Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Gov Uscourts DCD 263084 1 0
Gov Uscourts DCD 263084 1 0
COMPLAINT
Plaintiffs,
v.
RUDOLPH W. GIULIANI,
45 East 66th Street, Apt. 10W
New York, NY 10065,
Defendant.
INTRODUCTION
Giuliani (“Defendant”) from persisting in his defamatory campaign against Plaintiffs Ruby
Freeman and Wandrea’ ArShaye “Shaye” Moss (“Plaintiffs”). Defendant Giuliani has engaged in,
and is engaging in, a continuing course of repetitive false speech and harassment—specifically,
repeating over and over the same lies that Plaintiffs engaged in election fraud during their service
2. Defendant Giuliani has already been found liable for defamation arising from these
same lies in an action currently pending in this Court, captioned Freeman et al. v. Giuliani, No.
21-cv-3354 (D.D.C.) (“Freeman I”). A copy of the operative complaint in that action is attached
1
Plaintiffs respectfully request relief from Local Civil Rule 5.1(c)’s requirement that their
Complaint include the “full residence address” of each Plaintiff for the same reasons Plaintiffs
previously requested such relief in the related case. See Plaintiffs’ Ex Parte Mot. & Mem. in Supp.
of Mot. for Waiver of Local Civil Rule 5.1(c), Freeman v. Giuliani, No. 21-cv-3354 (D.D.C.),
ECF No. 2.
Case 1:23-cv-03754 Document 1 Filed 12/18/23 Page 2 of 10
to this Complaint as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. On August 31, 2023, the
United States District Court for the District of Columbia entered a default judgment as to liability
against Defendant Giuliani in Freeman I, which had the effect of deeming as true the factual
allegations in the operative complaint in Freeman I. A copy of the order granting a default
judgment is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference. A trial
on damages has recently been held, although judgment has not yet been entered, in Freeman I.
3. Defendant Giuliani continues to spread the very same lies for which he has already
been held liable in the Freeman I action. For example, on December 11, 2023, Defendant Giuliani
held an impromptu press conference before a gaggle of reporters. Standing in front of the cameras,
Defendant Giuliani stated that his forthcoming testimony would make: “definitively clear that
what I said was true, and that, whatever happened to them—which is unfortunate about other
people overreacting—everything I said about them is true.”2 When asked whether he regretted
his actions, Defendant Giuliani stated: “Of course I don’t regret it . . . I told the truth. They were
engaged in changing votes.” Finally, when a reporter pointed out that there was “no proof of that,”
4. On December 15, 2023, just hours after the jury in Freeman I returned a $148
million verdict against him, Defendant Giuliani appeared from Washington, D.C. for a live
implication, that he was in possession of video evidence demonstrating the truth of his allegations
against Plaintiffs.3 Defendant Giuliani explained that he was unable to present evidence at trial of
2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2W3Emypl4U0 at 0:44-0:56. An ABC News video of
Defendant Giuliani’s statement is available at https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/video/former-poll-
workers-stand-giuliani-defamation-trial-105595918 at 3:01-3:06.
3
https://www.newsmaxtv.com/Shows/Greg-Kelly-Reports/vid/37e2c0a0-9bcc-11ee-bf63-
1b74393babdd at 0:00-10:43.
2
Case 1:23-cv-03754 Document 1 Filed 12/18/23 Page 3 of 10
“all the videos at the time” showing “what happened at the arena.”4 Those statements at minimum
falsely implied to the reasonable viewer that Mr. Giuliani possesses video evidence that Ms.
Freeman and Ms. Moss engaged in election fraud in Georgia during the 2020 Presidential
Election.
5. Before filing this lawsuit, Plaintiffs’ counsel asked Defendant Giuliani to enter into
an agreement to stop publishing these and any similar false claims about Plaintiffs. Defendant
Giuliani refused.
6. Defendant Giuliani’s statements, coupled with his refusal to agree to refrain from
continuing to make such statements, make clear that he intends to persist in his campaign of
targeted defamation and harassment. It must stop. In these unique circumstances, the proper
remedy is a targeted injunction barring Defendant Giuliani from continuing to repeat the very
falsehoods about Plaintiffs that have already been found and held, conclusively, to be defamatory.
