Matthew Heiden Lawsuit

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE EIGHTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
DUPAGE COUNTY, ILLINOIS

Candice Adams
e-filed in the 18th Judicial Circuit Court
LA URIE HEID EN, as Independent DuPage County
ENVELOPE: 25325245
Administrator of the Estate of MATTHEW 2023LA001266
FILEDATE: 11/22/2023 3:37 PM
HEIDEN, deceased, Date Submitted: 11/22/2023 3:37 PM
Date Accepted: 11/27/2023 8:20 AM
SK
Plaintiff,
V.
VILLAGE OF WESTMONT, an Illinois

Municipal Corporation,
STEPHEN MAY, P.E., a licensed professional

engineer, in his individual capacity and as the
Village of Westmont Manager, 2023LA001266
Case No.:
INTERGOVERNMENTAL RISK
MANAGEMENT AGENCY, an unincorporated
association formed under the Illinois Jury Trial Demanded
Intergovernmental Cooperation Act,
MUELLER WATER PRODUCTS, INC., a

Delaware Corporation,
MUELLER CO., a Delaware limited liability

company, and
M.E. SIMPSON COMPANY, INC., an Indiana

Corporation,
Defendants.
COMPLAINT AT LAW
Plaintiff Laurie Heiden, as Independent Administrator of the Estate of Matthew Heiden,
deceased, by her attorneys Cooney & Conway, P.C., for her Complaint at Law against Defendants,
states as follows:
NATURE OF THE ACTION
1. This action arises out of the tragic death of Matthew Heiden ("Matthew") in
Westmont, Illinois, on February 23, 2023.
2. On that day, the Village of Westmont knowingly and intentionally sent Matthew,
the 20-year-old most junior full-time employee of the Water Department, into a known dangerous
confined space made even more deadly by the full force of municipal-strength water pressure, to
work on a non-isolated, fully energized, water main valve, without even the most basic plan,
training, safety equipment, support, or supervision.
3. As a result, Matthew "died of drowning due to submersion in a flooded water main
vault following cutting of a water main pipe and subsequent entrapment of the right upper
extremity within the pipe" according to the DuPage County Coroner's Chief Forensic Pathologist,
Dr. Hiliary S. McElligott.
4. Matthew fought for his life as he lay trapped just a few feet under the sidewalk in
his hometown where he recently graduated from its only high school. As the injuries described in
the Coroner's report show, Matthew's final moments were violently horrific as he struggled to
save his own life. Pinned to the floor of the water valve vault, Matthew was forced to watch while
he and his workspace became engulfed by the relentless flow of municipal water flowing freely
from the Village's water main piping all while the sunlight shined through the manhole opening
only a few feet above.
5. A few months before Matthew's tragic death the Illinois Department of
Labor/Illinois OSHA cited the Village of Westmont for serious violations of Illinois's Health and
Safety laws the same laws that would be violated again in February 2023 leading to Matthew's
death.
2
6. In an October 2021 citation, the Illinois Department of Labor/Illinois OSHA
foretold of the tragedy that would unfold on February 23, 2023, when it found the Village of
Westmont:
a. "water department employees are expected to enter into confined spaces

when performing certain job duties, without being properly trained to
perform these tasks," in violation of29 CFR 1910.146(g)(2); and
b. "failed to provide documentation that employees have been trained in the

