Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Pg ID 94
v.
Matthew Finston is a New York resident who maintains his principal residence in
Samuel Charles Cary is a Texas resident who maintains his principal residence at
Addison Bradley Bachman is a New Mexico resident who maintains his principal
6.
Pg ID 95
CX3 Holdings, LLC is a Georgia limited liability company with its principal
place of business located at 3379 Peachtree Road, NE, Suite 555, Atlanta, Georgia 30326.
7.
Upon information and belief, Defendants are the owners, operators, and
science, industry, lifestyle, health, business and politics surrounding medical marijuana around
the world and related industry subjects.
9.
Michigan.
10.
article on May 8, 2015 entitled Potential Criminal Indictment of Stock Basher Matthew
Finston. (Ex. A, the Article.)
11.
As set forth below, Defendants published the Article in order to have a negative
impact on Finston in Michigan, and to bolster the value of a publicly traded Michigan
corporation.
12.
Michigan.
13.
the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 and the dispute is between citizens of different States
and a foreign state.
15.
Pg ID 96
17.
Finston has published a number of articles regarding companies that are vying to
20.
21.
CEN Biotech was a Michigan company, maintaining its principal office within
this District at 29235 Stephenson Highway, Suite 206, Madison Heights, Michigan 48071.
22.
Nearly one quarter of all the stockholders of CEN Biotech live in Michigan.
23.
24.
Finston was sued in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Michigan regarding his articles on CEN Biotech. (Ex. B.) That case was voluntarily dismissed
before service.
25.
entitled Potential Criminal Indictment of Stock Basher Matthew Finston. (Ex. A.)
26.
Defendants appear to have updated the Article since May 8, 2015 to include the
words From our viewpoint and allegedly. Such statements do not make the article any less
defamatory.
27.
Pg ID 97
The Article maliciously and falsely claims that Finston has engaged in obvious
and admitted fraudulent conduct and willful misrepresentations with the intent to manipulate the
price of FITX and cause a loss of value to shareholders stock as sellers or purchasers. His
alleged fraudulent conduct satisfies all of the elements . . . necessary to constitute a Rule 10b-5
violation. (Ex. A.)
28.
The day that the Article was published, May 8, 2015, was the same day that
unrestricted. The market value of those shares had a redemption value of $952,000.
30.
Finston, in his articles regarding CEN Biotech, stressed concern regarding the
Specifically, Finstons concern was that 136 million shares becoming freely
tradeable could mean excessive dilution for non-insider shareholders, to the benefit of insider
shareholders.
32.
Upon information and belief, the Article was published to have the specific effect
of reassuring Michigan investors that their investments in CEN Biotech were still valuable, at the
expense of defaming Finston in the eyes of the Michigan investors.
33.
The Article was viewed by Michigan residents, and Michigan residents promoted
The Article is defamatory. Finston has not engaged in fraudulent conduct, and
Finston has not made willful misrepresentations to manipulate stock prices or cause a loss of
value to shareholders stock.
35.
Pg ID 98
Rather, given the timing of the Article and the restrictions on CEN Biotech stock,
it appears that the Article was published to manipulate the stock prices of CEN Biotech.
36.
The Article was published maliciously, with knowledge that it was false, or with
On May 10, 2015, Finston demanded a retraction of the Article. (Ex. C.)
38.
Defendants did not respond to Finstons demand for retraction, and Defendants
41.
42.
44.
The Article is capable of being viewed by anyone in the world with internet
46.
The Article was published maliciously, with knowledge that it was false, or with
access.
48.
49.
Pg ID 99
50.
52.
53.
Upon information and belief, the Article was viewed by thousands of people, if
not millions of people, because it is capable of being viewed by anyone in the world with internet
access.
54.
Defendants knew or acted with reckless disregard as to the falsity of the Article
56.
Awarding Finston money damages sufficient to compensate him for all forms of
economic loss including, without limitation, actual, incidental, consequential, and/or exemplary
damages;
B.
C.
Awarding Finston all legal fees and costs associated with bringing this lawsuit;
D.
Awarding Finston any and all such other relief as this Court deems just, equitable
and
Pg ID 100
Jury Demand
Finston demands a jury for all matters so triable.
Respectfully submitted,
BOYLE BURDETT
Pg ID 101
v.