0% found this document useful (0 votes)
2K views54 pagesMaywood Police Lawsuit
Paula Ali vs. Village of Maywood, Et. Al.
Uploaded by
MichaelRomainCopyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
2K views54 pagesMaywood Police Lawsuit
Paula Ali vs. Village of Maywood, Et. Al.
Uploaded by
MichaelRomainCopyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
/ 54
FILED.
‘23/2020 442 PM
DOROTHY BROWN
IN Tar. Cincurt Court OF CooK County, IKLINOIS CIRCUIT CLERK
‘COUNTY DEPARTMENT, LAW DIVisiOn OOK COUNTY, I
2019L06401S
= 940890
PAULA AU, AS INDEPENDENT
ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF
RUTHIE L. JOENSON, DECEASED,
PLAnVTIFR,
v.
‘VILLAGE OF MAYWOOD, AMUNICIPAL,
Corpora iON, LIEUTENANT DARYL
FAIRLEY, OFFICER JANETTE SANTOYO,
OFACER JASON SMITH, INDIVIDUALLY eee
[AND AS AGENTS OF DEFENDANT VILLAGE
(OF MAYWOOD, A MUNICPAL
CORPORATION, Avis BUDGET GROWP,
ING,, ANEW JERSEY CoRPORATION,
‘Avis CAR RENTAL GRCUP, LLC, A
DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY
‘COMPANY, AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM,
LLG, A DELAWARE LIMTED LIABILITY
COMPANY, AND EDWARD N, OWENS,
Jury DEMANDED
DereNpANTS. _|
‘SECOND AMENDED CoMPLAINT AT LAW
NOW COMES the Paintff, PAULA ALI, as Independent Administrator of the
Estat of RUTHIE L. JCHNSON, Deceased, by and through he attoreys, THE LAW
OFFICES OF PETER W. DELONGIS, LTD., complaining ofthe Defendant, VILLAGE
(OF MAYWOOD, a Musicipal Corporation; LIEUTENANT DARYL FAIRLEY;
OFFICER JANETTE SANTOYO; OFFICER IASON SMITH, individually and as agents
‘of Defendant VILLAGE OF MAYWOOD; AVIS BUDGET GROUP, INC, a New
Jersey corporation; AVI5 CAR RENTAL GROUP, LLC, a Delaware limited liability
‘company; AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company;
and EDWARD N OWENS, and in support of ad Complaint, tates as follows: EACTUAL ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS
1. That on or about June 16,2019, and at al times relevant, Defendant
VILLAGE OF MAYWOOD, a Municipal Corporation (hereinafter, Defendant
“VILLAGE OF MAYWOOD"), was 2 municipal corporation located in Cook County,
Minis, which opersteda police department
2, That ono about une 16,2019, and at al mes relevant, Defendant
VILLAGE OF MAYWOOD employed individuals as Maywood Police Officers, and was
sctng in a poston of rspondeat superior tits Police Oificer, cluding Defendants
LIEUTENANT DARYL FAIRLEY (fereinafer, Defendant “LT. FAIREEY"),
OFFICER JANETTE SANTOYO (hereinafter, Defendant “OFFICER SANTOYO") and
OFFICER JASON SMITH (hereinafter, Defendant “OFFICER SMITH”).
3, Thaton or about June 16, 2019, and a all ines relevant, Defendants LT.
PAIRLEY, OFFICER SANTOYO and OFFICER SMITH were doy sworn Maywood
Police Officers acting individually and at duly authorized agents, servants and employees
of Defendant VILLAGE OF MAYWOOD.
4, That ono about Tune 16, 2019, and atl tes relevant, Defendant
VILLAGE OF MAYWOOD and the sction of Defendant VILLAGE OF MAYWOOD's
police officers were governed by various directives iamued by the Maywood Police
‘Department including, without limitation, vnitten Pursuit Policy Number 20.2.2.