purpose and function of the energy control program and fail[ ed] to ensure
that the program is understood by the employees. As a result, the employees
were exposed to energy control hazards," in violation of 29 CFR
1910.147( c)(7)(i).
7. The Village of Westmont was cited, agam, by the Illinois Department of
Labor/Illinois OSHA on January 19, 2022, for failing to provide proof that it had properly abated
the October 2021 citation.
8. On June 26, 2023, upon completion of its investigation into Matthew's death, the
Illinois Department of Labor/Illinois OSHA cited the Village of Westmont for multiple violations
oflaw including two willful violations of the law. One willful violation relating to permit-required
confined spaces, and another for willfully failing to develop and implement the means, procedures,
and practices necessary for safe permit space entry operations, including, but not limited to
isolating the permit space.
9. Matthew's death undeniably could have-and should have-been prevented. As
set forth in more detail below, each of the Defendants caused, or substantially contributed to
causing, Matthew's death, and are jointly and severally liable therefore.
PARTIES
10. Plaintiff Laurie Heiden is a resident of Illinois, and she was a resident of Illinois at
all times relevant herein.
3
11. Laurie Heigen was appointed Independent Administrator of the Estate of Matthew
Heiden on July 6, 2023, by the Eighteenth Judicial Circuit, DuPage County. That order is attached
as Exhibit A.
12. The Village of Westmont is a domestic municipal corporation authorized and
organized under the laws of the state of Illinois.
13. Stephen May is a Professional Engineer licensed by the State of Illinois (license
number 062046522) who previously served as the Director of Public Works for Defendant Village
of Westmont and who currently serves as the Village Manager for Defendant Village of Westmont.
14. Stephen May is a citizen of Illinois.
15. The Intergovernm ental Risk Management Agency ("IRM A") is a domestic
unincorporated association authorized and organized under the law of the state of Illinois, namely
the Illinois Intergovernm ental Cooperation Act, 5 ILCS 220/1 et seq. with more than 70 members
(including the Village of Westmont).
16. IRMA is a member-owned, self-governed public risk pool that exists "solely to
provide high-quality risk management services" to public entities.
1 7. IRMA' s mission is "to provide reliable protection against human and financial
losses through a self-directed and proactive partnership which delivers high quality risk
management services that are professionally managed for the members at a cost that is
competitively priced."
18. IRMA further purports to provide "litigation management, risk prevention and
training services at a substantial savings" that have "translated into lower rates and increased return
on investment" for its members.
4
19. Mueller Water Products, Inc. is a foreign for-profit public (NYSE: MWA)
corporation authorized and organized under the laws of the state of Delaware. It conducts business
in the state of Illinois, DuPage County, Illinois, and with the citizens thereof.
20. Mueller Co., LLC is a foreign for-profit wholly-owned subsidiary of Mueller Water
Products, Inc. authorized and organized under the laws of the state of Delaware. It conducts its
business in the state of Illinois, and with citizens thereof through the sale of water control
equipment. Mueller Co., LLC is authorized to transact business in the state of Illinois.
21. M.E. Simpson Company, Inc. is a foreign for-profit corporation authorized and
organized under the laws of the state oflndiana. It systematically makes contact of the kind alleged
herein with the state of Illinois, DuPage County, Illinois, and the citizens thereof. M.E. Simpson
Company, Inc. is authorized to transact business in the state of Illinois.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
22. All parties are citizens of the state of Illinois or an entity which conducts business
in Illinois.
23. At all relevant times, all parties made contact with the state of Illinois, all parties
purposefully availed themselves of the privileges and protections of the laws of Illinois, and the
transactions and tortious acts alleged herein occurred in Illinois.
24. Therefore, Illinois courts may exercise jurisdiction over the instant claims against
the Defendants pursuant to the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure Section 2-209.
25. IRMA is an unincorporated association authorized and organized under the law of
the state of Illinois with numerous members that are residents of DuPage County, Illinois,
including for purposes of venue under the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure Section 2-101.
5
26. M.E. Simpson Company, Inc., a foreign corporate entity authorized to transact
business in the state of Illinois that transacts business in DuPage County, Illinois, is a resident of
Cook County, Illinois for purposes of venue under the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure Section 2-
102(a).
27. DuPage County is a proper venue under the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure Section
2-101, as DuPage County is the residence of Defendants.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
The Illinois Workers' Compensation Act
28. The Illinois Workers' Compensation Act ("the Act"), 820 ILCS 305 et seq.,
imposes liability without fault upon Illinois employers and, in return, prohibits common lawsuits
by employees. See Meerbrey v. Marshall Field & Co., Inc., 139 Ill.2d 455,462 (1990). Section
5(a) of the Act, thus, traditionally bars common law or statutory recovery of damages against
employers.
29. The Act's "exclusivity provision" does not, however, apply to bar common law
causes of action for injuries that an employer themself inflicts, commands, or expressly authorizes.
See Collier v. Wagner Castings Co., 81 111.2d 229, 239-40 (1980). In other words, employers'
intentional actions are not preempted by the Act's exclusivity provision. See, e.g., Fredericks v.
LibertyMut. Ins. Co., 255 Ill. App. 3d 1029, 1031 (5th Dist. 1994) (citingMeerbrey v. Marshall
Field & Co., 139 Ill.2d 455,463 (1990)).
30. The Act's "exclusivity provision," likewise, does not apply to bar common law
causes of action against an employer for injuries which do not arise from employment. Collier,
81 Ill.2d at 237.
6
31. Fundamental contract law prohibits-and, indeed, invalidates-employment
"requir[ing] someone to do something illegal." See Daniels v. Venta Corporation, 2022 IL App
(2d) 210244, / 2425 ( citing, inter alia, Frydman v. Horn Eye Center, Ltd., 286 Ill. App. 3d 853,
859 (1st Dist. 1997); Ransburg v. Haase, 224 Ill. App. 3d 681, 684-85 (3d Dist. 1992) ("courts
will not enforce a contract involving" conduct that violates "legislation that expressly prohibits the
carrying on of the particular activity ... when the legislation was enacted for the protection of the
public."); Marriage of Newton, 2011 IL App (1st) 090683, ,r 39 (agreement, acquiescence, or
consent to illegal directive is irrelevant, as one cannot contractually consent to carrying out illegal
acts)).
The Federal Occupational Safety & Health Act
32. In 1970, Congress passed and President Nixon signed into law the Occupational
Safety and Health Act (the "Federal OSH Act") to "assure safe and healthful working conditions
for working men and women; by authorizing enforcement of the standards developed under the
Act; by assisting and encouraging the States in their efforts to assure safe and healthful working
conditions; by providing for research, information, education, and training in the field of
occupational safety and health; and for other purposes." PL 91-596, December 29, 1970, 84 Stat.
1590.
33. Under the Federal OSH Act, "[e]ach employer shall furnish to each of [its]
employees' employment and a place of employment which are free from recognized hazards that
are causing or are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to his employees." 29 U.S.C. §
654(a).
34. To those ends, the United States Secretary of Labor is authorized by Congress to
enact national safety standards by regulation. See 29 U.S.C. § 655.
7
35. The United States Department of Labor, pursuant to its rulemaking authority, has
enacted regulations applicable to the Village of Westmont and its water department.
36. Namely, 29 CFR 1910.132(d)(l) requires that employers "shall assess the
workplace to determine if hazards are present, or are likely to be present, which necessitate the use
of personal protective equipment (PPE). If such hazards are present, or likely to be present, the
employer shall" have each employee use "the types of PPE that will protect the affected employee
from the hazards identified in the hazards assessment."
37. 29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2) requires that employers "shall verify that the required
workplace hazard assessment has been performed through a written certification that identifies the
workplace [has been] evaluated; the person certifying that the evaluation has been performed; the
date(s) of the hazard assessment; and, which identifies the document as a certification of hazard
assessment."
38. 29 CFR 1910.132(£)1) requires that employers "shall provide training to each
employee who is required by this section to use PPE. Each such employee shall be trained to know
at least the following: *When PPE is necessary; *What PPE is necessary; *How to properly don,
doff, adjust, and wear PPE; *The limitations of the PPE; and, *The proper care, maintenance,
useful life and disposal of the PPE."
39. 29 CFR 1910.146(g) requires that employers that have determined their workplace
contains permit-required confined spaces must provide training "so that all employees whose work
is regulated by this section [on permit-required confined spaces] acquire the understanding,
knowledge and skills necessary for the safe performance of the[ir] duties," training that "shall
establish employee proficiency in the duties required by this section." See also 29 CFR
1910.146( c ). This training must be provided "[b ]efore the employee is first assigned duties under
8
this section; [b ]efore there is a change in assigned duties; [ w ]henever there is a change in permit
space operations that presents a hazard about which an employee has not previously been trained;"
and"[ w ]henever the employer has reason to believe that there are deviations from the permit space
entry procedures required." 29 CFR 1910.146(g)(2).
40. 29 CFR 1910.146( d)(3 )(iii) requires that those employers shall "[ d]evelop and
implement the means, procedures, and practices necessary for safe permit space entry operations,
including, but not limited to, the following: *** Isolating the permit space."
41. 29 CFR 1910.146(e)(l) requires that those employers "shall document the
completion of measures required by paragraph (d)(3) of this section [regarding confined space
entry] by preparing an entry permit" "[b ]efore entry is authorized."
42. 29 CFR 1910.146(k)(3)(i) requires, where permit-required confined space entry is
authorized, that each "authorized entrant shall use a chest or full body harness, with a retrieval line
attached at the center of the entrant's back near shoulder level, above the entrant's head, or at
another point ... for the successful removal of the entrant."
43. 29 CFR 1910.147(c)(7)(i) requires that those employers "shall provide training to
ensure that the purpose and function of the energy control program are understood by employees
and that the knowledge and skills required for the safe application, usage, and removal of the
energy controls are acquired by employees."
The Illinois Occupational Safety & Health Act
44. The Illinois Occupational Safety & Health Act (the "Illinois OSH Act"), likewise,
requires employers within its purview to "provide reasonable protection to the lives, health, and
safety of its employees and must furnish to each of its employees employment and a workplace
9
which are free from recognized hazards that cause or are likely to cause death or serious physical
harm to its employees." 820 ILCS 219/20.
45. The Illinois OSH Act "applies to every public employer in this State and its
employees," and explicitly incorporates "[a]ll federal occupational safety and health standards
which the United States Secretary of Labor has promulgated or modified in accordance with the
federal [OSH Act] ..." 820 ILCS 219/25.
46. Public employers, like the Village of Westmont and its water department, cannot
deviate from an Illinois occupational safety and health standard (including those federal standards
incorporated by reference) without requesting and receiving a Variance from the Director of the
Illinois Occupational Safety and Health Administration (ILOSHA). 820 ILCS 219/40, 45, 50.
Westmont's Pattern of Violating Employee-Safety Regulations
47. While it is believed that Defendant Village of Westmont regularly and routinely
violated state and federal health and safety laws-particularly those related to confined spaces and
locking out energized systems ILOSHA cited the Village of Westmont in October 2021, January
2022, and June 2023 (collectively, the "ILOSHA Citations") for violations directly relevant to the
issues in this lawsuit.
October 2021 Citation
48. On October 12, 2021, the ILOSHA cited the Village of Westmont and its water
department for its failure "to conduct a hazard assessment of the job tasks of [ water department]
employees to determine what PPE is required to complete the[ir] job task safely." Citations and
10
Notification of Penalty at 6 (October 12, 2021 ), attached as Exhibit B [hereinafter "October 12,
2021 ILOSHA Citation"].
49. The October 12, 2021 ILOSHA Citation found the Village of Westmont and its
water department "failed to ensure that a hazard assessment certification was complete for the
company's hazard assessment/JSA program. Certifying the hazard assessment/JSA program could
ensure that the employees' exposure to hazardous situations are being identified and addressed."
water department "failed to provide documentation that employees ha[ d] been trained in the proper
use of the Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) that they have issued/use to perform their job
duties."
51. The October 12, 2021 ILOSHA Citation found employees of the Village of
Westmont and its water department "are expected to enter into confined spaces when performing
certain job duties, without being properly trained to perform these tasks. This determination is
based on the employer failing to provide any documentation in confined spaces training."
water department "failed to provide documentation that employees have been trained in the
purpose and function of the energy control program and fail to ensure that the program is
understood by the employees. As a result, the employees were exposed to energy control hazards."
January 2022 Citation
53. On January 19, 2022, ILOSHA again cited the Village of Westmont and its water
department for its failure to submit "information on abatement" of the actions and omissions cited
on October 12, 2021 and "demonstrating that abatement is complete for each willful or repeat
11
violation and for any serious violation" as required by Title 56, Part 350.210(d)(l) of the Illinois
Administrative Code.
54. The January 19, 2022 ILOSHA Citation recalled that:
On or about July 28, 2021 while conducting an inspection of the

