CHARLESTON – A Charleston attorney has filed a lawsuit to regain possession of personal property.
Travis A. Griffith filed his complaint Aug. 4 in Kanawha Circuit Court against Hilliard and Swartz LLP, Olivio Law Firm PLLC, Swartz Law Office, Mark Swartz, Allyson E. Hilliard and Michael A. Olivio.
Griffith, who is representing himself, says he and Hilliard, another attorney, were married. Their divorce was finalized last year, but the equitable distribution of goods is yet to be concluded.
When the divorce was finalized, Hilliard and Swartz were doing business as Swartz Law Offices. Swartz represented Hilliard in the divorce, according to Griffith’s complaint.
Griffith previously worked with Olivio at Olivio & Griffith until earlier this year. He says Olivio and Olivio Law Firm are in possession of items belonging to Griffith, including a conference table, a circular table, about 10 chairs, a barrister bookshelf, a desk, a credenza, a jacket valet, clothing, five small lamps, reporter books, other books used to practice law, his form bank and other electronic files, collectable material, artwork, personal photographs (including the last photo his has of his maternal grandparents), white shelving, a set of Ping Eye 2 golf clubs with a bag, personal files, a file cabinet, medals won in half-marathons, a blood pressure monitor, a glass and metal end table, a large decorative clock, a wooden end table, a cordless keyboard and mouse with attachments, his paternal grandfather’s original Miner’s Foreman Certificate, degrees, awards, a refrigerator, a monitor, a television/monitor, a printer, two space heaters and other “small tangible items too voluminous to list specifically.”
He says Hilliard filed a Writ of Execution and Suggestion of Execution on June 8 based on the final divorce order seeking financial interests. One such execution was served on Olivio at Olivio Law Firm, where items of Griffith’s are held.
“Olivio personally interpreted the filing to include the tangible, personal property of the plaintiff, and, therefore, has refused to allow plaintiff access to obtain these items of personal property,” the complaint states. “Olivio Law Firm PLLC and Michael A. Olivio are currently using on a daily basis items of personal property belonging to plaintiff and on loan from Gray Griffith & Mays a.c. and Sharon D. Griffith, respectively, for their own financial gain.”
Griffith says he had a representative ask Swartz to clarify that this personal property wasn’t included in the execution filed on Olivio. He did clarify that, and an email stating that was forwarded to Olivio.
But later, Swartz refused to sign a stipulation to that effect, saying “he was waiting to see if an appeal was filed in the underlying divorce case with the West Virginia Supreme Court of Appeals.”
“I feel your pain, but I want to hold off until next week to see whether or not your client takes another appeal,” Swartz said in the email.
“The personal property items which defendants Hilliard, Swartz, Swartz Law Offices and Hilliard and Swartz LLP have blatantly declared they do not want remain in the custody and control of defendants Olivio Law Firm PLLC and Michael A. Olivio,” Griffith states.
According to court documents, Hilliard received a divorce settlement of $100,809.25 from Griffith.
Other court filings show that Olivio and Griffith dissociated with each other on May 28. Olivio says Griffith didn’t appear at the office after April 15, following “several periods of extended absences and lengthy hours devoted toward the business.”
In court documents, Olivio says he had evidence that Griffith was soliciting and signing clients on May 15, 16 and 19.
Griffith accuses the defendants of abuse of process due to the willful and/or malicious misuse and/or misapplication of lawfully issued process to accomplish a purpose not intended or warranted. He also accuses them of unlawful conversion and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
“The actions of defendants (Swartz and Hilliard) were atrocious, utterly intolerable in a civilized community, and so extreme and outrageous as to exceed all possible bounds of decency, causing plaintiff substantial and several emotional distress,” he writes. “These defendants’ actions were intentionally designed to cause plaintiff emotional distress.”
Griffith seeks immediate recovery of his personal property, and he requests a pre-judgment hearing on the issue of recovery of his personal property. He also seeks compensatory damages for lost time, earnings and benefits, damages for indignity, embarrassment and humiliation, punitive damages, pre-judgement interest, attorney fees, court costs, reasonable rental value of his property being used for personal gain by Olivio and his firm as well as other relief.
Griffith now operates the Griffith Law Center PLLC.
The case has been assigned to Circuit Judge Tod Kaufman.
Kanawha Circuit Court case number: 15-C-1478