WAS DOUG MCCARRON ALWAYS A PUNK ..HEY FBI.CAN YOU SAY PATTERN OF CRIMNAL BEHAVIOR

HOW LONG HAS DIRTY DOUG MADE IT A HABIT OF THREATENING WOMEN AND CHILDREN

 "Since you do not seem to be concerned about your safety and well-being, maybe you will be concerned about the well-being of your wife and children." 

DOUG MCCARRON DECEMBER 20,1977

 HOW LONG AS DIRTY DOUG "THE ICE CREAM CRAPPER" MCCARRONS UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS AND PUNKS ENGAGED IN AN ORGANIZE BY THREAT,SLANDER,EXTORTION AND LIES CAMPAIGN

1977-2019

Civ. No. 66721. Court of Appeals of California, Second Appellate District, Division Four. June 22, 1983.]

PETER E. KISESKEY et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. CARPENTERS' TRUST FOR SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA et al., Defendants and Respondents.

The FAC alleges, among other things, that on or about October 17, 1977, Douglas McCarron and others acting as "agents and/or employees" of respondent, within the scope of their employment telephoned Peter Kiseskey and stated "You are a no good son of a bitch and if you don't resign the agreement and get in set with the union, you'll be put in the hospital." It alleges that on or about November 20, 1977, Douglas McCarron and others telephoned Peter Kiseskey and said, "Rejoin the union or you might not live to regret it," and that on or about December 20, 1977, Douglas McCarron and others telephoned Peter Kiseskey and said "Since you do not seem to be concerned about your safety and well-being, maybe you will be concerned about the well-being of your wife and children."

Each of these statements taken alone, or considered together as part of a course of conduct, needs no delicate weighing in order to conclude that it constitutes outrageous conduct.

The FAC alleges that "Defendants', and each of them, conduct [sic] was so severe and outrageous that on January 9, 1978, plaintiff was caused to incur a heart attack.We conclude that the facts alleged in that complaint are sufficient to state a cause of action which accrued on January 9, 1978, the date of the heart attack 

The judgment (order of dismissal) is reversed.
Ackerman, J.

HOW MUCH DID MCCARRON BEING A PUNK COST UBC MEMBERS 

Plaintiff further pled that "[t]he aforementioned acts of defendants, and each of them, were willful, wanton, malicious, outrageous and done with ill will, a desire to do harm to the plaintiff, and evil motive, and a conscious disregard of the rights of the others and justify the awarding of exemplary and punitive damages in the amount of $5,000,000.00."

HEY DOUGY.PHONES FOR YOU..

PUSSIE!!