New Lawsuit Filed in Brittanee Drexel Case

ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2023 Nov 02 1:55 PM - RICHLAND - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2023CP4005853
IN THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

COUNTY OF RICHLAND ) FOR THE 5TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
CASE NO: 2023-CP-40-
DAWN M. PLECKAN individually and as

Personal Representative of the ESTATE
OF BRITTANEE DREXEL,
Plaintiff,
v. SUMMONS
(JURY TRIAL DEMANDED)
RAYMOND DOUGLAS MOODY, BAR
HARBOR RESORT, INC., and SMITH
FAMILY PARTNERS, LLC,
Defendants.
TO: THE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANTS:
YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and required to Answer the Complaint in this action, a copy
of which is herewith served upon you, and to serve a copy of your Answer to said Complaint upon
the Plaintiff or Plaintiff’s attorneys, Roy T. Willey, IV and Jonathan M. Riddle at their offices at
32 Ann Street, Charleston, South Carolina 29403, within (30) days after the service hereof,
exclusive of the date of such service and if you fail to Answer the Complaint within the time
aforesaid, Plaintiff will apply to the court for the relief demanded in the Complaint.
Dated at Charleston, South Carolina on November 2, 2023.
POULIN | WILLEY | ANASTOPOULO, LLC
/s/ Jonathan M. Riddle

Jonathan M. Riddle
S.C. Bar No.: 101475
Roy T. Willey, IV
S.C. Bar No.: 101010
32 Ann Street
Charleston, SC 29403
T: (803) 222-2222
E: TeamRiddle@PoulinWilley.com
1
IN THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
COUNTY OF RICHLAND ) FOR THE 5TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
CASE NO: 2023-CP-40-
DAWN M. PLECKAN individually and as

