l 1

CM-010
~HORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address): ENDftSllll!dNLY
Barbara J. Parker (#69722)
Farrah Hussein (#305726) FILED
One Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, 6th fl. ALAMEDA COUNTY
Oakland, CA 94612
TELEPHONE NO.:510-238-6512 FAXNO.: 510-238-6500
The People of the State of California and City of Oakland
ATTORNEY FoR !NameJ:
APR 2 B zan
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF Alameda "',, .. -<:l~~ntoR couRT
sTREET ADDREss: 1225 Fallon St. CU~Rl\ ~~~~~{J4:tP~
MAILING ADDRESS: 6y -~'fr:i~F\OMA6, oupl)\y
CITY AND z1P coDE: Oakland, CA 94612
BRANCH NAME:
CASE NAME:
People ofthe State ofCA and City of Oakland v. George Dy Jr. et al.
CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET CASE NUMBER:
[l] Unlimited D Limited
Complex Case Designation
fl 1
! ~. f)
~ ) ('l .. . 'J ,. (1 8
1~ b' 7
(Amount (Amount D
Counter DJoinder
JUDGE:
demanded demanded is Filed with first appearance by defendant
.exceeds $25,000) $25,000 or less) (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.402) DEPT:
Items 1-6 below must be completed (see mstructtons on page 2).
1. Check one box below for the case type that best describes this case:
Auto Tort Contract Provisionally Complex Civil Litigation
D Auto (22) D
Breach of contracVwarranty (06) (Cal. Rules of Court, rules 3.400-3.403)
D Uninsured motorist (46) D
Rule 3.740 collections (09) 0 AntitrusVTrade regulation (03)
Other PI/PD/WD (Personal Injury/Property D
Other collections (09) 0 Construction defect (10)
Damage/Wrongful Death) Tort D
Insurance coverage (18) 0 Mass tort (40)
D Asbestos (04) D
Other contract (37) 0 Securities litigation (28)
D Product liability (24) Real Property 0 Environmentalrroxlc tort (30)
D Medical malpractice (45) D
Eminent domain/Inverse D Insurance coverage claims arising from the
D Other PI/PDIWD (23) condemnation (14) above listed provisionally complex case
Non-PI/PD/WD (Other) Tort D
Wrongful eviction (33) types (41)
D Business torVunfair business practice (07) W
Other real property (26) Enforcement of Judgment
D Civil rights (08) Unlawful Detainer 0 Enforcement of judgment (20)
D Defamation (13) D
Commercial (31) Miscellaneous Civil Complaint
D Fraud (16) D
Residential (32) D RIC0(27)
D Intellectual property (19) D
Drugs (38) 0 Othe~ complaint (not specified above) (42)
D Professional negligence (25) Judicial Review Miscellaneous Civil Petition
D Other non-PI/PDIWD tort (35) D
Asset forfeiture (05) 0Partnership and corporate governance (21)
Employment D
Petition re: arbitration award (11) 0Other petition (not specified above) (43)
D Wrongful termination (36) D
Writ of mandate (02)
D Other employment (15) D
Other judicial review (39)
2. This case LJ is LLJ is not complex under rule 3.400 of the California Rules of Court. If the case is complex, mark the
factors requiring exceptional judicial management:
a. D Large number of separately represented parties d. D
Large number of witnesses
b.D e. D
Coordination with related actions pending in one or more courts
in other counties, states, or countries, or in a federal court
f. D
Substantial postjudgment judicial supervision

b. [ZJ nonmonetary; declaratory or injunctive relief c. D punitive

NOTICE
Plaintiff must file this cover sheet with the first paper filed in the action or proceeding (except small claims cases or cases filed
under the Probate Code, Family Code, or Welfare and Institutions Code). (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.220.) Failure to file may result
in sanctions.
File this cover sheet in addition to any cover sheet required by local court rule.
If this case is complex under rule 3.400 et seq. of the California Rules of Court, you must serve a copy of this cover sheet on all
other parties to the action or proceeding.
Unless this is a collections case under rule 3.7 40 or a complex case, this cover sheet will be used for statistical purposes onlv.
flage 1 of2
Form Adopted for Mandatory Use CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET Cal. Rules of Court, rules 2.30, 3.220, 3.401}-3.403, 3.740;
Judicial Council of California Cal. Standards of Judicial Administration, std. 3.10
CM-01 0 [Rev. July 1, 2007] www.courtlnfo.ca.gov
 l
J

