Robert T. Bell, Esq. Lance P. Jasper, Esqi REEP, BELL, LAIRD JASPER, P.C. P.0I Box 16960 2955 Stockyard Road Missoula, Montana 59808--6960 Telephone: (406) 541-4100 BY Facsimile: (406) 541--4101 FILED 5 ml? andace Fisher er CLERK or DISTRICT COURT Email: bell@wesiernmontanalaw.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs MONTANA TWENTIETH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, SANDERS COUNTY and Cause No.: Dept. NIL: a FLAINTIFFS, 1). RIM CHRISTIIPHER COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL V. REFLECTIONS ACADEMY, MICHELLE MANNING, CHAFFIN PULLAN and DOES 1-10, DEFENDANTS. COME NOW Plaintiffs, by and through counsel of record, Reep, Bell, Laird and Jasper, P.C., and for their Complaint against Defendants Reflections Academy, Inc., Michelle Manning, Chaflin Pullan and Dues 1- 10, states and alleges as follows: COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL PAGE 1. GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 1. Prams are the parents and were the guardians of their minor child, -- (collectively, "the - Family") who has since reached the age of majority. At the times pertinent herein, -- advance paid tuition to Reflections Academy inc. and _attended school there. Reflections Academy, Inc. provided individual and group therapy to the -amily. 2. Plaintiff _Ivas a student at Reflections Academy, Inc. She presently resides with her parents in Oregon. At the times pertinent to this Complaint, she was a resident of Sanders County, Montana and living at a facility operated by Reflections Academy, Inc. 3. Defendant Reflections Academy, Inc. ("Reflections") is a Montana Corporation with its principal place of business at 88 Steamboat Way E, Thompson Falls, Sanders County, Montana. Reflections held itself out as a therapeutic boarding school for teenage girls. 4. Defendant Michelle Manning ("Manning") is an individual who resides in Sanders County, Montana. Manning is the owner and an employee of Reflections. She is identified on the Reflections website as its COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FDR JURV mm PAGE 2. executive director. She also represented herself to students and their parents as a therapeutic professional. At all times pertinent, she operated Reflections and managed its employees, She had operational responsibility for all aspects of Reflections including both its therapeutic and scholastic aspects. Manning communicated regularly with the - Family about enrollment of -- tuition obligations and the services to be provided by Reflections to the - Family. She interacted with the -Family on a near-daily basis. 5. Defendant Chaffin Pullan ("Chaffin") is an individual who resides in Sanders County, Montana. Chaffin is affiliated with Reflections and represented himself to students and their parents at various times as an "owner," a manager, and therapeutic professional. 6. Does 1-10 are individuals or entities who were involved with provision of professional services to Reflections as advisors, subcontractors or employees. 7. During the time--was attending Reflections, Chaffin was employed by Reflections. 8. During the time _was attending Reflections, Chaffin was a shareholder of Reflections. COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL PAGE 3. The tortious acts alleged in this Complaint occurred in Sanders County, Montana. 10. Jurisdiction is proper in this Court. 11. Venue is proper in this Court. COUNT ONE (Professional Negligence) 12. Plaintiffs reallege all allegations of the Complaint as iffully set forth herein. 13. t'tended Reflections from April through August of 2018. 14. Reflections held itself out as providing professional services for students, including - and their family members. These included, without limitation, therapy, boarding, schooling, organization and supervision of extracurricular activities and provision of a "home-like" environment, 15. Reflections held itself out as offering a "unique residential program" that was a "safe haven for struggling teenage girls and their families," 16. Reflections held itself out as competent to help girls "conquer behavioral problems such as anger, addictions, disrespect, low self- esteem, attachment disorders, anxiety and depression." COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL PAGE A its website, Reflections specifically recognized the heightened risks of sexual acting out and sexual promiscuity for struggling teenage girls and marketed itself as a school that was capable of providing therapeutic services to deal with such risks. 18. Reflections represented itself as "fully licensed," and having a "highly experienced staff." It claimed to provide "high-quality, experienced therapeutic services and a comprehensive, fully accredited education program." 19. in its website and communications with students and parents, Reflections claimed to have a "program." It purported to offer a "highly- structured environment" that cultivated personal care, self-esteem, responsibility, consistency and dependability. 20. In its website, Reflections claimed to offer "a safe space" to girls. 21. _enrolled_ in Reflections and paid tuition and other valuable consideration to Reflections. 22. Reflections and the other Defendants who were involved in care owed a duty to _to provide professional services in a manner consistent with the representations it made on its AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL PAGE 5. website and in conformance with the standard of care expected of like professional services providers. 23. Defendants failed to live up to that duty, causing damages to the -Family' 24. Defendants' failures included, but are not limited to: failing to implement a therapeutic program conforming the representations made by Reflections; 2) failing to implement a therapeutic program conforming to any generally accepted therapeutic methodology or standard of care; 3) failing to implement adequate safeguards to ensure the safety of students; 4) failing to provide therapy as represented; 5) failing to provide appropriate supervision of extracurricular activities; 6) hiring and retention of unqualified personnel; 7) allowing unqualified personnel to become involved in provision of therapy to girls to the detriment of the therapy; 8) failing to implement appropriate safeguards for a therapeutic program leading to their exposure to pornographic images on Chaffin's cell phone; and 9) failing to ensure that staff, particularly Chaffin, were adequately trained and supervised resulting in Chaffin's inappropriate communications to girls including sharing of pornographic images, inappropriate physical contact causing emotional injury, inappropriate counselor-client relationships, and grooming of and other students to conform to sexual AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL PAGE 6. relationships Chaffin was engaged in with at least one other student, All of the foregoing failures occurred and impacted _directly in the course of the professional services rendered to her. 25. As a result of the failures identified above, and others which may be revealed in the course of discovery, Defendants committed professional negligence. 