Orginal - Court 2nd copy - Paint Approved, SAO {eteopy-Deendant 2rd copy - Reta STATE OF MICHIGAN CASE NO. JUDICIAL DISTRICT “No im JUDICIAL CRCUIT ‘SUMMONS 07421 county . Touartoaaress Tour Taephone no 180 Ottawa Ave, NW, Grand Rapids, MI 49503 616.532-5220 PSR am, oar, and TRENT Ta Batons na, SISS, an IRGRORE TS Matthew Hoffman, as Personal Representative ofthe Thresholds, ne Estate of Rober Hoffman, Deceased |4255 Kalamazoo Ave SE 1522 N, Cleaver Steet v- | Grand Rapids, MI 49508 Chicago, IL 60642 616-581-9481 Pains atomay, bar no. address, and Wlephone ro. F, WILLIAM MCKEE (P34347) Warmer Norcross + Judd LLP 150 Ottawa Avenue NW, Ste, 1500 (Grand Rapids, MI 49503 P: (616) 752-2146 / F: (616) 752-2500 NSON | Instructions: Check the items below that apply to you and provide any ‘Submit this form tothe court clerk along with your complaint and, if necessary @ case inventory addendum (MC 21). The summons section wil be completed by the court clerk. Domestic Relations Case There are no pending or resolved cases within the jurisdiction of the family division of the circuit court involving the family or family members of the person(s) who are the subject of the complaint. i There is one or more pending or resolved cases within the jurisdiction of the family division of the circuit court involving the family or family members of the person(s) who are the subject of the complaint. | have separately filed a completed confidential case inventory (MC 21) listing those cases. Otis unknown if there are pending or resolved cases within the jurisdiction of the family division of the circuit court involving the family or family members of the person(s) who are the subject of the complaint. Civil Case This is a business case in which all or part of the action includes a business or commercial dispute under MCL 600.8035, [IMDHHS and a contracted health plan may have a right to recover expenses in this case. | certify that notice and a copy of the complaint will be provided to MDHHS and (if applicable) the contracted health plan in accordance with MCL 400.106(4). [21 There is no other pending or resolved civil action arising out of the same transaction or occurrence as alleged in the ‘complaint. Ci Acivil action between these parties or other parties arising out of the transaction or occurrence alleged in the complaint has been previously filed in Cithis court, 1] Court, where itwas given case number ‘and assigned to Judge The action Clremains Cis no longer pending Summons section completed by cout clerk (SUMMONS NOTICE TO THE DEFENDANT: Inthe name ofthe people ofthe State of Michigan you are noted 1, You are being sued. 2. YOU HAVE 21 DAYS after receiving this summons and a copy of the complaint to file a written answer with the court and serve a copy on the other party or take other lawful action with the court (28 days if you were served by mail or you were served outside of Michigan). 2. youd not answer or take oor acon whi the time allowed, judgment may be entered against you forte ret demanded in the complaint. 4. ttyou require aocommodations to use the court because of a dsabily orf you requ a foreign language interpreter to help you fully participate in court proceedings, please contact the court immediately to make arrangements, mene aan oa AUG 9 2 ee NOV 0.1. 2023 ISA POSTHUMUS LYONS ] “THis summons i invalé unless Served on or before Wi expration dale. This document must bo Sealed by the Seal Of the Cour. mc o1 (3/23) SUMMONS MCR 1.109(0), MOR 2.102(B), MCR 2.103, MCR 2.104, MCR 2.105Summons. (329) PROOF OF SERVICE. TO PROCESS SERVER: You must serve the summons and complaint and file proof of service with the court clerk before the expiration date on the summons. If you are unable to complete service, you must return this original and all copies to the court clerk, ‘CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE / NONSERVICE Oiserved Cipersonally — Ciby registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, and delivery restricted to the the addressee (copy of return receipt attached) a copy of the summons and the complaint, together with the attachments listed below, on: Ihave attempted to serve a copy of the summons and complaint, together with the attachments listed below, and have been unable to complete service on: Name [Bato and ie series [Pace oradaress oF sence [atachmenis (any) (C§itam a sheriff, deputy sherif, bailif, appointed court officer or attorney for a party. (1am a legally competent adult who is not a party or an officer of a corporate party. | declare under the penalties of perjury that this certificate of service has been examined by me and that its contents are true to the best of my information, knowledge, and belief. Sanvce