Roy Warden

6502 E. Golf Links Rd., #H129

Tucson, Arizona 85730
TELEPHONE: (520) 551-3496
E-MAIL: roywarden@hotmail.com

Pro Se Plaintiff

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF PIMA

ROY WARDEN, NO: C20153232

Plaintiff in Pro
Se FOURTH AMENDED COMPLAINT

vs.

PHYLLIS RUSSELL, individually (Promissory Estoppel, Conspir-

and in her official capacity as Di- acy, Intentional Infliction of Emo-
rector of Esperanza en Es- tional Distress, Negligence
calante; AINDREA McCAMMON,
LMSW, individually and in her THE HON. GUS ARAGON
official capacity as employee of
Esperanza en Escalante, ES-
PERANZA EN ESCALANTE, an
Arizona Corporation,

Defendants

A. PARTIES
The Plaintiff, for his complaint, therefore alleges:

1. That at all relevant times, Plaintiff Roy Warden resided

in Pima County, Arizona.

1
 2. That at all relevant times, Defendant Phyllis Russell was
the Director of Esperanza en Escalante (EEE), an Ari-
zona not for profit corporation, and resided in Pima
County, Arizona.
3. That at all relevant times, Defendant Aindrea McCam-
mon, LMSW, was employed by EEE, acted as Plaintiffs
case manager and resided in Pima County, Arizona.
4. That Defendant EEE (1) is an Arizona not for profit cor-
poration located at 3700 South Calle Polar, Tucson Ar-
izona, (2) is organized and funded by authority1 granted
by 38 U.S.C. 2011, 2012, 2061, 2064, the McKinney-
Vento Homeless Assistance Act and 42 11431, (3) op-
erates a Grant Per Diem (GPD) Program for Homeless
Veterans, (4) is obligated to provide the services the tax-
payers have paid it to provide as set forth in VHA Hand-
books 1162.01(1) [Grant Per Diem (GPD) Pro-
gram],1162.07 [Supportive Services for Veteran Fami-
lies (SSVP) Program] and 1162.09 [Health Care for
Homeless Veterans (HCHV) Program], and (5) is obli-
gated to provide the services it promised as set forth in
Articles I and II of The BYLAWS of Esperanza En Es-
calante 2013.
5. That the events giving rise to this lawsuit occurred in
Pima County, Arizona.

1 VHA Handbook 1162.01(1)

2
 B: TRIAL BY JURY
6. Pursuant to Ariz.R.Civ.P. 38(b) Plaintiff requests a trial
by jury.
C: GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
7. That EEE is obligated to provide the services it promised
as set forth in the 2013 EEE BYLAWS:
a) to aid, assist, promote and act for the benefit of
Veterans and Veteran families;
b) to provide social rehabilitation for homeless Veter-
ans (in) support of (their) transition from homeless-
ness to self sufficiency;
c) to provide for the mutual welfare and enhance the
quality of life of those Veterans who are housed at
EEE;
d) to provide a rehabilitation program that includes
socialization and the participation of the residents
and
e) to help those who are willing to be active partici-
pants in their own rehabilitation and self suffi-
ciency;
8. That EEE is obligated to provide the services the taxpay-
ers have paid it to provide as set forth in VHA Handbook
1162.09 Healthcare for Homeless Veterans Program:
a) Assist Veterans with mental health conditions to
re-establish normal roles in the community;
b) Help people live more stable (and) productive
lives;

3
 c) Provide life skills (aka how to get along with oth-
ers) training;
d) Provide crisis management services and monitor
psychiatric status and stability;
e) Intervene, when necessary, and advocate on behalf
of the Veteran;
f) Provide enhancement of independent living skills
(aka how to get along with others);
g) Help with the prevention of future homeless epi-
sodes;
h) Ensure that issues pertaining to security and law
enforcement are addressed;
i) Instill hope that the homeless Veteran can main-
tain housing stability and be self-sustaining in the
community;
j) Improve the Veterans safety;
k) Assist the Veteran in achieving or returning to
mainstream community housing and
l) Instill hope, improve the Veterans self-esteem, self
efficacy and independence, (and) assist the Veteran
in achieving the optimal level of pschosocial func-
tioning.
9. That (1) the majority of EEE Veteran Residents receive
off site V.A. psychiatric counseling and medications for
conditions ranging from depression and PTSD to schiz-
ophrenia, (2) some have done hard time for violent of-
fenses, including assault, rape and manslaughter, (3)

4
 most have issues with drinking and hard drug use, (4)
most lack adequate socialization skills, and (5) in large
part EEE Veterans, ALL of whom have been trained for
physical confrontation and in the hand-to-hand killing
arts, became homeless because they lacked the sociali-
zation skills necessary for getting along with others.