Personal Representative of the ESTATE
OF BRITTANEE DREXEL,
Plaintiff,
v. COMPLAINT
(JURY TRIAL DEMANDED)
RAYMOND DOUGLAS MOODY, BAR
HARBOR RESORT, INC., and SMITH
FAMILY PARTNERS, LLC,
Defendant.
The Plaintiff, complaining of the Defendants, alleges and says as follows:
CASE SYNOPSIS
1. In April, 2009, seventeen-year-old Brittanee Drexel traveled from her home in Rochester,
New York for spring break with adults who were not her legal guardians to Myrtle Beach,
South Carolina.
2
2. Unbeknownst to her, this would not be a weekend of fun and relaxation.
3. While in Myrtle Beach the group was able to check into Bar Harbor Hotel owned and
operated by Bar Harbor Resort Inc., and Smith Family Partners, LLC. This is the hotel
where Brittanee was made to stay, and at all relevant times she was an unaccompanied
minor. The hotel and its operating group profited from this transaction.
4. Upon information and belief, the hotel and its operating group had no policies in place to
detect and alert law enforcement to the presence of unaccompanied minors traveling
without their parents and/or legal guardians. To the extent policies were in place they did
not do so, which would have prevented the rape and murder of Brittanee that was to follow.
5. Sometime in the evening hours of April 25th, 2009, Brittanee departed the beach and her
hotel to visit a friend at the Blue Water Resort. This would be the last time anyone other
than the Defendant Moody would see Brittanee alive.
3
6. Just after 9:00 p.m., Brittanee was walking alone in Myrtle Beach having just left the Blue
Water Resort, when she was approached by a Ford Explorer driven by Defendant Moody,
a registered sex offender.
7. Defendant Moody kidnapped Brittanee and transported her to a remote campsite near
Defendant Moody’s home at the Sunset Motor Lodge in Georgetown, South Carolina.
8. Prior to the morning of April 26, 2009, Defendant Moody held Brittanee against her will
and brutally raped and tortured Brittanee before murdering her.
9. Defendant disposed of Brittanee’s cell phone somewhere in the North Santee River.
10. Defendant Moody buried the lifeless body of Brittanee Drexel in a shallow grave, disposing
of her personal effects and clothing in an attempt to hide his horrific actions.
11. Unknowing of the horrific events that had already occurred, friends, family, public
officials, and community members continued to search for Brittanee for thirteen years.
12. Brittanee’s body was not recovered until May 11, 2022, when Defendant Moody
surrendered to the Georgetown County Sheriff’s Office on a separate charge. At that time,
Defendant Moody confessed to the kidnapping, sexual assault, and murder of seventeen-
year-old Brittanee Drexel.
13. Defendant Moody advised law enforcement as to the exact location of Brittanee’s remains.
After discovering human remains at the location identified by Moody, police were able to
positively identify them as Brittanee Drexel on May 15, 2022.
14. Defendant Moody was ultimately arrested for his crimes and on October 19, 2022,
Defendant Moody plead guilty to murder, kidnapping, and first-degree criminal sexual
misconduct.
4
PARTIES AND JURISDICTION
15. That Plaintiff Dawn Pleckan was duly appointed as Personal Representative of the Estate
of Brittanee Drexel (“Decedent” and/or “Plaintiff”) by order of the Surrogate Court of the
State of New York for the County of Monroe filed February 22, 2023. Exhibit A.
16. That Plaintiff Dawn Pleckan (“Plaintiff”) is a citizen and resident of Lake County, Florida.
17. That Defendant Raymond Douglas Moody (“Defendant”) is an inmate of the South
Carolina Department of Corrections and, upon information and belief, is currently a
resident of Kirkland Correctional Institution in Richland County, South Carolina.
18. Defendant Bar Harbor Resort Inc., (“collectively “Hotel Defendants” with Smith Family
Partners, LLC) is a South Carolina corporation doing business as Bar Harbor Hotel on S.
Ocean Blvd., Myrtle Beach, South Carolina 29577 and whose registered agent is Dennis
Lee Smith, Jr., who can be served with process at 100 North Ocean Blvd., Myrtle Beach,
South Carolina 29577.
19. Defendant Smith Family Partners, LLC, (collectively “Hotel Defendants” with Bar Harbor
Resort Inc.) is a South Carolina limited liability company doing business as Bar Harbor
Hotel on S. Ocean Blvd., in Myrtle Beach and whose registered agent is Dennis L. Smith,
who can be served with process at 104 N. Ocean Blvd., Myrtle Beach, South Carolina
29577.
20. That the negligence, assault, battery, kidnapping, torture, sexual assault, and murder that is
the subject of this action occurred in Georgetown County in the State of South Carolina.
21. This Court has jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter of this action.
SPECIFIC AVERMENTS
FOR A FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION AS TO DEFENDANT MOODY

(Survival Action, S.C. Code § 15-5-90 – Assault)
5
1. Plaintiffs incorporate the above allegations herein in their entirety.
2. That through Defendant Moody’s wrongful conduct, Defendant Moody placed Decedent
in reasonable fear of bodily harm.
3. That as a direct and proximate result of Defendant Moody’s wrongful conduct, Decedent
was injured, endured pain and suffering, suffered mentally and emotionally, and has
otherwise been damaged and injured.
4. That Defendant Moody’s wrongful conduct was intentional and/or the result of willful
misconduct, malice, wantonness, and an entire want of care, raising a presumption of the
Defendant Moody’s conscious and callous indifference to the consequences of such
conduct.
5. That because of the Defendant Moody’s wrongful conduct and the proximate harm
resulting to Plaintiff and Decedent, Plaintiff should be awarded punitive damages in an
amount to be determined by the trier of fact, in order to punish and penalize the Defendant
Moody and to deter the Defendant Moody and others from similar behavior.
6. That Plaintiff is entitled to judgment against the Defendant Moody for actual,
compensatory, and exemplary or punitive damages for Decedent and Plaintiff’s personal
injuries set forth herein in an amount that is fair, just, and reasonable under the
circumstances, plus whatever costs, interest, and attorney fees that Plaintiffs may be
entitled, to be determined by a jury.
FOR A SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION AS TO DEFENDANT MOODY

