COUNTER CLAIM

January 3, 2024

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
COUNTY OF MECKLENBURG

RICARDO ALONZO BURRESS
Defendant- Counter Plaintiff
vs.
DIONNE CHARISE BURRESS
Plaintiff- Counter
Defendant

IN THE GENERAL COURT OF JUSTICE
DISTRICT COURT DIVISION
22-CVD-5663

COUNTER CLAIM

COMES NOW, Defendant/Counter Plaintiff RICARDO ALONZO BURRESS
(hereinafter “Counter-Plaintiff”), and answers Plaintiff-Counter Defendant’s Complaint as
follows:

PARTIES

1. Counter Plaintiff, RICARDO ALONZO BURRESS, is a citizen and resident of
Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.
2. Counter Defendant, DIONNE CHARISE BURRESS, is a citizen and resident of
Duluth, Gwinnett County, Georgia.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

3. The claims alleged herein arise under the General Statutes of North Carolina § 1-
75.3, et seq., other statutory and common law.
4. This Court has jurisdiction over Defendant because Defendant does sufficient business in
North Carolina, has sufficient minimum contacts in North Carolina.
5. This Court is a proper venue for this action pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1-77, et seq.,
because the cause of action alleged against Counter-Defendant arose in this Court’s jurisdiction.
Moreover, the Counter Defendant is located in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina
GENERAL FACTS COMMON TO ALL CLAIMS

6. On or about June 14, 2008, the Counter Plaintiff and Counter Defendant were
married. The parties separated in September 1, 2018 and divorced on September 23, 2020.
7. The parties had children born out of the union. These are: Thaddeus Elliot
Burress, born on July 19, 2008 and Ford Jameson Buress born on December 13, 2014.
8. Since Counter Plaintiff has separated from Counter Defendant, Counter

2

Defendant has tried everything in her power to make Counter Plaintiff’s life miserable and
unbearable. Since the divorce, Counter Defendant has taken Counter Plaintiff to a point of a
breakdown Financial, Mental and Physically.
9. On April 2017, Counter Defendant filed Chapter 13 bankruptcy. When she filed,
Counter Plaintiff had no knowledge of what was filed or how much was owed because Counter
Defendant never discussed that information with Counter Plaintiff even while they were married.
10. Counter Defendant hid and/or falsified information about her bankruptcy situation
and asked Counter Plaintiff at different times about payments that needed to be made at times he
did not have it.
11. It is noteworthy that Counter Plaintiff asked Counter Defendant if she made any
payments before the separation was signed because the bankruptcy was a few payments past due
after he started making payments based on the divorce decree. Counter Plaintiff only knew what
was needed to be paid each month.
12. Besides, the bankruptcy was modified numerous times throughout the bankruptcy.
Counter Plaintiff asked Counter Defendant to give him access to her bankruptcy lawyer so he
can keep track of what was going on. However, Counter Defendant was always very
argumentative and was known for twisting the story and had a hard time discussing anything
about what was going on with the bankruptcy.
13. Accordingly, Counter Plaintiff refinanced a vehicle for over $13,000 that was
paid off just to bring Counter Defendant’s Bankruptcy current because she kept him in the dark
of what was truly owed.
14. Counter Plaintiff also had a condo he purchased for $90,000 and had to sell it for
$80,000 which is 10,000 less than he purchased it for 2 years earlier because he was about to lose
it since Counter Defendant did not communicate with him about what her bankruptcy status was.
If Counter Plaintiff had the condo today, its price would have been $140,000, but of Counter
Defendant’s actions and/or inactions, thousands of dollars were lost and was Counter Plaintiff
was facing foreclosure because he had to make sure his children have a roof over their head.
15. Counter Defendant promised to have Counter Plaintiff on her insurance until the
bankruptcy was discharged or for 36 months. However the insurance was cut short costing
Counter Plaintiff’s medication to sky rocket and costing him hundreds of dollars more a month.
16. When Counter Plaintiff asked Counter Defendant about the insurance, she stated