10. That in July 2013, shortly after Plaintiff entered the 2

year EEE Veterans in Transition program for homeless
veterans, Plaintiff came to an agreement with Defendant
Russell to (1) refurbish an abandoned garden area in-
cluding 3 raised garden structures2 and the space en-
closed therein, (2) recruit, instruct and employ jobless
Veteran volunteers residing at EEE to grow organic veg-
etables for EEE community use, and (3) create a mean-
ingful surplus which might be provided to enrich the
diet for Veterans residing at the Veterans Hospital in
Tucson Arizona, and elsewhere.

11. That in consideration for his effort Defendant Russell

granted Plaintiff permission to create, establish and di-
rect an independent, ongoing, EEE located, Veteran di-
rected, Veteran run program which Plaintiff would con-
tinue to organize, promote and direct after concluding
his 2 year EEE residency program.

2 The three raised garden areas are referred to as the north garden,
the south garden and the west garden.

5
12. That Defendant Russell instructed Plaintiff to consult
and to develop a specific garden plan with EEE em-
ployee Clark, who managed a substance abuse pro-
gram in building 3, adjacent to the north side of the
designated garden area.
13. That in July 2013, after consultation with and direc-
tions given by EEE employee Clark, Plaintiff developed
a specific plan for the utilization of the 3 abandoned
raised garden structures, and the common space en-
closed therein, which had fallen into disuse and lay bar-
ren after years of neglect.
14. That the plan required Plaintiff to (1) clean out, refur-
bish, and establish a viable garden in the three aban-
doned raised garden structures and the common area
enclosed therein, as described in paragraphs 10 &11,
(2) maintain wheelchair access to all sides of the raised
garden structures, and all new structures to be created
therein, (3) recruit and employ volunteer gardeners from
EEE residents, and (4) grow and distribute organic pro-
duce to EEE residents.
15. That in July 2013 Plaintiff established a Facebook site
titled Vets Feeding Vets where he (1) posted a Mis-
sion Statement setting forth the general objectives of
Vets Feeding Vets, (2) posted articles intended to in-
spire self-reliance and community spirit within an oth-
erwise dependent and lethargic community, (3) solic-
ited interest in the program from a variety of off-site

6
 Pima County Veteran3 and garden enthusiasts, and (4)
posted articles relevant to organic gardening, aquapon-
ics, the use of key hole gardens to promote water con-
servation, etc.
16. That in July 2013 Plaintiff shared with Defendant Mc-
Cammon the details, and the objectives, of the Vets
Feeding Vets project, and continued to so advise her
during subsequent EEE program quarterly reviews.
17. That during quarterly reviews Plaintiff shared with De-
fendant McCammon his desire to modify his diet and
engage in exercise in order to reduce his intake of pre-
scribed medications to treat stress and depression.
18. That in August 2013 Plaintiff began removing trash, de-
bris and weeds from the garden site.
19. That in the fall of 2013 Plaintiff, while confined to a
wheelchair due to a broken hip suffered in late August
2013, continued preparing the soil and removing debris
from the site, confirming the feasibility of volunteer
wheelchair gardeners performing significant gardening
functions.
20. That in the spring of 2014 Defendants Russell and Mc-
Cammon failed to take action after Plaintiff informed
them an EEE employee, not connected to the garden
project, was causing Plaintiff emotional distress by re-
ferring to Plaintiff as a racist and woman abuser.

3 (Ret.) Colonel Martha McSally was the first outside veteran to be-
friend the program.

7
21. That in the spring of 2014 Plaintiff solicited participa-
tion from EEE resident Peter Fisher and assigned him
exclusive use of the south raised garden structure.
22. That several months later, when EEE resident Mike
Garcia asked permission to join the Vets Feeding Vets
garden project, Plaintiff assigned him exclusive use of
the north raised garden structure.
23. That Plaintiff (1) expended significant time and labor
improving the garden, delivering produce, and promot-
ing the program, (2) expended money for garden sup-
plies, including soil amendments, and (3) expended
money to secure the Vets Feeding Vets domain, etc.
24. That Plaintiff had lengthy conversations with both Mike
Garcia and Peter Fisher outlining the goals of the Vets
Feeding Vets garden project, their duty to work towards
those goals, etc.
25. That subsequently, gradually, and without permission,
Mike Garcia began encroaching into Plaintiffs west
raised garden structure and appropriating a substantial
portion of the common area between the raised gardens
to create structures for his exclusive use, including a
structure which blocked Plaintiffs access to the north
portion of Plaintiffs west raised garden structure.
26. That on March 15, 2015 Plaintiff directed Mike Garcia
to (1) restore wheelchair access to the entire Vets Feed-
ing Vets space, (2) restore Plaintiffs access to both sides