PARTIES
plaintiff in Freeman I.
8. Plaintiff Wandrea’ ArShaye “Shaye” Moss is a resident and citizen of Georgia. Ms.
a media personality. Defendant Giuliani is a resident and citizen of New York. Defendant Giuliani
is a defendant in Freeman I.
4
Id. at 9:50-10:43.
3
Case 1:23-cv-03754 Document 1 Filed 12/18/23 Page 4 of 10
10. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1332(a)(1) because this action is between citizens of different states and the amount in
11. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant Giuliani pursuant to D.C. Code
§ 13-423(a)(1) because the action arises from Defendant Giuliani’s transacting business within the
District of Columbia, and pursuant to D.C. Code § 13-423(a)(3) because the action arises from
Defendant Giuliani’s causing tortious injury in the District of Columbia by one or more acts in the
District of Columbia. The Court also has personal jurisdiction over Defendant Giuliani pursuant
to D.C. Code § 13-423(a)(4) because this action arises from Defendant Giuliani’s causing tortious
injury by acts committed outside the District of Columbia while (1) regularly doing or soliciting
business within, (2) engaging in a persistent course of conduct within, and/or (3) deriving
substantial part of the events giving rise to this action occurred in the District of Columbia.
FACTS
lies about them. His continuing course of repetitive defamatory statements include—but are not
14. A statement on December 11, 2023, when Defendant Giuliani held an impromptu
press conference before a gaggle of reporters in Washington, D.C. Standing in front of the cameras,
When I testify, the whole story will be definitively clear that what I said
was true, and that, whatever happened to them -- which is unfortunate
about other people overreacting -- everything I said about them is true.
4
Case 1:23-cv-03754 Document 1 Filed 12/18/23 Page 5 of 10
Reporter Terry Moran: Do you regret what you did to Ruby and Shaye?
Giuliani: Of course I don’t regret it. I told the truth. They were engaged in
changing votes.
15. A statement on December 15, 2023, when Defendant Giuliani again spoke to
reporters in Washington D.C., and stated as follows in response to the following question:
Q: Do you still believe that what you said about these two women in the wake of
the 2020 election is truthful?
A: I, yeah . . . I have no doubt that my comments were made and they were
supportable and are supportable today. I just did not have an opportunity to
present the evidence that we offered.6
16. A statement on December 16, 2023, on Steve Bannon’s “War Room” podcast,
First, I couldn’t defend myself on whether I had committed libel or not. Wasn’t
allowed to put in the videotapes of them doing what I said they did, which I could
have demonstrated to the jury. I couldn’t call witnesses, who would support what I
said. I couldn’t put documents on and reports from credible sources that said that
fraud took place there.
...
Never, never, never did any of those jurors see a single piece of evidence that many
Americans have seen about how these women acted that would have been totally
contrary to the, to their unrebutted, uncorroborated testimony. It’s a sham of a trial.7
5
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2W3Emypl4U0, at 0:38-1:10.
6
Rudy Giuliani Comments to Reporters on Elections Workers Defamation Case Verdict, C-
SPAN (Dec. 15, 2023), https://www.c-span.org/video/?532478-101/rudy-giuliani-comments-
reporters-election-workers-defamation-case-verdict.
7
Episode 3253: The Making of an American First Economy, Bannon's War Room (Dec. 16,
2023), https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/episode-3253-the-making-of-an-america-first-
economy/id1485351658?i=1000638797246
5
Case 1:23-cv-03754 Document 1 Filed 12/18/23 Page 6 of 10
17. Plaintiffs incorporate and re-allege all preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth
herein.
cause to be published—a series of repetitive false and defamatory statements of fact about
Plaintiffs, in a manner that also led and will continue to lead to the reasonably foreseeable
publication and republication of those and similar statements. The defamatory meanings of
Defendant’s false statements and implied statements of facts are apparent from the face of the
publications, refer to Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss by name, often are accompanied by images of
Ms. Freeman and/or Ms. Moss, and/or are understood to be about them.