Westmont water department multiple citations were issued for this
employer for various violations. The citations were issued on
10/12/2021 with an initial abatement due date of 12/20/2021. The
employer did not provide the necessary abatement certification
including documentation demonstrating complete abatement of the
cited violation to Illinois OSHA.
Abatement documentation is required for the above-mentioned

citation in addition to the signed abatement certification form.
55. On information and belief, the Village of Westmont and its water department never
abated the acts and omissions identified in the October 12, 2022 citation nor certified abatement
to ILOSHA.
June 2023 Citation
56. On June 26, 2023, ILOSHA again cited the Village of Westmont and its water
department, this time for its intentional and illegal acts leading to Matthew's death. See Citations
and Notification of Penalty (June 26, 2023).
57. The June 26, 2023 ILOSHA Citation found the Village of Westmont and its water
department had willful violated federal law on February 23, 2023 and earlier because the Village
of Westmont "did not prepare a permit prior to allowing an employee, [Matthew Heiden,] to enter
a 12" water main valve vault (60th Street and Deming Place, Westmont, IL) exposing the employee
to caught-in and asphyxiation hazards.
12
58. The Village of Westmont Public Works Water Division, in September 2013,
acknowledged that all "Distribution System valve vaults. Village wide" were permit-required
confined spaces. Employees routinely enter spaces requiring an entry permit, however, the last
entry permit on record was from 2017." Emphasis added.
department had willful violated federal law on February 23, 2023 and earlier because the Village
of Westmont:
did not implement the means, procedures and practices necessary

for safe permit space entry operations in a 12" water main valve
vault (60th Street and Deming Place, Westmont, IL) exposing an
employee to caught-in and asphyxiation hazards from the release of
stored hydraulic energy (water).
department had still failed to conduct a "hazard assessment for water main repair operations,"
"exposing employees to multiple physical hazards."
department "did not properly evaluate the workplace" on or before February 23, 2023 "to
determine if spaces are permit-required confined spaces. The employer document 'Confined
Space Operations' did not identify the involved 12" water main valve vault (60th Street and
Deming Place, Westmont, IL) or similar valve vaults in the workplace as a permit-required
confined space."
department employees and supervisors "were not aware of the employer's confined space entry
procedures, not aware of the employer document 'Confined Space Operations,' and had not
received training related to permit-required confined space entry."
13
department "did not ensure that an employee entering a permit-confined space utilized a full body
harness with a retrieval line."
64. Many of the acts and omissions originally cited in October 2021 went unaddressed
by January 2022 and even as of June 2023.
65. The Village of Westmont was given explicit notice of its safety shortcomings, the
risks they posed, and the actions necessary to comply with Illinois and federal law.
66. The recurrence of its ILOSHA violations show the Village of Westmont's
intentional conduct as well as deliberate indifference toward the health and safety of its water
department employees.
Stephen May's Role in the Village of Westmont's OSHA Violations
67. Stephen May is a professional engineer licensed in the State of Illinois.
68. As a professional engineer, Stephen May's practice of engineering affects "the
public health, safety, and welfare" and is "subject to regulation and control in the public interest."
225 ILCS 325/1-1. Engineers, too, shall hold paramount the safety, health, and welfare of the
public, notifying others of circumstances endangering life or property.
69. Stephen May, individually as professional engineer and in his roles as Director of
Public Works and Village Manager for the Village of Westmont, accepted and undertook a duty
as a professional engineer to prudently, and consistent with his professional-ethical obligations,
establish policies and procedures protecting employees of and residents served by the Village of
Westmont Water Department. He, likewise, accepted and undertook to prudently, and consistent
with his professional-ethical obligations, implement and assess the effectiveness of such policies
and procedures.
14
70. IRMA purports to provide "litigation management, risk management, and training
services at a substantial savings" for its members.
71. Stephen May assessed the appropriateness of IRMA's materials for training and
safety of the Village of Westmont Water Department's protections of it.
72. At all relevant times Stephen May was aware of, and had control over, the policies
and procedures implemented by the Village of Westmont in attempts to make safe permit-required
confined space entry.
COUNT I: VILLAGE OF WESTMONT

