1 Thomas G.

Adams SBN 270808

Law Office of Thomas G. Adams
2 5425 Everglades St.
3 Ventura, CA 93003
Tel: (805) 229-1529
4 Fax: (805) 644-7390
5 E-mail: thomasgadams@gmail.com
6
Attorney for Defendant/cross-claimant, ROBERT ERINGER
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 WESTERN DIVISION
12
TC Reiner, an individual, CASE NO.: 2:18-cv-243 DSF-JPR
13
14
PLAINTIFF, DEFENDANT ROBERT
15 ERINGER’S COUNTERCLAIMS
v.
16 FOR:
17 (1) DECEIT/FRAUD
Robert Eringer, an individual, and
(2) SLANDER
18 Skyhorse Publishing, Inc., a Delaware
corporation, (3) COMMERCIAL
19 MISAPPROPRIATION OF
20 DEFENDANTS. ANOTHER’S LIKENESS
21 Robert Eringer, an individual,
22
23 COUNTER CLAIMAINT
24 v.
25
26
TC Reiner, an individual,

27
COUNTER DEFENDANT
28

-1-
ROBERT ERINGER’S COUNTERCLAIMS
 1 Defendant Robert Eringer (“Mr. Eringer”) comes now in support of his
2 Counterclaims and he does allege the following.
3 1. Plaintiff TC Reiner (“Reiner”) befriended Mr. Eringer while
4 socializing in Montecito, CA. Mr. Reiner learned that Mr. Eringer was, among
5 other things, a published author who had a new book coming to print soon. In
6 addition to this, Mr. Eringer is a private security consultant whose business
7 depends, in large part, on a reputation for honesty and discretion. Reiner solicited
8 Mr. Eringer and asked him to allow Reiner to photograph him for Mr. Eringer’s
9 book cover. Mr. Eringer explained that his publisher, co-Defendant Skyhorse
10 Publishing, had photographs that would be used but Reiner persisted and promised
11 that Mr. Eringer could use the photograph for the book cover without charge. Mr.
12 Eringer, for the reasons below, alleges that this was a false misrepresentation upon
13 which he reasonably relied to his detriment. During his solicitation, Reiner said
14 that perhaps if Mr. Eringer liked his work then Mr. Eringer would hire Reiner to
15 photograph the Eringer family. Mr. Eringer reluctantly agreed to sit for a portrait
16 for the book cover with Reiner but never agreed to any additional services. Reiner
17 took Mr. Eringer’s photograph and, unknown to Mr. Eringer, procured a copyright
18 on the picture. Reiner was granted no right to publish or profit from the photograph
19 by Mr. Eringer.
20 2. Following the photograph, Reiner began to pester Mr. Eringer about
21 when Reiner could take photographs of the Eringer family. Due to various travel
22 schedules and other commitments, Mr. Eringer explained that it was unlikely his
23 family could come together for a photograph. Reiner then contacted Mr. Eringer in
24 late 2017 and claimed, falsely, that Reiner was planning to move away from town
25 and would need to take the Eringer family photos soon. Mr. Eringer explained that
26 it was not going to be possible to arrange and said there would be no such photo
27 taken by Reiner. Reiner’s then falsely claimed that Mr. Eringer owed him for the
28 portrait taken for the book cover if Mr. Eringer did not agree to allow Reiner, for a