CM-010
INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO COMPLETE THE COVER SHEET
To Plaintiffs and Others Filing First Papers. If you are filing a first paper (for example, a complaint) in a civil case, you must
complete and file, along with your first paper, the Civil Case Cover Sheet contained on page 1. This information will be used to compile
statistics about the types and numbers of cases filed. You must complete items 1 through 6 on the sheet. In item 1, you must check
one box for the case type that best describes the case. If the case fits both a general and a more specific type of case listed in item 1,
check the more specific one. If the case has multiple causes of action, check the box that best indicates the primary cat,Jse of action.
To assist you in completing the sheet, examples of the cases that belong under each case type in item 1 are provided below. A cover
sheet must be filed only with your initial paper. Failure to file a cover sheet with the first paper filed in a civil case may subject a party,
its counsel, or both to sanctions under rules 2.30 and 3.220 of the California Rules of Court.
To Parties in Rule 3.740 Collections Cases. A "collections case" under rule 3.740 is defined as an action for recovery of money
owed in a sum stated to be certain that is not more than $25,000, exclusive of interest and attorney's fees, arising from a transaction in
which property, services, or money was acquired on credit. A collections case does not include an action seeking the following: (1) tort
damages, (2) punitive damages, {3) recovery of real property, (4) recovery of personal property, or (5) a prejudgment writ of
attachment. The identification of a case as a rule 3.740 collections case on this form means that it will be exempt from the general
time-for-service requirements and case management rules, unless a defendant files a responsive pleading. A rule 3.740 collections
case will be subject to the requirements for service and obtaining a judgment in rule 3.740.
To Parties in Complex Cases. In complex cases only, parties must also use the Civil Case Cover Sheet to designate whether the
case is complex. If a plaintiff believes the case is complex under rule 3.400 of the California Rules of Court, this must be indicated by
completing the appropriate boxes in items 1 and 2. If a plaintiff designates a case as complex, the cover sheet must be served with the
complaint on all parties to the action. A defendant may file and serve no later than the time of its first appearance a joinder in the
plaintiffs designation, a counter-designation that the case is not complex, or, if the plaintiff has made no designation, a designation that
the case is complex. CASE TYPES AND EXAMPLES
Auto Tort Contract Provisionally Complex Civil Litigation (Cal.
Auto (22)-Personal Injury/Property Breach of Contract/Warranty (06) Rules of Court Rules 3.400-3.403)
Damage/Wrongful Death Breach of Rental/Lease Antitrust/Trade Regulation (03)
Uninsured Motorist (46) (if the Contract (not unlawful detainer Construction Defect (1 0)
case involves an uninsured or wrongful eviction) Claims Involving Mass Tort (40)
motorist claim subject to Contract/Warranty Breach-Seller Securities Litigation (28)
arbitration, check this item Plaintiff (not fraud or negligence) Environmental/Toxic Tort (30)
instead of Auto) Negligent Breach of Contract/ ln.surance Coverage Claims
Other PIIPDIWD (Personal Injury/ Warranty (arising from provisionally complex
Property Damage/Wrongful Death) Other Breach of Contract/Warranty case type listed above) (41)
Tort Collections (e.g., money owed, open Enforcement of Judgment
Asbestos (04) book accounts) (09) Enforcement of Judgment (20)
Asbestos Property Damage Collection Case-8eller Plaintiff Abstract of Judgment (Out of
Other Promissory Note/Collections County)
Asbestos Personal Injury/
Wrongful Death Case Confession of Judgment (non-
Product Liability (not asbestos or Insurance Coverage (not provisionally . domestic relations)
toxiclenvironmentaQ (24) complex) (18) Sister State Judgment
Medical Malpractice (45) Auto Subrogation Administrative Agency Award
Medical Malpractice- Other Coverage (not unpaid taxes)
Physicians &Surgeons Other Contract (37) Petition/Certification of Entry of
Other Professional Health Care Contractual Fraud Judgment on Unpaid Taxes
Malpractice Other Contract Dispute Other Enforcement of Judgment
Real Property Case
Other PIIPD/WD (23)
Premises Liability (e.g., slip Eminent Domain/Inverse Miscellaneous Civil Complaint
and fall) Condemnation (14) RIC0(27)
Intentional Bodily lnjury/PD/WD Wrongful Eviction (33) Other Complaint (not specified
above) (42)
(e.g., assault, vandalism) Other Real Property (e.g., quiet title} (26)
Intentional Infliction of Declaratory Relief Only
Writ of Possession of Real Property Injunctive Relief Only (non-
Emotional Distress Mortgage Foreclosure harassment)
Negligent Infliction of Quiet Title
Emotional Distress Mechanics Lien
Other Real Property (not eminent
Other PI/PD/WD Other Commercial Complaint
domain, landlord/tenant, or
Case (non-tort/non-complex)
Non-PI/PDIWD (Other) Tort foreclosure)
Other Civil Complaint
Business Tort/Unfair Business Unlawful Detainer (non-tort/non-complex)
Practice (07) Commercial (31) Miscellaneous Civil Petition
Civil Rights (e.g., discrimination, Residential (32) Partnership and Corporate
false arrest) (not civil Drugs (38) (if the case involves illegal Governance (21)
harassment) (08) drugs, check this item; otherwise, Other Petition (not specified
Defamation (e.g., slander, libel) report as Commercial or ResidentiaQ above) (43)
(13) Judicial Review Civil Harassment
Fraud (16) Asset Forfeiture (05) Workplace Violence
Intellectual Property (19) Petition Re: Arbitration Award (11) Elder/Dependent Adult
Professional Negligence (25) Writ of Mandate (02) Abuse
Legal Malpractice Writ-Administrative Mandamus Election Contest
Other Professional Malpractice Writ-Mandamus on Limited Court Petition for Name Change
(not medical or legal) Case Matter Petition for Relief From Late
Other Non-PIIPD/WD Tort (35) Writ-Other Limited Court Case Claim
Employment Review Other Civil Petition
Wrongful Termination (36) Other Judicial Review (39)
Other Employment (15) Review of Health Officer Order
Notice of Appeal-Labor
Commissioner Appeals
CM010 [Rev. July 1. 2007] Page 2 of2
CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET
 Unified Rules of the Superior Court of California, County of Alameda

Case Number:

CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM

1 Hayward Hall of Justice (447)

1 Oakland, Rene C. Davidson Alameda County Courthouse (446) 1 Pleasanton, Gale-Schenone Hall of Justice (448)

Is this an un no

[1 75 Asbestos (D)
[ I 89 Product liability (not asbestos or toxic tort/environmental) (G)
[ I 97 Medical malpractice (G)
33 Other PIIPDIWD tort
Bus tort I unfair bus. practice (07) [1 79 Bus tort I unfair bus. practice (G)
Civil rights (08) [1 80 Civil rights (G)
Defamation (13) [ I 84 Defamation (G)
Fraud (16) [1 24 Fraud (G)
Intellectual property (19) [1 87 Intellectual property (G)
Professional negligence (25) [1 59 Professional negligence - non-medical (G)
non-PIIPDIWD tort 03 Other non-PIIPD/WD tort
38 Wrongful termination (G)
Other employment (G)

81
86 Ins. coverage - non-complex (G)
98 Other contract
Real Property 18 Eminent domain llnv Cdm (G)

Unlawful Detainer Unlawful Detainer - commercial Is the deft. in possession

47 Unlawful Detainer- residential of the property?
21 Unlawful detainer- Yes No
Judicial Review 41 Asset forfeiture
62 Pet. re: arbitration award
49 Writ of mandate
Is this a CEQA action (Pubi.Res.Code section 21000 et seq) [ ] Yes [ ] No

