Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A.C. Carter vs. Lane Kiffin Lawsuit
A.C. Carter vs. Lane Kiffin Lawsuit
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
3/21/2017 3:36 PM
58-CV-2017-900270.00
CIRCUIT COURT OF
SHELBY COUNTY, ALABAMA
MARY HARRIS, CLERK
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF SHELBY COUNTY, ALABAMA
COMPLAINT
PARTIES
1. Plaintiff, ANTONIO CARTER, is over the age of nineteen (19) years, and is a resident citizen
college football player at the University of Alabama, with more than ten years of experience as
an assistant football coach, both at the collegiate and high school levels.
2. Defendant LANE KIFFIN is over the age of nineteen (19) years, and is believed to be a
resident citizen of Boca Raton, Palm Beach County, Florida. At all times relevant hereto,
LANE KIFFIN was the head football coach and an employee/ agent of Defendant
principal campus located in Boca Raton, Palm Beach County, Florida. At all times relevant
hereto, Defendant FAU was the employer of Defendant LANE KIFFIN and a political
DOCUMENT 2
4. Defendant STATE OF FLORIDA is the 27th state to the United States of America. At all
times thereto, Defendant STATE OF FLORIDA was the employer of Defendant LANE
KIFFIN.
INTRODUCTION
5. This action arises from tortuous conduct by Defendants LANE KIFFIN and Defendant
CARTER a position to join the football coaching staff at Defendant FAU, under head
football coach Defendant LANE KIFFIN. It is believed that, at the time of the offer,
Defendants knew that Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER had a family friendship with a
coveted football prospect (hereinafter "the prospect" or "the coveted prospect"), and
believed Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER could get the coveted prospect to commit to
FAU.
assistant wide receivers coach and assistant strength and condition coach just one week .
before National Signing Day, February 1, 2017. Such offer was made without any
contingencies. Plaintiff accepted the offer and LANE KIFFIN personally ratified it.
7. Upon his hiring, Defendant LANE KIFFIN immediately tasked Plaintiff ANTONIO
CARTER with the recruitment of the coveted prospect. Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER
diligently carried out his assignment and secured the prospect's commitment. In addition,
Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER participated in the recruitment of two other recruits who
8. Immediately after National Signing Day-and after the coveted recruits had submitted their
executed letters of intent-Defendants LANE KIFFIN and FAU revoked the employment
2
DOCUMENT 2
agreement with Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER on grounds that, as described below, were
pre-textual in nature and not applied to the hiring of other FAU assistant coaches.
9. Despite obviously benefiting from the labors of Plaintiff, Defendants LANE K.IFFIN,
FAU, and, in turn, STATE OF FLORIDA have failed to pay and have refused to pay
10. On or about December 13, 2016, Defendants STATE OF FLORIDA and FAU hired
Defendant LANE KIFFIN to serve as head football coach for Defendant FAU.
immediately began to recruit and hire assistant coaches to join the football staff at Defendant
FAU.
12. On or about December 14, 2016, Defendants STATE OF FLORIDA and FAU hired Wilson
Love (hereinafter "Coach Love") as strength and conditioning coach for Defendant FAU.
Coach Love was hired at the request and recommendation of Defendant LANE KIFFIN.
13. Within the same week of Coach Love's hire, Coach Love reached out to Plaintiff ANTONIO
14. On January 25, 2017-just seven days before National Signing Day-Defendant LANE
assistant wide receivers coach and assistant strength and conditioning coach at Defendant FAU.
The offer was for a one-year term to begin immediately, consisting of a compensation package
of $40,000 salary, up to $4,000 for relocation expenses, and eligibility for various coaching
bonuses. No contingencies were placed upon said offer. Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER
15. At all times relevant to the offer and acceptance of the position with Defendant FAU, Plaintiff
3
DOCUMENT 2
ANTONIO CARTER resided in Shelby County, Alabama, and was physically in Shelby
16. All communications were transmitted to Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER while he was in
Shelby County to entice him to leave the state and take the offered job in Florida.