(Survival Action, S.C. Code § 15-5-90 – Battery)
2. That through his wrongful conduct, Defendant Moody inflicted unlawful, unauthorized
violence on Decedent.
6
conduct.
injuries as set forth herein in an amount that is fair, just, and reasonable under the
FOR A THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION AS TO DEFENDANT MOODY

(Survival Action, S.C. Code § 15-5-90 – Murder)
8. That through Defendant Moody’s wrongful conduct, Defendant Moody intentionally took
the life of Decedent.
was injured, endured pain and suffering, suffered mentally and emotionally, and ultimately
lost her life.
7
conduct.
injuries as set forth herein in an amount that is fair, just, and reasonable under the
FOR A FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION AS TO DEFENDANT MOODY

(Survival Action, S.C. Code § 15-5-90 – Kidnapping & False Imprisonment)
14. That through their wrongful conduct, Defendant Moody kidnapped and held Decedent
against her will and in fear of her life.
15. That as a direct and proximate result of Defendant Moody Moody’s wrongful conduct,
Decedent was injured, endured pain and suffering, suffered mentally and emotionally, and
has otherwise been damaged and injured.
8
conduct.
injuries set forth herein in an amount that is fair, just, and reasonable under the
FOR A FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION AS TO DEFENDANT MOODY

(Survival Action, S.C. Code § 15-5-90 – Sexual Assault)
20. That through Defendant Moody’s wrongful conduct, Defendant Moody repeatedly and
brutally sexually assaulted Decedent.
conduct.
9
injuries and property damages set forth herein in an amount that is fair, just, and reasonable
under the circumstances, plus whatever costs, interest, and attorney fees that Plaintiffs may
be entitled, to be determined by a jury.
FOR A FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION AS TO HOTEL DEFENDANTS