[1 77 Antitrust I Trade regulation

[1 82 Construction defect
[1 78 Claims involving mass tort
91 Securities litigation

Misc. Civil Petition

202-19 (511100) A-13

 SUM-100
SUMMONS FOR COURT USE ONLY
(SOLO PARA USO DE LA CORTE)
(CITACION JUDICIAL)
NOTICE TO DEFENDANT: ENDORSED
(AVISO AL DEMANDADO): FILED
George Dy Jr., Trustee of the Dy Children's Family Trust, Lani Dy, an ALAMEDA COUNTY
individual, Leticia de Leon, an individual, continued on Attachment A
APR 2 8 2017
YOU ARE BEING SUED BY PLAINTIFF:
(LO ESTA DEMANDANDO EL DEMANDANTE): CLERK ~~'JiE;:.J'.'rpJ~]{J9~ C.OUR.T
B _"/t]Liti!I!L~~
The People of the State of California, Plaintiff, and City of Oakland, a y --;;; ,":ff;i5'MA:3, ffi')pUi'Y-"""'
Municipal Corporation, Plaintiff and Real Party in Interest
NOTICE I You have been sued. The court may decide against you without your being heard unless you respond within 30 days. Read the information
below.
You have 30 CALENDAR DAYS after this summons and legal papers are served on you to file a written response at this court and have a copy
served on the plaintiff. A letter or phone call will not protect you. Your written response must be in proper legal form if you want the court to hear your
case. There may be a court form that you can use for your response. You can find these court forms and more information at the California Courts
Online Self-Help Center (www.courlinfo.ca.gov/selfhelp), your county law library, or the courthouse nearest you. If you cannot pay the filing fee, ask
the court clerk for a fee waiver form. If you do not file your response on time, you may lose the case by default, and your wages, money, and property
may be taken without further warning from the court.
There are other legal requirements. You may want to call an attorney right away. If you do not know an attorney, you may want to call an attorney
referral service. If you cannot afford an attorney, you may be eligible for free legal services from a nonprofit legal services program. You can locate
these nonprofit groups at the Cali.fornla Legal Services Web site (www.lawhelpcalifornia.org), the California Courts Online Self-Help Center
(www.courtinfo.ca.gov/selfhelp), or by contacting your local court or county bar association. NOTE: The court has a statutory lien for waived fees and
costs on any settlement or arbitration award of $10,000 or more in a civil case. The court's lien must be paid before the court will dismiss the case.
;AVISO/ Lo han demandado. Si no responde dentro de 30 dfas, Ia carle puede decidir en su contra sin escuchar su versi6n. Lea Ia informaci6n a
continuaci6n.
Tiene 30 D!AS DE CALENDAR/0 despues de que le entreguen esta citaci6n y papeles legales para presentar una respuesta por escrito en esta
corle y hacer que se entregue una copia a/ demandante. Una carla o una 1/amada telef6nica nolo protegen. Su respuesta por escrito tiene que estar
en formato legal correcto si desea que procesen su caso en Ia corle. Es posible que haya un formulario que usted pueda usar para su respuesta.
Puede encontrar estos formularios de Ia carle y mas informaci6n en el Centro de Ayuda de las Corles de California (wWw.sucorte.ca.gov), en Ia
biblioteca de /eyes de su condado o en Ia corle que le quede mas cerca. Sino puede pagar Ia cuota de presentaci6n, pida a/ secretario de Ia corle
que le de un formulario de exenci6n de pago de cuotas. Sino presents su respuesta a tiempo, puede perder e/ caso por incumplimiento y Ia corte le
podra quitar su sue/do, dinero y bienes sin mas adverlencia.
Hay otros requisitos legales. Es recomendable que /lame a un abogado inmediatamente. Sino conoce a un abogado, puede /lamar a un servicio de
remisi6n a abogados. Si no puede pagar a un abogado, es posible que cumpla con los requisitos para obtener servicios legales gratuitos de un
programs de servicios legales sin fines de /ucro. Puede encontrar estos grupos sin fines de lucro en e/ sitio web de California Legal Services,
(www.lawhelpcalifornia.org), en el Centro de Ayuda de las Cortes de California, (www.sucorte.ca.gov) o poniendose en contacto con Ia corte o el
colegio de abogados locales. AVISO: Por ley, Ia corle tiene derecho a reclamar las cuotas y los costos exentos por imponer un gravamen sobre
cualquier recuperaci6n de $10,000 6 mas de valor recibida mediante un acuerdo o una concesi6n de arbitraje en un caso de derecho civil. Tiene que
pagar el gravamen de Ia corle antes de que Ia corte pueda desechar el caso.
The name and address of the court is:
(EI nombre y direcci6n de Ia corte es):
1225 Fallon Street Oakland CA 94612

The name, address, and telephone number of plaintiff's attorney, or plaintiff without an attorney, is:
(EI nombre, Ia direcci6n y el numero de telefono del abogado del demandante, o del demandante que no tiene abogado, es):
Oakland City Attorney, Farrah Hussein, 1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, 6th Fl., Oakland, CA 94612 510-238-6512