-2-
ROBERT ERINGER’S COUNTERCLAIMS
 1 fee, to photograph the Eringer family. Mr. Eringer replied that the book photograph
2 was taken gratuitously and he would not pay Reiner for it. This enraged Reiner.
3 3. In response, Reiner began to tell social acquaintances of Mr. Eringer
4 that Mr. Eringer owed money to Reiner. When this did not compel Mr. Eringer to
5 pay him, Reiner filed the instant action.
6 4. Upon information and belief, Mr. Eringer alleges that Reiner told
7 others that he had photographed Mr. Eringer for the book cover and showed the
8 book cover photograph of Mr. Eringer to others in an effort to procure business.
9 Mr. Eringer believes that Reiner may have profited by displaying the image Reiner
10 took of Mr. Eringer to them while soliciting business.
11 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
12 FRAUD/DECEIT
13 5. Mr. Eringer re-adopts and incorporates all of the allegations above for
14 each of the causes of action plead.
15 6. Reiner made a false representation, concealed his true intentions, or
16 did not disclose his true intentions, when Reiner promised to take a photograph of
17 Mr. Eringer for Mr. Eringer’s use on his book cover.
18 7. At the time Reiner made the representation, concealment, or
19 nondisclosure, Reiner knew that the representation, concealment, or nondisclosure
20
was false.
21
8. It was Reiner’s intent to defraud Mr. Eringer by getting Mr. Eringer to
22
accept his representation of a gratuitous photograph and then later compel Mr.
23
Eringer to hire Reiner to photograph the Eringer family.
24
9. Mr. Eringer reasonably relied upon Reiner’s representation and
25
believed that the photograph Reiner took of Mr. Eringer for his book cover would
26
be unconditional.
27
10. Mr. Eringer has been harmed by Reiner’s false representations,
28

-3-
ROBERT ERINGER’S COUNTERCLAIMS
 1 concealment, or nondisclosure, because Reiner demanded money from Mr. Eringer
2 for the photograph when Mr. Eringer decided not to hire Reiner to photograph the
3 Eringer family. Reiner’s lawsuit against Mr. Eringer for alleged copyright
4 infringement and breach of contract is in furtherance of this fraud and an attempt to
5 compel Mr. Eringer to pay for a photograph he never solicited.
6 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
7 SLANDER
8
11. Reiner publicly and falsely claimed that Mr. Eringer owed him money
9
for services.
10
12. Reiner’s statements about Mr. Eringer directly injure Mr. Eringer in
11
respect to his office, profession, trade or business by imputing something with
12
reference to his profession, trade, or business that has a natural tendency to lessen
13
its profits.
14
13. Reiner’s statements about Mr. Eringer constitute slander per se and
15
directly impact Mr. Eringer’.
16
14. Notwithstanding the fact that slander per se does not require actual
17
damages, Mr. Eringer has sustained damages as a result of Reiner’s slander.
18
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
19
COMMERCIAL MISAPPROPRIATION OF ANOTHER’S LIKENESS
20
21
15. Mr. Eringer is the subject of the photograph in dispute in this case.

22 16. Reiner copyrighted the image but does not have the right to publish or

23 profit from the image of Mr. Eringer.

24 17. Upon information and belief, Mr. Eringer alleges that Reiner used Mr.
25 Eringer’s likeness.
26 18. Reiner’s use of Mr. Eringer’s likeness was to Reiner’s benefit,
27 commercially or otherwise.
28 19. Mr. Eringer did not consent to Reiner’s use of Mr. Eringer’s likeness.

-4-
ROBERT ERINGER’S COUNTERCLAIMS
 1 20. Reiner intentionally, and knowing that he was not authorized to do so,
2 used Mr. Eringer’s likeness for Reiner’s advantage.
3 21. Mr. Eringer was harmed by Reiner’s use of Mr. Eringer’s image in an
4 amount to be proved at trial.
5 WHEREFORE, Mr. Eringer prays for the following:
6 1. For actual and punitive damages arising from Reiner’s fraud/deceit;
7 2. For per se damages and actual damages arising from Reiner’s slander;
8 3. For actual damages arising from Reiner’s commercial misappropriation
9 of another’s likeness;
10 4. For an award and judgment in favor of Mr. Eringer including costs of suit
11 and attorney fees; and
12 5. For any such other relief the Court may deem appropriate.
13
14 DATED: May 7, 2018 LAW OFFICE OF THOMAS G. ADAMS
15
By: s/Thomas G. Adams
16 Thomas G. Adams, attorney
Defendant/cross-claimant, ROBERT
17
ERINGER
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-5-
ROBERT ERINGER’S COUNTERCLAIMS