state farm amended cross claim

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI

NORTHERN DIVISION

STATE FARM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PLAINTIFF VS. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:14cv736-HTW-LRA CRYSTAL WISE MARTIN AND BRANDI BARNETT DEFENDANTS

DEFENDANT CRYSTAL WISE MARTIN’S AMENDED CROSS-CLAIM

COMES NOW Crystal Wise Martin, by and through counsel, and hereby demands a trial

by jury and hereby submits this her Amended Cross-Claim against Brandi Barnett, and would

show unto the Court as follows:

AMENDED CROSS-CLAIM OF CRYSTAL WISE MARTIN AGAINST BRANDI

BARNETT

NOW COMES Crystal Wise Martin (“Martin”) as Cross-Claimant, and submits this

Amended Cross-Claim against Brandi Barnett, Cross-Defendant, as follows:

1. Crystal Wise Martin is a named Defendant in this action, and submits this Cross-

Claim in order to avoid waiver of any and all legal rights against Brandi Barnett to the extent that

such may be determined to be present, and without waiver of any and all rights and defenses

and/or objections as otherwise referenced in this document.

2. Brandi Barnett is a named Defendant in this action, and is present in this action by

the submission of pleadings herein, and may be served with this Cross-Claim in accordance with

the applicable rules and laws governing the parties and this Court.

Case 3:14-cv-00736-HTW-LRA Document 19 Filed 12/03/14 of 9

2

FACTS

3. Crystal Wise Martin and Precious Martin were married on May 23, 1998 in Hinds

County, Mississippi. Crystal Wise Martin and Precious Martin resided with their children in

Madison County, Mississippi.

4. In January of 2014, Crystal Wise Martin became aware that Brandi Barnett, the

bookkeeper at Precious Martin, Sr. & Associates Law Firm, the place of employment of Precious

Martin and Crystal Martin, had seduced and continued to recklessly engage in certain solicitous

conduct and activities with Precious Martin. Unbeknownst to Crystal Martin, Brandi Barnett

resided in Hinds County, Mississippi in a home owned by a Limited Liability Company in which

Precious Martin was the sole member and provided to Barnett by Precious Martin. At the time

of said solicitous conduct by Barnett, Precious and Crystal Martin resided together with their

children in Madison County, Mississippi.

5. On May 11, 2014, Precious Martin tragically died in an ATV accident while

riding in his Madison County, Mississippi neighborhood. Subsequent to Mr. Martin’s death,

Crystal Martin learned that the application for the State Farm Premium Term Life Insurance

Policy purchased by Precious Martin named Brandi Barnett as the primary beneficiary.

6. The home provided to Barnett by Martin as well as the naming of Barnett as the

beneficiary of Martin’s State Farm Life Insurance policy are the results of Barnett’s actions in

seducing Precious Martin and engaging in and encouraging a continuing elicit relationship

between Barnett and Precious Martin for the purposes of receiving material benefits from

Precious Martin. Barnett seduced Precious Martin and encouraged and pursued a continuing

sexual relationship with Precious Martin for the purpose of unduly influencing Precious Martin

to provide material benefits to Brandi Barnett that should have been given to Crystal Wise


3

Martin and her children, including but not limited to exerting undue influence on Precious

Martin to name Brandi Barnett as the beneficiary in his application for Precious Martin’s State

Farm Life Insurance Policy.

COUNT I- ALIENATION OF AFFECTIONS

7. Cross-Plaintiff hereby incorporates paragraphs 1-6 by reference.

8. Cross-Defendant Brandi Barnett seduced Precious Martin and induced, persuaded

and encouraged Precious Martin to engage in an extra-marital affair and sexual relationship with

her. Brandi Barnett engaged in such solicitous activity culminating in a sexual relationship with

Precious Martin with full knowledge that Precious Martin was married to Crystal Martin with

children. Brandi Barnett’s actions were wrongful in that she seduced Precious Martin with full

knowledge of his marital relationship with Crystal Martin, her employer, and induced and

encouraged Precious Martin to engage in a sexual relationship outside of his marriage and

continuously encouraged Precious Martin to abandon his marriage and family and affection for

Crystal Martin.

