Sealed Complaint — United States ex rel. Kiara Moore v. Mount Zion Baptist Church (Dkt. 1, M.D. Tenn.)
Summary
A qui tam Complaint, Document 1, filed 01/11/23 in the Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville Division, Case No. 3:23-cv-00024, in United States of America ex rel. Kiara Moore v. Mount Zion Baptist Church. Relator Kiara Moore sues under the False Claims Act; the caption reads filed in camera and under seal pursuant to 31 U.S.C. § 3730(b)(2), do not serve. The Complaint alleges that the Church was approved for a PPP loan for $967,600.00 on April 10, 2020, obtained forgiveness totaling $978,028.58 on May 17, 2021, and knowingly provided false information in its application. It demands treble damages, civil penalties between $12,537.00 and $25,076.00 for each and every false claim, and a jury trial; the signature lines read s/ Christopher C. Sabis and s/ William D. Harris II.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Cite this document
“Sealed Complaint — United States ex rel. Kiara Moore v. Mount Zion Baptist Church (Dkt. 1, M.D. Tenn.).”
Original at storage.courtlistener.com. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/court-filing-no-3-23-cv-00024-dkt-1-m-d-tenn-20dc18e7c5/
, SHA-256 3cd112f62c90512dbf526ad8ec853b1263d4f5780a02bcc9425ac15603db2164.Full text
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
ex rel. KIARA MOORE, )
)
Plaintiffs, ) Case No.
) Judge
v. ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
)
MOUNT ZION BAPTIST CHURCH, ) FILED IN CAMERA AND UNDER
) SEAL PURSUANT TO 31 U.S.C. §
Defendant. ) 3730(b)(2) – DO NOT SERVE
SEALED COMPLAINT
FILED
IN CAMERA
AND UNDER SEAL
PURSUANT TO
31 U.S.C. § 3730(b)(2)
(DO NOT SERVE)
Case 3:23-cv-00024 Document 1 Filed 01/11/23 Page 1 of 20 PageID #: 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )
ex rel. KIARA MOORE, )
)
Plaintiffs, ) Case No.
) Judge
v. ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
)
MOUNT ZION BAPTIST CHURCH, )
)
Defendant. )
COMPLAINT
Relator Kiara Moore (“Relator” or “Mrs. Moore”), by and through her attorneys, files this
qui tam action in the name of the United States of America (“United States”) pursuant to the
provisions of the False Claims Act, 29 U.S.C. § 3729 et seq. (“FCA”), against Defendant Mount
Zion Baptist Church (“MZB” or “Church”) and states as follows:
INTRODUCTION
1. Relator brings this action in the name of the United States to recover treble
damages, civil penalties, costs, and all other appropriate relief under the FCA.
2. The specific allegations in this Complaint have not been publicly disclosed (a) in a
federal criminal, civil, or administrative hearing in which the U.S. Government or its agent is a
party or (b) in a Congressional, Government Accountability Office, or other U.S. Government
report, hearing, audit, investigation.
3. To the extent that any facts alleged herein may have been disclosed by the media,
or any Court determines that a public disclosure has taken place, Relator is an original source of
the information upon which this Complaint is based, as that term is defined in 31 U.S.C.
§ 3730(e)(4)(B). Specifically, on or about November 29, 2022, Relator disclosed to the United
2
Case 3:23-cv-00024 Document 1 Filed 01/11/23 Page 2 of 20 PageID #: 2
States the information on which the allegations in this Complaint are based, and Relator has
knowledge of the facts alleged herein independent of any public disclosure and that materially
adds to the publicly disclosed information.
4. This action arises from false statements and claims that MZB knowingly presented,
or caused to be presented, to the United States and the United States Small Business Administration
(“SBA”), and lenders acting on the SBA’s behalf, in violation of the FCA.
5. On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared the novel coronavirus
(“COVID-19”) a global pandemic. On March 27, 2020, the President signed into law the
Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, Pub. L. 116-136, 134 Stat. 281 (“CARES
Act”), which was designed to provide emergency financial assistance to the millions of Americans
suffering the economic effects caused by the pandemic. The CARES Act created the Paycheck
Protection Program (“PPP” or the “Program”).
6. The PPP provided emergency, and under certain circumstances, forgivable loans to
small businesses that would use the funds only to pay certain, specified expenses during a covered
period, including payroll expenses, rent, mortgage interest, or utilities.