WRONGFUL DEATH: INTENT TO HARM & INVALID EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT
73. Plaintiff Laurie Heiden, as Independent Administrator of the Estate of Matthew
Heiden, deceased, incorporates the allegations set forth in Paragraph 1 through 72 above as if they
were fully set forth within this Count.
74. Plaintiff Laurie Heiden brings this action pursuant to 740 ILCS 180/1-et seq. on
behalf of the next-of-kin of Matthew Heiden:
Laurie Heiden, Mother

Robert Heiden, Father
Nicholas Heiden, Brother
Grace Heiden, Sister
75. Before February 23, 2023, Defendant Village of Westmont had acquired sufficient
knowledge and information concerning permit-required confined space entry and the hazards of
undertaking such entry without proper equipment, education, training, and instruction-that
persons making such entry would be physically compromised and suffer immediate bodily injury
and harm.
76. Defendant Village of Westmont intentionally directed Matthew to conduct work in
a dangerous permit-required confined space with a highly energized municipal water main in
15
violation of Illinois and federal health and safety laws on February 23, 2023 with full knowledge
that injury and/or death would occur.
77. Defendant Village of Westmont intentionally ignored the known and obvious risks
associated with such work and further intended that Matthew be injured or killed rather than take
the necessary precautions to prevent Matthew's injury or death.
78. On and before February 23, 2023, Defendant Village of Westmont knew that
directing Matthew into the water main valve vault at 60th Street and Deming Place without proper
equipment, education, training, and instruction would be physically compromising and cause
Matthew to suffer immediate bodily injury if not death.
79. It was the duty of Defendant Village of Westmont to abstain from deliberate acts
and omission with a specific intent to injure.
80. Notwithstanding that duty and knowledge, Defendant Village of Westmont, by and
through its duly authorized agents, employees, and/or servants committed one or more of the
following acts and omissions, a direct and proximate result of which cause the injury and death of
Matthew Heiden:
a. Ignored and/or chose not to determine whether the water main valve vaults in its
water system, including that at 60th Street and Deming Place, were permit-
required confined spaces;
b. Chose not to educate employees including Matthew on the Village ofWestmont's

then-existing confined space entry procedures;
c. Chose not to train employees including Matthew on the Village of Westmont's

then-existing confined space entry procedures;
d. Chose not to implement means, procedures, and practices necessary for safe
permit space entry operations into water main valve vaults;
e. Chose not to complete or direct the completion of a confined space entry permit
for entry into the water main valve vault at 60th Street and Deming Place on
February 23, 2023;
16
f. Directed Matthew Heiden into the water main valve vault at 60th Street and
Deming Place on February 23, 2023 in violation of the law and knowing and
intending that he be injured; and
g. Otherwise acted deliberately with a specific intent to injure Matthew Heiden in

manners to be determined throughout discovery.
81. Defendant Village of Westmont as a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid
acts, caused or substantially contributed to causing, Matthew Heiden to experience physical pain,
mental suffering, emotional distress, disability, disfigurement, loss of a normal life, lost wages,
and death.
82. Defendant Village of Westmont's actions demonstrate utter indifference to and
conscious disregard for Matthew's safety.
83. That as a direct and proximate result of one or more of the foregoing Intentional
acts or omissions on the part of the defendants, MATHEW HEIDEN drowned on February 23,
2023; MATTHEW HEIDEN prior to his death, experienced great physical pain and mental
anguish as a result of the drowning; further, by reason of the death of MATTHEW HEIDEN, his
family has experienced grief, sorrow, and mental suffering, and has been deprived of his means
of support and has lost the society of MATTHEW HEIDEN.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, LAURIE HEIDEN, Independent Administrator of the Estate
of MATTHEW HEIDEN, Deceased, demands judgment against the Defendants, in an amount in
excess of the jurisdictional amount, plus costs.
COUNT II: VILLAGE OF WESTMONT

SURVIVAL ACT: INTENT TO HARM & INVALID EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT
17
85. MATTHEW HEIDEN was hindered and prevented from pursuing his normal
course of employment, thereby losing large sums of money which otherwise would have accrued
to him and his estate; lastly, substantial sums of money were expended by MATTHEW HEIDEN' s
Estate for funeral and burial.
86. Plaintiff brings this action pursuant to the Illinois Survival Act, 755 ILCS 5/27-6,
for the disability, physical and mental suffering of Plaintiffs Decedent following, and as a result
of, the aforesaid intentional conduct of Defendant, Village of Westmont.
WH EREFORE, the Plaintiff, Laurie Heiden, Special Administrator of the Estate of
Matthew Heiden, Deceased, demands judgment against the Defendant, in an amount in excess of
the jurisdictional amount, plus costs.
COUNT III: STEPHEN MAY, P.E., IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY

Wrongful Death Negligence
88. Plaintiff Laurie Heiden brings this action pursuant to 740 ILCS 180/I-et seq. on