DATE:
(Fecha)
~~~ ZS201r1 Ch d F'nk
a I e
clerk, by
(Secretario)
, Deputy
(Adjunto)
(For proof of service of this summons, use Proof of Service of Summons (form POS-010).)
(Para prueba de entrega de esta citation use el formulario Proof of Service of Summons, (POS-010)).
NOTICE TO THE PERSON SERVED: You are served
1. D
[SEAL]
as an individual defendant.
2. 0 as the person sued under the fictitious name of (specify):

3.
4.
Fonn Adopted for Mandatory Use
Judicial Council of California
SUM-100 [Rev. July 1, 2009]
D on behalf of (specify):
under: D CCP 416.10 (corporation)
D CCP 416.20 (defunct corporation)
D CCP 416.40 (association or partnership)
0 other (specify):
0 by personal delivery on (date):
SUMMONS
0 CCP 416.60 (minor)
D CCP 416.70 (conservatee)
D CCP 416.90 (authorized person)
Pa e 1 of 1
Code of Civil Procedure 412.20,465
www.courtinfo.ca.gov
Summons- Attachment A

Laura Panica, an individual

Chang H. Oh, an individual
Andrew Lee, an individual
Hong Gyun Ro, an individual
Sock Kyong Lee, an individual
Sang Long, an individual
Suk Choi, an individual
Hyun Kyung Lee, an individual
Hang Thi Corcoran, an individual
Hiroshi Odashima, an individual
Does One through Twenty
 I BARBARA J. PARKER, City Attorney - SB # 69722
OTIS MCGEE, Chief Asst. City Attorney- SB #071885
2 MARIA BEE, Special Counsel- SB #167716
FARRAH HUSSEIN Attorney - SB #305726
ENDORSED
FILED
3 One Frank H. Ogawa Plaza, 6th Floor . ALAMEDA COUNTY
Oakland, California 94612
4 Telephone: (510) 238-6512 Fax: (510) 238-6500 APR 2 B 2017
CE04109
5
CLERK ~{l~~tt~~~~~
6
Attorneys fo~Plaintiff, The People of
the State of California; and Plaintiff ey "''""'"'"J~~it'~trrvrA':~r:oa~MY
and Real Party in Interest,
7 City of Oakland

8
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9
COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
10
UNLIMITED JURISDICTION
11

12
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF
13 CALIFORNIA,
COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE
14 Plaintiff, and . RELIEF, CIVIL PENALTIES AND
OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF FOR
15 CITY OF OAKLAND, a Municipal Corporation,
VIOLATIONS OF:
16 Plaintiff and Real Party in Interest
(1) RED LIGHT ABATEMENT ACT
17 v. [Penal Code 11225 et seq.]

18 GEORGE DY JR., Trustee ofthe Dy Children's (2) PUBLIC NUISANCE [California Civil
Family Trust, LANI DY, an individual,
19 LETICIA DE LEON an individual, LAURA
Code 3479; 3480; Oakland Municipa
PANICA, an individual, CHANG H. OH, an Code 1.08 et seq.]
20 individual, ANDREW LEE, an individual,
HONG GYUN RO, an individual, SOOK (3) MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENT AND
21 KYONG LEE, an individual, SANG LONG, an MASSAGE THERAPISTS
individual, SUK CHOI, an individual, HYUN REGULATIONS [Oakland Municipal
22 KYUNG LEE, an individual, HANG THI Code 5.36 et seq.]
CORCORAN, an individual, HIROSHI
23 ODASHIMA, an individual, and Does ONE
through TWENTY
24 Defendants.

25

26

27

28

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, CIVIL PENALTIES AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF
Page 1 of 13
 1 Plaintiffs, the People of the State of California and the City of Oakland, a municipal

2 corporation and a chartered city, (collectively "Plaintiffs") allege:

3 INTRODUCTION

4 1. George Dy Jr., Trustee of the Dy Children's Family Trust, Lani Dy, an individual, Leticia de

5 Leon, an individual, Laura Panica, an individual, Chang H. Oh, an individual, Andrew Lee,

6 an individual, Hong Gyun Ro, an individual, Sook Kyong Lee, an individual, Sang Long, an

7 individual, Suk Choi, an individual, Hyun Kyung Lee, an individual, Hang Thi Corcoran, an

8 individual, Hiroshi Odashima, an individual, and Does One through Twenty (collectively

9 "Defendants") allowed and maintained a public nuisance at the massage establishment

10 commonly known as Evergreen, located at 3200 Telegraph Avenue, (hereinafter referred to

11 as "Evergreen") and the real property upon which it sits. Evergreen has a reputation for, and

12 is being used for, the purposes of assignation and prostitution.

13 2. The Oakland Police Department (hereinafter referred to as "OPD") has made eight

14 prostitution arrests on multiple occasions at Evergreen over the past four years. Despite the

15 repeated intervention of the OPD, the illegal activity at Evergreen has been ongoing.

16 Accordingly, because Defendants maintain and permit the ongoing prostitution business,

17 Plaintiffs file this action to enjoin Defendants from permitting and maintaining the nuisance,

18 to abate the nuisance, and to obtain all additional relief to which Plaintiffs are entitled on

19 behalf of the People of the State of California and the City of Oakland.

20 3. The real property subject to this action (hereinafter referred to as "the property") is a

21 commercial building with a situs address of 3200 Telegraph Avenue, Oakland, CA 94609.

22 4. The Assessor's Parcel Number (APN) is 9-746-25 and the land is legally described in

23 Attachment A.

24 PARTIES

25 5. The City of Oakland is a municipal corporation and a chartered city organized and existing

26 under the laws of the State of California.

27 6. The City of Oakland, by and through City Attorney Barbara J. Parker, has authority to bring

28 this action pursuant to the powers conferred on her by the Oakland City Charter and the State

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, CIVIL PENALTIES AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF
Page 2 of13
 1 of California.

2 7. Barbara J. Parker, as City Attorney for the City of Oakland, has authority to bring this action

3 in the name of the People of the State of California pursuant to California Penal Code

4 11226, California Code of Civil Procedure 731, and California Civil Code 3494.

5 8. Defendant George Dy Jr. is Trustee of the Dy Children's ~amily Trust, the registered owner

6 ofthe real property in question as of December 14, 2010. Plaintiffs are informed and believe,

7 and on that basis allege, Defendants Leticia de Leon and Laura Panica are also owners of the

8 property in question as of July 2014.

9 9. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege Defendant Lani Dy is the

10 property manager of the real property in question.

11 10. Plaintiffs are informed and believe that Defendants Chang H. Oh, Sook Kyong Lee, Hong

12 Gyun Ro, Hiroshi Odashima, and Andrew Lee were or are business owners at the time of the

13 illegal activity.

14 11. Plaintiffs are informed and believe that Defendants Sang Long, Suk Choi, Hyun Kyung Lee,