3

that her job took Counter Plaintiff off because the parties are no longer married. She did not
notify Counter Plaintiff of the foregoing, and that it happens in the prevailing circumstances.
17. For the Counter Defendant’s actions and/or inactions, Counter Plaintiff is now
stuck with bills that unfortunately could not be processed with insurance. He also had a lien with
the IRS for $10,000 because Counter Defendant stated each of them could file a child on their
taxes and since Counter Plaintiff filed one child, he had to pay that money back because she filed
both children and knew that she did when she signed her tax papers with both of the children’s
name listed.
18. Counter Plaintiff got an email and call from his tax preparer and was informed
that he was going to owe a lot due to the fact that the SSN he tried to file on his taxes had already
been used. Counter Defendant also totaled Counter Plaintiff’s vehicle during bankruptcy, which
did not allow Counter Plaintiff to get another vehicle because it could not fit in the plan. For that
reason, Counter Plaintiff had to get another vehicle and the monthly payment was higher than he
could afford because of term, interest rate and year of the vehicle.
19. Further, the car that Counter Defendant totaled would have been paid for after the
bankruptcy. Counter Plaintiff had to start a new loan all over again.
20. Counter Defendant also tried to sue Counter Plaintiff for $62,000 which caused
Counter Plaintiff to retain an attorney for more than $10,000 at $400 a hour and put Counter
Plaintiff and his business in a financial bind which lead Counter Plaintiff to sell off assets to
come up with funds to afford an attorney. This also put Counter Plaintiff’s business in jeopardy
which led him not being able to complete his contracts and now these businesses are coming
after him for not completing those jobs due the sell off assets.
21. Counter Plaintiff has also lost his business due to everything Counter Defendant
has put him through and now Counter Plaintiff has no income. Counter Plaintiff is also on the
verge of getting evicted due to all the cost he has incurred through this process and has no money
to pay anything. He has bills piling up because of this and he sees no way of fixing it. He is
therefore filing for CHAPTER 7 bankruptcy.
22. On or about April 1, 2022, the Counter Defendant filed a Complaint against
Counter Plaintiff alleging Counter Plaintiff’s nonpayment of bankruptcy payments.
23. Counter Plaintiff hereby files this Counter Claim.

4

CAUSES OF ACTION

AS AND FOR COUNTER PLAINTIFF’S FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

Intentional infliction of Emotional Distress

24. Counter Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and re-alleges each and every allegation set
forth in paragraphs 1 through 23 hereinabove, with the same force and effect as though more
fully set forth herein.
25. The conducts of the Counter Defendant as set forth above was extreme, and
outrageous.
26. Since the divorce, Counter Plaintiff has been taking medication because of the
emotional stress Counter Defendant has put him through since their divorce. She claims she just
wants to move on, but it is hard to believe since Counter Plaintiff has gone through all of this
since 2020. Counter Plaintiff let her write the divorce decree, whose provisions Counter
Defendant has failed to follow. Counter Plaintiff just wanted to make sure Counter Defendant
had access to the children. However, Counter Defendant is always out of town and leaving the
children with different people without letting Counter Plaintiff know exactly what’s going on.
27. The children call Counter Plaintiff constantly saying they are hungry or wanting
to get out of the house.
28. Counter Defendant calls her family or coworkers/friends to pick-up the children
to take them to practice or games instead of their father. It has been an uphill battle. Every time
Counter Plaintiff’s phone makes a sound, he thinks it is Counter Defendant, with her demands
and threats of legal action. It is therefore hard to even speak with Counter Defendant about the
smallest things. It is very stressful and depressing.
29. The Counter Defendant ought to have reasonably known that her actions and/or
inactions would cause severe harm on Counter Plaintiff.
30. The Counter Defendant failed to consider the adverse effects of her actions and/or
inactions on Counter Plaintiff.
31. Counter Plaintiff alleges that Counter Defendant continue to act with full
knowledge of the consequences and damage being caused to Counter Plaintiff, by Counter
Defendant’s actions and/or inactions, and Counter Defendant’s actions and/or inactions were,
and are, willful, oppressive, and malicious. Accordingly, Counter Plaintiff is entitled to punitive
damages against Counter Defendant, in a sum according to proof at trial.