89. Defendant Stephen May, P.E., as a licensed professional engineer, negligently
undertook to oversee and implement safe policies and procedures, provide education, training, and
instruction regarding, among other things, entry into permit-required confined spaces to Matthew
18
Heiden. Defendant Stephen May, P.E., negligently, willfully and wantonly, and with utter
indifference to the life, health, and safety of Matthew, failed to act reasonably in the course of his
professional engineering duties causing or contributing to causing Matthew's injury and death.
90. Defendant Stephen May, P.E., as a licensed professional engineer, Village
Manager, and former Public Works Director of the Village of Westmont, had a special relationship
with Matthew as well as independent duties of care to guard Matthew against injuries which
naturally flow as a reasonably probable and foreseeable consequences of Defendant Stephen
May's actions or inactions due to his position as a professional engineer who was also tasked with,
and in control of, adopting, implementing, and ensuring the efficacy of the Village of Westmont's
policies and procedures regarding, among other things, confined-space entry.
91. Defendant Stephen May, P.E. further owed a duty to perform those enumerated
actions with reasonable care.
92. On and before February 23, 2023, Defendant Stephen May, P.E., knew, or in the
exercise of ordinary care should have known, as a licensed professional engineer, of the
insufficiencies of the polices and procedure he enacted or oversaw and the education, training, and
instruction related thereto would foreseeably result in bodily injury and harm.
93. On and before February 23, 2023, Defendant Stephen May, P.E. knew, or in the
exercise of ordinary care would have known, that failing to comply with state and federal health
and safety laws, and failure to enact, enforce, implement, and train workers on adequate permit-
required confined space and lock-out tag-out, programs, policies and procedures would
foreseeably result in bodily injury and harm to workers like Matthew.
94. Indeed, Defendant Stephen May, P.E., through his licensure holds himself out as
an expert professional engineer in such matters.
19
95. As an expert, Defendant Stephen May, P.E., is subject to heightened duties to act
as someone with same or similar expertise would act.
96. Therefore, it was the duty of Defendant Stephen May to use heightened care for the
safety workers like Matthew who utilized the confined space entry and lock-out tag-out practices
and procedure May implemented and oversaw.
97. As a result of his undertaking to enact, enforce, oversee, implement, provide
education, training, and instruction to workers like Matthew it was the duty of Defendant Stephen
May, P.E., to use heightened care to protect the health and safety of such workers.
98. Notwithstanding those duties, Defendant Stephen May, P.E., breached his duties to
Matthew, negligently, willfully and wantonly, and with utter disregard for the health and safety of
Matthew, in one or more of the following ways:
a. Failure to enact, implement, and enforce policies and procedures to comply with
state and federal health and safety laws;
b. Failure to enact, implement, enforce, and train workers on sufficient minimum

safety requirements and standards that water department workers could and
would strive to meet and adhere to;
c. Failure to enact, implement, enforce, and train workers on sufficient safety

procedures for permit-required confined space entry;
d. Failure to enact, implement, enforce, and train workers on sufficient lock-out tag-
out protocols;
e. Failure to enact, implement, enforce, and train workers on the need for properly
educated, trained, and instructed water department workers each time a permit-
required confined space entry was to be made;
f. Failure to enact, implement, enforce, policies and procedures to check the

education, training, and instruction history of water department employees before
dispatching said employees to make permit-required confined space entry;
g. Inadequately and ineffectively designed, approved, monitored, enforced,

implemented, oversaw, and enacted training programs regarding proper confined
space entry and lock-out tag-out polices and procedures;
20
h. Failed to warn Matthew Heiden of the unreasonable risk of harm posed by
entering water main valve vaults without proper equipment, education, training,
compliance with policies and procedures, or instruction;
1. Failed to warn Matthew Heiden of the unreasonable risk of harm posed by

working on highly energized water mains without the aid and supervision of
properly trained colleagues;
j. Failed to require competent and responsible supervision of junior water

department workers by properly trained and educated individuals to ensure
appropriate precautions are taken;
k. Failed to ensure that junior water department workers would be properly

equipped, educated, trained, instructed, and supervised regarding entry of permit-
required confined spaces and lock-out tag-out protocols; and
I. Otherwise acted negligently, willfully and wantonly, deliberately with a specific

intent to injury, or indifferent to the risks inherent to Matthew Heiden in manners
to be determined throughout discovery.
99. Defendant Stephen May, P.E., as a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid
breaches, caused or substantially contributed to causing, Matthew Heiden to experience physical
pain, mental suffering, emotional distress, disability, disfigurement, loss of a normal life, lost
wages, and death.
100. Defendant Stephen May's actions demonstrate utter indifference to and conscious
disregard for Matthew's safety.
acts or omissions on the part of the defendants, MATHEW HEID EN drowned on February 23,
family has experienced grief, sorrow, and mental suffering, and has been deprived of his means of
support and has lost the society of MATTHEW HEIDEN.
21
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, LAURIE HEIDEN, Independent Administrator of the
Estate of MATTHEW HEIDEN, Deceased, demands judgment against the Defendants, in an
amount in excess of the jurisdictional amount, plus costs.
COUNT IV: STEPHEN MAY, P.E., IN HIS INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY

Survival Act-Negligence
Heiden, deceased, incorporates the allegations set forth in Paragraph 1 through 72, and 84 through
101 above as if they were fully set forth within this Count.
103. MATTHEW HEIDEN prior to his death, experienced great physical pain and
mental anguish as a result of the drowning; MATTHEW HEIDEN was hindered and prevented
from pursuing his normal course of employment, thereby losing large sums of money which
otherwise would have accrued to him and his estate; MATTHEW HEIDEN was deprived of years
of life; and lastly, substantial sums of money were expended by MATTHEW HEIDEN' s Estate
for funeral and burial.
for the disability, physical, mental suffering and death of Plaintiffs Decedent following, and as a
result of, the aforesaid negligent conduct of Defendant, Stephen May.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, Laurie Heiden, Special Administrator of the Estate of
22
COUNT V: STEPHEN MAY, P.E., AS VILLAGE MANAGER
WRONGFUL DEATH: INTENT TO HARM & INVALID EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT

107. Before February 23, 2023, Defendant STEPHEN MAY P.E. had sufficient
knowledge and information concerning permit-required confined space entry and the hazards of
undertaking such entry without proper equipment, education, training, and instruction-that
persons making such entry would be physically compromised and suffer immediate bodily injury
and harm.
108. Defendant STEPHEN MAY, P.E. intentionally directed Matthew to conduct work
in a dangerous permit-required confined space with a highly energized municipal water main in
violation of Illinois and federal health and safety laws on February 23, 2023 with full knowledge
that injury and/or death would occur.
109. Defendant STEPHEN MAY, P.E. intentionally ignored the known and obvious
risks associated with such work and further intended that Matthew be injured or killed rather than
take the necessary precautions to prevent Matthew's injury or death.
110. On and before February 23, 2023, Defendant STEPHEN MAY, P.E. knew that
directing Matthew into the water main valve vault at 60th Street and Deming Place without proper
23
equipment, education, training, and instruction would be physically compromising and cause
Matthew to suffer immediate bodily injury if not death.
111. It was the duty of Defendant STEPHEN MAY, P.E. to abstain from deliberate acts
and omission with a specific intent to injure.
112. Notwithstanding that duty and knowledge, Defendant STEPHEN MAY, P.E.
committed one or more of the following acts and omissions, a direct and proximate result of which
cause the injury and death of Matthew Heiden:
a. Ignored and/or chose not to determine whether the water main valve vaults
in its water system, including that at 60th Street and Deming Place, were
permit-required confined spaces;
b. Chose not to educate employees including Matthew on the Village of