7. The PPP loan application required that the borrower certify that it would only use
PPP funds for payroll or to make payments for mortgage interest, rent, utilities, or certain other
specifically enumerated expenses.
8. The PPP loan application also required recipients to certify that they would not
discriminate in any employment practice on bases prohibited by SBA regulations.
9. On April 10, 2020, the Church was approved for a PPP loan for $967,600.00. On
May 17, 2021, MZB obtained forgiveness of its PPP loan totaling $978,028.58.
10. MZB knowingly provided false information in its application for a PPP loan.
3
Case 3:23-cv-00024 Document 1 Filed 01/11/23 Page 3 of 20 PageID #: 3
11. Despite PPP requirements, the Church knowingly used the loan funds obtained
through the program for purposes outside of the limitations of the Program.
12. The Church also applied for forgiveness of its PPP loan while knowingly in
violation of 13 C.F.R. § 113.3(a), contrary to its certification that it would comply with all
applicable civil rights laws and other limitations required of PPP fund recipients.
13. The knowing submission of false information, misappropriation of funds, and
acceptance and retention of funds in violation of the conditions of the Program constitute violations
of the FCA, as these actions were material to the United States’ decision to fund the Church’s PPP
loan. MZB is liable for this violation as it submitted or caused the submission of these false claims
to the United States.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
14. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 31 U.S.C. §§ 3730 and 3732.
15. This Court has personal jurisdiction over MZB pursuant to 31 U.S.C. § 3732(a)
because at all times material hereto, MZB transacted business and is found in the Middle District
of Tennessee, and acts proscribed by 31 U.S.C. § 3729 occurred in this district.
16. Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 31 U.S.C. § 3732(a), and under 28 U.S.C.
§§ 1391(b) and 1395(a), because MZB resides, is headquartered, or does business in Davidson
County, Tennessee. Furthermore, acts that form the basis of this Complaint occurred in the Middle
District of Tennessee.
PARTIES
17. Relator is an adult female citizen of the United States and resides in Rutherford
County, Tennessee.
4
Case 3:23-cv-00024 Document 1 Filed 01/11/23 Page 4 of 20 PageID #: 4
18. Relator began working as MZB’s Health & Wellness Program Coordinator in
January 2016, and during her employment with MZB has obtained knowledge of the facts alleged
herein.
19. MZB is a Tennessee Non-Profit Corporation, with its principal place of business
located in this District.
LEGAL FRAMEWORK
I. The PPP
20. On March 27, 2020, the CARES Act created the PPP, initially making $349 billion
in forgivable loans available to small businesses impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. The SBA
administers the PPP, promulgates the rules and regulations that govern it, and guarantees all PPP
loans made by lenders.
21. The PPP allows small businesses (less than 500 employees) to obtain forgivable
loans of up to $10 million, at 1% interest, to cover payroll costs, rent, mortgage interest, utilities,
and other overhead expenses for a “covered period.” See generally 85 F.R. 20814. PPP loans are
processed and approved by qualified lenders approved by the SBA. Lenders may issue PPP loans
without the SBA’s prior review or approval, but lenders are responsible for determining borrower
eligibility under the SBA’s criteria.
22. Because the initial PPP funding was quickly exhausted, on April 24, 2020, the
President signed into law the Paycheck Protection Program and Health Care Enhancement Act,
Pub. L. No. 116-139, 134 Stat. 620, whereby Congress allocated a second tranche of funding, $310
billion, for PPP loans to small businesses. The SBA adopted interim rules governing eligibility
through June 24, 2020. The United States further modified the PPP on June 5, 2020, when the
5
Case 3:23-cv-00024 Document 1 Filed 01/11/23 Page 5 of 20 PageID #: 5
President signed the Paycheck Protection Program Flexibility Act of 2020 (“Flexibility Act”), Pub.
L. No. 116-142, 134 Stat. 641.
23. If a PPP loan application was approved, the participating lender funded the PPP
loan using its own monies. Although the participating lender issued the PPP loan, the loan was
100% guaranteed by the SBA. Data from the application, including, but not limited to, information
about the borrower, the total amount of the loan, and the listed number of employees, was
transmitted by the lender to the SBA in the course of processing the loan and subsequent
forgiveness process.
24. To obtain a PPP loan, a qualifying business submitted a PPP loan application (SBA
Form 2483) signed by an authorized representative. In the PPP loan application, the small business
(through its authorized representative) was required to provide, among other things, its (a) average
monthly payroll expenses and (b) number of employees. These figures were used to calculate the
amount of money the small business was eligible to receive under the PPP. In addition, businesses
applying for a PPP loan were required to provide documentation confirming their payroll expenses.