Tee ies vaveed Fee Signature is is inaarecladarens Too ilies Wavored — Fao TOTAL FEE Fame (Wear Br s is s ‘ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE | acknowledge that | have received service of a copy of the summons and complaint, together with on. ‘Fitechinnis (any) Daw andame on behalf of Signatare Raame (pe or pant MCL. 600.1910, MCR 2.104, MCR 2.105,STATE OF MICHIGAN IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF KENT MATTHEW HOFFMAN, as Personal Case No: 23: 07 42 1-no Representative of the Estate of Hon. “ ROBERT HOFFMAN, Deceased, CURT A. BENSON Plaintiff, (P-38891) vs. THRESHOLDS, INC., Defendant. JONATHAN R. MARKO (P72450), Attomey for Plaintiff Marko Law, PLLC 220 W. Congress, 4 Floor Detroit, MI 48226 P: (313) 777-7529 / F: (313) 771-5728 jon@markolaw.com F, WILLIAM MCKEE (P34347) Attorney for Plaintiff Warner Norcross + Judd LLP 150 Ottawa Avenue NW, Ste. 1500 Grand Rapids, MI 49503 P: (616) 752-2146 / F: (616) 752-2500 bmckee@wnj.com There is no other civil action between these parties arising out of the same transaction or occurrence as alleged in this Complaint pending in this Court, nor has any such action been previously filed and dismissed or transferred after having been assigned to a judge, nor do I know of any other civil action, not between these parties, arising out of the same transaction or occurrence as alleged in this Complaint that is either pending or was previously filed and dismissed, transferred or otherwise disposed of after having been assigned to a Judge in this Court. 1 ~~ PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND Hoffinan v. Thvesholds Jon R. Marko, Esq. Case No. F. William McKee, Esq,5 q 5 PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND Plaintiff, MATTHEW HOFFMAN, as Personal Representative of the Estate of ROBERT HOFFMAN, by and through his attorneys, MARKO LAW, PLLC and WARNER NORCROSS + JUDD LLP, for his Complaint against Defendant states as follows: PARTIES LL. Defendant Thresholds, Inc. (hereafter “Defendant”), at all times relevant to this complaint, was located in Grand Rapids, Michigan in Kent County. 2. Robert Hoffman (hereafter “Robert™), by and through Plaintiff Matthew Hoffman, as the personal representative of his estate, was at all times relevant hereto a resident of the County of Kent, state of Michigan, JURISDICTION AND VENUE 3. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to MCL 600.605, which gives the circuit court original jurisdiction. The Court also has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because it is located in Michigan. The amount of controversy exceeds $25,000. 4. Venue is proper because the original injury occurred in Kent County, Michigan, and all parties—at all times relevant to this complaint—resided in or were located in Kent County. FACTS 5. Defendant operates a group home for people with developmental disabilit — PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND. Hoffman v. Thresholds Jon R, Marko, Esa. Case No. F. William McKee, Esq,5 > & SM) Marko LAW 6. Robert was one of the residents of Defendant's group home. 7. Robert had severe autism, cerebral palsy, and cognitive impairments, as well as pronounced physical limitations. 8. Robert wholly depended on Defendant and its employees for care and assistance with basic day-to-day activities. 9. For example, Robert relied on Defendant to run his baths and to ass getting in and out of these baths, as well. 10. On the morning of February 21, 2022—sometime between 7:30 AM and 8:00. AM—Mahogany Johnson, an employee of Defendant, ran a bath for Robert. 11. Johnson assisted Robert in getting into the bathtub and left him alone for an extended period of time. 12. Johnson stated that she checked the temperature of the bath water and claimed that the water was “luke warm” and “not hot.” Jt wos fot tke ctf and she stated "No, was hike warm She stated she hon went to assist another resident gel nc the ber. She elated she fel the wate, ax she aways dows belore anyone lakes abath or shower, and sated l was war ul hot PoL =| Excerpt from an Incident Report Form written by Officer Rillema, a police officer with the Grand Rapids Police Department 13. At 8:01 AM, Johnson called emergency services after she found Robert a fetal position making a choking noise” in the bathtub. Ms. Johnson stated she left Resident Ain the bathtub alone with the bathroom door open to soak. Ms. Johnson stated she transitioned to the “other side of the house to assist another resident” while Resident A soaked in the bathtub. Ms. Johnson stated approximately “five minutes later" she returned to the bathroom to check on Resident A and observed Resident A "in a fetal position making a choking noise”. Excerpt from LARA’s Special Investigation Report into Rob's death 3 PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND Hoffman v. Thresholds Jon R. Marko, Esq, Case No, F. William MeKee, Esq$M) MARKO LAW 14. However, Johnson—after finding Robert in that perilous state—called her boss before calling 911. 