Westmont's then-existing confined space entry procedures;
c. Chose not to train employees including Matthew on the Village of

Westmont's then-existing confined space entry procedures;
d. Chose not to implement means, procedures, and practices necessary for safe
permit space entry operations into water main valve vaults;
e. Chose not to complete or direct the completion of a confined space entry

permit for entry into the water main valve vault at 60th Street and Deming
Place on February 23, 2023;
f. Directed Matthew Heiden into the water main valve vault at 60th Street and
Deming Place on February 23, 2023 in violation of the law and knowing
and intending that he be injured; and
g. Otherwise acted deliberately with a specific intent to injure Matthew Heiden

in manners to be determined throughout discovery.
113. Defendant STEPHEN MAY, P.E., as a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid
acts, caused or substantially contributed to causing, Matthew Heiden to experience physical pain,
mental suffering, emotional distress, disability, disfigurement, loss of a normal life, lost wages,
and death.
24
114. Defendant STEPHEN MAY, P.E. actions demonstrate a conscious disregard for
Matthew's safety.
acts or omissions on the part of the defendants, MATHEW HEIDEN drowned on February 23,
family has experienced grief, sorrow, and mental suffering, and has been deprived of his means
of support and has lost the society of MATTHEW HEIDEN.
WH EREFORE, the Plaintiff, LAURIE HEIDEN, Independent Administrator of the Estate
COUNT VI: STEPHEN MAY, P.E., AS VILLAGE MANAGER

SURVIVAL ACT: INTENT TO HARM & INVALID EMPLOYMENT CONTRACT
Heiden, deceased, incorporates the allegations set forth in Paragraph 1 through 72, and 105
through 115 above as if they were fully set forth within this Count.
117. MATTHEW HEIDEN was hindered and prevented from pursuing his normal
course of employment, thereby losing large sums of money which otherwise would have accrued
to him and his estate; lastly, substantial sums of money were expended by MATTHEW HEIDEN's
Estate for funeral and burial.
25
for the disability, physical and mental suffering of Plaintiffs Decedent following, and as a result
of, the aforesaid intentional conduct of Defendant, STEPHEN MAY, P.E.
COUNT VII: INTERGOVERNMENTAL RISK MANAGEMENT AGENCY

Wrongful Death-Negligence
Heiden, deceased, incorporates the allegations set forth in Paragraph 1 through 72 above as if
they were fully set forth within this Count.

121. Defendant Intergovernmental Risk Management Agency negligently created,
updated, researched, designed, implemented, ensured compliance with, provided education,
training, and instruction regarding health and safety polices, programs and procedures related to
the work Mathhew Heiden engaged it on February 23, 2023 which resulted in Matthew's injury
and death.
122. Defendant Intergovernmental Risk Management Agency further undertook to
deliver high quality risk management services to protect Matthew Heiden from injury and death
26
through the creation, updating, researching, design, implementation, compliance, education,
training, and instruction of policies and procedures for, among other things, permit-required
confined spaces entry and lock-out tag-out activities.
123. Defendant Intergovernmental Risk Management Agency owed a duty of care to
guard against injuries which naturally flow as a reasonably probable and foreseeable consequence
of its actions.
124. Defendant Intergovernm ental Risk Management Agency owed a duty to perform
with reasonable care that which it undertook to do.
125. On and before February 23, 2023, Defendant Intergovernmental Risk Management
Agency knew, or in the exercise of ordinary care would have known, that failing to deliver high
quality risk management services and failing to adequately create, update, research, design,
implement, ensure compliance, educate, train, and instruct its members and their employees on
policies and procedures for, among other things, permit-required confined spaces entry and lock-
out tag-out activities would foreseeably result in bodily injury and harm.
126. Indeed, Defendant Intergovernm ental Risk Management Agency, through its
promulgation of resources and training materials holds itself out as an expert in the field of, among
other things, confined-space entry and lock-out tag-out procedures.
127. As an expert, Defendant Intergovernmental Risk Management Agency is subject to
heightened duties to act as someone with same or similar expertise would act.
128. It was, therefore, the duty of Defendant Intergovernmental Risk Management
Agency's to use heightened care for the safety of employees of its municipal members, including
Matthew Heiden, whose employers utilized IRMA's materials.
27
129. Notwithstanding those duties, Defendant Intergovernmental Risk Management
Agency, by and through its duly authorized agents, employees, and or servants breached its duties
to Matthew Heiden in one or more of the following ways:
a. Failed to adequately create, update, research, design, implement, ensure

compliance with, educate, train, and instruct its members and their
employees on policies and procedures sufficient to comply with state and
federal health and safety laws and protect workers from injury or death;
b. Failed to enact sufficient minimum safety policies, procedures, programs,

standards, training and education of its members, including Defendant
Village of Westmont, and their employees to comply with state and federal
health and safety laws and protect workers from injury or death;
c. Failed to enacted safety procedures for permit-required confined space

entry which it knew or should have known, because of its members
likelihood of following them or otherwise, created an outsize risk of harm
to water department employees;
d. Failed to enacted lock-out tag-out protocols to identify potential hazards;
e. Failed to require the presence of properly educated, trained, and instructed

water department employees each time a permit-required confined space
entry was to be made;
f. Failed to require its members to check the education, trammg, and

instruction history of water department employees before dispatching said
employees to make permit-required confined space entry;
g. Undertook to design and conduct training programs regarding its

negligently designed requirements, standards, procedures, and protocols;
h. Failed to warn Matthew Heiden of the unreasonable risk of harm posed by

entering water main valve vaults without proper equipment, education,
training, or instruction;
1. Failed to warn Matthew Heiden of the unreasonable risk of harm posed by

engaging in the types of activity he was engaged in on February 23, 2023;
J. Failed to require competent and responsible supervision of junior water

department employees by individuals educated and trained to make permit-
required confined space determinations and ensure appropriate precautions
are taken;
k. Failed to require competent and responsible municipal works directors to

ensure that junior water department employees would be equipped,
28
educated, trained, instructed, and supervised regarding entry of permit-
required confined spaces; and
1. Otherwise acted deliberately with a specific intent to injury, or indifferent

to the risks inherent to, Matthew Heiden in manners to be determined
throughout discovery.
130. Defendant Intergovernm ental Risk Management Agency, as a direct and proximate
result of the aforesaid breaches, caused or substantially contributed to causing, Matthew Heiden
experience physical pain, mental suffering, emotional distress, disability, disfigurement, loss of a
normal life, lost wages, and death.
131. That as a direct and proximate result of one or more of the foregoing negligent acts
or omissions on the part of the Defendant Intergovernm ental Risk Management Agency,
MATHEW HEIDEN suffered and died on February 23, 2023; further, by reason of the death of
MATTHEW HEIDEN, his family has experienced grief, sorrow, and mental suffering, and has
been deprived of his means of support and has lost the society of MATTHEW HEIDEN.
WH EREFORE, the Plaintiff, LAURIE HEIDEN, Independent Administrator of the Estate
COUNT VIII: INTER GOVERNMENT AL RISK MANAGEMENT AGENCY

29
of life; and lastly, substantial sums of money were expended by MATTHEW HEIDEN's Estate
result of, the aforesaid negligent conduct of Defendant, Intergovernm ental Risk Management
Agency.
Matthew Heiden, Deceased, demands judgment against the Defendant, in an amount in excess the
of jurisdictional amount, plus costs.
COUNT IX: M.E. SIMPSON CO., INC.

