Decide Mathis threatened to shoot a metropolis employee all as a result of a dump truck was blocking his driveway … no less than in line with a brand new lawsuit.
Within the docs, obtained by TMZ, a person named Ricardo Acosta claims he was on the job with the L.A. Dept. of Water and Energy in July 2023, working outdoors of Mathis’ house when he says the TV choose began swearing at him.
Acosta claims Mathis was pulling out of his storage in his automobile, then received out of the automobile and began hurling expletives … yelling at Acosta to “transfer the f***** truck out of the way in which.”
The town employee claims Mathis was standing behind the dump truck at this level and he says he advised Mathis to maneuver from behind the truck for security causes … as a result of he was involved the truck would roll backward when put into gear as a result of it was parked on an incline.
Acosta claims Mathis advised him he “didn’t give a f*** and to run him over and see what occurs to him.” He says Mathis then advised him he had one thing for him and bumped into the home and returned with a gun.
Within the docs, Acosta claims Mathis brandished the firearm and acknowledged, “I’ll bust a cap … you wanna f*** with me.” He says Mathis then received again within the automobile and drove off, however not earlier than threatening once more to “bust a cap.”
Acosta is suing Mathis for assault and intentional infliction of emotional misery … and he is going after Mathis for damages.
The lawsuit follows a narrative we broke in July 2023 … when legislation enforcement sources advised us a LADWP worker made a grievance with police, accusing Mathis of threatening staff with a gun following a heated confrontation.
Decide Mathis’ legal professional, Anahita Sedaghatfar tells TMZ … “This unfiled grievance that has been conveniently publicly circulated is a final ditch try by Mr. Acosta to extort my consumer Decide Mathis, for monetary acquire. Mr. Acosta’s recitation of the ‘info’ merely don’t comport with what really transpired throughout the incident, which occurred over one 12 months in the past.”
She continues, “The report made to the LAPD by Mr. Acosta’s superior accommodates many demonstrable falsities, whereas additionally admitting that Decide Mathis feared for his personal security and the security of his household because of the threats made by Mr. Acosta and his cohorts and the false imprisonment they imposed on Decide Mathis on his personal non-public property.”
She provides, “That the LAPD didn’t even examine Mr. Acosta’s claims speaks to their lack of benefit. Ought to Mr. Acosta pursue this lawsuit, we is not going to solely vigorously defend the case, we’ll file cross claims towards Mr. Acosta for his unlawful conduct and repeated defamation of my consumer.”