15. Despite Johnson's claims that the water was not hot, her 911 call implies otherwise. 71 QI: Okay. And is he changing color? 72 Al: Uh, he's red 73 A: Yes, the bottom half of his body is red. Excerpt from the transcript of the 911 dispatch call 16. When first responders arrived, they took Robert out of the tub and onto his bed to administer CPR, which they did for approximately 30 minutes. 17. D 1g CPR, “the skin on Robert's back began peeling off.” off. Once at the hospital, @ physician at the hospital concluded that Rabert was in scalding water which is evi Excerpt from a document referring the case of Robert's death to Detective Sean Wolf nd not responsive, When EMS and LE arrived, they started CPR While doing CPR, the sin on Robert's back sen) 18, After being administered CPR, Robert was taken to the hospital. 19. A doctor with the intensive care unit noted that Robert “was severely burned on his legs, groin area, and buttocks, thought to be caused by hot water from the bathtub faucet.” “cord the yn apoko wih nthe lve care w be ald a ro ceased wan severely Bisie Ws aps Wa ees, and BOOT ‘Teagna be one by htwater Vom the bali avs, Tho burpyane wee coved. He was Vanslred th OU, whee his os pressure Aarti. He was made comlor cae on he meng of 222 and pronounced daceased a C859 hou Excerpt from an Investigator Narrative from the Kent County Medical Examiner's Office 20. At the hospital, Robert's “feet, arms, hips and buttocks were red and blistered.” 4 ~~ PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND Hoffman v. Thresholds Jon R. Marko, Esq, Case No. F. William McKee, Esq.§ 8 : a $M) MARKO LAW 21. Robert's skin was also “sloughing off easily.” 22. Doctors in the emergency room concluded that “the water would have to be very hot for these injuries to have occurred.” [aber was sm the waura bay when | arived atthe hospital. His fet, ams, hips and buttoeks were fe and bstered. The skin was sioughing of easy. Stat at Bttewort, casing ER Or BM though ne water wows have to be very het fr these juries to heve occurred. Further tests showed Rober had @ preumathorax, tKely from CPR. ithe made through, Or thought brain damage was ily cue to now long he was without oxygen (lore CPR was started) Excerpt from a follow-up police report written by Officer Martin with the Grand Rapids Police Department 23. On February 22, 2022, at approximately 8:53 AM—afier just over 24 hours of unimaginable suffering—Robert tragically died in the hospital. 24, Robert’s death was not only avoidable, but easily avoidable had Defendant acted in a manner even half-way reasonable, which it did not. 25. Defendant made a myriad of negligent decisions in its care for Robert, and had any one of these negligent actions not occurred Robert may still be alive today. 26. First, Johnson needlessly delayed emergency treatment to Robert by calling her boss before calling 911 after finding Robert having what was clearly a medical emergency in the bath. 27. This completely pointless and avoidable delay could have proved decisive in whether emergency treatment failed or succeeded. 28. Johnson was a new employee, and Defendant completely and utterly failed to adequately train her. 5 PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND Hoffman v. Thresholds Jon R. Marko, Esq. Case No. F, William McKee, Esq,i $M) MARKO LAW 29. Defendant’s abysmal training of Johnson and others almost certainly contributed to Johnson needlessly delaying emergency treatment to Robert by calling her boss instead of 911, as she was unfamiliar with even the most elementary emergency procedures. 30. In fact, Johnson did not even know what a basic emergency treatment device like a defibrillator was at the time of the emergency, as evidenced by the call she made to oul. 8 Oi All right? And if there is « defibrillator available, send someone to get it now 90 in case we need it later. ls) Al Yeah, what's. lor a. a defibrillator? | don't los Qi AED. loa Al Okay jos a Or |, uh, I'm not sure to be honest, ma'am, We're both new. Like I said, my [96 manager, he was - he's on - he - he's on his way in, but - Excerpt from the transcript of the 911 dispatch call 31. When police tested the water that came out of Defendant's faucet, the thermometer read 128.1°F. 6 PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND Hoffman v. Thresholds Jon R. Marko, Esq. Case No. F. William McKee, Esq,5M) MaRKOLAW Photo depicting the temperature test Police conducted on Defendant's water 32. Defendant, through its negligence, not only failed to care for Robert—as he relied on them to do and as they had a duty to do—but allowed him to die in one of the most gruesome ways imaginable: being scalded to death. 