5

32. As a result of the Counter Defendant’s actions and/or inactions, Counter Plaintiff
has been subjected to a malicious lawsuit filed against him, by the Counter Defendant, which
action has in turn caused Counter Plaintiff emotional harm.
AS AND FOR COUNTER PLAINTIFF’S SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

Fraud

33. Counter Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and re-alleges each and every allegation set
forth in paragraphs 1 through 32 hereinabove, with the same force and effect as though more
fully set forth herein.
34. On April 2017, Counter Defendant filed Chapter 13 bankruptcy. When she filed,
Counter Plaintiff had no knowledge of what was filed or how much was owed because she never
discussed that information with him even while they were married.
35. Counter Plaintiff asked Counter Defendant if she made any payments before the
separation was signed because the bankruptcy was a few payments past due after he started
making payments based on the divorce decree. Counter Plaintiff only knew what was needed to
be paid each month.
36. Besides, the bankruptcy was modified numerous times throughout the bankruptcy.
Counter Plaintiff asked Counter Defendant to give him access to her bankruptcy lawyer so he
can keep track of what was going on. However, Counter Defendant was always very
argumentative and was known for twisting the story and had a hard time discussing anything
about what was going on with the bankruptcy.
37. When Counter Plaintiff and Counter Defendant were married, he had access and
shortly after the divorce he was immediately cutoff not knowing where the bankruptcy stood, if it
was current, modified or what the balance was. Counter Plaintiff spoke with Counter Defendant
about the payments Bankruptcy Payments for March, April, May 2021, and told her those
payments were going to be taken care of which they were. The outstanding payments on
bankruptcy plan were going to be modified and Counter Plaintiff asked Counter Defendant about
the modification by text and she never replied back to him about the status. According to the
documents filed with bankruptcy court on 7/13/21 (Exhibit A- Motion to Modify filed 7-13-
21).
38. Further, Counter Defendant stated her family member was going to help her
payoff the remaining amount of the bankruptcy because Counter Plaintiff does not pay his court

6

ordered child support on time. Counter Plaintiff asserts that this amounts to giving fraudulent
information to the courts about child support. On the contrary, Counter Plaintiff is not due to pay
court ordered child support until the bankruptcy has been dismissed or discharged according to
Article V of the Divorce Decree. (Exhibit B- Divorce Decree). On July 10, 2021, Counter
Defendant obtained a payoff from her mortgage company to provide it to the individual or
company that purchased 535 Tansy Dr. (Exhibit C- Motion to Sell Real Estate filed on
10/26/21). At this point the bankruptcy was current and due for a July payment. On 10/26/2021,
they also prayed that trustee permitted Carrington Mortgage Services not to receive any more
funds from the bankruptcy and would be paid in full outside of the bankruptcy once the house
was sold. On 8/25/21 Counter Defendant went to the court to withdrawal her modification
according to (Exhibit D- Motion to Modify the Plan, filed on 8/25/21) that was filed on
7/13/21 (Exhibit A- Motion to Modify filed 7-13- 21).
39. Counter Plaintiff never told Counter Defendant he couldn’t make payments
towards the bankruptcy anymore due to his medical bills. He also has property in the bankruptcy
that should be his possession after the bankruptcy was discharged, which has not happen.
Counter Defendant and Counter Plaintiff had an agreement that she would keep him on her
medical insurance until the bankruptcy ended. Counter Plaintiff was cut off in 2021 because
Counter Defendant stated her employer Sedgewick called her and noticed she was no longer
married and abruptly took him off the insurance. When Counter Plaintiff was on her insurance he
was paying $130 out of pocket and when insurance was canceled it jumped to over $500 a
month.
40. Counter Defendant and her lawyer also stated in the lawsuit that she was forced to
sell the property on November 23, 2021 and she was actually was speaking with a company to
sell her 535 Tansy Drive property to 3 months earlier. She also stated that Counter Plaintiff was
not going to make any payments because he was unable even at a lower amount when she
already withdrawn the modification back in 8/25/21 at the time Counter Plaintiff still has no
knowledge of what is going on in the bankruptcy (Exhibit D- Motion to Modify the Plan, filed
on 8/25/21).
41. On 10/15/21 Counter Defendant went back to modify the bankruptcy again not
contacting Counter Plaintiff in months letting him know of what was going on or when the
payments could be made due to non-communication. When asked, the Counter Defendant stated