5, That onor about Sune 16,2019, and at all imed relevant, the Maywood Potice
Department had written directives, including without limitation, written Pursuit Policy
[Number 20:22, that ween fil force and effect tat governed motor vehicle pursuits by
‘Maywood Police Officas. 6. Onor about June 16,2019, and a all tmes relevant, 19® Avenue was a
roadway running generaly in a north/south direction, inthe Villages of Maywood and
Melrose Park, County of Cook, State of incis.
7. Onor about Jne 16, 2019, and at all imes relevant, Lake Street was &
roadway running generally in en east west direction, in the Villages of Maywood and
Melrose Park, County of Cook, State of llinois.
8. Onorabout Sine 16,2019, and at ll ames relevant, 1 Avenue was a roadway
running generally in a nortvsouth direction in the Village of Maywood, County of Cook,
State of incis,
9. On orabout Jine 16, 2019, and at all times relevent, Rendolph Street wes a
roadway running generally in an east'west direction, inthe Village of Maywood, County
of Cook, State of Tints,
10, Onor about ane 16,2019, and at all ines relevant, RUTHIE L. JOTINSON,
Deceased, was «passenger in a vehicle driven by Defendant, EDWARD N. OWENS
(Defendant “OWENS”), (bereinafter refered to as “Defendant OWENS’ Vekicle”) who
resides in Cook County, Ilinois, travelling northbound on 1* Avenue ator near its
intersection with Rando'ph Stet in the Village of Maywood.
11, Onor about Sune 16,2019, and atall times relevant, Defendant VILLAGE,
(OF MAYWOOD, by and through its duly authorized on-duty police officer LT.
FAIRLEY, observed a 2019 GMC Terrain SUV vehicle (hereinafter referred to asthe
“GMC SUV”) traveling northbound on 19% Avenue in the Village of Maywood when it
lisobeyed the stop sign at Oak Street, in the Village of Maywood, at which time
Defendant LT. FAIRLEY began to pursus the GMC SUV at a high rate of speed northbound on 19! Averue through the block north of Oak Steet, which is a narrow
residential street, lined with single family residences, with a 25 mph. speed limit and
pedestrian sidewalks ruming directly along the curb on both sides of the street without
parkway.
12, That at the tne Defendant LT. FAIRLEY commenced his pursuit ofthe
GMC SUV on 19! Avenue without the sid of an in-car camera video, a dash-cam, or any
other video recarding device, he had no basis to commence the pursuit other than thatthe
GMC SUV driver had allegedly disobeyed a stop sign atthe intersection of 19 Avenue
and On Street.
13, That Defencant LT. FAIRLBY failed to notify the Dispatch Center at that
time that he was initiating a pursuit ofthe GMC SUV. Further, Defendant VILLAGE OF
MAYWOOD personnel, inchuding without limitation Defendant LT. FAIRLEY, failed to
notify the Maywood Potce eld supervisur of the initiation ofthe pursalt,failed to notify
the Dispatch Center to cler the radio channel ofall unnecessary trafic, and failed to
advise all other units thatthe pursuit was in progress.
14, Defendant LT, FAIRLEY continued his high speed pursuit ofthe GMC SUV
northbound on 19th Avenue with his emergency lights and siren activated through a stop
light atthe busy intersetion of 19" Avenue and St. Charles Road, a main thoroughfare
running East and West scross 19% Avenue, with pedestrians located in and around «large
‘grocery store located dtectly onthe southeast comer of the intersection,
15, Defendant LT. FAIRLBY continued to pursue the GMC SUV ata high rate
cf speed northbound on 19" Avenue through the block past St. Charles Road with a
single lane for vehicle taffic in each direction and parallel parking on each side ofthe street, with pedestrian
aks running drestly curbside along 19% Avenue without
parkways, passing numerous residences as well as United Faith MB, Church on the
‘westleft side of 19 Avenue and a daycare center and playground on the eastight side
‘of 19" Avenue, approaching a main rin crossing approximately one block north of St.