25. PPP loan proceeds were required to be used by the business on certain permissible
expenses, including payroll costs, interest on mortgages, rent, and utilities. E.g., 85 F.R. 20814.
The Program allowed the interest and principal on the PPP loan to be entirely forgiven if the
business spent the loan proceeds on these expense items within a designated period of time and
used a defined portion of the PPP loan proceeds on payroll expenses. See generally 85 F.R. 66214.
6
Case 3:23-cv-00024 Document 1 Filed 01/11/23 Page 6 of 20 PageID #: 6
26. The April 2, 2020 version of the SBA’s PPP Borrower Application Form (“BAF”)1
required the borrower to acknowledge the Program rules and make certain affirmative
certifications to be eligible to obtain the PPP loan, including, inter alia, that
• “All SBA loan proceeds will be used only for business-related purposes as specified in
the loan application and consistent with the Paycheck Protection Program Rule;”
• “Current economic uncertainty makes this loan request necessary to support the
ongoing operations of the Applicant;”
• “The funds will be used to retain workers and maintain payroll or make mortgage
interest payments, lease payments, and utility payments, as specified under the
Paycheck Protection Program Rule; I understand that if the funds are knowingly used
for unauthorized purposes, the federal government may hold me legally liable, such as
for charges of fraud;”
• For a PPP loan to be eligible for forgiveness, “not more than 25% of the forgiven
amount may be for non-payroll costs;”2
• “Current economic uncertainty makes this loan request necessary to support ongoing
operations of the Applicant;”
• “The Applicant is eligible to receive a loan under the rules in effect at the time this
application is submitted that have been issued by the [SBA] implementing the [PPP]
under Division A, Title I of the [CARES Act] (the Paycheck Protection Program
Rule);”
1
Although Relator does not have a copy of the Church’s final BAF, the SBA required MZB to
complete and sign a BAF in order to apply for and obtain a PPP loan.
2
This threshold was later raised to 40%.
7
Case 3:23-cv-00024 Document 1 Filed 01/11/23 Page 7 of 20 PageID #: 7
• “that the information provided in this application and the information provided in all
supporting documents and forms is true and accurate in all material respects,” and that
the Applicant understood that “making a false statement to obtain a guaranteed loan
from SBA is punishable under the law, including under 18 USC 1001 and 3571 by
imprisonment of not more than five years and/or a fine of up to $250,000; under 15
USC 645 by imprisonment of not more than two years and/or a fine of not more than
$5,000; and, if submitted to a federally insured institution, under 18 USC 1014 by
imprisonment of not more than thirty years and/or a fine of not more than $1,000,000;”
• “The Applicant is not engaged in any activity that is illegal under federal, state or local
law;” and
• “[The applicant] will comply, whenever applicable, with the civil rights and other
limitations in this form,” including that “All businesses receiving SBA financial
assistance must agree not to discriminate in any business practice, including
employment practices and services to the public on the basis of categories cited in 13
C.F.R., Parts 112, 113, and 117 of SBA Regulations.”
27. 13 C.F.R. § 113.3(c) states that recipients of SBA financial assistance may not
With regard to employment practices within the aided business or
other enterprise, whether or not operated for profit; discriminate
against a qualified handicapped person; or because of handicap, fail
or refuse to seek or retain the person’s services or to provide the
person with opportunities for advancement or promotion, or accord
an employee the rank and rate of compensation, including fringe
benefits, merited by the employee’s services and abilities. All
employment decisions shall be made in a manner which ensures that
discrimination on the basis of handicap does not occur. Such
decisions may not limit, segregate, or classify job applicants or
employees in any way that adversely affects the opportunities or
status of qualified handicapped individuals.
8
Case 3:23-cv-00024 Document 1 Filed 01/11/23 Page 8 of 20 PageID #: 8
(emphasis added).3
28. 13 C.F.R. § 113.3(e) further states, in part, that recipients of SBA financial
assistance may not “[u]se employment tests or criteria that discriminate on the basis of race, color,
religion, sex, marital status, handicap, or national origin.” (emphasis added).
