IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Civil Division _____________________________________ William Andrew Yockey : 327 Forrest Avenue

: Norfolk, Virginia 23505 : : : K. Y., a minor, by her father and next friend, : William Andrew Yockey : 327 Forrest Avenue : Norfolk, Virginia 23505 : : : Plaintiffs, : : vs. : : Starbucks Corporation : 325 Seventh Street, NW : Washington, DC 20004 : Defendant : ____________________________________:

Case No. 2011 CA 003909 B Hon. John Ramsey Johnson Next Event: Initial Conf. August 19, 2011, 9:30 a.m.

AMENDED COMPLAINT (Negligence; Negligent Hiring, Training & Supervision) INTRODUCTION 1. This is a civil action seeking damages against the Defendant for negligence, and negligent hiring, training and supervision and other tortious conduct all in violation of District of Columbia statutory laws, common law and constitutional law. 2. Jurisdiction of this Court is founded upon D.C. Code 11-921 and 13-423. 3. All of the acts complained of herein occurred in the District of Columbia. 4. The Plaintiffs are residents of the Commonwealth of Virginia and reside at the captioned address in Norfolk, Virginia.

5. The Defendant corporation is actively doing business in the District of Columbia and elsewhere throughout the United States. 6. At all times mentioned herein, Defendants local store manager and employees were acting in concert and as a team having common knowledge of the tortious conduct of one and the other. STATEMENT OF FACTS 7. During the weekend of Saturday, April 23, 2011, William Andrew Yockey together with his wife Lindsay and their minor child, K.Y., came to sightsee in Washington, D.C. While enjoying their sightseeing vacation, they visited the corporate Defendants establishment to relax and enjoy some refreshments. 8. The Defendant Starbucks is located at 325 Seventh Street, NW in the District of Columbia. Inside the store, there are two unisex bathrooms although only one of the bathrooms was operational. William Andrew Yockey and his minor daughter, K.Y. [five-years old] had need to use the unisex toilet. After both father and daughter used the unisex toilet, K.Y. noticed that there was a camera [Coby Digital video camcorder] hidden in the U shaped drain pipe. At the time, the camera was recording, ON and fully operating, taking images and digital pictures while William Andrew Yockey and his daughter were using the toilet and attending to their personal and private needs. 9. William Andrew Yockey immediately reported this humiliating and disgusting matter to the Defendants store manager. The crime was reported to the Metropolitan Police who came to the scene, roped off the area, took photographs

and dusted the camera for prints. The video camcorder was confiscated by the police and taken into custody for their investigation and use as evidence. 10. The Starbucks local store manager, together with the Starbucks employees, at all times mentioned herein were acting in concert with full knowledge of what each and the other were doing in connection with this tortious behavior.

COUNT I (Negligence) 11. Plaintiffs adopt and incorporate the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 10, as if fully set forth herein. 12. The Defendant and its local store employees, acting in concert, failed to timely and periodically inspect the unisex bathroom available and open for public use. Their negligence permitted the camera/video equipment to be on and record/operate continuously. The Defendant also failed to assure that the unisex bathroom was maintained in compliance with the laws, rules, regulations and ordinances of the District of Columbia and failed to adhere and follow its own rules and regulations pertaining to cleaning, maintenance and sanitation requirements pertaining to the public bathroom under its control and supervision. 13. Because members of the public can access and use the unisex bathroom in a Starbucks, and because these members of the public will be able to access these bathrooms in private, it is foreseeable that unknown persons can access these bathrooms and use them for nefarious purposes. Members of the public accessing the unisex bathroom can use the secrecy and privacy afforded by a bathroom in a Starbucks to place a hidden camera, such as the one involved in the facts in this

Complaint, in a position to prey upon other, later, bathroom users. This danger is foreseeable and known to Defendant and its employees and, indeed, has taken place at other Starbucks establishments. 14. As a direct result of the Defendant and its employees conduct, the Plaintiffs suffered, inter alia, permanent and continuing emotional pain and suffering, humiliation, embarrassment and great emotional distress. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendant for compensatory damages in the amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000), plus allowable interest and costs.

COUNT II (Negligent Hiring, Training and Supervision) 15. Plaintiffs adopt and incorporate the allegations of the Complaint paragraphs 1 through 14, as if fully set forth and repeated herein. 16. At all times relevant herein, the Defendants store manager and employees were required to act under the direction and control, and pursuant to the rules, regulations, policies and procedures put in place by the corporate Defendant. 17. The Defendants store manager and its employees acted in contravention to their duty of care to the Plaintiffs, negligently, carelessly and recklessly, by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct and monitor directions pertaining to the store bathroom facilities including their duties to inspect, clean and protect the safety and privacy of store invitees while using the bathroom facilities.

18. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of the Defendant and its employees, the Plaintiffs were wrongfully and tortiously subjected to extreme humiliation, embarrassment, loss of personal dignity heretofore alleged in the proceeding paragraphs of this Complaint. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendant for compensatory damages in the amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000), plus allowable interest and costs. JURY DEMAND The Plaintiffs demand a trial by jury on all issues so triable. Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Hubert M. Schlosberg___________ Hubert M. Schlosberg, Esquire #28290 4626 Wisconsin Ave., NW Suite 300 Washington, DC 20016 (202) 843-3500

/s/ Matthew G. Kaiser____________ Matthew G. Kaiser # 486272 The Kaiser Law Firm PLLC 910 17th Street NW Suite 800 Washington, DC 20006 (202) 640-2850

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Plaintiffs Amended Complaint was served this June 17, 2011, electronically to the following:

Christopher E. Hassell Felicity A. McGrath 1233 20th Street, N.W. Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036

/s/ Hubert M. Schlosberg____ Hubert M. Schlosberg, Esquire