33. Robert could not get in or out of the bath on his own, so he was left by Defendant in the scalding water until he eventually lost consciousness and succumbed to his injuries one day later. 34, The Michigan Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs (hereafter “LARA”) requires, to be licensed in the state of Michigan, that a facility’s water temperature must be between 105°F and 120°F, so as to avoid scalding and dangerous burns. 1 PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND Hoffman v. Thresholds Jon R, Marko, Esq. Case No, F, William McKee, Esq.35. LARA found that Defendant violated this rule by having its water temperatures above 120°P. 36. Defendant’s own water heater contained two very explicit warnings to this same effect, which—if heeded—would have prevented Robert's death. 37. First, the warming label expressly cautioned that “[wJater temperatures over 125°F can cause severe burns instantly or death from scalds.” 38. Moreover. the warning immediately below this stated that “[e]hildren, disabled and elderly are at highest risk of being scalded.” Photo depicting warnings on Defendant's water heater 39, Defendant had actual and/or ostensible knowledge of its employees’ and/or staffs’ and/or agents’ care of Robert at Defendant's group home. a PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND Hoffman v. Thresholds Jon R. Marko, Esq. Case No. F. William McKee, Esq,3 i = =< Ss ° ra = ™ 40. Defendant owed Robert duties of care and safety while he was under Defendant’s care, custody, and control. 41, Robert relied wholly on Defendant to provide him this care, and Defendant breached these duties it owed to Robert through its egregiously negligent behavior. 42. Asa consequence of Defendant's failure to meet its duties it owed Robert, he died a premature, gruesome, and entirely avoidable death. 43. Plaintiff has suffered immense damages from Robert's premature death, including but not limited to: a. Emotional suffering from Robert's horrifying and prolonged manner of death; b. Loss of society and companionship with Robert; c. Burial, funeral, and medical expenses; and d. Other such damages arising out of the appalling negligence that led to Robert’s death. LICENSING RULES FOR SMALL ADULT FOSTER CARE GROUP HOMES 44. Asa Licensed Adult Group Home for those with developmental disabilities, Defendant was responsible for adhering to the statutes and/or safety regulations regarding the Licensing Rules for Small Adult Foster Care Group Homes, particularly the following: a, R 400.14303 — Resident care; licensee responsibilities Hoffnan v. Thresholds Jon R. Marko, Esq. Case No. F, William McKee, Esq,3 JM) MarKOLAW i, R-400.14303(2) ~ A licensee shall provide supervision, protection, and personal care as defined in the act and as specified in the resident's written assessment plan. b. R 400.14304 — Direct care staff, qualifications and training i. R 400.14304(2) — Direct care staff shall possess all of the following qualifications: 1. R 400.14304(2)(a) — Be suitable to meet the physical, emotional, intellectual, and social needs of each resident. 2. R 400.14304(2)(b) — Be capable of appropriately handling emergency situations. ¢. R 400,14305 — Resident protection i, R-400.14305(3) — A resident shall be treated with dignity and his, or her personal needs, including protection and safety, shall be attended to at all times in accordance with the provisions of the act. CAUSES OF ACTION COUNT I Negligence & Gross Negligence 45. Plaintiff, by reference, incorporates the preceding paragraphs of his Complaint as though fully set forth herein. lo PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND Jon R. Marko, Esq. Hoffman v. Thresholds F. William McKee, Esq, Case No.3 i 46. Defendants owed certain duties to its residents, and to Robert in particular, to provide a safe residential living facility. 47. Defendant breached this duty through its flagrant negligence in a multitude of ways, including but not limited to: a, Failing to protect Robert and keep him safe; b. Failing to ensure that its employees were adequately trained in both caring for its residents and dealing with medical emergencies; c. Failing to ensure that the water temperature in the group home was within the safe, legally-mandated range, so that its residents—who were of diminished capacity and depended on Defendant for care—would not be injured by scalding water; and d. Scalding Robert to death. 