9. Cross-Plaintiff Crystal Martin was entitled to the lawful, natural, and conjugal

rights and privileges with her spouse Precious Martin which included, but is not limited to, the

love, companionship, services, financial support, and comfort that form the foundation of

marriage. As a direct and proximate result of the wrongful solicitous acts of Brandi Barnett, the

Cross-Plaintiff suffered a loss of affection of Precious Martin, loss of her conjugal rights and

consortium with, of, to and from her husband, as well as the financial support after the death of

Precious Martin that would have been provided in the form of the State Farm Life Insurance

Policy had Barnett not unduly influenced Precious Martin to name Barnett as the beneficiary of

said policy if a court of competent jurisdiction rules that Brandi Barnett is the beneficiary of said


4

policy. The loss of consortium, society, love and affection, and financial support of Precious

Martin for Crystal Martin was directly and proximately caused by the wrongful acts of Brandi

Barnett in soliciting, inducing, and encouraging Precious Martin to engage in an extra-marital

sexual relationship with Brandi Barnett.

COUNT II- INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

10. Cross-Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1-9 herein by reference.

11. Cross-Defendant Brandi Barnett solicited, induced and encouraged Precious

Martin to engage in an extra-marital sexual relationship and solicited, induced and encouraged

Precious Martin to provide gifts and other assets to Brandi Barnett, including but not limited to a

home, a vehicle and naming Brandi Barnett as the beneficiary of Precious Martin’s State Farm

Life Insurance Policy, with full knowledge that Precious Martin was married to Crystal Martin

with children and that Crystal Martin and her children could have and would have benefited from

the financial resources and support of Precious Martin that was instead spent on Brandi Barnett

as a result of Barnett’s wrongful inducement of a sexual relationship.

12. Brandi Barnett knew or should have known that soliciting, inducing, and

engaging in an extra-marital affair with Precious Martin would cause severe emotional distress to

Crystal Martin and that severe emotional distress would result upon Crystal Martin’s discovery

of the extra-marital affair. Brandi Barnett also knew or should have known that Crystal Martin’s

discovery that Brandi Barnett had induced Precious Martin to name Brandi Barnett, rather than

Crystal Martin or any of her children, as the beneficiary of Precious Martin’s State Farm Life

Insurance policy, would result in Crystal Martin’s severe emotional distress especially as such

discovery would not, and did not occur until the tragic death of Precious Martin, Crystal Martin’s

husband and the father of her children.


5

13. The actions of Brandi Barnett in soliciting, inducing and encouraging Precious

Martin to engage in an extra-marital affair and to provide Barnett with gifts and other assets with

full knowledge of Precious Martin’s marriage to Crystal Martin and with full knowledge that

said financial support and assets should have and could have been used for the support of Crystal

Martin and her children are outrageous and go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and are

regarded as atrocious and utterly intolerable in a civilized community. The outrageousness of

Barnett’s actions are more apparent with the fact that Barnett was employed as the bookkeeper

for the law firm of Crystal Martin and Precious Martin, a position of trust in which Crystal

Martin placed Barnett as a fiduciary for her business and life’s work. Barnett abused this

position of trust and used it as access and a means to solicit, induce, and encourage an extra-

marital sexual relationship with Precious Martin.

14. As a result of the Cross-Defendant’s actions, the Cross-Plaintiff has suffered and

will continue to suffer great emotional and psychological damages as well as financial losses,

including but not limited to the loss of the benefits of the State Farm Life Insurance Policy

should a court of competent jurisdiction find that Brandi Barnett is the beneficiary of said policy.

COMPENSATORY DAMAGES

15. Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1-13 herein by reference.

16. As a proximate consequence of the lawful and tortious acts of the Cross-

Defendant, the Cross-Plaintiff has suffered these damages:

(a) Extreme emotional distress and mental anguish, past, present and future;

(b) Loss of the society, companionship, support, day to day family life and

relationship, and loss of comfort and services;


6

(c) The loss of financial support, including but not limited to the benefits of the State

Farm Life Insurance Policy should a court of competent jurisdiction find that Brandi Barnett is

the beneficiary of said policy and any amounts expended by Precious Martin on housing or other

items for Brandi Barnett that should have been used for the support of the Cross-Plaintiff and her

children;

(d) Legal fees and other costs associated with the interference with the marriage

between the Cross-Plaintiff and Precious Martin, including but not limited to the costs of the

instant civil action.