15 and Hang Thi Corcoran were or are operators of the business in question during the time the

16 illegal activity was occurring.

17 12. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege that each Defendant is acting as

18 the agent of the others and are liable for the acts of each.

19 JURISDICTION

20 13. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter because Evergreen and the real property upon

21 which the violations regularly occur are located in Oakland, Alameda County, California.

22 STATEMENT OF FACTS

23 14. On December 14, 2010 Defendant George Dy, of the Dy Children's Trust obtained title to

24 the property and is the owner of record today.

25 15. The property in question has had several false addresses associated with it over the past six

26 years including: 3129 Elm Street, 3133 Elm Street, 3150 Telegraph and 3170 Telegraph. The

27 true and correct situs address of the property, recognized by the Alameda County Parcel

28 Map, is 3200 Telegraph Avenue, Oakland, CA 94609.

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, CIVIL PENALTIES AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF
Page 3 of13
 1 16. Plaintiffs are infonned and believe, and on that basis allege that the false addresses listed
2 above in paragraph 15 were used by Defendants in furtherance of maintaining the illegal
3 activity.

4 17. In addition to false addresses, Evergreen has been known by several names, but is the same
5 illicit massage parlor business.
6 18. In the past, the illicit massage parlor on the property was registered on business tax
7 certificates with the City of Oakland as "Pinetree Wellness Center", "Pinetree" or "Ever
8 Green", but the business is in fact the same illicit massage parlor business in existence today
9 as Evergreen.
10 19. The illicit massage parlor. is also known online as "Evergreen Therapy" and "Evergreen
11 Spa," but is in fact the same illicit massage parlor business in existence today as Evergreen.
12 20. Websites that promote the business use the same business phone number irrespective of
13 which name or address is provided. In this complaint Evergreen will be used to refer to the
14 illicit massage parlor regardless of which name or address appears on the business tax
15 certificates, zoning documents, or online advertisements.
16 21. None of the defendants named in this action nor any of the other business names Evergreen
17 is known as has applied for, or was issued, a massage establishment pennit by the City of
18 Oakland.
19 22. Plaintiffs are infonned and believe, and on that basis allege, that as early as July of 2011
20 Evergreen, and the property upon which it sits, were used for the purposes of assignation and
21 prostitution.
22 23. Evergreen has operated as a brothel and gained a reputation as such within the community.
23 24. The OPD investigated and responded to Evergreen's activities as a place where acts of
24 prostitution were occurring on or about April of2012.
25 25. Plaintiffs are infonned and believe, and on that basis allege Defendants Chang H. Oh and
26 Sook Kyong Lee were business owners of Evergreen on or about April 2012.

27 26. Defendant Sook Kyong Lee has been affiliated with another illicit massage parlor in
28 Oakland, California doing business as 888 Spa. 888 Spa, as mentioned below, was owned by

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, CIVIL PENALTIES AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF
Pal!e 4 of 13
 1 Defendant Hiroshi Odashima. Plaintiffs filed suit against 888 Spa for the same violations
2 alleged in this complaint.
3 27. Defendant Chang H. Oh also owned another illicit massage parlor in Oakland, California. On
4 April 29, 2015 the Plaintiffs filed suit against the owners and operators of a massage parlor
5 known as Green Therapy pursuant to the Red Light Abatement Act (California Penal Code
6 Section 11225 et seq.). See Alameda County Superior Court No. RG15768389; On
7 December 6,2016 adefaultjudgl}lentwas entered againstchang H. Oh as the owner of the
8 massage parlor.
9 28. In April 2012 the OPD conducted an operation and arrested two female workers of
10 Evergreen for violations of California Penal Code 647(b), soliciting undercover OPD officers
11 to engage in sexual acts in exchange for money.
12 29. During the April 2012 OPD operation, one female worker pulled up her "mini dress" in a
13 private massage room and exposed her breasts to the undercover officer during the

14 solicitation.
15 30. During the April 2012 OPD operation, an officer noticed evidence of living quarters by
16 traveling persons. Additionally, the business did not appear to have a massage establishment
17 permit, licensed massage therapists, or enforce the requirement that masseurs wear
18 identifying badges or name tags.
19 31 .. On April 20, 2012 the Oakland City Administrator's Office issued a nuisance to abate notice
20 to property owner Defendant George Dy Jr. and property manager Defendant Lani Dy to
21 make them aware of the illegal activity.
22 32. On March 1, 2013 Defendant Hong Gyun Ro was approved for zoning clearance to operate
23 the massage parlor. In the year 2013, Defendant Hong Gyun Ro also appears on the business
24 tax certificate as the business owner of the illicit massage parlor.
25 33. On August 7, 2013 the OPD investigated and responded to Evergreen's activities as a place
26 where acts of prostitution were occurring. Through an undercover operation, OPD officers
27 arrested two female workers of Evergreen for violations of California Penal Code 647(b),
28 soliciting undercover OPD officers to engage in sexual acts in exchange for money and one

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, CIVIL PENALTIES AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF
PRP'P. "i nf 1'i
 1 worker for violations of California Penal Code 316, maintaining a disorderly house where
2 acts of prostitution occur.

3 34. During the August 2013 OPD operation, the OPD learned that one of the arrested workers
4 had previously been arrested in Gardenia, California for prostitution and working in massage
5 parlor without a massage license.
6 35. During the August 2013 OPD operation, the undercover officers described the clothing worn
7 by the workers as a "strapless mini-dress."
8 36. On November 5, 2013, the Oakland City Administrator's Office again issued a nuisance to
9 abate notice to property owner Defendant George Dy Jr. and property manager Defendant
10 Lani Dy to make them aware of the illegal activity.
11 37. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and on that basis allege that Defendant Hiroshi
