Christ v.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF SAN FRANCISCO

JESUS CHRIST,

Plaintiffv.

JOHN DOEs, JANE DOEs, and

THE HOLY SEE, THE SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION, THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF AMERICA, THE EASTERN ORTHODOX CHURCH OF AMERICA, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, LAUGHING PANDA INDUSTRIES, et al
Defendants

 

Civil Action No.

COMPLAINT

Preliminary Statement

1. This is a suit for defamation, invasion of privacy, copyright infringement, unlicensed use of likeness and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Summary of Plaintiff’s Claims

2. In or about September, in the year 5 B.C.E., Plaintiff Jesus Christ was born.

3. Subsequently, in or about November, 29 A.D., Mr. Christ was crucified by order of the Romans.

4. He suffered, died and was buried. On the third day he rose again in fulfillment of the scriptures.

5. Subsequently, in late November or early December 29 A.D., Mr. Christ ascended into heaven, where he was, among other things, seated at the right hand of his father.

6. Since that date, numerous individuals, groups, organized religions and nations have used the unauthorized likeness and endorsements of Mr. Christ without his express permission and without just compensation.

7. Mr. Christ seeks damages for the continued and rampant use of his likeness and name without his permission. Pursuant to federal and local statutes, it is also explicitly clear that related causes of action may be pursued under the federal Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125 (a), for example, for unauthorized use of a person’s identity in order to create a false endorsement. Mr. Christ is entitled to damages and pain and suffering after the continued use of his name in such a manner that it creates an implied and sometimes explicit endorsement which has been continually and intentionally used to recruit, retain and financially benefit the above-named organized religions and nations.

8. The California Civil Code – Section 3344 – 3344.1 [Astaire Celebrity Image Protection Act] permits the use of a person’s likeness once 70 years has passed since the time of death provided that heirs do not obtain a claim to continued exclusive use of that likeness (Mr. Christ has no heirs). However, we submit as evidence proof of Mr. Christ’s resurrection on Sunday, March 31, 2013. Because of this holy resurrection (“The Second Coming”), Mr. Christ is once again a living human being and as such entitled to all rights as they relate to his name and likeness. These rights revert immediately back to Mr. Christ upon his resurrection and he is entitled to just compensation for proceeds and licensing fees related to the use of his likeness in the intervening 1,984 years.

9. Mr. Christ is also seeking an injunction against the municipality of Corpus Christi, Texas for using his name without permission for financial gain. This has affected Mr. Christ financially, as this was the name of a proposed resort community on the shores of the Sea of Galilee that Mr. Christ was an investor in.

10. Mr. Christ would like back royalties and licensing fees from Laughing Panda Industries, the American importer of Chinese-made “What Would Jesus Do (WWJD)” wristbands and the “Jesus Bobblehead” and “Holy Action Figure” toy lines as well as other items fully catalogued in the addendum including but not limited to votive candles, prayer beads, rosaries, velvet paintings, crucifixes, breath mints, playing cards, poker chips, statues, garden gnomes, coloring books, flags, scarves, communion wafers and leather sandals.

11. Additionally, Mr. Christ is seeking an injunction against the Roman Catholic Church, the Pentecostal Church, New Life Urban Ministries, et al, for defamation and libel against his good name in portraying him and his beliefs as racist, nationalist, homophobic, misogynistic, xenophobic, anti-Semitic (Mr. Christ is a practicing member of the Jewish faith), Republican, Democratic, Libertarian, prudish and intolerant.

Count I

Unfair Competition

12. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference all of the averments of paragraphs 1 through 7 with like force and effect as though set forth in full herein.

13. The defendants intentionally infringed on the plaintiff’s rights to protect, defend and establish his likeness, endorsements and other trademarks in order to pursue monetary and other considerations and compensations for such endorsements.

14. The conduct of the defendants has been sufficiently outrageous as to entitle plaintiff an award of punitive damages.

Count II

Misappropriation of Name or Likeness

15. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference all of the averments of paragraphs 1 through 9 with like force and effect as though set forth in full herein.

16. Defendants did knowingly and without remorse misappropriate the name and likeness of the defendant for their own material gain and without any consideration for compensation or redress of the plaintiff.

17. The aforementioned misappropriation was so rampant and unmitigated that the plaintiff’s likeness is now considered the 14th most recognizable brand on Earth, following such other noted marks and likenesses as the Nike “swoosh”, the McDonald’s arches and the name, voice and likeness of Miley Cyrus/Hannah Montana.

Count III

Defamation

18. Plaintiff incorporates herein by reference all of the averments of paragraphs 1 through 10 with like force and effect as though set forth in full herein.

19. The defendants made outrageous, indefensible and untrue claims about the plaintiff including their continued insistence that he “hated homosexuals,” “hated Jews,” “damned fornicators,” and “wanted a Republican in the White House.”

20. The defendants’ conduct, as described above, was intentional and reckless.

21. The defendants’ conduct was extreme and outrageous. The defendants intended to harm plaintiff Jesus Christ and besmirch his personal beliefs.

22. The defendants’ conduct has caused severe emotional and physical distress to the plaintiff.

23. The conduct of the defendants has been sufficiently outrageous as to entitle plaintiff to an award of punitive damages. In addition, the plaintiff would like a notarized letter of apology, on official letterhead, from each of the parties named in the above complaints.

YAWEH, NINEVAH AND GREEN LLP

                                                            By: ________________________________

Harvey J. Green, Esq.
14 Temple Square
Suite 7777
San Francisco, CA 94102