19. The statements authored, published, and caused to be published by Defendant about
Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss are reasonably understood to state or imply that they: had a history of
engaging in fraudulent behavior; engaged in a criminal conspiracy, along with others, to illegally
exclude observers during the counting of ballots “under false pretenses” so that they could engage
in election fraud; criminally and/or fraudulently introduced “suitcases” of illegal ballots into the
ballot counting process; criminally and/or fraudulently counted the same ballots multiple times;
surreptitiously passed around flash drives that were not supposed to be placed in Dominion voting
20. Each of these statements and implications is false and defamatory per se.
Defendant’s statements and implications about Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss constitute defamation
per se in that they damaged them in their trade, office, or profession and claimed that they
participated in criminal activity punishable by law and, in the full course of his conduct, he has
6
Case 1:23-cv-03754 Document 1 Filed 12/18/23 Page 7 of 10
21. Each of these statements was or will be viewed, read, or listened to by thousands,
22. Plaintiffs are private figures, but in any event each of these false statements was
published with actual malice, i.e., with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard as to its
truth. At a minimum, Defendant acted negligently—that is, without an ordinary degree of care in
assessing or investigating the truth of the statement prior to publication. Further, Defendant had
no applicable privilege or legal authorization to make these false and defamatory statements, or if
23. Defendant acted with willful misconduct, malice, fraud, wantonness, oppression,
and/or entire want of care which would raise the presumption of conscious indifference to
consequences, and he specifically intended to cause Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss harm.
24. Defendant’s statements damaged and continue to damage Ms. Freeman’s and Ms.
Moss’s reputations in the general public, in their professions, in their church communities, in their
25. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s conduct, Ms. Freeman and Ms.
Moss have suffered and continue to suffer significant general, actual, consequential, and special
damages including, without limitation, impairment of reputation and standing in the community,
personal humiliation, mental anguish and suffering, emotional distress, stress, anxiety, lost
earnings, and other pecuniary loss. Among other things, Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss have lost
income. Those harms are ongoing and, if Defendant Giuliani is not prevented from continuing to
repeat his defamatory statements about Plaintiffs, those harms will continue.
7
Case 1:23-cv-03754 Document 1 Filed 12/18/23 Page 8 of 10
26. Plaintiffs incorporate and re-allege all preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth
herein.
27. Defendant Giuliani’s course of conduct directed specifically at Ms. Freeman and
Ms. Moss was malicious, wanton, and intentional, and reflected a want of care which would raise
drawing attention to Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss, encouraging others to scrutinize and disbelieve
them, and continuing to fuel the perception held by those receptive to his views that Ms. Freeman
and Ms. Moss engaged in criminal wrongdoing during the 2020 Presidential Election.
28. Moreover, Defendant Giuliani specifically intended to cause Ms. Freeman and Ms.
Moss harm. Defendant Giuliani understands the nature and extent of the threats and harassment
that have previously followed from Defendant Giuliani’s intentional repetition of his false and
defamatory lies. His continuing repetition of those statements, in light of this documented history,
29. Defendant’s wrongful conduct was extreme and outrageous, and it was calculated
to cause harm to Ms. Freeman and Ms. Moss. Defendant’s wrongful conduct is so outrageous in
character and so extreme in degree that it is beyond all possible bounds of decency and is to be
regarded as atrocious and utterly intolerable in a civilized community. Defendant Giuliani carried
out his campaign with actual malice, as he either knew that his accusations were false or published
30. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s conduct, Plaintiffs have suffered
significant general, actual, incidental, and special damages including, without limitation,
emotional distress, overwhelming stress and anxiety, lost earnings, and other pecuniary loss. Those
8
Case 1:23-cv-03754 Document 1 Filed 12/18/23 Page 9 of 10
harms are ongoing and, if Defendant Giuliani is not prevented from continuing to repeat his
be made or published, further statements repeating any and all false claims that
during or related to the 2020 presidential election; that either Plaintiff was
arrested for any such fraud, illegal activity, or misconduct; and/or that either
Plaintiff had any record of engaging in election fraud or related illegal activity
C. Such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.
9
Case 1:23-cv-03754 Document 1 Filed 12/18/23 Page 10 of 10
10