17. In reliance on said offer, Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER immediately began to make initial
18. After Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER accepted the offer, Coach Love informed Plaintiff
19. On January 27, 2017, Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER informed Coach Love that he had not
received an e-mail from FAU Human Resources regarding any "paperwork." Coach Love
reassured Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER that the paperwork was coming and that he was
20. On January 28, 2017, Defendant LANE KIFFIN sent a text message to Plaintiff ANTONIO
21. Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER immediately replied to Defendant LANE KIFFIN that he
was waiting on the paperwork and that he could be there as soon as possible. In response,
Defendant LANE KIFFIN reassured Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER that he was hired and
the deal was "done." Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER was also told by Wilson Love to get on
down to campus to get started. Neither coach ever wavered on the finality of the hiring nor
22. In reliance upon Coach Love's and, more importantly, Defendant LANE KIFFIN's
representations that Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER's employment was finalized, Plaintiff and
his wife immediately resigned from their current jobs to facilitate their move to Boca Raton.
4
DOCUMENT 2
Plaintiff and his wife also began the school-transfer process so Plaintiff's school-age children
could leave their current schools and enroll in schools in the Boca Raton area.
23. Immediately after finalizing the hiring of ANTONIO CARTER, Plaintiff ANTONIO
CARTER was assigned by LANE KIFFIN to recruit a junior college prospect from Plaintiff
24. Said prospect was a highly-touted, "4-star" athlete that was recruited in high school by
numerous Division I college football programs. Following his senior high school season, the
prospect signed a letter of intent to play football at the University of Florida. However,
25. Tbis coveted prospect was a close family friend of Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER, and the
prospect's family had just celebrated New Year's Eve together with Plaintiff ANTONIO
CARTER and his family just a few weeks earlier. It is believed that this relationship between
Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER and the coveted prospect was known to the coaches and
26. Pursuant to LANE KIFFIN and Coach Love's requests, Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER
27. On January 30, 2017, it was stressed by Coach Love that Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER
needed to get down to campus as soon as possible because LANE KIFFIN wanted him down
Boca Raton the following day. Later that day, Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER finally received
an e-mail from FAD's Department of Human Resources, stating, in pertinent part, ''Welcome
to Florida Adantic University. Athletics has notified us of your acceptance of a position with
the Football program." The e-mail went on to read, however, "Tbis offer is contingent upon
1This is not the only prospect that Carter was tasked with recruiting. In addition to this prospect, Carter's efforts
successfully secured commitments from two other prospects for FAU on National Signing Day.
5
DOCUMENT 2
28. This post-acceptance e-mail was the first mentioning of any contingency upon Plaintiff's
employment This attempted contingency came after Defendant FAD, by and through its
employees/ agents Coach Love (who had actual authority or, at a minimum, apparent
authority to extend such an offer) had already offered the position, without contingency, and
Plaintiff accepted the position. This attempted contingency also came after Defendant LANE
KIFFIN ratified the offer/ acceptance, without contingency, through telling Plaintiff
ANTONIO CARTER his employment was "done" before any paperwork was received.
29. The e-mail from FAD's Department of Human Resources went on to explain that Plaintiff
would receive an e-mail from a third-party employment company that would necessitate
ANTONIO CARTER received the third-party e-mail and immediately completed all
Plaintiff's work or services in any way. Instead, Defendant LANE KIFFIN continued to
converse with Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER about his recruiting efforts towards his
assigned prospects.
30. The next day, January 31, 2017, Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER flew to Boca Raton to join his
new colleagues on the FAU coaching staff. Coach Love picked him up from the airport and
immediately took Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER to meet the coaches, including Defendant
CARTER about his efforts to sign the coveted prospect and the team's recruitment strategy
FAD football facility for the team's morning workouts at 5:00 A.M. Shordy thereafter,
6
DOCUMENT 2
ANTONIO CARTER-and informed them that the first coach to get a recruit to fax in their
letter of intent would get a cash bonus. Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER replied, messaging
Defendant LANE KIFFIN that he was "On it!!" Defendant LANE KIFFIN then messaged
Plaintiff, stating that the coveted prospect could "screen shot u [sic]" his letter of intent.
32. Throughout the course of the day, there were additional texts and communications between
Defendant LANE KIFFIN and Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER about various prospects and
33. Ultimately the coveted prospect, and two others prospects Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER
was tasked with recruiting, signed and sent their letters of intent in to Defendant FAU.