48. Defendant is also vicariously liable under respondeat superior for the actions of its actual/ostensible agents. 49. Defendant’s actions in failing to protect Robert and to ensure he was safe, allowing him to be scalded to death in his bathtub—with full knowledge that he relied on Defendant for care and that he could not get in or out of the bath by himself—violate the aforementioned Licensing Rules for Small Adult Foster Care Group Homes that Defendant was supposed to adhere to ul PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND Hoffman v. Thresholds Jon R. Marko, Esq. Case No. F, William McKee, Esq,50. Defendant’s actions were grossly negligent and undertaken in a reckless disregard for whether injury would result. 51. These actions are the most immediate cause, as well as the proximate cause, of Plaintiff's injuries. 52. Defendant's negligence/gross negligence has caused Plaintiff to suffer damages from Robert’s tragic, gruesome, and untimely death. COUNT II Direct Negligence 53. Plaintiff, by reference, incorporates the preceding paragraphs of his Complaint as though fully set forth herein. 54. Defendant had a special relationship with its residents and its employees, which created a duty whereby Defendant was required to provide a safe living environment : for Robert, and to act in a prudent and safe manner. 55. Defendant breached the duties owed to Robert by negligently hiring, supervising, training, retaining, and/or monitoring Defendant's employees 56. Defendant also breached the duties it owed to Robert by failing to ensure that the water at the home was maintained at a safe temperature. 57. Defendant knew or should have reasonably expected to know that failure to competently train, supervise, retain, and hire employees and to maintain safe water would result in injuries to a resident, including Robert. 12 PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND Hoffman v. Thresholds Jon R. Marko, Esq. Case No. F. William McKee, Esq,= = a °o xz a = 58. Defendant's blatantly negligent conduct violated the Licensing Rules for Small Adult Foster Care Group Homes that Defendant was subject to by exposing Robert to wholly unnecessary risk of harm. 59. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant’s negligence and/or gross negligence, Plaintiff has suffered injuries resulting from Robert's untimely and easily avoidable death DAMAGES 1. Plaintiff, by reference, incorporates the preceding paragraphs of his Complaint as though fully set forth herein. 2. The wrongful acts and/or omissions, neglect, and/or fault of Defendant and its employees/agents as set forth above resulted in injuries to Plaintiff, including but not limited to: a. Extreme pain and suffering and mental health and emotional damages resulting from Defendant’s acts and omissions, up to and including Robert’s untimely and tragic death: b. Loss of comfort, society, and companionship; c. Reasonable medical, funeral, and burial expenses; d. Compensatory damages; e. All damages allowed under the Wrongful Death Act, including loss of society and companionship; and 1B PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND Hoffinan v, Thresholds Jon R. Marko, Esq, Case No. F. William MeKee, Esq,f. Any and all other damages to be discovered throughout the course of litigation. 3. Asa direct and proximate cause of Defendant's conduct, Plaintiff has been damaged in the manner outlined above. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Matthew Hoffman, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Robert Hoffman, respectfully requests that this Honorable Court enter judgment 2 : on Plaintiff's causes of actions in a sum that is just, including attorney fees, costs, and : exemplary damages. 5 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL a Plaintiff MA1 EW HOFFMAN, as Personal Representative of the Estate of @ ROBERT HOFFMAN, by and through his attorneys, MARKO LAW, PLLC and 4 WARNER NORCROSS + JUDD LLP, hereby demands a trial by jury in the above- captioned matter. Respectfully submitted, 4s/ Jonathan R. Marko Jonathan R. Marko (P72450) MARKO LAW, PLLC Attomey for Plaintiff 220 W. Congress, 4" Floor Detroit, MI 48226 P: (313) 777-7529 / jon@markolaw.com : (313) 771-5785 14 PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND Hoffman v. Thresholds Jon R. Marko, Esq Case No, F. William McKee, Esq,AND F. William McKee (P34347) WARNER NORCROSS + JUDD LLP Attorney for Plaintiff 150 Ottawa Avenue NW, Ste. 1500, Grand Rapids, MI 49503 P: (616) 752-2146 / F: (616) 752-2500 bmekee@wnj.com Dated: August 2, 2023 2o0ars78-2 15 PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND Hoffman v. Thresholds Jon R. Marko, Esq. Case No, F. William McKee, Esq.