West Virginia E-Filing Notice CC-24-2020-C-46 Judge: Patrick Wilson To: Tony O'Dell todell@tolawfirm.com NOTICE OF FILING IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MARION COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA Emily Calhoun Santini v. Jakob Streyle CC-24-2020-C-46 The following complaint was FILED on 3/23/2020 5:16:20 PM Notice Date: 3/23/2020 5:16:20 PM Rhonda Starn CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT Marion 219 Adam Street, Room 211 FAIRMONT, WV 26554 (304) 367-5360 rhonda.starn@courtswv.gov E-FILED 3/23/2020 5:16 PM CC-24-2020-C-46 Marion County Circuit Clerk Rhonda Starn COVER SHEET GENERAL INFORMATION IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MARION COUNTY WEST VIRGINIA Emily Calhoun Santini v. Jakob Streyle First Plaintiff: Judge: Business Individual Government Other First Defendant: Business Individual Government Other Patrick Wilson COMPLAINT INFORMATION Case Type: Civil Complaint Type: Other Origin: Initial Filing Jury Trial Requested: Yes No Mediation Requested: Yes No Substantial Hardship Requested: Yes No Appeal from Municipal Court Appeal from Magistrate Court Case will be ready for trial by: Do you or any of your clients or witnesses in this case require special accommodations due to a disability? Wheelchair accessible hearing room and other facilities Interpreter or other auxiliary aid for the hearing impaired Reader or other auxiliary aid for the visually impaired Spokesperson or other auxiliary aid for the speech impaired Other: I am proceeding without an attorney I have an attorney: Tony O'Dell, PO Box 11830, Charleston, WV 25339 SERVED PARTIES Name: Jakob Streyle Address: 77 Mill Fall Road, Fairmont WV 26554 Days to Answer: N/A Type of Service: No Service Name: Christopher Guinup Address: 205 Edison Street, Fairmont WV 26554 Days to Answer: N/A Type of Service: No Service Name: City of Fairmont Address: 20 Jackson St. 3rd Floor, Room 305, Fairmont WV 26555 Days to Answer: N/A Type of Service: No Service 3/23/2020 5:16 PM MEMORANDUM TO FOR INSTITUTING CIVIL A Marion County Circuit Clerk Rhonda Starn To the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Marion County, West Virginia EMILY CALHOUN SANTINI, individually And as Executrix of the Estate of STEVEN GENE SANTINI, deceased, Plaintiff, . Days to Type of v. Answer Service CITY OF FAIRMONT 30 SEC. OF STATE c/o Kevin Sansalone, Esq. 200 Jackson Street 3rd Floor, Room 305 Fairmont, WV 26555 JAKOB N. STREYLE 20 PERSONAL 77 Mill Fall Road Fairmont, WV 26554 CHRISTOPHER GUINUP 20 PERSONAL 205 Edison Street Fairmont, WV 26554 Defendants. Please issue a summons in the above-styled action as indicated. Original and 6 copies of complaint furnished herewith. ?sel'T?OFFlaintiff ony L. O'Dell (WV #5770) Cheryl A. Fisher (WV #6379) Max L. Corley, (WV #7434) TIANO PLLC P.O. Box 11830 Charleston, West Virginia 25339 Date: March 23, 2020 I. PLAINTIFF: EMILY CALHOUN SANTINI, individually and as Executrix ofthe Estate of Steven Gene Santini, deceased DEFENDANTS: City of Fairmont, Jakob Nathaniel Streyle and Christopher Guinup CASE NUMBER: 11. TYPE OF CASE: Personal Injury/Wrongful Death JURY DEMAND: Yes CASE WILL BE READY FOR TRIAL BY: 03/2021 IV: DO YOU OR ANY OF YOUR CLIENTS OR WITNESSES IN THIS CASE REQUIRE SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS DUE TO A DISABILITY OR No TONY L. (WV #5770) Representing: Plaintiff Dated; Maw/L a 2e 'lw Charleston, West Virginia 25339 y?lfO'DelHWV #5770) 3/23/2020 5:16 PM Marion County Circuit Clerk Rhonda Starn IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MARION COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA EMILY CALHOUN SANTINI, individually, and as Executrix of the Estate of Steven Gene Santini, deceased, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. Judge CITY OF FAIRMONT, a municipal corporation, JAKOB NATHANIEL STREYLE, and CHRISTOPHER GUINUP Defendants. COMPLAINT For her complaint, Plaintiff, Emily Calhoun Santini, individually and as the Executrix of the Estate of Steven Gene Santini, states and alleges as follows: 1. Plaintiff Emily Calhoun Santini is a resident and citizen of Fairmont, Marion County, West Virginia, and is the duly con?rmed and acting Executrix of the Estate of her deceased husband, Steven Gene Santini. Plaintiff?s decedent, Steven Gene Santini, also was a resident of Fairmont, Marion County, West Virginia at the time of his death. 2. Defendant City of Fairmont (hereinafter ?Fairmont?) is a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of West Virginia. The City of Fairmont is located in Marion County, West Virginia and it maintains a police force. 3. Defendant Jakob Nathaniel Streyle (hereinafter ?Defendant Streyle" or ?Of?cer Streyle?), is and was at all times relevant to the events underlying this Complaint, a resident of Marion County, West Virginia. Defendant Streyle was also at all times alleged herein, and still is to this day, employed by Defendant City of airmont as a police of?cer and he is authorized to act on behalf of the City of Fairmont. 