"Mr Parker's paper makes some very serious attacks on my integrity, my honesty and my ethics as a professional sportsman. I have endeavoured to resolve these issues with Mr Parker but have been unable to do so. He has left me with no choice but to defend myself and my reputation this way."
McCullum is paying for the case and is not seeking monetary damages.
"I simply want his (Parker's) acknowledgment that the claims he makes are completely false."
Coach Mike Hesson has also instructed lawyers to threaten legal action. When contacted he said: "The matter is in the hands of my lawyers. I have no further comment."
Mr Gallaway said: "I believe Brendon has acted honourably in seeking a retraction over the last two weeks but it has not been forthcoming." Parker's lawyer and fellow director in The Sport Management and Training Group, John Wiltshire could not be reached for comment. Parker, who played 36 tests between 1973 and 1980, is in the Middle East on business.
Any legal action issued by McCullum and Hesson is expected to target the original recipients of the allegations and anyone, including media, who published, forwarded or broadcast it.
The Parker movement's main aim has always been to gain more influence on the New Zealand Cricket board for former players. Until past national representatives Ian Smith and Mark Greatbatch officially came forward, Parker had been alone in being prepared to attach his name to the group. That came undone with the release of "The Taylor Affair" and an email trail earlier this month.
As many as possible of the more than 20 names on Parker's email list were contacted.
Almost to a person they either did not return calls, did not want to be named, claimed to be part of the email chain but didn't have input into the report, or had unsuccessfully requested to be removed from future correspondence.
There can be no doubting Parker's passion for the game and his intentions regarding a board which has struggled with the Taylor saga.
Parker this month said he wanted the focus to be on governance rather than it becoming "a Ross Taylor vs Brendon McCullum issue".
"It's wider than that. That was just meant to be an example of poor governance ... We're focusing on the revamped constitution and the appointment of good board members."