PUNITIVE DAMAGES

17. The Cross-Plaintiff incorporates paragraphs 1-15 herein by reference.

18. The tortious conduct of the Cross-Defendant as set forth in this complaint

constitute willful, wanton, reckless and tortious actions entitling the Cross-Plaintiff to an

assessment of punitive damages. In support of her request for punitive damages and in addition

to the facts stated above, the Plaintiff will introduce evidence relating to the factors set forth in

Miss. Code Ann. § 11-1-65. Such evidence will include but will not be limited to Cross-

Defendant’s commission of multiple acts in furtherance of her tortious conduct, Cross-

Defendant’s efforts to conceal her tortious conduct, Cross-Defendant’s financial worth and

expected future income and the undue influence committed by the Cross-Defendant in coercing

Precious Martin to divert assets from his wife and family to the Cross-Defendant.

19. The arbitrary and capricious restrictions on compensatory and punitive damages

as set forth in Miss. Code Ann. § 11-1-60 and 11-1-65, respectively, are void and unenforceable

in that they violate due process and equal protection clauses of the Mississippi Constitution and

the United States Constitution.


7

20. The Cross-Defendant’s wanton and reckless interference with the marriage,

destruction of family values and her actions of un-condoned adultery with the Cross-Plaintiff’s

husband was accompanied with her continuous encouragement for Precious Martin to leave the

marriage and be with the Cross-Defendant, as well as encouragement to provide material assets

to the Cross-Defendant including a home and the benefits of a State Farm Life Insurance Policy,

as well as concealment of her actions from the Cross-Plaintiff and others further justifying

punitive damages against the Cross-Defendant. The Cross-Plaintiff would further show unto the

Court that the Defendant engaged in such negligent, wrongful, wanton and reckless conduct and

behavior to such an extent, without regard to the consequences to the Cross-Plaintiff. Therefore,

the Cross-Plaintiff is entitled to an award of punitive damages, of, from and against the Cross-

Defendant in such an amount as to punish her, make an example of her to others, and to deter her

and other similarly situated Cross-Defendants from engaging in such conduct in the future and

otherwise serve the public interest.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Cross-Plaintiff, Crystal Wise Martin,

demands a judgment of from and against Cross-Defendant Brandi Barnett, awarding the Plaintiff

the following:

(a) $500,272 in proceeds from the State Farm Life Insurance Policy of Precious Martin,

Sr. in the event that a court of competent jurisdiction rules that Brandi Barnett is the beneficiary

of said policy;

(b) Other compensatory damages to be determined by a jury;

(c) Punitive damages to be determined by a jury so as to punish the Cross-Defendant,

deter the Cross-Defendant and others similarly situated from engaging in such conduct in the


8

future, and otherwise serve the public interest; attorney’s fees, court costs and related expenses;

and, all other relief to which the Plaintiff may be entitled.

The Cross-Plaintiff also demands a trial by jury.

THIS the 3rd day of December, 2014.

Respectfully submitted, CRYSTAL WISE MARTIN BY: ___/s/ Chuck McRae________

Chuck McRae, MSB #2804

CHUCK McRAE, MSB #2804 SETH C. LITTLE, MSB #102890 CHRISTOPHER A. BAMBACH, MSB #104838 McRAE LAW FIRM, PLLC 416 EAST AMITE STREET JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI 39201 Office: 601.944.1008 Facsimile: 866.236.7731 Email: [email protected]

[email protected] [email protected]


9

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Chuck McRae, hereby certify that I have this day filed a true and correct copy of the

above and foregoing with this Court’s electronic filing system which automatically sends

notification to the following:

Kelly Simpkins, Esq. ([email protected])

Louis H. Watson, Esq. ([email protected]) Nick Norris, Esq. ([email protected])

THIS the 3rd day of December, 2014.

/s/ Chuck McRae________ Chuck McRae, MSB #2804

CHUCK McRAE, MSB #2804 SETH C. LITTLE, MSB #102890 CHRISTOPHER A. BAMBACH, MSB #104838 McRAE LAW FIRM, PLLC 416 EAST AMITE STREET JACKSON, MISSISSIPPI 39201 Office: 601.944.1008 Facsimile: 866.236.7731 Email: [email protected]

[email protected] [email protected]


state farm amended cross claim

Documents