4. Defendant Christopher Guinup (hereinafter ?Defendant Guinup? or ?Of?cer Guinup?) is and was at all times relevant to the events underlying this Complaint, a resident of Marion County, West Virginia. Defendant Guinup was also at all times alleged herein, and still is to this day, employed by Defendant City of Fairmont as a police of?cer and he is authorized to act on behalf of the City of Fairmont. COUNT I NEGLGIENCE OF DEFENDANTS 5. The Plaintiff incorporates by reference each and every allegation contained within Paragraph Nos. 1 through 4, inclusive, as if each were set forth herein verbatim. 6. At all times relevant hereto, Defendants Streyle and Guinup were acting within the scope of their respective employment with the City of Fairmont. 7. On July 10, 2019, Defendant Streyle, while on duty, was driving a marked, black and white City ofFairmont police cruiser (?police cruiser?), more speci?cally a 2016 RAM RTR2 pickup truck owned by the City of Fairmont, westbound on County Club Road around 1:40 pm. Defendant Streyle carelessly, recklessly, grossly negligently and/or negligently drove the police cruiser at speeds of at least 73 MPH in a residential area of Fairmont with a posted speed limit of 35 MPH without sounding the siren and/or the ?ashing blue emergency lights. Moreover, Defendant Streyle carelessly, recklessly, grossly negligently and/or negligently drove the police cruiser at excessive speeds even though there was no active emergency call requiring an emergency response from police of?cers. 8. At all times alleged herein, Of?cer Guinup, while on duty, was a passenger in the police cruiser being driven by Of?cer Streyle, and knew Of?cer Streyle was carelessly, recklessly, grossly negligently and/or negligently driving the police cruiser at speeds of at least 73 MPH in a residential area of Fairmont with a posted speed limit of 35 MPH without sounding the siren, ?ashing the blue emergency lights, and without an active emergency call requiring an emergency response from police of?cers. At no time did Of?cer Guinup direct or take any actions to cause or encourage Of?cer Streyle to slow down or to at least turn his siren or ?ashing lights on. In fact, Of?cer Guinup acted in concerted tortious activity with, encouraged, rati?ed and sanctioned Of?cer Streyle?s actions despite his sworn duty as a police of?cer to do otherwise. The actions and/or inactions of Of?cer Guinup were careless, grossly negligent, reckless and negligent. 9. At the same time, Steven Santini was driving his Subaru Forester southbound on Bison Street and approached the intersection of Bison Street and Country Club Road. Based on eyewitnesses, Mr. Santini stopped at the stop sign at the intersection of Bison Street and Country Club Road for a period time before preceding to make a left-hand turn onto Country Club Road. 10. After a portion of the Santini?s Forester reached the eastbound lane during his attempted left hand turn onto Country Club Road, the police cruiser being driven by Of?cer Streyle at an excessively high rate of speed violently and brutally crashed broadside into Mr. Santini?s Forester in the area of the driver?s side door, causing the Forester to be flipped on its side and be propelled several yards from the point of impact where it secondarily crashed into a telephone pole and gas pipeline near the roadway. In addition, the police cruiser spun around and came to rest against Mr. Santini?s Forester. The crash sequence and the damage to the vehicles involved left no doubt to even casual observers that the police cruiser was travelling a very high rate of speed when the crash happened. 11. As a result of the defendants? actions and/or inactions, Steven Santini suffered severe blunt force injuries to his body due to the severe intrusion of the police cruiser into the Forester?s passenger compartment, and he died at the scene of the crash. 12. Shortly following the crash, other Fairmont police of?cers arrived on the scene of the crash and told at least two witnesses to the crash to leave the scene without obtaining statements. 13. Moreover, on the very day of the crash, on July 10, 2019, the City of Fairmont Police Department posted on its acebook pro?le about the crash and admitted in the post that the police of?cers involved in the crash were not chasing a ?eeing vehicle, and the police vehicle did not have its lights and sirens activated. Unfortunately, in a blatant attempt to avoid accountability for the crash, the Police Department further posted that the police vehicle ?was not being operated at an excessive rate of speed. . . An independent witness stated the civilian vehicle ran a stop sign . . The post about the police cruiser speed was manifestly false and no mention was made of the two eyewitnesses who con?rm they were directly behind Mr. Santini?s Forester waiting to turn onto Country Club Road at the time of the crash, and further confirm that Mr. Santini stopped before he made a left onto Country Club Road. 14. Following the crash, a download of the police cruiser?s event data recorder, commonly referred to as the ?black box?, was performed by an independent accident reconstruction investigation expert and con?rmed that Of?cer Streyle was driving the police cruiser at a speed of at least 73 MPH, and the reconstruction further con?rmed that had Of?cer Streyle been driving the speed limit of 35 MPH, the crash would not have happened. The reason the accident reconstruction expert said the police cruiser was traveling at least 73 MPH is because the Police Department had replaced the original wheels on the police cruiser with one size larger wheels than the cruiser came with standard. If the police department did not calibrate the speedometer and vehicle computer to take those larger wheels into consideration, it means the police cruiser was actually driving faster than the already excessive speed of 73 MPH. 15. Defendants City of Fairmont and its Police Department are liable for the negligence of its employees if those negligent acts occur within the scope of their employment. 