12 Odashima was the business owner at this time.
13 38. Defendant Odashima has owned other illicit massage parlors in Oakland, California. In
14 September of 2016 the Plaintiffs filed suit against the owners and operators of a massage
15 parlor known as 888 Spa pursuant to the Red Light Abatement Act (California Penal Code
16 Section 11225 et seq.). See Alameda County Superior Court No. RG16833442. Hiroshi
17 Od~shimawas named as al)efendantfor b~irigth,e owner of888 Spa.
18 39. DefendantOdashirna is also the tenant in possession of another illicit massage parlor in
19 Oakland known as Oak Spaldcatedat800L Edgewater Drive. Plaintiffs filed suit against the
20 owner~ and oper:ators of this massage, parlor pursuant to the Red Light Abatement Act
21 (California Penal Code Section 11225 et seq.). See Alameda County Superior Court No.
22 RG17845916 where Hiroshi Odashimais named as a defendant.

23 40.1)efendant Hiroshi Odashima previously owned an illicit massage parlor in Sacramento

24 County, doing business as Sun bay Spa in Citrus Heights, California, from October 2006 to
25 September 2015. The City of Citrus Heights revoked the business license for prostitution
26 and lack of proper permi~s and business practices.
27 41. On January 23, 2014 Defendant Andrew Lee was approved for zoning clearance and appears
28 on the business tax certificates as the owner of Evergreen.

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, CIVIL PENALTIES AND 'OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF
Pat:~:e 6 of 13
 1 42. Various government agencies have prosecuted Defendant Andrew Lee for owning and

2 operating brothels under the pretext of being legitimate acupuncture businesses.

3 43. In June 2008, the Orange County District Attorney's Office brought forth eight misdemeanor

4 counts against Defendant Andrew Lee all relating to prostitution.activities occurring at Sun
5 Acupuncture, 64 7 South Beach Boulevard in La Habra, California.

6 44. On or about September 27, 2011, Defendant Andrew Lee pled no contest to Penal Code 315,
7 maintaining a brothel.

8 45. In January 2014~ the Attorney General's Office of California filed a formal Accusation on
9 behalf of the Acupuncture Board against Defendant Andrew Lee for owning and operating
10 several brothels in Montebello, California and Redondo Beach, California in 2010.

11 46. As a result of the Attorney General's Accusation, Defendant Andrew Lee's acupuncture
12 license was suspended for 30 days and he was placed on probation for seven years.

13 47. On November 19, 2014 the Garden Grove Police Department cited Defendant Andrew Lee
14 for various municipal massage parlor ordinance violations. Additionally, two other workers
15 were charged with Penal Code 315, maintaining a brothel, and Penal Code 647(b),
16 solicitation of prostitution, at an illicit business known as C&C Acupuncture Therapy.

17 Defendant Andrew Lee was in the receptionist area during the Garden Grove Police
18 . Department's operation. Defendant Andrew Lee was the owner and operator of C&C

19 Acupuncture Therapy at this time.

20 48. On July 1, 2014 Defendants Leticia de Leon and Laura Panica recorded an ownership
21 interest in the property in question with the county.

22 49. On April 21, 2015 the OPD investigated and responded to Evergreen's activities as a place

23 where acts of prostitution were occurring. Through an undercover operation, OPD officers

24 arrested two female workers of Evergreen for violations of California Penal Code 647(b),
25 soliciting undercover OPD officers to engage in sexual acts in exchange for money.

26 50. During the April 2015 operation, the officer again described the clothing worn by the

27 workers as a "strapless mini-dress."

28

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, CIVIL PENALTIES AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF
Pl'laP. 7 of 11
 1 51. On November 2, 2016 the OPD investigated and responded to Evergreen's activities as a

2 place where acts of prostitution were occurring. Through an undercover operation, OPD

3 officers arrested two female workers of Evergreen for violations of California Penal Code

4 647(b), soliciting undercover OPD officers to engage in sexual acts in exchange for money.

5 52. During the November 2016 operation, an undercover officer observed that the entry to the

6 business included a locked second interior door known as a "man trap" to screen clients and

7 avoid detection by law enforcement.

8 53. During the November 2016 operation, one undercover officer observed a worker remove her

9 "strapless mini dress," and underwear exposing her bare buttocks and breasts to him.

10 54. During the November 2016 operation, a worker took $140 from an undercover officer in a

11 private back room, left the room temporarily, and upon reentry removed all her clothing and

12 had a condom in her hand.

13 55. During each operation, the undercover officer was required to pay a house fee of $60 upfront

14 to the operator in order to be led to a private back room.

15 56. During the November 2016 operation, the undercover officers did not observe any of the

16 workers with their required identification badges or name tags, nor were they asked to

17 provide any registration information such as their names or addresses for a log upon entry.

18 57. During the April2015 and November 2016 operations, a worker of Evergreen engaged in a

19 law enforcement screening process by giving the undercover officers a table shower and

20 touching their groin area and buttocks to gauge their reactions before being led to the private

21 room.

22 58. Since July 2011 to the present, Evergreen has been heavily reviewed online by over 100

23 purchasers of sex on Rubmaps.com, a website used to review sexual services provided by

24 massage parlors.

25 59. Since at least April2012, Evergreen has been advertising on websites known to be used by

26 purchasers of sex, such as Backpage.com.

27 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION FOR VIOLATION OF THE RED LIGHT

28 ABATEMENT ACT BY PLAINTIFFS AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, CIVIL PENALTIES AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF
Pa11:e 8 of13
 1 [California Penal Code 11225 et seq.]

2 60. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference each preceding paragraph.

3 61. Plaintiffs bring this action pursuant to Penal Code 11225 et seq. ("Red Light

4 Abatement Act") in the name of the People of the State of California and the City of

5 Oakland.

6 62. During the period of approximately July 2011 through the present, Defendants