8
 of the west raised garden structure, (3) stop appropriat-
ing space in Plaintiffs west raised garden structure and
Plaintiffs key hole garden structure, (4) stop building
additional structures within the Vets Feeding Vets com-
mon area, (5) fill in the hole he dug outside the garden
which was presenting a hazard, etc.
27. That Mike Garcia replied angrily, in sum and sub-
stance, You cant tell me what to do. Your plans will
come to nothing. Wheelchair people dont need access
here and you can build another area for them elsewhere
if you want.
28. That on March 16, 2015 Defendant McCammon failed
to take action after Plaintiff informed her regarding Mike
Garcias non-cooperation.
29. That subsequently, Defendant McCammon informed
Plaintiff, there are issues that have come up with the
Vets Feeding Vets Garden Agreement and that Plaintiff
should speak with Defendant Russell for further clari-
fication.
30. That subsequently, Defendant McCammon and John
Adams, employed by the Veterans Administration, came

9
 to an agreement to misapply the term clinical eligibil-
ity4 as a fraudulent justification to prematurely5 termi-
nate Plaintiffs two year residency at EEE and to breech
the agreement to allow Plaintiff to direct Vets Feeding
Vets.
31. That on or about March 24, 2015 Defendant McCam-
mon advised Plaintiff that John Adams had decided to
advance Plaintiffs move out date from July 9, 2015 to
April 1, 2015 because Plaintiff was no longer clinically
eligible to receive EEE benefits.

32. That within an hour of Plaintiffs conversation with De-

fendant McCammon as set forth in paragraph 31, John
Adams called Plaintiff and suggested Plaintiff reconsider
his interest in continuing on as Director of the Vets
Feeding Vets program, warning that EEE had the power
to withhold from Plaintiff a significant rent subsidy from
the Shelter Plus program to which Plaintiff was entitled.
33. That, in reliance upon Defendant Russells grant of per-
mission to direct the Vets Feeding Vets program, as set
forth in paragraphs 10 & 11, and solely on the basis of
its close proximity to the Vets Feeding Vets Garden,

4 The only criteria for a two year residency at EEE is homelessness.

5 Plaintiffs move out date had been set for July 9, 2015.

10
 Plaintiff (1) executed a Rental Application to Sunflower
Apartments and, as instructed, (2) gave the application
to Defendant McCammon for processing and submis-
sion to Sunflower.
34. That in reliance upon Defendant Russells grant of per-
mission to direct the Vets Feeding Vets program, as set
forth in paragraphs 10 & 11, Plaintiff declined to apply
for residence at a series of midtown locations which pro-
vided significantly better accommodations.
35. That on April 9, 2015, Plaintiff became angry and re-
fused to sign, despite repeated promptings, an applica-
tion form for Shelter Plus Rent Subsidy benefits when
he discovered several significant misstatements of fact
which significantly understated his income and assets.
36. That subsequently, Plaintiff obtained a copy of the Sun-
flower Apartment Rental Application which demon-
strated EEE had altered the document, after Plaintiff
had signed it, in a manner significant to the issues of
this case, prior to submission to Sunflower Apartments.
37. That subsequently, Plaintiff received a letter from De-
fendant Russell, dated April 13, 2015, which, amongst
other things, denied the existence of any ongoing Vets
Feeding Vets program.
38. That on May 4, 2015 when Plaintiff, after repeated re-
quests, objected to Mike Garcias continual encroach-
ment upon Plaintiffs key hole garden site Garcia, sneer-
ing, taunting, and provoking Plaintiff to anger, told

11
 Plaintiff: (1) You cant make me stop, (2) I can do
whatever I want, (3) You cant tell me what to do, (4)
Show me where I signed anything, 6 (5) You dont
know how to garden; your big plans7 will never come to
anything, (6) What are you going to do if I dont stop,
burn an American flag?

