Daniel v. Chi. Transit Auth.
| Decision Date | 20 February 2020 |
| Docket Number | No. 1-19-0479,1-19-0479 |
| Parties | Floyd DANIEL, as Independent Administrator of the Estate of Corey Daniel, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The CHICAGO TRANSIT AUTHORITY and Duane Ferrell, Defendants-Appellees. |
| Court | United States Appellate Court of Illinois |
Leslie J. Rosen, of Leslie J. Rosen Attorney at Law, P.C., of Chicago, and Robert J. Rooth, of Rooth Law Firm, of Evanston, for appellant.
Karen G. Seimetz, Stephen L. Wood, and Irina Y. Dmitrieva, of Chicago Transit Authority, of Chicago, for appellees.
¶ 1 The instant appeal arises from the death of decedent Corey Daniel, a passenger on a Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) bus who died from prolonged alcohol toxicity. Plaintiff Floyd Daniel, the independent administrator of the decedent's estate, filed a wrongful-death and survival action against defendant CTA and its driver, defendant Duane Ferrell. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, arguing that they did not owe a duty to the decedent, and the trial court granted the motion, dismissing the complaint with prejudice. Plaintiff appeals, and for the reasons that follow, we affirm.
¶ 3 On August 28, 2018, plaintiff filed a four-count complaint against defendants, arising from the death of the decedent while he was a passenger on a CTA bus; the complaint was amended on November 30, 2018, and it is the dismissal of the amended complaint that is at issue on appeal. The amended complaint alleged that Ferrell was the operator of a CTA bus boarded by the decedent at 2:52 a.m. on March 3, 2018. The complaint alleged that "on and after" the time that the decedent boarded the bus, Ferrell "was aware that Plaintiff's decedent * * * was intoxicated and/or infirm and in a helpless condition and unable to care for himself so that the hazards of his travel were increased." The complaint alleged that Ferrell breached the duties owed to the decedent by:
With respect to the CTA, the complaint additionally alleged that the CTA breached the duties owed to the decedent by:
The complaint alleged that, as a result of defendants' negligence, the decedent "sustained the effects of prolonged alcohol toxicity
," including pain and suffering prior to his death. The complaint further alleged that the decedent left three sons as his next-of-kin, who sustained pecuniary damage, including the loss of society, love, and affection, after the decedent's death.
¶ 4 The complaint set forth four causes of action, all based on negligence, with two counts pursuant to the Survival Act ( 755 ILCS 5/27-6 (West 2016) ) and two counts pursuant to the Wrongful Death Act ( 740 ILCS 180/0.01 et seq. (West 2016)).
¶ 5 On January 2, 2019, the CTA filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint pursuant to section 2-619 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Code) ( 735 ILCS 5/2-619 (West 2018) ), arguing that defendants did not owe a duty to the decedent because the decedent never exhibited any signs of a medical emergency while on the bus, nor did he inform Ferrell that he needed medical attention.1 The CTA further argued that the decedent's intoxication did not give rise to a duty on the part of defendants and that they did not owe the decedent a duty to assess his physical condition and obtain medical assistance for him without any sign that he was in distress and in need of medical attention. The CTA also claimed that none of the allegations in the amended complaint gave rise to a duty on the part of the CTA and that many of the allegations were conclusory and void of any factual support. Finally, the CTA claimed that imposing a duty on the CTA in such a case would be impractical and overly burdensome, as the function of the CTA was to provide public transportation, not to assess the medical condition and guarantee the personal safety of every passenger.
¶ 6 Attached to the CTA's motion to dismiss were two CDs containing video surveillance footage from the bus on which the decedent had been traveling, which the CTA claimed showed that the decedent had not exhibited any visible signs of distress and also showed that Ferrell had followed the CTA's policies in dealing with the decedent. The CDs were included in the record on appeal, and our description of the contents of the videos is based on our own observations, not those of either party.
¶ 7 The videos, which have no audio, begin at 2:50 a.m. on March 3, 2018. At 2:52 a.m., the decedent enters the bus, walks past the farebox without stopping, and sits down in the second row of seats, directly behind a baby stroller. Between 2:53 a.m. and 2:58 a.m., the decedent appears to engage in conversation with a couple sitting in front of him and drinks three times from a bottle he is holding. The decedent also pours from his bottle into the cup of the man with whom he is conversing. At 2:58 a.m., the decedent stands up, walks to the front of the bus, takes another drink from the bottle, appears to look back at the bus driver, stands in the doorway of the bus, and throws the bottle out the door; the bus is not moving at the time. At 2:59 a.m., the decedent turns as though to go back to his seat but stops and appears to converse with the bus driver; the decedent is swaying as he is standing before the bus driver. The decedent pulls out his cell phone and spends time looking at it. At 3 a.m., the couple with whom the decedent had been conversing come to the front of the bus, and the woman has a conversation with the bus driver. At the end of the conversation, the woman indicates to the decedent that he should proceed toward the bus seats. The decedent moves to sit behind the couple again and appears to converse with them for a few minutes as the bus begins to move along its route. At approximately 3:04 a.m., the decedent leans back in his seat and over the next few minutes gradually slumps further down in the seat until, at 3:12 a.m., he is shown laying across two seats with his legs protruding across the aisle. The decedent is largely motionless during the next few minutes, and as passengers enter the bus, they step over the decedent's legs.
¶ 8 The decedent appears to briefly rouse at 3:25 a.m., when the passenger seated across from him rises from his seat, and the woman in front of him appears to address the decedent and pats his leg several times. The woman again pats the decedent's leg at 3:29 a.m., but the decedent only moves slightly in response. The woman pats the decedent's leg a third time at 3:30 a.m., and the decedent again moves only slightly. At 3:30 a.m., the couple stand up and, at 3:31 a.m., the male in the couple reaches into the decedent's pocket and removes something. The woman exits the bus with the baby stroller from the front, while the man exits the bus from the rear. Another passenger appears to observe the event and, immediately after the couple exits the bus, pulls the cord to request the next stop. The passenger then stands and moves to the front of the bus and appears to briefly converse with the bus driver before exiting the bus at the next stop.
¶ 9 At 3:35 a.m., the bus makes its final stop. The bus driver speaks, then cups his hands around his mouth and speaks again. Approximately five seconds later, the bus driver speaks again, more animatedly. Approximately 20 seconds after the last time the bus driver speaks, a passenger rises from the back of the bus and exits through the rear door. Once that passenger leaves, the bus driver closes the bus doors and drives away; the decedent remains on board, laying across the seats.
¶ 10 At 3:37 a.m., the bus parks at the bus terminal, and the bus driver leaves his seat. He looks toward the back of the bus, then leaves the bus, leaving the bus doors open. The bus driver walks away toward a nearby building, which he enters at approximately 3:38 a.m. He remains in the building for approximately 52 seconds, then leaves the building and walks back toward the bus. At 3:39 a.m., the bus driver appears to make a phone call, continuing to walk toward the bus while on the phone. The phone call appears to last approximately 35 seconds and, by the end of the phone call, the driver is standing at the front of the bus, looking inside. The bus driver continues to look inside the bus for the next several minutes; the decedent is largely motionless but moves slightly several times. At 3:45 a.m., the bus driver walks several feet from the bus and looks around, primarily looking down the road; there appear to be occasional vehicles traveling down a road in the distance, including flashing lights. The bus driver remains in that position for nearly five minutes...
To continue reading
Request your trial