7

“Speak to my lawyer”. This was all the information Counter Plaintiff could get out of Counter
Defendant. He has not received a letter or email from her attorney.
42. Counter Defendant asked the court to modify her bankruptcy to take out her
school loan of 149k which was included in the bankruptcy and should not been in the bankruptcy
and was non-dischargeable and was long term debt plus could have lowered Counter Plaintiff’s
monthly payment considerably. On 12/01/21, Counter Defendant was granted leave to modify
the plan to take her Education of 149k. However, there still is no updated information to Counter
Plaintiff about what is going on with bankruptcy or modification or the sale of any property to
decrease the monthly payment. For instance, no communication was made to the Counter
Plaintiff regarding the Motion to modify, whose order was issued on 1/28/22. (Exhibit E- Court
Order dated 1/28/22).
43. On 2/02/22, all payments had been made by debtor for chapter 13 and there was
still no communication to Counter Plaintiff on what was going on with the bankruptcy. Counter
Plaintiff reached out to Counter Defendant to congratulate her on the sale of the house. She never
replied and so he asked about 2009 Honda Accord, Title to Range Rover and Counter Plaintiff
was told he owed her 62k because he made her sell her home. Counter Plaintiff could not make
Counter Defendant sell her home because of the bankruptcy.
44. Weeks later, Counter Defendant told him her lawyer told her not to disperse any
property. Then, Counter Plaintiff was served with the instant lawsuit alleging inter alia, breach
of contract as the first claim. Counter Plaintiff asserts that there was no breach of contract.
Counter Plaintiff should not be liable for $62,200 since the bankruptcy has been discharged and
all payment have made as of 02/02/22.
45. Counter Defendant also stated she had to pay $13,500 for post lease of her sold
home and she was viable credit risk with open bankruptcy, but did not make that came when she
was looking to sell her home back in July of 2021. After the discharge, Counter Defendant will
still be credit risk to anyone until the bankruptcy is off her credit and at this point Counter
Plaintiff still has no idea what is going on with bankruptcy. He has also contracted her lawyer
more 10 times over the span of year and a half with only one response from Natalie her attorney,
who laughed at the matter at hand.
46. Counter Defendant is also stating that her lawyers should be paid, but she stated
to Counter Plaintiff that her job is paying for her lawyer to make it easier for the completion of

8
the ongoing case and that she would play fair.
47. On the second claim, Counter Defendant states that as a result of Counter
Plaintiff’s alleged nonpayment and noncompliance, she was forced to pay the bankruptcy and he
received a much greater percentage of the marital estate that the party agreed to. Counter
Plaintiff had to purchase a home of his own. He had to acquire furniture. Counter Defendant
totaled his vehicle so he was without a vehicle and had to walk to work for almost 6 months. He
also had to pay the bankruptcy of $2050 since 2019, plus her vehicle or $800 a month. This also
was during the first hard hits of Covid-19 when businesses were shutdown.
48. It follows; as a result of Counter Defendant’s fraud, Counter Plaintiff lost his
house trying to make sure he paid the bankruptcy and her truck because she had the boys. He
also paid for a vehicle that her mother was and is currently driving. Counter Plaintiff was
working two jobs because Covid-19 cut his income in half and he also needed to take his
medication and was without it for several months which caused him to have bad withdrawals
which enabled him not work per his doctor’s advice. Counter Plaintiff is losing income by the
day as she continues to push these fraudulent claims, defrauds, deceives, misuses, and wastes the
time of the court and countless hours of everyone in the situation excluding hers. This is why I
think this case should be dismissed.
AS AND FOR COUNTER PLAINTIFF’S THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

Defamation (Slander)