(Negligence)
26. At all relevant times, the Hotel Defendants created a foreseeable zone of risk by creating,
fostering, and maintaining an environment where minors, including Decedent, could stay
on their premises unaccompanied by their legal guardians.
27. This foreseeable zone of risk is ongoing and should have been or was apparent to Hotel
Defendants and was apparent and is apparent to other members of the public, as
evidenced by the publicly available reviews:
10
28.
29. Decedent fell within the foreseeable zone of risk created by the Hotel Defendants’
misconduct alleged above, as she was an unaccompanied minor female who was brutally
kidnapped, raped, and murdered during her stay.
11
30. Having created a foreseeable zone of risk through the actions and omissions described
above, the Hotel Defendants each owed a duty to the unaccompanied minors, including
Decedent, to minimize the risk of harm or otherwise take sufficient precautions to protect
those unaccompanied minors.
31. The Hotel Defendants breached their duty of care by continuing to enable unaccompanied
minors at their hotels. Indeed, rather than acting to minimize the risk of harm to
unaccompanied minors, including Decedent, or taking reasonable steps to protect the
unaccompanied minors, the Hotel Defendants instead accepted substantial sums of
money in exchange for allowing the unaccompanied minors to continue stay at
Defendants’ hotels as occurred with Decedent.
32. The Hotel Defendants further breached their duty of care by failing to:
a. Adequately distribute information to assist employees in identifying
unaccompanied minors;
b. Provide a process for escalating concern for unaccompanied minors within the
organization;
c. Mandate managers, employees, or owners attend training related to unaccompanied
minors;
d. Provide new hire orientation on human rights and corporate responsibility;
e. Provide training and education on unaccompanied minors through webinars,
seminars, conferences, and online portal.
f. Develop and hold or require ongoing training sessions on unaccompanied minors;
and
12
g. Provide checklists, escalation protocols, and other information to property
management staff regarding unaccompanied minors.
33. The actions and omissions of the Hotel Defendants directly, and in a natural and continuous
sequence, caused and contributed to the brutal kidnapping, sexual assault, and murder of
Decedent.
34. That because of the Hotel Defendants wrongful conduct and the proximate harm resulting
to Plaintiff and Decedent, Plaintiffs should be awarded punitive damages in an amount to
be determined by the trier of fact, in order to punish and penalize the Defendant and to
deter the Defendant and others from similar behavior.
35. That Plaintiffs are entitled to judgment against the Defendant for actual, compensatory,
and exemplary or punitive damages for Decedent and Plaintiff’s personal injuries set forth
herein in an amount that is fair, just, and reasonable under the circumstances, plus whatever
costs, interest, and attorney fees that Plaintiffs may be entitled, to be determined by a jury.
FOR A SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Aiding & Abetting as to Hotel Defendants)
37. At all relevant times, the Hotel Defendants created a foreseeable zone of risk by creating,
fostering, maintaining and profiting from an environment where minors, including
Decedent could stay on their premises unaccompanied.
38. Despite knowing of significant risks to unaccompanied minors in the area, including but
not limited to kidnapping, child human trafficking, illicit drug use, and alcohol use, the
Hotel Defendants continued to enable unaccompanied minors at their hotels.
39. Rather than acting to minimize the risk of harm to unaccompanied minors, including
Decedent, or taking reasonable steps to protect the unaccompanied minors, the Hotel
13
Defendants instead accepted substantial sums of money from unaccompanied minors,
including Decedent, in exchange for allowing unaccompanied minors to continue to stay
at Defendants’ hotels.
40. The Hotel Defendants’ actions in doing so provided substantial assistance to
unaccompanied minors, and their companions, as the hotel rooms provided seemingly safe
and anonymous neutral locations, where minors were permitted to stay unaccompanied by
their parents and/or legal guardians.
41. The actions and omissions of the Hotel Defendants directly, and in a natural and continuous
sequence, caused and contributed to the brutal kidnapping, sexual assault, and murder of
Decedent.
42. That because of the Hotel Defendants wrongful conduct and the proximate harm resulting
to Plaintiff and Decedent, Plaintiffs should be awarded punitive damages in an amount to
be determined by the trier of fact, in order to punish and penalize the Defendant and to
deter the Defendant and others from similar behavior.
43. That Plaintiffs are entitled to judgment against the Defendant for actual, compensatory,
and exemplary or punitive damages for Decedent and Plaintiff’s personal injuries set forth
herein in an amount that is fair, just, and reasonable under the circumstances, plus whatever
costs, interest, and attorney fees that Plaintiffs may be entitled, to be determined by a jury.
FOR A SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Wrongful Death, S.C. Code § 15-50-10 et seq.)
45. That as a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct, Decedent suffered
death.
14
46. That as a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ wrongful conduct causing the
Decedent’s death, Plaintiff suffered pecuniary loss; mental shock and suffering; wounded
feelings; grief and sorrow; loss of companionship; and deprivation of the use and comfort
of Decedent’s society, including the loss of her experience, knowledge, and judgment in
managing the affairs of herself and of her beneficiaries.
47. That Defendants’ wrongful conduct was intentional and/or the result of willful misconduct,
malice, wantonness, and an entire want of care, raising a presumption of the Defendants’
conscious and callous indifference to the consequences of such conduct.
48. That because of the Defendants’ wrongful conduct and the proximate harm resulting to
Plaintiff and Decedent, Plaintiffs should be awarded punitive damages in an amount to be
determined by the trier of fact, in order to punish and penalize the Defendants and to deter
the Defendants and others from similar behavior.
49. That Plaintiffs are entitled to judgment against the Defendants for actual, compensatory,
and exemplary or punitive damages for Decedent and Plaintiff’s injuries and damages set
forth herein in an amount that is fair, just, and reasonable under the circumstances, plus
whatever costs, interest, and attorney fees that Plaintiffs may be entitled, to be determined
by a jury.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs pray for judgment against the Defendants for an amount to be
ascertained by the jury at the trial of this action for all damages, punitive and actual, for the
cost and disbursements of this action, both prejudgment and post judgment interest, and for
such other and further relief, in law or in equity, as this court may deem just and proper.
[SIGNATURE PAGE TO FOLLOW]
15
Respectfully submitted,
POULIN | WILLEY | ANASTOPOULO, LLC
s/ Jonathan M. Riddle
Jonathan Riddle, Esquire
S.C. Bar No.: 101475
Roy T. Willey IV, Esquire
S.C. Bar No.:101010
32 Ann Street
Charleston, SC 29403
T: 803- 222-2222
E: teamriddle@poulinwilley.com
Georgetown, South Carolina

