FILED DATE: 12/26/2019 1:42 PM 2019L012941 FILED 12/26/2019 1:42 PM DOROTHY BROWN CIRCUIT CLERK COOK COUNTY, IL 2019L012941 7856424 FILED DATE: 12/26/2019 1 :42 PM 2019L012941 4. On and before October 18, 2019, Defendants, owned a restaurant and bar at 15 W. Hubbard St., Chicago, Cook County, Illinois, commonly known as El Hefe. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE admits it owned a restaurant and bar at 15 W. Hubbard St., Chicago, Cook County, Illinois, commonly known as El Hefe. 5, On and before October 18, 2019, Defendants, operated a restaurant and bar at 15 W. Hubbard St., Chicago, Cook County, Illinois commonly known as El Hefe. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE admits the allegations of paragraph 5. 6. On and before October 18, 2019, Defendants, managed a restaurant and bar at 15 W. Hubbard St., Chicago, Cook County, Illinois, commonly known as El Hefe. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE admits the allegations of paragraph 6. 7. On and before October 18, 2019, Defendants, maintained a restaurant and bar at 15 W. Hubbard St., Chicago, Cook County, Illinois, commonly known as El Hefe. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE admits the allegations of paragraph 7. 8. On and before October 18, 2019, Defendants, controlled a restaurant and bar at 15 W. Hubbard St., Chicago, Cook County, Illinois, commonly known as El Hefe. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEF lacks knowledge or information suf?cient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 8 and therefore denies same. 9. On or about October 18, 2019, plaintiff, Jane Doe, was a patron at El Hefe. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE lacks knowledge or information suf?cient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 9 and therefore denies same. 10. On or about October 18, 2019, plaintiff, Jane Doe, was a business invitee of the Defendants, El Hefe. FILED DATE: 12/26/2019 1 :42 PM 2019L012941 ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE lacks knowledge or information suf?cient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 10 and therefore denies same. 11. On or about October 18, 2019, plaintiff, Jane Doe, was provided alcohol by a bartender employed by the Defendant. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE lacks knowledge or information suf?cient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 11 and therefore denies same. 12. On or about October 18, 2019, plaintiff, Jane Doe, was supplied alcohol by a bartender that were purchased by an unknown individual. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE lacks knowledge or information suf?cient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 12 and therefore denies same. 13. On or about October 18, 2019, the bartender employed by the Defendants recognized the unknown individual make sexual advances towards the plaintiff, Jane Doe. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE lacks knowledge or information suf?cient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 13 and therefore denies same. 14. On or about October 18, 2019, the bartender employed by the Defendants, recognized the plaintiff? condition rapidly deteriorating after consuming the alcoholic beverages purchased by the unknown individual. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE lacks knowledge or information suf?cient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 14 and therefore denies same. 15. On or about October 18, 2019, the bartender employed by the defendants, believed that the plaintiff, Jane Doe, had been drugged. FILED DATE: 12/26/2019 1 :42 PM 2019L012941 ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE lacks knowledge or information suf?cient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 15 and therefore denies same. 16. On or about October 18, 2019, the bartender employed by the Defendants, saw the unknown individual make sexual advances towards the plaintiff, Jane Doe, after she had vomited at the bar. The bartender told the unknown male to stop, and the unknown male told the bartender that she could not tell him what to do. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE lacks knowledge or information suf?cient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 16 and therefore denies same. 17. El Hefe by and through its employees then required the Plaintiff to leave the premises because of her deteriorated condition. The security guards removed the Plaintiff from the bar out of the rear into the alleyway of the Defendant?s premises with an unknown individual. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE lacks knowledge or information suf?cient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in paragraph 17 and therefore denies same. 18. Plaintiff, Jane Doe, was then sexually assaulted by the unknown individual in the dark alley, while two of Defendant?s security guards were present less than 100 feet away. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE denies the allegations of paragraph 18. 19. The security guards that escorted the Plaintiff into the dark alley with her assailant strayed in the alley while the Plaintiff was sexually assaulted about 100 feet away. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE denies the allegations of paragraph 19. 20. After the plaintiff was sexually assaulted, the assailant then flagged down the security guards while the Plaintiff lay in the alley and left the scene. FILED DATE: 12/26/2019 1 :42 PM 2019L012941 ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE denies the allegations of paragraph 20. 21. E1 Hefe by and through its agents/ employees knew or should have known that the assailant posed a risk of danger to the Plaintiff, and speci?cally a danger of sexual assault. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE denies the allegations of paragraph 21. 22. Despite having this knowledge, E1 Hefe, by and through its agents/employees forced the plaintiff to leave its premises through the back exit into a dangerous alley while in a deteriorated condition with her assailant who they believed had drugged her and was making unwelcome sexual advances. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEF denies the allegations of paragraph 22. 23. On or about October 18, 2019, no employee of the Defendant made any effort to stop the unknown individual from sexually assaulting the plaintiff, Jane Doe. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE has no knowledge as to any sexual assault of Plaintiff Jane Doe and, therefore, denies the same. Defendants deny the remaining allegations of paragraph 23. COUNT I Negligence 15 Hubbard LLC d/b/a El Hefe 1-23. Plaintiff realleges and adepts paragraphs one through twenty-three of this complaint at law (1-23) as though fully stated and pled herein. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE realleges and adopts its answers to paragraphs one through twenty-three as its answer to (1-23) as though fully stated and pled herein. 24. On and before the aforementioned ate, the defendant, 15 Hubbard LLC d/b/a El Hefe, had a duty of ordinary care so as to avoid causing injury and/or harmful or offensive contact to the plaintiff, Jane Doe. FILED DATE: 12/26/2019 1 :42 PM 2019L012941 ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE admits only those duties imposed by law and denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 24 inconsistent therewith. 25. On or before the aforementioned date, the defendant, 15 Hubbard LLC d/b/a El Hefe, had a special relationship with the Plaintiff a business invitee, and a duty to prevent foreseeable attack. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE denies the allegations of paragraph 25. 26. On and before the aforementioned date, the defendant, 15 Hubbard LLC d/b/a El Hefe, had a duty to refrain from assisting and encouraging tortious conduct of the assailant against the Plaintiff. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE admits only those duties imposed by law and denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 26 inconsistent therewith. 27. On or before the aforementioned date, the defendant, 15 Hubbard LLC d/b/a El Hefe, breached one or more of the aforementioned duties in one more of the following ways: a. Failed to prevent the plaintiff from being sexually assaulted; b. Failed to adequately train its staff and security; c. Failed to protect the safety of its patrons, speci?cally the plaintiff; d. Created a condition to allow the plaintiff to be sexually assaulted; e. Required the plaintiff and her assailant to leave through the back exit alleyway; f. Failed to follow and enforce appropriate policies or procedures for patron safety; g. Allowed patrons to enter and exit through the back which is not the customary entrance to the premises. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE denies the allegations of paragraph 27 including FILED DATE: 12/26/2019 1 :42 PM 2019L012941 subparagraphs a g. 28. As a direct and proximate result of one or more of the foregoing negligent acts or omissions, the plaintiff was sexually assaulted and suffered injuries of a personal and pecuniary nature. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE denies the allegations of paragraph 28. WHEREFORE, Defendant, 15 Hubbard LLC d/b/a E1 Hefe, demands judgment against Plaintiff, Jane Doe, and in its favor and for its costs sustained herein. COUNT II Willful and Wanton Conduct-15 Hubbard LLC d/b/a Hefe 1-23. Plaintiff realleges and adopts paragraphs one through twenty-three of Count 1 (1- 23) as though fully stated and plead herein. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE realleges and adepts its answers to paragraphs one through twenty-three as its answer to (1-23) as though fully stated and pled herein. 24. Notwithstanding the aforestated duties, Defendants, 15 Hubbard LLC d/b/a El Hefe, by and through its agents, employees and/or servants, committed one or more of the following willful and wanton acts and/or omissions in reckless disregard and/or indifference for the safety of the plaintiff, Jane Doe. a. Willfully and wantonly failed to provide its employees, agents and/or servants with adequate safety training and failed to protect its patrons even though said Defendants had actual knowledge and/0r constructive knowledge that the plaintiff, Jane Doe was being subjected to sexual assault; b. Willfully and wantonly failed to protect its patrons, including Jane Doe, from battery even though said Defendants had actual knowledge and/0r constructive knowledge that its patron, Jane Doe, was being subjected to physical and sexual assault; 0. Willfully and wantonly failed to protect its patrons, including Jane Doe, from sexual assault during business hours when said Defendants had actual 7 FILED DATE: 12/26/2019 1 :42 PM 2019L012941 knowledge and/or constructive knowledge that the patron, Jane Doe, was being subjected to physical and sexual assault; d. Willfully and wantonly failed to take action to prevent plaintiff, Jane Doe from suffering from battery and sexual assault even though Defendants had actual knowledge and/or constructive knowledge that the patron, Jane Doe, was being subjected to physical and sexual assault; 6. Was otherwise willful and wanton and/or otherwise acted with reckless disregard and/or indifference. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE denies the allegations of paragraph 24 a inclusive. 25. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned willful and wanton acts and/or omissions in the conscious disregard for the safety of the plaintiff, Jane Doe, Jane Doe sustained serious injuries of a personal and pecuniary nature. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE denies the allegations of paragraph 25. WHEREFORE, Defendant, 15 Hubbard LLC d/b/a E1 Hefe, demands judgment against Plaintiff, Jane Doe, and in its favor and for its costs sustained herein. COUNT Negligent In?iction of Emotion Distress-15 Hubbard LLC d/b/a El Hefe 1-23. Plaintiff realleges and. alleges paragraphs one through twenty?three of the complaint at law (1-23) as though fully stated and pled herein. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEF realleges and adopts its answers to paragraphs one through twenty-three as its answer to (1-23) as though fully stated and pled herein. 24. At the aforementioned time and place, Defendant, had a duty to exercise reasonable care as not to cause emotion injury and or emotional distress to Jane Doe. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE denies the allegations of paragraph 24. 25. Notwithstanding said duty, Defendant, 15 Hubbard LLC d/b/a E1 Hefe, failed to exercise reasonable care so as not to cause emotional injuries and/or emotional distress to the 8 FILED DATE: 12/26/2019 1 :42 PM 2019L012941 plaintiff, Jane Doe, when the Defendants knowingly allowed Jane Doe to be sexually assaulted. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE denies the allegations of paragraph 25. 26. As a direct and proximate result of the unlawful actions of Defendants, the plaintiff Jane Doe, sustained serious injuries and suffered severe emotional distress. ANSWER: Defendant denies the allegations of paragraph 26. WHEREFORE, Defendant, 15 Hubbard LLC d/b/a E1 Hefe, demands judgment against Plaintiff, Jane Doe, and in its favor and for its costs sustained herein. COUNT IV Negligence El Hefe 1-23. Plaintiff realleges and alleges paragraphs one through twenty-three of the complaint at law (1?23) as though fully stated and pled herein. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE realleges and adopts its answers to paragraphs one through twenty-three as its answer to (1-23) as though fully stated and pled herein. 24. On and before the aforementioned dates, the defendant, El Hefe, had a duty of ordinary care so as to avoid causing injury and/or harmful or offensive contact to the plaintiff, Jane Doe. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE admits only those duties imposed by law and denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 24 inconsistent therewith. 25. On and before the aforementioned date, the defendant, El Hefe, had a special relationship with the Plaintiff as a business invitee, and a duty to prevent foreseeable attack. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE denies the allegations of paragraph 25. 