39. That on May 5, 2015 Defendant McCammon executed a

false, misleading and self-serving document which (1)
significantly limited Plaintiffs access to his west raised
garden space and (2) in sum and substance, denied
Plaintiff ever claimed directorship of the ongoing Vets
Feeding Vets program simply because she had not in-
cluded such claims in her quarterly review case notes.
40. That in August 2016 EEE staff, including Defendant
McCammon, began pressuring veteran garden volun-
teers into abandoning the Vets Feeding Vets program,
and to discontinue their association with Plaintiff as fol-
lows:

6 Referencing Plaintiffs original guidelines to the gardeners: Were

supposed to grow food and give it away to needy Veterans.
7 As set forth in the Mission Statement: to create a meaningful sur-
plus to provide food to Veterans off site and those in the VA hospi-
tal.

12
 a) Vets Feeding Vets Garden Volunteer Lorenzo Kibler
has been kicked out of EEE housing;
b) Vets Feeding Vets associate Ken has been admon-
ished for his association with Plaintiff and kicked
out of EEE housing;
c) Vets Feeding Vets Garden Volunteer gardener Ken-
dall Yankee, an expert on aquaponics, has been pre-
sured and now appears disinterested in the pro-
gram;
d) EEE resident Bill, housed in unit 3 adjacent to the
Vets Feeding Vets north garden, has (1) confronted
Plaintiff and called him an asshole and ungrateful
for bringing this suit, (2) challenged Plaintiffs right
to run Vets Feeding Vets independent of EEE man-
agement, and (3) stolen Plaintiffs shade cloth netting
used to shelter vegetables in the Vets Feeding Vets
west garden.
41. That on January 6, 2017 while Plaintiff was tending to
the middle portion of the West Garden, EEE Resident
Bill, as identified in paragraph d) above, rapidly ap-
proached Plaintiff screaming obscenities;
42. That Bill thrust his chest into Plaintiff, knocking Plain-
tiff backwards as Plaintiff shouted Get away from me!;
43. That Bill continued to advance, again knocking Plaintiff
backwards, while Plaintiff continued to shout Get away
from me!;

13
44. That Plaintiff stood his ground, put up his arms, ex-
tended his forearms in a blocking posture and stopped
Bills advance, all the while continuing to shout Get
away from me!;
45. That Bill continued to advance; both parties now shout-
ing and shoving at each other;
46. That the duration of the violent encounter described in
paragraphs 41-45 above was approximately two
minutes;
47. That EEE employees Angie and Perry arrived on
scene and physically grappled with a thoroughly en-
raged Bill who continued to lunge at Plaintiff;
48. That Angie, who had grabbed Bill from behind, was
pulled off balance by a thoroughly enraged Bill;
49. That Plaintiff and Perry moved ten feet away while Angie
grappled with Bill, who continued to shout and lunge at
Plaintiff;
50. That EEE employee Mike finally arrived on scene from
his office estimated to be 150 yards away;
51. That Angie finally got control of Bill and both walked
away from the scene of the encounter.
52. That Plaintiff declined when Perry offered to call the po-
lice;

53. That Plaintiff and Perry spoke calmly and rationally for
a few minutes;

14
54. That soon after another EEE resident arrived on scene
by car and spoke with Perry on matters unrelated to the
incident;
55. That Plaintiff and the resident described in paragraph
54 above had a friendly conversation regarding the res-
idents family, residing in unit 18, participating in the
Vets Feeding Vets Garden Project;
56. That Plaintiff told Perry I just want to be left in peace
to work the garden and give vegetables away;
57. That when Plaintiff asked Perry for Bills last name so
he could get an A.R.S. 12-1809 Injunction against Har-
assment Perry went to the EEE Office to obtain the in-
formation;
58. That Perry returned several minutes later and stated he
was not permitted to divulge Bills last name;
59. That Perry advised and Plaintiff agreed in the interest of
public safety, that Plaintiff should obtain his injunction
prior to returning to the Vets Feeding Vets Garden Pro-
ject;
60. That Plaintiff departed the scene and later that after-
noon, wrote a message to Counsel Pastore informing
him of the incident and asking for Bills last name;
61. That, as per Counsel Pastores email response sent at
4:39 pm on January 6, 2017, the parties conversed on
Monday January 9, 2017 after (1) Plaintiff failed to get
a hearing regarding his A.R.S. 12-1809 injunction be-
cause he could not provide the court clerk with Bills