Wrongful Death-Negligence

137. On or before February 23, 2023, Defendant M.E. Simpson Company, Inc.
performed tasks at the request of Defendant Village of Westmont to maintain the Village's water
and/or wastewater systems.
30
138. Specifically, Defendant M.E. Simpson Company, Inc. undertook a distribution
system and valve assessment program "to exercise the [ water main] valves" including the water
main valves at and around 60th Street and Deming Place "so they will work when they are needed
and to document the location and all pertinent information about the valves so they can be accessed
quickly and closed properly." Defendant M.E. Simpson Company, Inc. further admitted that its
"valve exercising program for the Village of Westmont was performed by M.E. Simpson Co., Inc.
to fulfill these needs."
139. Upon information and belief, Defendant M.E. Simpson Company, Inc. exercised
the water main valves at and around 60th Street and Deming Place in Westmont, Illinois shortly
before February 23, 2023.
140. Defendant M.E. Simpson Company, Inc. owed a duty of ordinary care to guard
against injuries which naturally flow as a reasonably probable and foreseeable consequence of its
actions.
141. Defendant M.E. Simpson Company, Inc. owed a duty to perform with reasonable
care that which it undertook to do.
142. Before February 23, 2023, Defendant M.E. Simpson Company, Inc. knew, or in the
exercise of ordinary care would have known, that negligently performed maintenance on municipal
water and/or wastewater systems could foreseeably result in bodily injury and harm to others it
knew, or in the exercise of ordinary care would have known, would encounter the system and its
water main valve vaults.
143. On February 23, 2023, Defendant M.E. Simpson Company, Inc. knew, or in the
exercise of ordinary care would have known, that negligently performed maintenance on municipal
31
water and/or wastewater systems could foreseeably result in bodily injury and harm to persons
entering the water main valve vault at 60th Street and Deming Place in Westmont, Illinois.
144. Indeed, Defendant M.E. Simpson Company, Inc. held itself out as an expert in the
field of water distribution and wastewater collection systems, touting "highly-educated engineers
and technical team," with "highly skilled technicians" who "utilize[ e] the latest technologies and
highly trained professionals [to] ensure that [its customers'] water systems are operating the way
they should."
145. Defendant M.E. Simpson Company, Inc. was to "perform valve assessments on the
distribution system and document all locations and valves;" "document each valve operated and
individual valve data to such an extent as to provide information characteristic to each specific
attribute as defined by the Utility in a manner that will allow a prioritized list of maintenance
items;" and "[p]rovide instruction and council to Utility staff during the course of the valve
exercising and assessments so once the program is concluded, the Utility staff will have a complete
understanding of all the parameters of conducting valve exercising and assessments with the
established goal of reducing the amount of maintenance required for the distribution system while
providing up to date data for the Utility for each and every valve."
146. As an expert, Defendant M.E. Simpson Company, Inc. is subject to heightened
duties to act as someone with same or similar expertise would act.
147. Therefore, it was the duty of Defendant M.E. Simpson Company, Inc. to use
heightened care for the safety of those who would come into contact with the municipal water
and/or wastewater systems on which it performed maintenance.
148. Defendant M.E. Simpson Company, Inc., was, on and before February 23, 2023,
aware that "points located in a 'confined space' such as pit and vault installations that require entry
32
[ should] be treated in accordance with the safety rules regarding Confined Space Entry, designated
by the Utility, The Department of Labor and OSHA."
149. Notwithstanding those duties and knowledge, Defendant M.E. Simpson Company,
Inc., by and through its duly authorized agents, employees, and/or servants committed one or more
of the following acts and omissions, a direct and proximate result of which is the injury and death
of Matthew Heiden:
a. Failed to identify the defects present in the water main valve at 60th Street
and Deming Place in the course of its valve exercise program for Defendant
Village of Westmont;
b. Failed to properly identify and inform the Village of Westmont and its
employees of all pertinent information about the valves so they can be
accessed quickly and closed properly;
c. Failed to assess and exercise the water valves so they will work when they
are needed;
d. Manipulated the valves at around 60th Street and Deming Place in such a
manner to caused or contributed to causing the valves to leak, be damaged
or compromised, or otherwise cause or contribute to causing the valve on
which Matthew Heiden was working to injury him;
e. Failed to warn Defendant Village of Westmont or Matthew Heiden of the

defects and configuration present in (and the resulting risks and hazards of
the water main valve at 60th Street and Deming Place;
f. Putting a series of Village of Westmont water main valves into a

combination of positions creating excess, uncontrollable pressure on the
valve at 60th Street and Deming Place;
g. Failed to recognize the flange present on the water main valve at 60th Street
and Deming Place, would allow the valve to slide off under pressure or
otherwise be inadequate to prevent injury or death of a worker maintaining
the valve;
h. Inadequately undertook to assess and exercise Defendant Village of

Westmont's water main valves; and in the course thereof:
1. Otherwise acted negligently in light of the risks posed by the water main
valve in manners to be determined throughout discovery.
33
150. As a further direct and proximate result of one or more of the foregoing acts or
omissions on the part of Defendant M.E. Simpson Company, Inc., Matthew Heiden experienced
physical pain, mental suffering, emotional distress, disability, disfigurement, loss of a normal life,
and lost wages.
or omissions on the part of the Defendant M.E. Simpson Company, Inc., MA THEW HEIDEN
suffered and died on February 23, 2023; further, by reason of the death of MATTHEW HEIDEN,
his next-of-kin has experienced grief, sorrow, and mental suffering, and has been deprived of his
means of support and has lost the society of MATTHEW HEIDEN.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, LAURIE HEIDEN, Independent Administrator of the Estate
COUNT X: M.E. SIMPSON COMPANY, INC.