26. Defendants' professional negligence caused damages general and special to the -Family including without limitation, emotional injury, therapeutic setbacks, enhanced need for future therapeutic care and loss of tuition. COUNT TWO Consumer Protection Act) 27. Plaintiffs reallege all allegations of the Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 28. The Montana Consumer Protection Act renders unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce unlawful. Mont. Code Ann. 30-14-103. 29. The-Family is a consumer. Defendants supplied professional services to them primarily for their personal, family or household purposes. cow'ri AND DEMAND FORJURY TRIAL PAGE 7, 30. Defendants engaged in acts which caused and were liker to cause substantial injury to consumers, including the-amily. 31. Defendants engaged in acts or practices by making representations, omission and engaging in practices that did and were likely to mislead consumers like the - Family. 32. The -:amily's interpretation and understanding of the representations, omissions, and practices of Reflections were reasonable under the circumstances. 33. Defendants' misleading representations, omissions and practices were material to the-Family's enrollment o-t Reflections. 34. Defendants made false representations as to the characteristics, benefits, and other qualities of Reflections therapeutic boarding program. 35. Defendants advertised Reflections' professional services with intent not to provide them as advertised. 36. Defendants violated the Montana Consumer Protection Act causing damages general and special to the -:amily. COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY Tam. PAGE 37. Pursuant to Mont. Code Ann, 30-14-133, Defendants are liable for Plaintiffs' damages, attorney's fees incurred in this suit and treble damages. COUNT THREE (Negligent Misrepresentation 38. Plaintiffs reallege all allegations of the Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 39. Defendants made representations of fact to the -=amily in order to induce _s enrollment at Reflections. 40. The representations, including but not limited to those identified in 14-19 were false. 41. The _Family had reasonable grounds for believing them to be true. 42. The representations were made with the intent that the - Family would rely on them. 43. The _was unaware of the falsity of the representations and acted in reliance thereon. 44. The-Familyiustifiably relied on the representations and sustained damages general and special as a result. DEMAND FORJURY TRIAL PAGE a COUNT FOUR Piercin the Cor orate Veil 45. Plaintiffs realiege all allegations of the Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 46. Upon information and belief, Reflections was used as an alter ego entity for the other Defendants, particularly Chaffin, who held himself out as an "owner," paying expenses associated with housing, food, entertainment, and other personal expenses. Additionally, Defendants accepted tuition from parents to Reflections and, upon information and belief, used these funds to support other business or personal ventures. Discovery will likely result in identification of additional alter ego abuses. 47. Reflections was used by the other Defendants as a subterfuge to defeat public convenience, justify wrong or perpetrate fraud. 48. This is an appropriate case for piercing of the corporate veil. The individual Defendants' personal assets should answer in whole or in partfor any judgment against Reflections in this case. COUNT (Fiduciam Duties) 49. Plaintiffs realiege each of the other paragraphs of this Complaint as iffully set forth herein. 50. _reposed faith, confidence and trust in Defendants in conjunction with the care of -and Reflections' COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL PAGE 10. representations about its capability to provide a stable and safe therapeutic and scholastic boarding school environment. 51. Due to the nature of the school, Le. a school in which limited communications are permitted with children, other students, and parents, and a high level of control is exercised by Defendants over the activities conducted within the school. there exists a special and unique relationship between students and their families, and Defendants, in which Defendants occupy a position of unique power and control, and in which Plaintiffs lack control and are highly dependent upon Defendants. 52. The foregoing factors establish a fiduciary relationship owed by Defendants to the -Family. This relationship creates a duty of the highest loyalty to the interests of the -Family. 53. Defendants breached fiduciary duties owed to the - Family. 54. Defendents' breaches of fiduciary duty caused Damages to the -Fami|y. COUNT SIX (Exemplag Damages) 55. Plaintiffs reallege each of the other allegations of the Complaint as if fully set forth herein. COMPLAINT AND DEMAND PAGE 11. 56. Defendants had knowledge of facts or intentionally disregarded facts that created a high probability of injury to the-amily. 57. Defendants deliberately proceeded to act with indifference to the high probability of injury to the -Family. 58. Defendants made representations about Reflections with knowledge of their falsity and/or concealed material facts such as the danger posed by unqualified personnel like Chaffin, with the purpose of depriving the-amily of property or othen/vise causing them injury. 59. Additional conduct supporting exemplary damages may be determined to exist during discovery. 60. The-Famin is entitled to an award of punitive damages against Defendants. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully pray for the following relief: 1. For an award of general damages against Defendants; 2. For an award of special damages against Defendants; 3. For an award of attorney's fees against Defendants; 4. For an award of treble damages against Defendants; 5. For an award of exemplary damages against Defendants; and 6. For such further and other relief as this Court may deem just. DEMAND FDR JURY PAGE 12. DATED this L?day of November, 2018. A R0 ert T. ell orneys or Plaintiffs DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL COME NOW Plaintiffs, and hereby demand a trial byjury of all issues raised herein. 54' DATED this day of November, 2018. REEP, BE By: QUY \Egge/l T. he? neys or Plaintiffs COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL PAGE 13.