34. On February 2, 2017, Defendant FAU, by and through their Human Resources Department, e-
mailed Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER asking for clarification of "concerns" with the
background check Defendant FAU had conducted on Plaintiff. Specifically, Defendant FAU
inquired about Plaintiff's credit history, previous minor criminal charges/traffic violations, and
response to each alleged concern and offered to secure all documentation necessary to verify
35. Meanwhile, Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER continued to work in his role as assistant wide
receivers and assistant strength and conditioning coach. Because Defendant LANE KIFFIN
informed the staff that they had the following week of February 5th through February 10th off,
Plaintiff made travel arrangements to fly back to Birmingham, Alabama, on the aftemoon of
February 3, 2017, to assist his wife in finalizing the family's move to Boca Raton.
7
DOCUMENT 2
36. Later on February 3'd, Defendant FAU contacted Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER and advised
that he would not be hired2 due to two prior minor misdemeanor criminal charges. 3
37. Upon his return to Alabama on February 3, 2017, Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER secured
documentation showing the resolution of the minor criminal charges. Plaintiff ANTONIO
CARTER provided these documents to Defendant FAU via e-mail on February 7, 2017.
38. On February 8, 2017, Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER e-mailed Patrick Chun, Athletic
Director for Defendant FAU, and provided additional clarification and assurances regarding
Defendant FAD's alleged concerns. Patrick Chun never responded. Plaintiff ANTONIO
CARTER also called Patrick Chun on multiple occasions. Patrick Chun refused to accept or
39. Meanwhile, Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER reached out to Defendant LANE KIFFIN for
assistance, reasonably believing that Defendant LANE KIFFIN, as head football coach at
FAU, had the authority and power to influence Defendant FAD's post-acceptance revocation
Plaintiff need not wait for any "papetwork" from FAU because the hiring of Plaintiff was
"done," Defendant LANE KIFFIN claimed the decision was out of his hands and that he
40. On February 13, 2017, Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER returned to Boca Raton, Florida, in an
attempt to meet with F AU Athletic Director, Patrick Chun. Mr. Chun refused to meet with
Plaintiff, despite Plaintiff waited outside his office for several hours.
2This announcement to "not hire" Plaintiff is in spite of the fact that Plaintiff already had a legally binding agreement in
place. Therefore, FAU's claim that they would not "hire" Plaintiff is best described as a revocation of Plaintiffs
employment.
3 One charge was deemed a ''No Information" (refusal to prosecute) by the Assistant State Attorney of Florida more
than 7 years ago. The other charge was resolved via unsupervised probation.
8
DOCUMENT 2
41. After being refused a meeting with Mr. Chun, Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER approached
and met with a representative of Defendant F AU's Human Resources Department, providing
details, assurances, and documentation to alleviate any of their alleged concerns. Plaintiff
ANTONIO CARTER received a phone call from the Human Resources representative later
that day informing him that they refused to reverse their decision.
42. Although Defendant FAU represented to Plaintiff that his two minor criminal charges were the
basis of his revocation of employment, Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER has since learned that
Defendant FAU and, in turn, Defendant STATE OF FLORIDA, hired numerous assistant
football coaches at the request of Defendant LANE KIFFIN despite significant publicized
43. Defendant FAU has failed to compensate Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER for the hours he
worked on the behalf of Defendant FAU and, in turn, Defendant STATE OF FLORIDA, as
an assistant wide receivers and strength and conditioning coach. Defendants LANE KIFFIN,
FAU, and STATE OF FLORIDA have been unjusdy enriched from the unpaid work of
44. At all times relevant hereto, Coach Wilson Love and Defendant LANE KIFFIN were
acted within the line and scope of their employment with said Defendants.
45. At all times relevant hereto, Coach Wilson Love and Defendant LANE KIFFIN had actual
contingency. Defendant LANE KIFFIN had actual and/ or apparent authority to ratify the
46. As a result, Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER has been damaged as oudined below.
9
DOCUMENT 2
47. Although the full nature and extent of the knowledge and scienter of Defendant LANE
KIFFIN and Coach Love is not fully known, the circumstantial evidence of their knowledge
strongly suggests, at the least, mistaken fraud and, at the worst, promissory or legal fraud.