29. The PPP also provided for loan forgiveness if PPP funds were used for authorized
purposes. The June 16, 2020 version of the SBA’s Loan Forgiveness Application (“LFA”) requires
the PPP loan recipient to certify, inter alia that
• “The dollar amount for which forgiveness is requested[] was used to pay costs that
are eligible for forgiveness (payroll costs to retain employees; business mortgage
interest payments; business rent or lease payments; or business utility payments;”
and
3
See generally 13 C.F.R. § 113.1(a) (“The purpose of this part is to reflect to the fullest extent
possible the nondiscrimination policies of the Federal Government as expressed in the several
statutes, Executive Orders, and messages of the President dealing with civil rights and equality of
opportunity, and in the previous determination of the Administrator of the Small Business
Administration that discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, marital status, handicap or
national origin shall be prohibited, to the extent that it is not prohibited by part 112 of this chapter,
to all recipients of financial assistance from SBA.”) (emphasis added); 29 U.S.C. § 794(a) & (d)
(“No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States, as defined in section
705(20) of this title, shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the
participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or
activity receiving Federal financial assistance or under any program or activity conducted by any
Executive agency or by the United States Postal Service. The head of each such agency shall
promulgate such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the amendments to this section made
by the Rehabilitation, Comprehensive Services, and Developmental Disabilities Act of 1978. . . .
The standards used to determine whether this section has been violated in a complaint alleging
employment discrimination under this section shall be the standards applied under title I of the
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12111 et seq.) . . . .”); 42 U.S.C § 12112(b)(4)
(discriminating on the basis of disability includes “excluding or otherwise denying equal jobs or
benefits to a qualified individual because of the known disability of an individual with whom the
qualified individual is known to have a relationship or association.”).
9
Case 3:23-cv-00024 Document 1 Filed 01/11/23 Page 9 of 20 PageID #: 9
• The borrower understood that “if the funds were knowingly used for other purposes,
the federal government may pursue recovery of loan amounts and/or civil or
criminal fraud charges.”
II. The FCA
30. The FCA provides, in pertinent part, that any person who:
(a)(1)(A) knowingly presents, or causes to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for
payment or approval;
(a)(1)(B) knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used, a false record or statement
material to a false or fraudulent claim; [or]
(a)(1)(G) knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used, a false record or statement
material to an obligation to pay or transmit money or property to the Government, or
knowingly conceals or knowingly and improperly avoids or decreases an obligation to pay
or transmit money or property to the Government
is liable to the United States for three times the amount of damages that the United States sustains,
plus a civil penalty per violation. 31 U.S.C. § 3729(a)(1).
31. FCA penalties are regularly adjusted for inflation. See 28 U.S.C. § 2461 note. For
violations occurring after November 2, 2015, the civil penalty amounts currently range from a
minimum of $12,537.00 to a maximum of $25,076.00. 28 C.F.R. § 85.5.
32. For purposes of the FCA, the terms “knowing” and “knowingly”
(A) mean that a person, with respect to information—
(i) has actual knowledge of the information;
(ii) acts in deliberate ignorance of the truth or falsity of the information; or
(iii) acts in reckless disregard of the truth or falsity of the information; and
(B) require no proof of specific intent to defraud.
31 U.S.C. § 3729(b)(1).
33. Under the FCA, a “claim” includes a request to the United States for payment,
whether made directly or indirectly to the United States. 31 U.S.C. § 3729(b)(2)(A).
10
Case 3:23-cv-00024 Document 1 Filed 01/11/23 Page 10 of 20 PageID #: 10
34. The FCA defines “material” to mean “having a natural tendency to influence, or be
capable of influencing, the payment or receipt of money or property.” 31 U.S.C. § 3729(b)(4).
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
I. MZB Misrepresented the Church’s Number of Employees and Payroll
35. In PPP loan applications, small businesses were required to provide, among other
things, their (a) average monthly payroll expenses and (b) number of employees. These figures
were used to calculate the amount of money the small business was eligible to receive under the
PPP.
36. When applying for its PPP loan, MZB certified “that the information provided in
this application and the information provided in all supporting documents and forms is true and
accurate in all material respects.”
37. As of April 2020, MZB employed approximately 54 individuals.
38. At no time during the relevant period for this case has MZB employed over 200
individuals. Indeed, during that period MZB never had more than 100 employees.
39. In or around April 2020, MZB submitted a PPP BAF. Based on information
available from the SBA, the BAF stated that MZB had 223 employees.
40. In the PPP BAF, MZB certified that it would comply with all of the requirements
of the Program, including those outlined above.
