. Plaintiff Vaughan rea lieges and incorporates paragraphs 1-17 as though fully set forth herein.

36. Defendanfs conduct detailed above, and on information and belief Defendant's yet-undiscovered
conduct, is extreme and outrageous.

37. Through the intentional conduct described in this Complain, Defendant intended to inflict severe
emotional distress upon the Plaintiff, and is further aware that there Is at least a high probability
that their conduct will cause severe emotional distress.

38. As a result of the above alleged conduct, Plaintiff Michael Vaughan sustained deprivations to his
civil rights, suffered and will continue to suffer from mental distress with resulting physical
manifestations, humiliation, embarrassment, and defamation of his character and reputation for
which Plaintiff is entitled to monetary relief. Plaintiffs damages are directly and proximately
caused by the conduct of Defendant as alleged herein and will be proved at trial, but are in
excess of $25,000.

Count Five (Punitive Damages)

39. Plaintiff rea lieges the statements made in paragraphs 1 through 38 above.

40. That at all times mentioned herein, Hayes's conduct toward Vaughan was committed with
oppreSSion and/or malice, done willfully and without justification, thereby making Hayes liable to
Vaughan in punitive damages pursuant to the common law, KRS 411.184, and KRS 411.186.
 Case: 3:10-cv-00054-DCR Doc #: 3 Filed: 08/16/10 Page: 5 of 5 - Page ID#: 10

PRAYER FOR BELIEF

Wherefore, Plaintiff respectfully prays that the Court grant the following relief:

A. A permanent injunction prohibiting Defendant, his agents, servants, employees, and/or

persons acting in concert or participation with him, from publishing or republishing any further
the Defendant's defamatory statements regarding the Plaintiff.

B. An order requiring the Defendant, his agents, servants, employees, and/or persons having
acted in concert or participation with him to retract all statements regarding the Plaintiff to all
persons they have published or republished to, up to and including any individuals or entities
send retractions to any persons, or entities they have published the defamatory content to.

C. An order to third parties where the Defendant has published his defamatory statements that
all such material is stricken from any records either ON or OFF the Internet. That any and all
accounts controlled by the Defendant or a,d parties used in publishing the Defamatory content
be deactivated, and that those third parties take reasonable, available steps to prevent the
Defendant from republishing further defamatory statements about the Plaintiff.

D. An order to third parties where the Defendant, his agents, servants, employees, and/or
persons acting in concert or partiCipation with him, published or republished to, to
Immediately reverse any and or all negative personnel or administrative actions, taken
against the Plaintiff based on the Defendant's defamatory statements or allegations.

E. An award of compensatory damages, including damages for emotional distress of at least

$1,000,000. 00 [one million dollars] :

F. An award of punitive damages atop compensatory damages in an amount deemed just,

along With interest, costs incurred by Plaintiff.

G. All other further relief to which Plaintiff is entitled.

Dated:August16~,2010

:~pectfuu~~----------
VAUGH~
'MICHAEL DEAN
Plaintiff (PRO SE)
205 Bluegrass Dr. APT 72B
Newport, KY 41071
(502) 628-8449