15
 last name, and (2) Plaintiff filed Incident Report #
1701090187 with TPD Officer Gonzales.
62. That on January 10, 2017 Plaintiff emailed Counsel
Pastore another request for Bills last name;
63. That on January 10, 2017 when Plaintiff spoke with
Counsel Pastore regarding (1) EEEs failure to provide
Bills last name, and (2) EEEs duty to adequately in-
struct EEE Veteran Residents on the specifics of crimi-
nal assault and battery, Plaintiff was shocked when
Counsel Pastore stated he didnt think EEE had such a
duty;
64. That on January 11, 2017 Plaintiff returned to the Vets
Feeding Vets Garden site, spoke with Perry, and worked
the garden;
65. That several days later Plaintiff received a letter from
EEE dated January 11, 2017 permanently baring his
access to the Vets Feeding Vets Garden site.
66. That sometime in May 2017 Plaintiff was informed by
his landlord, Kay Zeigler, that Sunflower Apartments
was no longer accepting veterans-with-a-voucher rent
applicants because they (1) abused alcohol and drugs,
(2) were violent and (3) didnt know how to get along
with others.
67. That EEE had a duty pursuant to federal statute, regu-
lations, guidelines, and the Department of Veterans Af-
fairs Handbooks cited in paragraphs 3, 4 and 8, as well

16
 as a general duty, to provide a safe environment, to pro-
vide reasonable protection from harm, to ensure that
issues pertaining to security and law enforcement are
appropriately addressed, to provide crisis management
services and to monitor psychiatric status and stability
for the safety of all Veterans.
68. That during Plaintiffs 2 year residency at EEE, Defend-
ants failed to provide counseling to residents on general
life and socialization skills and how to get along and re-
solve disputes without resorting to violence.

COUNT I: PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL

69. That in reliance upon Defendant Russells grant of per-

mission to direct an ongoing Vets Feeding Vets Garden
program, as set forth in paragraphs 10 & 11, Plaintiff
(1) expended significant time and labor improving the
garden, delivering produce, and promoting the pro-
gram, (2) expended money for garden supplies, includ-
ing soil amendments, (3) expended money to secure
the Vets Feeding Vets domain, (4) moved to a less de-
sirable location at Sunflower Apartments to be in close
proximity to the Vets Feeding Vets project, etc.
COUNT II: CONSPIRACY
70. That Defendant McCammon and John Adams con-
spired and employed the irrelevant term clinical eligi-
bility (1) to prematurely terminate Plaintiffs residency
at EEE, (2) to pressure Plaintiff and to discourage his

17
 directorship of Vets Feeding Vets, (3) to cause Plaintiff
emotional distress, and (4) that Plaintiff suffered eco-
nomic and emotional damages as a result of that con-
spiracy.
COUNT III: INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF
EMOTIONAL DISTRESS (Extreme and Outrageous
Conduct)
71. That Defendants engaged in the reprehensible conduct
set forth above knowing (1) Plaintiff was committed
toand emotionally and financially invested inthe
ongoing Directorship of Vets Feeding Vets, (2) Plaintiff
was taking medications prescribed for severe depres-
sion and stress, (3) Plaintiff was under the authority
and subject to the control of Defendants EEE, Russell
and McCammon, (4) Plaintiff was suffering severe emo-
tional distress as a consequence of their conduct and
provocations, and (5) that Plaintiff currently suffers se-
vere emotional distress as a consequence of Defend-
ants actions.
COUNT IV: NEGLIGENCE
72. That Defendant EEE (1) has a duty to provide all Vet-
eran Residents the services it promised in its 2013 BY-
LAWS, (2) has a duty to provide all Veteran Residents
the services the taxpayers have paid it to provide as set
forth in paragraphs 7-8, including comprehensive in-
structions on how to get along with each other and
resolve their conflicts without resorting to violence, (3)
failed in its duty to provide the services specified in

18
 paragraphs 7 & 8, and (5) failed in their duty even
though they were on notice that Bill had previously
instigated trouble with Plaintiff;
73. Additionally; as a foreseeable consequence of Defend-
ant EEE negligence Plaintiff (1) was assaulted and bat-
tered, (2) suffered significant additional emotional
damages, and (3) was permanently divested of access
to his Vets Feeding Vets Garden Project.
D: PRAYER
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for a judgment against the De-
fendants as follows:

1. For special damages in an amount to be determined

herein;
2. For compensatory damages in a just and reasonable
amount;
3. For attorneys fees, if any;
4. For Plaintiffs cost of suit incurred herein;
5. For pre-judgment and post-judgment interest to the ex-
tent allowed by law;
6. For such other and further relief as the Court or jury
deems just and proper.

DATED this 19th day June, 2017.

By:

/s/Roy Warden

19
Original filed with the Court on June 19, 2017. I hereby certify
that on June 19, 2017 I personally sent the Fourth Amended
Complaint, and attachments, by email, to the following:

Christopher M. Pastore,
Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C.,
3430 E. Sunrise Drive, Suite
220 Tucson AZ 85718

20