Charles Road
16, Defendant LT. FAIRLEY then continued to pursue the GMC SUV ata high
rate of speed northboune on 19th Avenue in a25 mp.h. posted speed zone up and over &
‘rain crossing, then speeding through the intersection of 198 Avenue and Main Street
he crossed the boundary from the Village of Maywood into the Village of Melrose Park,
‘nd past the Melrose Pak Police Station on the eastside of 198 Avenue a the pursuit
spproached the main Melrose Park shopping/Business District on 198 Avenue,
17, That despite the fact thatthe route of Defendant LT. FAIRLEY’s high speed
pursuit of the OMC SUY bey al Ouk Steet and eoutlaued on 198 Avenue catering the
Village of Metrose Prkend going directly past the Melrose Park Police Station,
Defendant LT. FAIRLEY made no attempt during the course ofthe pursuit to notify
members ofthe Melrose Park Police Department that is pursuit was entering the Village
cof Melrose Park and proceeding directly past the Melrose Park Police Station
18, Defendant T. FAIRLEY then continued his high speed pursuit ofthe GMC
SUV with his lights an siren activated, catching up withthe GMC SUV and attempting
to curb the vehicle as they passed the Melrose Park Police Station and entered the main
Melrose Park shopping/Business District
19. That Defendant LT. FAIRLEY's high speed pursuit ofthe GMC SUV then
‘continued northbound on 19 Avenue through the main Melrose Park shopping/Business Distt which hes «20 m.ph. posted speed limit with one narrow lane of trafic in each
rection, divided by a median, with agonal parking in front of mumerous restaurant,
shops and oer retail esublshments ning both sides of 19% Avenue, which were open
for business Father's Dey morning, June 16,2019, with heavy vehicle end pedestrian
traffic all the way through the approximate two block long shopping/Business Distt.
20, Defendant LT, FAIRLEY continued his pursuit directly behind the GMC
SU northbound on 19" Avenue in a 20 mph. posted speed zone through the entire
Melrose Pack shopping/Basiness District.
21, As Defendat LT. PAIRLEY's pursuit appreched the end ofthe Melrose
Park shopping/Business District at Lake Street, the GMC SUV was slowed by other
rivers traveling northtound on 19% Avene, at which time the GMC SUV driver began
blowing his hoe, diving eatcally and riding the bumper of the vehicle ahead.
22, Defendant LT. FAIRLBY vontinse his pursuit dicetty behind the OMC
SSUY northbound on 19" Avenue approaching Lake treet at which time Defendant LT.
FAIRLEY ran the Califia opistration of the GMC SUV through the IKE dispatch
contr.
23, Defendant LT. FAIRLEY continued his high speed pursuit of the GMC SUV
approaching Lake Steet despite not having eceved any information tat the GMC SUV
‘was stolen o that the oscupants had commited a serious criminal ect o any act that
‘would in any way justify his ongoing highspeed pursuit.
24, Defendant LT, FAIRLEY then continued his high speed pursuit directly
behind the GMC SUV through stp light atthe intersection of 19% Avenue and Lake
‘treo, taming right easbound on Lake Street ata high rate of speed from a 20 mph. posted speed zone inthe 19" Avenve shopping/Business District into a 30 m.p.h. posted
speed zone for eastbound Lake Strest, accelerating during the pursuit of the GMC SUV at
speeds in excess of $0 mph.
25, Defendant LT. FAIRLEY then continued his high speed pursuit behind the
‘GMC SUV eastbound on Lake Street with heavy eastbound Lake Street vehicle traffic,
and heavy westbound orcoming vehicle traffic through a residential and commercial
neighborhood on Lake Steet, past Melrose Park Elementary Schoo! and playground as
they approached 18" Steet ina 30 m.plh posted speed zone.