41. On or about April 10, 2020, MZB was approved for a PPP loan in the amount of
$967,600.
42. This PPP loan amount was based on misrepresentations in a loan application
submitted to Truist Bank. For example, in the PPP loan application, MZB misrepresented the
number of employees at MZB.
11
Case 3:23-cv-00024 Document 1 Filed 01/11/23 Page 11 of 20 PageID #: 11
43. On information and belief, the Church also misrepresented its payroll costs, which
were used in calculating the maximum loan amount for which MZB was eligible. These
misrepresentations caused MZB to receive loan proceeds in excess of what it otherwise would
have received.
44. Despite these misrepresentations, MZB accepted and retained the PPP loan funds
that it obtained because of its application.
45. Moreover, on or around May 17, 2021, MZB applied for and obtained forgiveness
of its PPP loans having never corrected or disclosed the misrepresentations on its PPP BAF.
II. MZB Used Its PPP Loan Funds for Unauthorized Purposes
46. The SBA required that PPP loan proceeds be used on certain permissible expenses,
including payroll costs, interest on mortgages, rent, and utilities. The Program allowed the interest
and principal on the PPP loan to be forgiven if the business spent the loan proceeds on these
expense items within a designated period and used a defined portion of the loan on payroll
expenses.
47. The BAF required MZB to certify that “The funds will be used to retain workers
and maintain payroll or make mortgage interest payments, lease payments, and utility payments,
as specified under the Paycheck Protection Program Rule; I understand that if the funds are
knowingly used for unauthorized purposes, the federal government may hold me legally liable,
such as for charges of fraud.” Moreover, MZB certified that “[c]urrent economic uncertainty
makes this loan request necessary to support ongoing operations of the Applicant.”
48. MZB misrepresented on its BAF that it would only use its PPP loan funds for
expenses authorized under the Program.
12
Case 3:23-cv-00024 Document 1 Filed 01/11/23 Page 12 of 20 PageID #: 12
49. To the contrary, MZB did not need a PPP loan to ensure its ongoing operations.
MZB’s own website acknowledges that it “continues to grow at a phenomenal rate of over 1,000
souls per year.” In or around May or June of 2020, Relator attended an Executive Committee
meeting where CEO Marilyn Stone notified the attendees of MZB’s PPP loan. During a
PowerPoint presentation at the same meeting, at a time when MZB allegedly needed federal loan
funding to ensure its ongoing operations, Ms. Stone also reported that giving to the Church had
increased from approximately $1.3 million per month to approximately $1.5-1.8 million per
month.
50. In 2020, Joseph Walker III (“Bishop Walker”), leader of MZB, was making
approximately $2.5 million per year, not counting additional money he received from speaking
engagements and other appearances.
51. Moreover, MZB continued to provide lavish perks to Bishop Walker and his family
during the entirety of 2020 and 2021. These included
• Personal Chef dinners from The Lost Spoon that ranged in price from $1,000-
$3,000 every Sunday. Usually these meals were for the Bishop and his immediate
family, though sometimes other family or invitees would attend.
• MZB provided Bishop Walker with a non-taxable Parsonage Allowance to cover
the majority of his rent/mortgage. The Walkers’ house has five bedrooms, eight
bathrooms, and has an estimated value of over $5 million.
• MZB also provided Bishop Walker and his family with periodic access to a private
jet by Jet Linx.
52. The circumstances surrounding MZB mortgage debt and the forgiveness of its PPP
loan further demonstrate that the Church did not need the loan funds to support ongoing operations.
13
Case 3:23-cv-00024 Document 1 Filed 01/11/23 Page 13 of 20 PageID #: 13
In 2019, MZB owed approximately $3.5 million in mortgage debt on its Old Hickory Boulevard
(“OHB”) property. By 2020, before receiving its PPP loan, MZB still owed approximately $1.8
million on the property.
53. On or around May 17, 2021, MZB obtained forgiveness of its PPP loans totaling
$978.028.58, having never corrected or disclosed the misrepresentations on its PPP BAF or its
misappropriation of PPP loan funds. In or around August 2021, approximately three months after
MZB secured forgiveness of its PPP loan, MZB reopened for services and announced that the
Church had paid off its remaining mortgage obligations, including all outstanding principal.
54. Within three months or less of receiving PPP loan forgiveness of approximately $1
million, MZB found sufficient funds to pay off the remaining debt on its OHB property, which at
that time was somewhere around $1-2 million.