Consequently, the Fraud counts below are pled in the aggregate and in the alternative as the full
48. Plaintiff adopts and re-alleges all previous paragraphs as if set out in full herein.
49. Defendant LANE KIFFIN and Coach Love while acting in the course and scope of their
employment with FAU recklessly represented to Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER that he was
employed, without contingency, as an assistant wide receivers coach and assistant strength and
conditioning coach at FAU. These representations included all terms of the employment,
Defendant LANE KIFFIN on January 28, 2017, confirming that the hiring of Plaintiff
ANTONIO CARTER was a "done" deal. This was done while Defendant LANE KIFFIN
knew that paperwork was required by F AU and had not been completed much less approved.
50. When making such representations, Defendant LANE KIFFIN and Coach Love did not
know whether or not such representations were true. Defendant LANE KIFFIN and Coach
Love made such false representations to Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER in order to induce
Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER to immediately begin to recruit and secure the coveted
prospect that Defendant LANE KIFFIN, and Coach Love, upon information and belief,
51. Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER did not know that such representations were false. Instead,
10
DOCUMENT 2
52. Furthermore, Defendant LANE KIFFIN, as head football coach at Defendant FAU, and
Coach Love had actual and/ or apparent authority to make such representations about the
53. At all times relevant hereto, Defendant LANE KIFFIN and Coach Love were
the line and scope of their employment/agency with Defendants. As such, Defendants FAU
and STATE OF FLORIDA are vicariously liable to Plaintiff for the conduct of Defendant
LANE KIFFIN and Coach Love under the doctrine of respondeat superior.
54. The aforementioned fraudulent conduct of Defendant LANE KIFFIN combined and
concurred with the tortious and wrongful conduct of all other named and fictitious defendants
(a) Plaintiff was not provided the compensation promised to him under said contract;
(b) Plaintiff and his wife were caused to resign from their then-current employment,
thereby sustaining a loss of income;
(d) Plaintiff has expended sums of money in the form of travel expenses, lodging
expenses, and other out-of-pocket expenses.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff therefore demands judgment against each of the Defendants, joindy
and severally, including the fictitious party Defendants, in a sum in excess of the jurisdictional limits of
this court, to be determined by a jury, which will fairly and adequately compensate the Plaintiff for
damages sustained. Further, Plaintiff requests that the jury selected to hear this case render a verdict for
Plaintiff and against each Defendant, and that it award punitive damages in an amount which will
adequately reflect the enormity of the Defendants' wrongful acts and which will effectively prevent
11
DOCUMENT 2
56. Defendant LANE KIFFIN and Coach Love while acting in the course and scope of their
CARTER that he was employed, without contingency, as an assistant wide receivers coach and
assistant strength and conditioning coach at F AU. These representations included all terms of
the employment, confirmation of hiring, and action by plaintiff in reliance. The representations
included Defendant LANE KIFFIN on January 28, 2017, confirming that the hiring of
Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER was a "done" deal. This was done while Defendant LANE
KIFFIN knew that paperwork was required by F AU and had not been completed much less
approved.
57. When making such representations, Defendant LANE KIFFIN and Coach Love mistakenly
and/ or negligently did not know whether or not such representations were ttue. Defendant
LANE KIFFIN and Coach Love made such false representations to Plaintiff ANTONIO
and secure the coveted prospect that Defendant LANE KIFFIN, and Coach Love, upon
information and belief, knew was a close family friend with Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER.
58. Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER did not know that such representations were false. Instead,
59. Furthermore, Defendant LANE KIFFIN, as head football coach at Defendant FAU, and
Coach Love had actual and/ or apparent authority to make such representations about the
60. At all times relevant hereto, Defendant LANE KIFFIN and Coach Love were
12
DOCUMENT 2
the line and scope of their employment/ agency with Defendants. As such, Defendants FAU
and STATE OF FLORIDA are vicariously liable to Plaintiff for the conduct ofDefendant
LANE KIFFIN and Coach Love under the doctrine of respondeat superior.
