Here is a summary of the claims Locricchio is making against the state and other parties in a complaint filed in First Circuit Court:
Count 1: Tortious Interference with Contractual and or Business Relationship and Extortion. Suntera claims that it lost the opportunity to make $7 million from the manufacture and sale of electric vehicles because the defendants foiled Suntera’s business relationships through acts of libel, slander, and interference with grant funding. Suntera also claims the defendants used extortion to force Locricchio to sign a release document. For this, Suntera seeks compen satory damages of $7 million and punitive damages in the same amount.
Count 2: Breach of Contract and Impairment of Business Relationship. Defendants allegedly maliciously and intentionally inter fered in and blocked the release of approved federal funding to Suntera and made misrepresentations to the board of High Technology Development Corp. (HTDC) regarding Suntera, thereby impairing Suntera’s business relationship with third persons and resulting in a loss of economic expectancy.” The plaintiffs request compensatory damages in the amount of $8,580,000 and punitive damages in the same amount.
Count 3: Conflict of Interest. This alleges that the defendants diverted funds that were earmarked for Suntera to products in which Defendants had an interest, such as selling electric vehicles to Hawaiian Electric Company. For this, plaintiffs seek payment from HEVDP of $135,000 or the amount “a jury determines was diverted by Yun from the 1993 contract,” and punitive damages in the amount of $1 million.
Count 4: Violation of the Whistle Blowers Protection Act. “Defendants allegedly retaliated against Suntera after it notified the governor, University of Hawai’i, and the HTDC Board about a claimed forgery committed by Defendants regarding Suntera’s 1994 grant application for $2 million in federal funds.” The plaintiffs request $900,000, the amount anticipated by Suntera to be approved for a 1995-96 ARPA proposal; $135,000 (again for Yun’s alleged diversion of funds), $294,000 approved for release from a “1994 negotiated agreement”; $7 million for lost YB Planning contracts; $1 million for potential contracts with entities in New York; and $7 million in punitive damages.
Count 5: Breach of Contract and Infliction of Emotional Distress, and Pain. This count alleges that the defendants’ conduct in breaching the contracts inflicted emotional distress and physical injury to Suntera President Jonathan Tennyson. The plaintiff’s request unspecified compensatory damages for medical expenses, pain and suffering, and lost past and future earnings. They also seek unspecified punitive damages.
Count 6: Failure to Properly Discharge Offi cial Duties and Operating Beyond the Scope of Authority. This count alleges that HTDC Director Kim-Stanton and the Office of At torney General did not properly investigate allegations made by Locricchio. The attorney general, it is claimed, also participated in or condoned wrongful acts such as having its agent Alston Hunt Floyd & Ing (the law firm to which belonged the HTDC contract attorney, Everett Kaneshige) prepare an ‘extortion’ demand.” On this count, the plaintiffs seek $8 million in compensatory damages and $8 million in punitive damages.
Count 7: Diversion of Funds, Breach of Fiduciary Relationship, and Extortion. Defendants Yun and Hendrickson allegedly used privileged information to divert funds from Suntera to HECO; other defendants allegedly defamed Suntera on television news. On this count, the plaintiffs seek unspecified com pensatory and punitive damages.
Volume 8, Number 1 July 1997
Leave a Reply