16. Upon information and belief, the City of Fairmont carelessly and negligently failed to provide appropriate and adequate training and supervision for Of?cers Streyle and Guinup and other law enforcement of?cers relating to operating police cruisers in a reasonably safe manner under the conditions and other matters. 17. Defendant City of Fairmont and/or its Police Department owed a duty of care to the public, including Plaintiff?s decedent, to exercise reasonable care in the training and supervision of police of?cers to which it assigned the use of cruisers which involve a high risk of serious physical harm or death unless skillfully and carefully operated with due care. 18. Defendant City of airmont and/or its Police Department negligently breached its duty of care in the training and supervision of Of?cers Streyle and Guinup. 19. The City of Fairmont is liable for Steven Santini?s injuries and death which were caused by the carelessness, gross negligence, recklessness and/or negligence of Of?cers Streyle and Guinup as described herein. 20. As a direct and proximate result of the actions or inactions of Defendants as alleged herein, Steven Santini suffered extreme pain, suffering and death. As a further direct and proximate result of the actions or inactions of Defendants as alleged herein, each of the potential bene?ciaries, as de?ned by West Virginia law, of Steven Santini?s Estate suffered some or all of the following damages, and is therefore entitled to compensation for the same: medical, funeral and burial expenses; a total loss of the reasonably expected services for protection, care, household services, and assistance, both past and future; the loss of income of Steven Santini, both past and future; sorrow, mental anguish and solace, including but not limited to loss of the society, companionship, comfort, guidance, kindly of?ces, and the advice of the decedent. COUNT II PUNITIVE DAMAGES (Liability of Defendants Streyle and Guinup for acts falling outside the scope of their employment or which were willful, wanton or reckless) 21. The Plaintiff incorporates by reference each and every allegation contained within Paragraph Nos. 1 through 20, inclusive, as if each were set forth herein verbatim. 22. Defendant Streyle's acts of operating the police cruiser at excessive speeds well in excess of the lawful speed limits, while possibly distracted, and his acts of operating the police cruiser in an unreasonable and dangerous manner were in reckless disregard for the safety and welfare of others, including Steven Santini, or their property. Such acts, when taken in total, rise above the level of mere negligence. 23. Defendant Guinup?s acts of willfully, wantonly or recklessly providing substantial assistance, encouragement, acquiescence or cooperation in or rati?cation of Defendant Streyle?s tortious conduct and aiding and abetting Defendant Streyle?s tortious conduct was unreasonable and dangerous and committed in reckless disregard for the safety and welfare of others, including Steven Santini, or their property. Such acts, when taken in total, rise above the level of mere negligence. 24. Of?cers Streyle and Guinup acted in conscious disregard of, or indifference to, a known risk of harm from the aforementioned activities constituting willfulness, wantonness and/or recklessness. 25. Of?cers Streyle or Guinup knew, or should have known, of circumstances which the ordinary, reasonable person would realize the highly dangerous character of their respective acts and/or failures to act. 26. Of?cers Streyle or Guinup acted with willful, wanton, and/or reckless disregard to the natural and foreseeable consequences of their activities and disregard for Plaintiff and Plaintiff?s decedent?s rights, well-being, and health and safety and, accordingly, the Plaintiff is entitled to and does seek relief in the form of punitive damages. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Emily Calhoun Santini, as Executrix of the Estate of Steven Gene Santini, demands judgment from Defendants, City of Fairmont, Of?cer Streyle and Of?cer Guinup, both jointly and severally, for compensatory damages in such sums as will adequately compensate the Estate and the bene?ciaries for the claims for relief brought herein, and further demands punitive damages from Defendants Streyle and Guinup in amounts to be determined by the jury, which said sums are well in excess of the minimum jurisdictional requirements of this Court, and for such other relief as may be proper under the law. I PLAINTIFF DEMANDS A TRIAL BY JURY. EMILY CALHOUN SANTINI, individually, and as Executrix of the Estate of Steven Gene Santini, By Counsel Clam/Wotan (WV #5770) Max L. Corley, 1H (WV #7434) TIANO PLLC Post Of?ce Box 11830 Charleston, WV 25339 (304) 720?6700 Counseifor Plaintiff