61. The aforementioned fraudulent conduct of Defendant LANE KIFFIN combined and
concurred with the tortious and wrongful conduct of all other named and fictitious defendants
(a) Plaintiff was not provided the compensation promised to him under said contract;
(b) Plaintiff and his wife were caused to resign from their then-current employment,
thereby sustaining a loss of income;
(d) Plaintiff has expended sums of money in the form of travel expenses, lodging
expenses, and other out-of-pocket expenses.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff therefore demands judgment against each of the Defendants, joindy
and severally, including the fictitious party Defendants, in a sum in excess of the jurisdictional limits of
this court, to be determined by a jury, which will fairly and adequately compensate the Plaintiff for
damages sustained. Further, Plaintiff requests that the jury selected to hear this case render a verdict for
Plaintiff and against each Defendant, and that it award punitive damages in an amount which will
adequately reflect the enormity of the Defendants' wrongful acts and which will effectively prevent
62. Plaintiff adopts and re-alleges all previous paragraphs as if set out in full herein.
63. Defendant LANE KIFFIN and Coach Love intentionally represented to Plaintiff
receivers coach and assistant strength and conditioning coach at FAU. These representations
13
DOCUMENT 2
included all terms of the employment, confumation of hiring, and action by Plaintiff in reliance.
The representations included Defendant LANE KIFFIN on January 28, 2017, confirming that
the hiring of Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER was a "done" deal. This was done while
Defendant LANE KIFFIN knew that Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER was not an employee
64. Defendant LANE KIFFIN and Coach Love conspired to and made such false representations
immediately begin to rectuit and secure the coveted prospect that Defendant LANE KIFFIN
and Coach Love knew was a close family friend with Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER.
65. Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER did not know that such representations were false. Instead,
66. Defendant LANE KIFFIN never intended to retain Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER.
Instead, Defendant LANE KIFFIN engaged in a ''bait and switch" scheme to secure the
67. Furthermore, Defendant LANE KIFFIN, as head football coach at Defendant FAU, and
Coach Love had actual and/ or apparent authority to make such representations about the
68. At all times relevant hereto, Defendant LANE KIFFIN and Coach Love were an
employee/agent of Defendant FAU and Defendant STATE OF FLORIDA, acting within the
line and scope of his employment/ agency with Defendants. As such, Defendants FAU and
STATE OF FLORIDA are vicariously liable to Plaintiff for the conduct of Defendant LANE
14
DOCUMENT 2
69. The aforementioned fraudulent conduct of Defendant LANE KIFFIN combined and
concurred with the tortious and wrongful conduct of all other named and fictitious defendants
(a) Plaintiff was not provided the compensation promised to him under said contract;
(b) Plaintiff and his wife were caused to resign from their then-current employment,
thereby sustaining a loss of income;
(d) Plaintiff has expended sums of money in the form of travel expenses, lodging
expenses, and other out-of-pocket expenses.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff therefore demands judgment against each of the Defendants, jointly
and severally, including the fictitious party Defendants, in a sum in excess of the jurisdictional limits of
this court, to be determined by a jury, which will fairly and adequately compensate the Plaintiff for
damages sustained. Further, Plaintiff requests that the jury selected to hear this case render a verdict for
Plaintiff and against each Defendant, and that it award punitive damages in an amount which will
adequately reflect the enormity of the Defendants' wrongful acts and which will effectively prevent
70. Plaintiff adopts andre-alleges all previous paragraphs as if set out in full herein.
71. Coach Wilson Love, as an employee/agent of Defendant LANE KIFFIN, Defendant FAU,
position of assistant wide receivers and assistant strength and conditioning coach with FAU at
72. At all times relevant hereto, Coach Wilson Love was acting within the line and scope of his
STATE OF FLORIDA.
15
DOCUMENT 2
73. Said offer was for a specified term of one year, calling for a $40,000 salary, up to $4,000.00 in
relocation expense reimbursement, and eligibility for various bonuses. No other contingency or
74. Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER accepted the offer, without modification or contingency.
75. Defendant LANE KIFFIN subsequendy ratified the aforementioned contract, representing to
Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER that his employment was "done" without concern for any
future paperwork.