November 2, 2023
16

New Lawsuit Filed in Brittanee Drexel Case

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

New Lawsuit Filed in Brittanee Drexel Case

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2023 Nov 02 1:55 PM - RICHLAND - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2023CP4005853

IN THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

DAWN M. PLECKAN individually and as

TO: THE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANTS:

Dated at Charleston, South Carolina on November 2, 2023.

POULIN | WILLEY | ANASTOPOULO, LLC

/s/ Jonathan M. Riddle

DAWN M. PLECKAN individually and as

The Plaintiff, complaining of the Defendants, alleges and says as follows:

than the Defendant Moody would see Brittanee alive.

a registered sex offender.

and brutally raped and tortured Brittanee before murdering her.

year-old Brittanee Drexel.

positively identify them as Brittanee Drexel on May 15, 2022.

Carolina Department of Corrections and, upon information and belief, is currently a

resident of Kirkland Correctional Institution in Richland County, South Carolina.

South Carolina 29577.

FOR A FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION AS TO DEFENDANT MOODY

in reasonable fear of bodily harm.

otherwise been damaged and injured.

Defendant Moody’s conscious and callous indifference to the consequences of such

resulting to Plaintiff and Decedent, Plaintiff should be awarded punitive damages in an

entitled, to be determined by a jury.

FOR A SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION AS TO DEFENDANT MOODY

1. Plaintiffs incorporate the above allegations herein in their entirety.

otherwise been damaged and injured.

Defendant Moody’s conscious and callous indifference to the consequences of such

resulting to Plaintiff and Decedent, Plaintiff should be awarded punitive damages in an

entitled, to be determined by a jury.

FOR A THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION AS TO DEFENDANT MOODY

7. Plaintiffs incorporate the above allegations herein in their entirety.

the life of Decedent.

lost her life.

Defendant Moody’s conscious and callous indifference to the consequences of such

resulting to Plaintiff and Decedent, Plaintiff should be awarded punitive damages in an

entitled, to be determined by a jury.

FOR A FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION AS TO DEFENDANT MOODY

13. Plaintiffs incorporate the above allegations herein in their entirety.

against her will and in fear of her life.

has otherwise been damaged and injured.

resulting to Plaintiff and Decedent, Plaintiff should be awarded punitive damages in an

entitled, to be determined by a jury.

FOR A FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION AS TO DEFENDANT MOODY

19. Plaintiffs incorporate the above allegations herein in their entirety.

brutally sexually assaulted Decedent.

otherwise been damaged and injured.

Defendant Moody’s conscious and callous indifference to the consequences of such

resulting to Plaintiff and Decedent, Plaintiff should be awarded punitive damages in an

be entitled, to be determined by a jury.

FOR A FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION AS TO HOTEL DEFENDANTS

25. Plaintiffs incorporate the above allegations herein in their entirety.

on their premises unaccompanied by their legal guardians.

evidenced by the publicly available reviews:

kidnapped, raped, and murdered during her stay.

those unaccompanied minors.

unaccompanied minors, including Decedent, or taking reasonable steps to protect the

unaccompanied minors, the Hotel Defendants instead accepted substantial sums of

money in exchange for allowing the unaccompanied minors to continue stay at

Defendants’ hotels as occurred with Decedent.

a. Adequately distribute information to assist employees in identifying

c. Mandate managers, employees, or owners attend training related to unaccompanied

d. Provide new hire orientation on human rights and corporate responsibility;

e. Provide training and education on unaccompanied minors through webinars,