7 maintained and allowed Evergreen and the real property upon which it sits to be

8 used for the purpose of assignation and prostitution.

9 63. Defendants violated Penal Code 11225 because the OPD arrested eight workers of

10 Evergreen for violations of Penal Code 647(b), solicitation for prostitution and/or

11 Penal Code 316 maintaining a disorderly house (brothel).

12 64. Defendant George Dy Jr. is Trustee of the Dy Children's Family Trust, is liable for

13 violations of Penal Code 11225 as property owner pursuant to Penal Code 11226.

14 65. Defendant Lani Dy is liable for violations of Penal Code 11225 as property

15 manager pursuant to Penal Code 11226.

16 66. Defendants Leticia de Leon and Laura Panica are also liable for violations of Penal

17 Code 11225 as they have a recorded interest in the property pursuant to Penal Code

18 11226.
19 67. Defendants Chang H. Oh, Sook Kyong Lee, Hong Gyun Ro, Hiroshi Odashima, and

20 Andrew Lee are liable for violations of Penal Code 11225 as owners of the brothel

21 known as Evergreen and for conducting or maintaining it pursuant to Penal Code

22 11226.
23 68. Defendants Sang Long, Suk Choi, Hyun Kyung Lee, and Hang Thi Corcoran are

24 liable for conducting or maintaining Evergreen as a brothel pursuant to Penal Code

25 11226.
26 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION FOR PUBLIC NUISANCE BY PLAINTIFFS

27 AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

28 [California Civil Code 3479 and 3480]

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, CIVIL PENALTIES AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF
Page 9 of13
 1 69. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference each preceding paragraph.

2 70. Plaintiffs bring this action pursuant to California Civil Code 3479 and 3480 in the

3 name of the People of the State of California.

4 71. The conduct described in paragraphs 14-59 is a nuisance pursuant to Penal Code

5 11225(a) and Oakland Municipal Code 1.08.030(b).

6 72. Defendants' failure to prevent the ongoing promotion of and current criminal nuisance

7 activity at Evergreen unreasonably interferes with the community's comfortable

8 enjoyment of their properties and adversely impacts OPD's resources by using

9 extraordinary police costs and resources.

10 73. Plaintiffs have no adequate remedy at law, and unless Defendants are enjoined and

11 restrained by order of this Court, they will continue to maintain or permit nuisance

12 activity at Evergreen.

13 74. Oakland Municipal Code 1.08.020(A) (3) & (4) authorizes civil penalties to be

14 assessed for the occurrence of any public nuisance as established by State law or

15 common law or equity in jurisprudence.

16 TIDRD CAUSE OF ACTION FOR VIOLATION OF MASSAGE

17 ESTABLISHMENT AND MASSAGE THERAPIST REGULATIONS BY CITY OF

18 OAKLAND AGAINST DEFENDANTS CHANG H. OH, ANDREW LEE, HONG GYUN

19 RO, SOOK KYONG LEE, SANG LONG, SUK CHOI, HYUN KYUNG LEE, HANG THI

20 CORCORAN, AND HIROSili ODASHIMA

21 [Oakland Municipal Code 5.36 and 1.08 et seq.]

22 75. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference each preceding paragraph.

23 76. Defendants maintain, operate, and allow repeated violations of Oakland

24 Municipal Code ("OMC") 5.36.

25 77. Defendants Chang H. Oh, Sook Kyong Lee, Hong Gyun Ro, Hiroshi

26 Odashima, and Andrew Lee, as owners of Evergreen, are responsible for all violations of

27 OMC 5.36 pursuant to OMC 5.36:150.

28 78. Defendant Andrew Lee violated and continues to violate OMC 5.36.80(A) by

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, CIVIL PENALTIES AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF
Page 10 of 13
 1 failing to maintain and operate a massage parlor with a valid City of Oakland massage
2 establishment permit.

3 79. Defendants Sang Long, Suk Choi, Hyun Kyung Lee, and Hang Thi

4 Corcoran violated OMC 5.36.080(A) by opera#ng a massage parlor without a permit.

5 80. Defendants violated OMC 5.36.160(B) by failing to ensure workers

6 remain fully clothed at all times during work hours or carry identification badges with

7 their name, photograph, and permit number thereon.

8 81. Defendants violated OMC 5.36.160(E) by failing to maintain a client

9 register that lists all patrons, their names, addresses, dates, times, and services

10 provided.

11 82. Defendants violated OMC 5.36.160(1) by failing to provide in a

12 conspicuous public place massage services provided, ~ength of time for performance,

13 and cost of service.

14 83. Defendants violated OMC 5.36.160(1) by having online advertisements

15 for Evergreen that were and continue to be overtly sexual in nature.

16 84. Defendants violated OMC 5.36.160(K) by having payment for services

17 occur in places other than the reception area of the massage parlor.

18 85. Defendants allowed workers of Oak Massage Spa to perform massage

19 services without a valid permit which is prohibited by OMC 5.36.180(A).

20 86. OMC 5.36.280(D) and 1.08 authorize civil penalties to be assessed of up

21 to $1,000 per day for any violation of the massage establishment and massage

22 therapist regulations.
23 PRAYER FOR RELIEF
24 Wherefore, Plaintiffs pray that the Court:

25 First Cause of Action

26 87. Declare Evergreen a public nuisance in violation of the Red Light

27 Abatement Act and order Defendants to immediately abate all conditions that cause or
28 maintain the nuisance at the property pursuant to Penal Code 11225(a)(1), California

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, CIVIL PENALTIES AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF
Page 11 of13
 1 Civil Code 3779 and 3480, and OMC 5.36.280.

2 88. Permanently enjoin all Defendants from permitting or maintaining the nuisance

3 at the property.

4 89. Order Defendants, who shall be jointly and severally liable pursuant to

5 California Civil Code 3496(b), to pay City of Oakland's costs of $10,000 for OPD's

6 investigations and operations, $35,450 for the City Administrator's time, and reasonable

7 attorney's fees.

8 90. Enter in the judgment of this action an order of abatement pursuant to Penal

9 Code 11230(a), and that it direct the following:

10 a. All fixtures, musical instruments and moveable property used in conducting,

11 maintaining, aiding, or abetting the nuisance be removed from the building located on the

12 property described in this complaint, and sold in the manner provided for the sale of

13 chattels under execution;

14 b. that the part of the building located on the property described in in this