76. As head football coach of Defendant FAD, Defendant LANE KIFFIN had the authority
77. Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER carried out his duties pursuant to said contract. However,
Defendants LANE KIFFIN, FAD, and STATE OF FLORIDA breached said contract with
78. The aforementioned breach by Defendants LANE KIFFIN, FAD, and STATE OF
FLORIDA combined and concurred with the tortious and wrongful conduct of all other
named and fictitious defendants to cause Plaintiff to sustain the following damages:
(a) Plaintiff was not provided the compensation promised to him under said contract;
(b) Plaintiff and his wife were caused to resign from their then-current employment,
thereby sustaining a loss of income;
(d) Plaintiff has expended sums of money in the form of travel expenses, lodging
expenses, and other out-of-pocket expenses.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff therefore demands judgment against each of the Defendants, jointly
and severally, including the fictitious party Defendants, in a sum in excess of the jurisdictional limits of
this court, to be determined by a jury, which will fairly and adequately compensate the Plaintiff for
16
DOCUMENT 2
80. Defendants LANE KIFFIN, FAU, and STATE OF FLORIDA have been unjustly enriched
from the fruits of Plaintiff's labor. Despite the receipt and enjoyment of such benefits,
Defendants LANE KIFFIN, FAU, and STATE OF FLORIDA have refused to compensate
Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER for his work, services, and expenses associated with his
employment as assistant \vide receivers coach and assistant strength and conditioning coach.
81. Plaintiff is entitled to equitable relief from Defendants LANE KIFFIN, FAU, and STATE
OF FLORIDA in the form of reimbursement of his time, services, and expenses associated
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff therefore demands judgment against each of the Defendants, jointly
and severally, including the fictitious party Defendants, in a sum in excess of the jurisdictional limits of
this court, to be determined by a jury, which will fairly and adequately compensate the Plaintiff for his
work, services, and expenses associated with his employment as assistant wide receivers coach and
assistant strength and conditioning coach. Further, Plaintiff further demands judgment as to any and all
other equitable relief available to Plaintiff under Alabama law, including but not limited to reasonable
82. Plaintiff adopts and re-alleges all previous paragraphs as if set out in full herein.
83. Defendants LANE KIFFIN, FAU, and STATE OF FLORIDA took action to entice
84. Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER undertook such work with a reasonable expectation for
17
DOCUMENT 2
85. Defendants LANE KIFFIN, FAU, and STATE OF FLORIDA knowingly accepted
services rendered by Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER and the benefit and result thereof, and
therefore the law implies a promise on the part of the defendant to pay the reasonable value
86. Despite the receipt and enjoyment of such benefits, Defendants LANE KIFFIN, FAU, and
STATE OF FLORIDA have refused to compensate Plaintiff ANTONIO CARTER for his
work, services, and expenses associated with his employment as assistant wide receivers coach
87. Plaintiff is entided to equitable relief from Defendants LANE KIFFIN, FAU, and STATE
OF FLORIDA in the form of reimbursement of his time, services, and expenses associated
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff therefore demands judgment against each of the Defendants, joindy
and severally, including the fictitious party Defendants, in a sum in excess of the jurisdictional limits of
this court, to be determined by a jury, which will fairly and adequately compensate the Plaintiff for his
work, services, and expenses associated with his employment as assistant wide receivers coach and
assistant strength and conditioning coach. Further, Plaintiff further demands judgment as to any and all
other equitable relief available to Plaintiff under Alabama law, including but not limited to reasonable
18
DOCUMENT 2
OF COUNSEL:
BELT & BRUNER, P.C.
880 Montclair Road, Suite 300
Birmingham, AL 35213
Phone: (205) 933-1500
Fax: (205) 933-5500
E-Mail: [email protected]
[email protected]
JURY DEMAND
Pursuant to Alabama Rules of Civil Proced~~~huntiff , .e / C. jury on .n coun"
The plaintiff hereby requests that the clerk serve the following Defendant be served by certified
mail, return receipt requested.
LANEKIFFIN
c/o FAU Athletics Department
777 Glades Road
Boca Raton, Florida 33431
STATE OF FLORIDA
c/o Governor Rick Scott
400 S. Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399
OFCOrSEL
19L/