49. Counter Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and re-alleges each and every allegation set
forth in paragraphs 1 through 48 hereinabove, with the same force and effect as though more
fully set forth herein.
50. Counter Defendant has been calling Counter Plaintiff’s friends and family
informing them that Counter Plaintiff is not paying his portion of payments and that she
therefore had to lose or sell certain things.
51. Counter Defendant also called Counter Plaintiff’s family members and informed
them that Counter Plaintiff took her information down to the courts and filed her information and
that is why she was in bankruptcy. Counter Defendant spread the false allegations about Counter
Plaintiff with the intent of making Counter Plaintiff look bad.
52. Counter Plaintiff spoke to her about it several times, but it keeps happening.
Counter Plaintiff does not like to hear his friends or family speak about things going on in his

9

personal life unless Counter Plaintiff disclosed it to them. Besides, Counter Plaintiff has not
contracted anyone in her family about anything going on between him and Counter Defendant.
53. It is noteworthy that none of these statements were true and Counter Defendant knew
them to be false when she made them.
54. Whereas Counter Plaintiff has suffered damages by these false statements, which damage
includes his emotional state, loss of reputation, loss of her job, and loss of income. Additionally, Counter
Plaintiff suffered pecuniary losses including, but not limited to the companionship, comfort, affection,
society, solace and moral support of her friends, family and son, based on the false allegations that the
defendants intentionally disseminated to the general public.
55. The false statements made by Counter Defendant were not protected rights of speech
because they were false facts.
AS AND FOR COUNTER PLAINTIFF’S FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Declaratory Relief

56. Counter Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and re-alleges each and every allegation set
forth in paragraphs 1 through 55 hereinabove, with the same force and effect as though more
fully set forth herein.
57. Declaratory relief is designed in a large part as a practical means of resolving
controversies, so that parties can conform their conduct to the law and prevent future litigation.
58. An actual controversy has arisen and now exists between Counter Plaintiff and Counter
Defendant concerning respective rights.
59. Counter Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court issue a declaratory
judgment declaring that the actions and/or inactions of the Counter Defendant violates the rights
of Counter Plaintiff, and issue appropriate remedies thereof.

AS AND FOR COUNTER PLAINTIFF’S FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

Civil Contempt

60. Counter Plaintiff repeats, reiterates and re-alleges each and every allegation set
forth in paragraphs 1 through 59 hereinabove, with the same force and effect as though more
fully set forth herein.
61. Counter Defendant took Counter Plaintiff’s boys to another state without Counter
Plaintiff’s consent. Pursuant to the Divorce Decree, Counter Plaintiff has physical and joint legal
custody.
62. There is no Court Order annulling the Divorce Decree, or altering the custody

10

arrangements that existed previously.
63. Counter Defendant’s actions therefore amount to civil contempt.
WHEREFORE, the foregoing considered, Counter Plaintiff demands judgment against
Counter Defendant as follows:
1. For Counter Plaintiff’s Counterclaim be deemed sufficient;
2. For all claims and prayers made by the Counter Defendant be dismissed with
prejudice;
3. For general damages;
4. $150,000 for defamation/slander, medical bills, the value of two vehicles that
were taken and/or destroyed because of Counter Defendant’s action and or her behavior;
5. For a lien with the IRS because Counter Defendant filed both Children when she
was only supposed to file one, which now has Counter Defendant paying the money back with
interest;
6. For punitive damages, according to proof;
7. For pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on all damages awarded;
8. For reasonable attorneys’ fees;
9. For costs of suit incurred;
10. For declaratory relief;
11. For such other and further relief that the Court deems just, proper, and equitable.

DATED: ________

Respectfully Submitted,

____________________________
RICARDO ALONZO BURRESS

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned does hereby certify that a true and correct copy of this Defendants’ answer to
plaintiff’s complaint was duly served upon Plaintiff’s Attorney, on [ENTER DATE].

COUNTER DEFENDANT’S ATTORNEY
Natalie J. Andruczyk
1315 East Blvd, Suite 250
Charlotte, NC 28203

____________________________
RICARDO ALONZO BURRESS

EXHIBITS

Exhibit A- Motion to Modify filed 7-13- 21

Exhibit B- Divorce Decree

Exhibit C- Motion to Sell Real Estate filed on 10/26/21

Exhibit D- Motion to Modify the Plan, filed on 8/25/21

Exhibit E- Court Order dated 1/28/22

At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, The LegalPen will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible. You can send us your quick enquiry ( here )