26. On and before the aforementioned date, the defendant, E1 Hefe, had a duty to refrain from assisting and encouraging tortious conduct of the assailant against the Plaintiff. FILED DATE: 12/26/2019 1 :42 PM 2019L012941 ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE admits only those duties imposed by law and denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 26 inconsistent therewith. 27. On and before the aforementioned date, the defendant, El Hefe, breached one or more of the aforementioned duties in one or more of the following ways: a. Failed to prevent the plaintiff from being sexually assaulted; b. Failed to adequately train its staff and security; c. Failed to protect the safety of its patrons, specifically the plaintiff; d. Created a condition to allow the plaintiff to be sexually assaulted; 6. Required the plaintiff and her assailant to leave through the back exit alleyway; f. Failed to follow and enforce appropriate policies or procedures for patron safety; g. Allowed patrons to enter and exit through the back which is not the customary entrance to the premises. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE denies the allegations of paragraph 27 a inclusive. 28.. As a direct and proximate result of one or more of the foregoing negligent acts or omissions, the plaintiff was sexually assaulted and suffered injuries of a personal and pecuniary nature. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE denies the allegations of paragraph 28. WHEREFORE, Defendant, 15 HUBBARD LLC d/b/a EL HEFE, demands judgment against Plaintiff, Jane Doe, and in its favor and for its costs sustained herein. COUNT Willfu! and Wanton Conduct? El Hefe 1-23. Plaintiff EL HEFE realleges and alleges paragraphs one through twenty-three of 10 FILED DATE: 12/26/2019 1 :42 PM 2019L012941 the complaint at law (1-23) as though fully stated and pled herein. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE realleges and adOpts its answers to paragraphs one through twenty-three as its answer to (1?23) as though fully stated and pled herein. 24. Notwithstanding the aforestated duties, Defendants, El Hefe, by and through the agents, employees and/or servants, committed one or more of the following willful and wanton acts and/0r omissions in reckless disregard and/or indifference for the safety of the plaintiff, Jane Doe. a. Willfully and wantonly failed to provide its employees, agents and/or servants with adequate safety training and failed to protect its patrons even though said Defendants had actual knowledge and/or constructive knowledge that the plaintiff, Jane Doe was being subjected to sexual assault; b. Willfully and wantonly failed to protect its patrons, including Jane Doe, from battery even though said Defendants had actual knowledge and/or constructive knowledge that its patron, Jane Doe, was being subjected to physical and sexual assault; c. Willfully and wantonly failed to protect its patrons, including Jane Doe, from sexual assault during business hours when said Defendants had actual knowledge and/or constructive knowledge that the patron, Jane Doe, was being subjected to physical and sexual assault; d. Willfully and wantonly failed to take action to prevent plaintiff, Jane Doe from suffering from battery and sexual assault even though Defendants had actual knowledge and/or constructive knowledge that the patron, Jane Doe, was being subjected to physical and sexual assault; e. Was otherwise willful and wanton and/or otherwise acted with reckless disregard and/or indifference. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE denies the allegations of paragraph 24, a inclusive. 25. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned willful and wanton acts and/or omissions in the conscious disregard for the safety of the plaintiff, Jane Doe, Jane Doe sustained serious injuries of a personal and pecuniary nature. 11 FILED DATE: 12/26/2019 1 :42 PM 2019L012941 ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE denies the allegations of paragraph 25. WHEREFORE, Defendant, 15 HUBBARD LLC d/b/a EL HEFE, demands judgment against Plaintiff, Jane Doe, and in its favor and for its costs sustained herein. COUNT VI Negligence In?iction of Emotional Distress?El Hefe 1-23. Plaintiff realleges and alleges paragraphs one through twenty-three of the complaint at law (1-23) as though fully stated and pled herein. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE realleges and adopts its answers to paragraphs one through twenty-three as its answer to (1-23) as though fully stated and pled herein. 24. At the aforementioned time and place, Defendant had a duty to exercise reasonable care as not to cause emotional injury and or emotional distress to Jane Doe. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE admits only those duties imposed by law and denies the remaining allegations of paragraph 24 inconsistent therewith 25. Notwithstanding said duty, Defendant, El Hefe, failed to exercise reasonable care so as not to cause emotional injuries and/or emotional distress to the plaintiff, Jane Doe, when the Defendants knowingly allowed Jane Doe to be sexually assaulted. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE denies the allegations of paragraph 25. 26. As a direct and proximate result of the unlawful actions of Defendants, the plaintiff Jane Doe, sustained serious injuries and suffered severe emotional distress. ANSWER: Defendant EL HEFE denies the allegations of paragraph 26. WHEREFORE, Defendant, 15 HUBBARD LLC d/b/a EL HEFE, demands judgment against Plaintiff, Jane Doe, and in its favor and for its costs sustained herein. 12 FILED DATE: 12/26/2019 1 :42 PM 2019L012941 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES As separate and af?rmative defenses, Defendant alleges as follows: FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 1. That the contributory fault on the part of the Plaintiff, Jane Doe, was more than 50 percent of the proximate cause of the injury or damage for which recovery is sought and therefore, Plaintiff is barred from recovering damages from Defendant EL HEFE . 2. In the event that the contributory fault on the part of the Plaintiff was not more than 50 percent of the proximate cause of the injury or damage for which she seeks recovery, any damages allowed should be diminished in proportion to that amount of fault attributable to the Plaintiff. 3. Defendant EL HEFE states that its fault, if any, is less than 25 percent of the total fault attributable to Plaintiff, known Defendant and other unknown Defendants, and in the event that the trier of fact ?nds in favor of Plaintiff on the issue of liability, Defendant EL HEFE is severally liable for any of the damages claimed herein by the Plaintiff. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 4. The Plaintiff had a duty to exercise reasonable care and caution for her own safety. 5. The Plaintiff is guilty of one or more of the following acts of negligence or fault which caused or contributed to her own injuries: a. Became overly intoxicated; b. Failed to take adequate and proper steps necessary to protect her own safety while at the subject establishment; 0. Left the company of her friend and/or partner who accompanied her to the Defendant?s establishment thereby being alone in an intoxicated condition; 13 FILED DATE: 12/26/2019 1 :42 PM 2019L012941 d. Became so intoxicated that she vomited inside Defendant?s establishment resulting in her being escorted out the rear of the premises per the Defendant?s standard and reasonable practice; e. Became so intoxicated that she exited the Defendant?s establishment with her alleged assailant; and f. Otherwise acted in an intoxicated matter. 6. That as a direct and proximate result of one or more of the foregoing negligent acts and/or omissions of the Plaintiff she sustained the alleged personal injury damages. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 7. Plaintiff?s damages, if any, were caused by the criminal acts or omissions of another individual over whom Defendant EL HEFE had no control, and for whose acts it is not responsible. The criminal acts or omissions of the unknown individual is the sole proximate cause of Plaintiff?s injuries and the damages claimed in Plaintiff?s Complaint at Law. FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 8. Defendant EL HEFE has no duty to protect others including Jane Doe Plaintiff from criminal acts by third persons on their property. FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 9. Defendant EL HEFE has no duty to protect others including Jane Doe Plaintiff from criminal acts by third parties outside of its establishment. SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 10. Defendant EL HEFE has no duty to protect others, including Jane Doe Plaintiff against criminal acts either in or outside its establishment. ll. Defendant EL HEFE has no knowledge of any danger facing Jane Doe Plaintiff. 14 FILED DATE: 12/26/2019 1 :42 PM 2019L012941 SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 12. The alleged criminal activity by Jane Doe?s alleged assailant was not reasonably foreseeable by Defendant EL HEFE . 13. Defendant EL HEFE had no duty to protect Jane Doe Plaintiff from said alleged criminal activity outside of its establishment. EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 14. Defendant EL HEFE is not a legal entity and, therefore, is improperly sued. WHEREFORE, Defendant,15 HUBBARD LLC d/b/a EL HEFE, demands judgment against Plaintiff, Jane Doe, and in its favor and for its costs sustained herein. Respectfully submitted, to New Jah'?s M. Hoey NIELSEN, ZEHE ANT AS, RC. 55 West Monroe Street, Suite 1800 Chicago, Illinois 60603 Tele: (312) 322-9900 Email: ihoev@nzalaw.com 15