55. MZB used Program funds, or other funds made available to the Church because of
MZB obtaining its PPP loan, to pay these impermissible expenses during the months following the
approval of the loan, culminating in the payment of all of its mortgage debt within three months
of obtaining loan forgiveness.
56. Despite these misrepresentations, MZB accepted and retained the PPP loan funds
that it obtained because of its false application and false representations that the funds would be
used to cover payroll and keep employees working. Indeed, MZB fired two employees, Gerald
Scott and Steffanie Barnett, in or around June or July of 2020 during the covered period of the PPP
loan. MZB staff were told that these firings were due to “budget cuts.”
III. MZB Used and Obtained Forgiveness for its PPP Loan Despite Violating Applicable
Federal Civil Rights Law
57. The BAF required the Church to certify that it would “comply, whenever
applicable, with the civil rights and other limitations in this form,” including that “All businesses
14
Case 3:23-cv-00024 Document 1 Filed 01/11/23 Page 14 of 20 PageID #: 14
receiving SBA financial assistance must agree not to discriminate in any business practice,
including employment practices and services to the public on the basis of categories cited in 13
C.F.R., Parts 112, 113, and 117 of SBA Regulations.”
58. MZB applied for and obtained forgiveness of its PPP loan while knowingly in
violation of its certification that it would comply with all applicable civil rights laws and other
limitations required of PPP fund recipients. Before obtaining forgiveness of its PPP loan, MZB
discriminated against Relator on the basis of handicap.
59. Relator received a bachelor’s degree in Biological Sciences from Hampton
University in 2012. She later received a Master of Science in Public Health from Meharry Medical
College in 2014.
60. In January 2016, MZB hired Relator as a full-time employee with the title of Health
& Wellness Program Coordinator (“Position”).
61. While employed by MZB, Relator earned a Master of Arts in Non-Profit
Administration from Lindenwood University in 2017.
62. During Relator’s employment with MZB, she has consistently met or exceeded
MZB’s expectations. Relator has enjoyed success in her Position and substantially helped the
Church further its business and mission.
63. In addition to praise by MZB for her work contributions, Relator received above-
average employee evaluations, as well as monetary performance bonuses.
64. Relator is the parent of a minor child, K.M., who suffers from Sickle Cell Disease
(“SCD”). K.M. was diagnosed with SCD in May of 2020, shortly after she was born.
15
Case 3:23-cv-00024 Document 1 Filed 01/11/23 Page 15 of 20 PageID #: 15
65. K.M.’s disability was well known within the Church, including but not limited to,
by Bishop Walker; Dr. Stephanie Walker (“Dr. Walker”); Lawrence Washington (“Elder
Washington”), and Andre Anderson (“Mr. Anderson”).
66. On or about December 6, 2020, K.M. was hospitalized due to her disability. Relator
immediately notified Dr. Walker of K.M.’s emergency hospitalization and the reason for the
hospitalization. The following day, Mrs. Moore also notified Elder Washington and Mr. Anderson
about K.M.’s hospitalization and for what reason she was hospitalized.
67. In observance of the holiday season, MZB was closed between December 18, 2020
and January 5, 2021.
68. On or about January 12, 2021, about 34 days after K.M. was released from the
hospital, and only seven days after MZB re-opened after closure for the holiday season, the Church
notified Mrs. Moore that (1) her full-time role was being reduced to part-time as of February 1,
2021; (2) her salary was being cut in half and she would become an hourly employee; and (3) that
she would also lose her employee health benefits in March of 2021.
69. Mrs. Moore was informed that these steps were required because MZB was
undergoing “budget cuts.”
70. MZB’s rationale of “budget cuts” was pretext, because in or about the summer of
2021, the Church paid off all its mortgage debt as discussed above. Moreover, in the spring of
2021, MZB hired additional employees, including another employee in its Health & Wellness
Department.
71. MZB discriminated against Mrs. Moore based on her known association with an
individual with a disability.
16
Case 3:23-cv-00024 Document 1 Filed 01/11/23 Page 16 of 20 PageID #: 16
72. The Church’s conduct violated applicable SBA civil rights regulations and other
federal laws regarding discrimination in employment practices on the basis of handicap.
73. The Church’s conduct rendered the certifications in its PPP BAF regarding
compliance with SBA’s civil rights regulations false.
74. Commencing February 1, 2021, through approximately the week of January 13,
2022, Relator regularly and consistently performed work for MZB, at the request of and direction
of the Church, for which she was not paid, despite her having the expectation that she would be
paid for all time worked.