15 complaint shall be closed against its use for any purpose, and kept closed for a period of

16 one year, or in lieu of closing, if the Court finds that any vacancy resulting from closure

17 may create a nuisance or that closure is otherwise harmful to the community, the Court

18 shall order Defendants to each pay damages in an amount equal to the fair market rental

19 value of that part of the building on the premise for one year to the City of Oakland.

20 91. Order each Defendant, separately as individuals, to pay a civil penalty in the

21 amount of$25,000 Pursuant to Penal Code 11230(b).

22 92. Order each Defendant, separately as individuals, to pay the City all costs

23 incurred in closing and keeping closed Evergreen pursuant to Penal Code 11230(a)(4)

24 and 11231(3).

25 93. Order a receiver to be appointed pursuant to California Code of Civil

26 Procedure 564 to effectuate the Court's orders.

27 Second Cause of Action

28 94. Order all injunctive relief deemed necessary, which may include but is not

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, CIVIL PENALTIES AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF
Page 12 of 13
 1 limited to the following:

2 a. order Defendants to cease all operations of Evergreen;

3 b. enjoin Defendants from permitting or maintaining assignation or prostitution at

4 the property;

5 c. requiring any business that operates at the property to conform with state and

6 locallaw;

7 d. assess civil penalties pursuant to OMC 1.08 in the amount of$1000 per day.

8 Third Cause of Action

9 95. Order Defendants to pay the City of Oakland its costs, expenses, and

10 disbursements incurred by the City or any of its contractors in corrections, abatement,

11 and prosecution of the violations pursuant to OMC 5.36.280(E) in the amount $10,000

12 for the costs of the OPD's investigations and operations and $35,450 for the City

13 Administrator's time.

14 96. Assess civil penalties pursuant to OMC 5.36.280(D) and 1.08 in the

15 amount of$1,000 per day.

16 All Causes of Action

17 97. Enter judgment in favor of Plaintiffs against Defendants.

18 98. Order all other relief as the interests of justice may require.

19

20

21 DATED: April28, 2017

22 BARBARA J. PARKER, City Attorney

OTIS MCGEE, Chief Asst. City Attorney
23 MARIA BEE, Special Counsel
FARRAH HUSSEIN, Attorney for the City of Oakland
24

By:~~~~~~_,_____
25

26 Farrah Hussein for the People of the

State of California and City of Oakland
27

28

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF, CIVIL PENALTIES AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF
Page 13 of13
 ORDER NO.: 1117015479-JM

EXHIBIT A
The land referred to is situated in the County of Alameda, CITY of Oakland, State of California,
and is described as follows:

Parcel One:

Lots 10 and 42 and the Southern 40 feet of Lots 9 and 43, as the said lots are shown on the
"Map of Buena Vista Homestead, Oakland", filed February 24, 1868, in Book 3 of Maps, Page
25, in the office of the County Recorder of Alameda County.

Excepting any portion thereof lying within Telegraph Avenue, as it now exists.

Parcel Two:

Lot 11, as the said lot is shown on the "Map of Buena Vista Homestead, Oakland", filed
February 24, 1868, in Book 3 of Maps, Page 25, in the office of the County Recorder of Alameda
County.

Excepting any portion thereof lying within Telegraph Avenue, as it now exists.

Parcel Three:

Portion of Lots 43 and 44, as said lots are shown on the "Map of Buena Vista Homestead,
Oakland", filed February 24, 1868, in Book 3 of Maps, Page 25, in the office of the County
Recorder of Alameda County, described as follows:

Beginning at a point on the Western line of Elm Street, distant thereon 290 feet Northerly from
the Northern line of Hawthorne Avenue, as said street and avenue are shown on said map; and
running thence along said line of Elm Street, Northerly 30 feet; thence at a right angle
Westerly, 101.32 feet; thence at right angles Southerly 30feet; and thence at right angles
Easterly 101.32 feet to the point of beginning.

Excepting any portion thereof lying within Telegraph Avenue, as it now exists.

Parcel Four:

Beginning at a point on the Western line of Elm Street, distant thereon Northerly 320 feet from
the intersection thereof with the Northern line of Hawthorne Avenue, as said street and
avenue are shown on said map hereinafter referred to; running thence Northerly along said line
of Elm Street, 30 feet; thence at right angles Southerly 30 feet; thence at right angles Easterly
101.32 feet to the point of beginning.

Being a portion of Lot 44, as said lot is shown on the "Map of Buena Vista Homestead,
Oakland", filed February 24, 1868, in Book 3 of Maps, Page 25, in the office of the County
Recorder of Alameda County.

Page 1 of 2
Parcel Five:

Consisting of portions of Lots 8, 9, 43 and 44, as said lots are shown on the "Map of Buena
Vista Homestead, Oakland", filed February 24, 1868, in Book 3 of Maps, Page 25, in the office
of the County Recorder of Alameda County, described as follows:

Beginning at a point on the Easterly line of Telegraph Avenue which bears North 13 o 08' 11"
East, 327.95 feet from the point of intersection of the easterly line of Telegraph Avenue and the
Northerly line of Hawthorne Avenue, which was abandoned by ordinance No. 9268, Council of
the City of Oakland; thence South 76 38' 56" East, 130.85 feet; Thence South 13 23' 48"
West, 39.31 Feet; thence North 76 28' 21" West, 130.80 feet; thence North 130 08' 11" East,
38.90 feet to the point of beginning.

Parcel Six:

Consisting of Lot 41 and portions of Lots 12 and 40, as said lots are shown on the "Map of
Buena Vista Homestead, Oakland", filed February 24, 1868, in Book 3 of Maps, Page 25, in the
office of the County Recorder of Alameda County, described as follows:

Starting at a point on the Easterly line of Telegraph Avenue which bears North 130 08' 11" East,
149.51 feet from the point of intersection of the easterly line of Telegraph Avenue and the
Northerly line of Hawthorne Avenue, which was abandoned by ordinance No. 9268, Council of
the City of Oakland; thence South 76 25' 38" East, 106.88 feet; thence North 13 11' 35"
West, 65.80 feet; thence South 760 26' 41" East, 125.39 feet; thence South 13 16' 11" West,
65.80 feet; thence North 760 25' 38" West, 232.17 feet; thence North 13 08' 11" East, 15.90
feet to the point of beginning.

Excepting from Parcels 1, 3 and 4 above, all that portion conveyed to Peralta Hospital
Association, a nonprofit corporation, by Deed recorded July 7, 1976, Reel 4433, Image 508,
Official Records.

APN: 009-0746-025-00

Page 2 of 2