26, Defendant LT, FAIRLEY"s high speed pursuit ofthe GMC SUV continued
eastbound on Lake Street for several blocks through another residential area past 17*
‘Avenue and through a slop light at 15" Avenue in heavy Lake Street vehicle trafic in
‘oth directions at speeds in excess of $0 mph. in 230 mph. posted speed zone, through
primary Pace Bus rou along eastbound Lake Steet with bus stops approximately
every 2 t03 blocks along the entire pursuit ofthe GMC SUV.
27, Defendant LT. FAIRLEY’s high speed pursuit ofthe GMC SUV continued
‘eastbound on Lake Street past 17% Avenue with several bright yellow pedestrian crossing
ign located along the south edge of Lake Strest for pedestrians crossing from the south
side of Lake Street tothe northside of Lake Street, wth pedestrian sidewalks running
slong the south edge of Lake Street directly along the right side curb with no parleways,
and with pedestrian traffic in the area of the pursuit along Lake Street,
28, That as ofthe point that Defendant LT. FAIRLEY’s high speed pursuit ofthe
GMC SUV had reached eastbound Lake Street at 17% Avenue, Defendant LT, FAIRLEY
had not made any radio transmissions to anyone, including any police personnel, providing information regarding his pursuit in progress.
29, Defendant LT. FAIRLEY'S high speed pursuit ofthe GMC SUV continued
eastbound on Lake Str past Westlake Hospital, and its main entrance off Lake Street,
‘passing 154 Aven, in «posted 30 mp.h speed zone, with parking ots for Westlake
Hospital running along the curbs of the south and north sides of Lake Street without
‘parkway, and with parallel parking running all along the south and north sides of Lake
Streot along the route of the pursuit, and with bright yellow pedestrian crosswalk signs on
the south edge of Lake sret at about 16" Avenue and 154 Avenue directly across from
the Westlake Hospital main entrance on Lake Street.
30. While continuing to pursue the GMC SUV ata high rate of speed through
hneevy vehicle trafic eastbound on Lake Stect and heavy oncoming westbound traffic in
the area of Westlake Hespital, Defendant LT. FAIRLEY notified the IKE dispatch center
that the GMC SUY hadaken off and gave the OMC SUV's Uisection of travel. This was
Defendant LT. FAIRLEY’s firs radio transmission regarding his pursuit ofthe GMC
SUV.
431, Defendant LT. FAIRLEY did not provide the IKE dispatch center, or any
other Maywood Police Officers, or other police authorities who may have been privy to
that radio transmission o TKE at that time, with any further information including,
without limitation, the fact that hs high speed pursuit ofthe GMC SUV began at 19
Avenue and Oak Street
32, Defendant LT. FAIRLEY also did not notify the IKE dispatch center, or any
other Maywood Police Officers or other police authorities who may have been privy
that radio transmissionto IKE at that time, that he had pursued the vehicle north on 194 ‘Avenue for several blocks past the Melrose Park Police Station, including through the
“Melrose Park shopping/Business District, and for several blocks eastbound on Lake
Street
33, Defendant LT. FAIRLEY also did not notify the IKE dispatch center, or any
other Maywood Police Officers or other police authorities who may have been privy to
that radio transmission to IKE at that time, that his pursuit wes based upon the GMC
SUY baving disobeyed t stop sign 194 Avenue and Oak Street, nor did he provide any
information as to whether the GMC SUV was reported stolen or not.
134, Defendant LT, PAIRLEY als did not provide the IKE dispatch center, ot
any other Maywood Police Officers or other police authorities who may have been privy
to that radio transmission to KE at that time, with any information as to whether
Defendant LT, FAIRLEY was continuing or terminating his pursuit, or whether as ©
Lieutenant with supervising authority inthe Maywood Polles Department, he was
directing or authorizing any other Officers to pursue, or not to pursue, the GMC SUV.
35. Defendant LT. FAIRLEY’s pursuit ofthe GMC SUV continued eastbound on
[Lake Street through hecvy vehicle traffic ina mixed residential and commercial
neighborhood with 2 3¢ mph posted speed zone past several more bright yellow
pedestrian crossing signs on the south side of Lake Street at 13% Avenue and 12 Avenue