COUNT ONE
False or Fraudulent Claims
31 U.S.C. § 3729(a)(1)(A)
75. Relator incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1 through 74 as if fully set forth
herein.
76. MZB knowingly presented or caused to be presented materially false claims and,
as a result, secured PPP loans in amounts to which it was not entitled, in violation of Program
rules.
77. MZB knowingly presented or caused to be presented materially false claims for
forgiveness of the PPP loans despite its violations of Program rules.
78. The United States, unaware of the material falsity of the claims made or caused to
be made by MZB, approved, paid, and participated in payments made by the United States’ fiscal
intermediaries for a loan that otherwise would not have been allowed.
79. Because of MZB’s false claims, the United States was damaged for the full amount
of the PPP loan forgiven by the SBA, and is entitled to treble damages plus civil penalties for each
violation pursuant to the FCA.
17
Case 3:23-cv-00024 Document 1 Filed 01/11/23 Page 17 of 20 PageID #: 17
COUNT TWO
False Statements
31 U.S.C. § 3729(a)(1)(B)
80. Relator incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1 through 79 as if fully set forth
herein.
81. MZB knowingly used or caused to be used a materially false PPP BAF in order to
obtain a PPP loan, which was ultimately paid by the United States.
82. MZB then knowingly submitted a PPP LFA that misrepresented its use of PPP loan
funds and eligibility for loan forgiveness.
83. The United States, unaware of the material falsity of the records, approved, paid,
and participated in payments made by the United States’ fiscal intermediaries for a loan that
otherwise would not have been allowed.
84. Because of MZB’s false statements, the United States was damaged for the full
amount of the PPP loan forgiven by the SBA, and is entitled to treble damages plus civil penalties
for each violation pursuant to the FCA.
COUNT THREE
Reverse False Claims
31 U.S.C. § 3729(a)(1)(G)
85. Relator incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1 through 84 as if fully set forth
herein.
86. MZB knowingly made, used, or caused to be made or used, a false record or
statement material to an obligation to pay or transmit money or property to the United States, or
knowingly concealed or knowingly and improperly avoided or decreased an obligation to pay or
transmit money or property to the United States.
18
Case 3:23-cv-00024 Document 1 Filed 01/11/23 Page 18 of 20 PageID #: 18
87. Because of MZB’s acts, the United States sustained damages for the full amount of
the PPP loan forgiven by the SBA, and is entitled to treble damages plus civil penalties for each
violation pursuant to the FCA.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Relator, in the name of the United States and for herself, demands
judgment in their favor and against MZB as follows:
A. For an amount of the United States’ damages, trebled as required by law, plus such
civil penalties in an amount between $12,537.00 and $25,076.00 for each and every false claim as
are required by law, together with all such further relief as may be just and proper;
B. That Relator be awarded an amount to be determined as set forth in 31 U.S.C.
§ 3730(d);
C. That Relator be awarded all costs of this action, including attorneys’ fees, expenses,
and costs pursuant to 31 U.S.C. § 3730(d);
D. That the United States and Relator be granted any and all other relief that the Court
deems appropriate and just.
JURY DEMAND
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38, Relator demands a trial by jury on all
claims properly triable by a jury.
19
Case 3:23-cv-00024 Document 1 Filed 01/11/23 Page 19 of 20 PageID #: 19
Dated: January 11, 2023 Respectfully Submitted,
s/ Christopher C. Sabis
Christopher C. Sabis, #30032
Sherrard Roe Voigt & Harbison, PLC
150 3rd Avenue South, Suite 1100
Nashville, Tennessee 37201
615.850.6822
csabis@srvhlaw.com
- and -
s/ William D. Harris II
William D. Harris II
Pro Hac Vice (forthcoming)
HARRIS LEGAL ADVISORS LLC
605 N. High Street, Suite 146
Columbus, Ohio 43215
614.504.3350
will@harrislegaladvisors.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff Kiara Moore
20
Case 3:23-cv-00024 Document 1 Filed 01/11/23 Page 20 of 20 PageID #: 20
File and source
- File
- 1.pdf
- Size
- 345,317 bytes
- SHA-256
- 3cd112f62c90512dbf526ad8ec853b1263d4f5780a02bcc9425ac15603db2164
- Our copy
- 1.pdf
- Original
- storage.courtlistener.com