Heiden, deceased, incorporates the allegations set forth in Paragraph 1 through 72, and 13 5 through
of life; and lastly, substantial sums of money were expended by MATTHEW HEIDEN' s Estate
34
result of, the aforesaid negligent conduct of Defendant, M.E. Simpson Company, Inc.
COUNT XI: MUELLER WATER PRODUCTS, INC. & MUELLER CO., LLC
Wrongful Death-Negligent Design/Failure to Warn
156. At all relevant times, Defendants Mueller Water Products, Inc. and/or Mueller Co.,
LLC designed, manufactured, assembled, inspected, repaired, endorsed, drafted, tested,
franchised, marketed, promoted, advertised, supplied, leased, distributed, and placed into the
stream of commerce the subject water main valve causing the injury and death of Matthew Heiden.
157. At all times the subject water main valve left the hands of Defendant Mueller Water
Products, Inc. and/or Mueller Co., LLC, the subject water main valve and its components were
defective and unsafe in manufacture, design, and warnings.
158. On and before February 23, 2023, Matthew Heiden was using the subject water
main valve in a reasonable and foreseeable manner. From the time the subject water main valve
was delivered to Defendant the Village of Westmont to the time of Matthew Heiden' s death, the
water main valve was, upon information and belief, used only for its intended purpose and was not
modified, upgraded, altered, damaged, or substantially changed in any manner.
35
159. Matthew Heiden was unaware that the subject water main valve was unsafe for its
intended use and/or otherwise defective.
160. The defective and unsafe conditions of the subject water main valve and its
components caused it to release under pressure, trapping Matthew Heiden and flood the water
main valve vault in which Matthew Heiden was working.
161. Defendants Mueller Water Products, Inc. and/or Mueller Co., LLC, had a duty, as
a designer and manufacturer of goods, to design, manufacture, inspect, and test the subject water
main valve and its components to ensure they were safe for its intended and reasonably foreseeable
uses by consumers.
162. Matthew Heiden was injured and was killed as a direct and proximate result of the
defective and unsafe conditions of the subject water main valve and its components.
163. Defendant Mueller Water Products, Inc. and/or Mueller Co., LLC, knew or should
have known that the subject water main valve, which constitutes a hazard for all coming into
contact with it and its components, was negligently and defectively designed, manufactured,
assembled, inspected, repaired, endorsed, drafted, tested, franchised, marketed, promoted,
advertised, supplied, leased, distributed, contained inadequate and ineffective warnings, and
placed into the stream of comm erce.
164. Defendant Mueller Water Products, Inc. and/or Mueller Co., LLC, negligently
failed to:
a. Design and manufacture a water main valve that was safe to use for its intended
purpose;
b. Design and manufacture a valve with proper flanges and components to prevent
it from slipping off a pipe under pressures for which it was intended to operate;
c. Disclose the water main valve's dangerous condition;
d. Disclose the water main valve's known defects;
36
e. Recall the water main valve;
f. Adequately notify, warn, and protect users and those coming into contact with the
water main valve about potential hazards of slipping off a pipe under pressures
for which it was intended to operate;
g. Failing to adequately warn or instruct about dangers and hazards associated with
maintaining or fixing the valve and its components;
h. Failing to adequately warn or instruct about proper and safe methods to maintain
and repair the valve and its components;
1. Otherwise acted negligently in light of the risks posed by the water main valve in
manners to be determined throughout discovery.
165. The subject water main valve placed into commerce by Defendant Mueller Water
Products, Inc. and/or Mueller Co., LLC, failed to perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would
have expected when the subject water main valve released and flooded the water main valve vault
in which Matthew Heiden was working.
166. Defendant Mueller Water Products, Inc., and/or Mueller Co., LLC, as a direct and
proximate result of the aforesaid breaches, caused or substantially contributed to causing, Matthew
Heiden experienced physical pain, mental suffering, emotional distress, disability, disfigurement,
loss of a normal life, lost wages, and death.
or omissions on the part of the Defendants Mueller Water Products, Inc., and/or Mueller Co., LLC,
MATHEW HEIDEN suffered and died on February 23, 2023; further, by reason of the death of
MATTHEW HEIDEN, his next-of-kin have experienced grief, sorrow, and mental suffering, and
has been deprived of his means of support and has lost the society of MATTHEW HEIDEN;
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, LAURIE HEIDEN, Independent Administrator of the
Estate of MATTHEW HEIDEN, Deceased, demands judgment against the Defendants, in an
amount in excess of the jurisdictional amount, plus costs.
37
COUNT XII: MUELLER WATER PRODUCTS, INC., AND/OR
MUELLER CO., LLC
of life; and lastly, substantial sums of money were expended by MATTHEW HEIDEN's Estate
result of, the aforesaid negligent conduct of Defendants, Mueller Water Products, Inc., and/or
Mueller Co., LLC.
Respectfully submitted,
Laurie Heiden, as Independent

Administrator of the Estate of
Matthew Heiden, deceased
38
DATED: November 22, 2023
Michael T. Egan, Jr.

COONEY & CONWAY, P.C.
120 North LaSalle Street, Suite 3000
Chicago, Illinois 60602
Telephone: (312) 236-6166
Facsimile: (312) 236-3029
megan@cooneyconway.com
Firm I.D. No. 16600
Attorneys for PlaintiffLaurie Heiden, as

Independent Administrator of the Estate of
Matthew Heiden, deceased
39

Matthew Heiden Lawsuit

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Matthew Heiden Lawsuit

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE EIGHTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

DUPAGE COUNTY, ILLINOIS

VILLAGE OF WESTMONT, an Illinois

STEPHEN MAY, P.E., a licensed professional

MUELLER WATER PRODUCTS, INC., a

MUELLER CO., a Delaware limited liability

M.E. SIMPSON COMPANY, INC., an Indiana

Plaintiff Laurie Heiden, as Independent Administrator of the Estate of Matthew Heiden,

Westmont, Illinois, on February 23, 2023.

training, safety equipment, support, or supervision.

3. As a result, Matthew "died of drowning due to submersion in a flooded water main

Dr. Hiliary S. McElligott.

only a few feet above.

5. A few months before Matthew's tragic death the Illinois Department of

a. "water department employees are expected to enter into confined spaces

b. "failed to provide documentation that employees have been trained in the

7. The Village of Westmont was cited, agam, by the Illinois Department of

the October 2021 citation.

isolating the permit space.

9. Matthew's death undeniably could have-and should have-been prevented. As

all times relevant herein.

12. The Village of Westmont is a domestic municipal corporation authorized and

organized under the laws of the state of Illinois.

14. Stephen May is a citizen of Illinois.

(including the Village of Westmont).

provide high-quality risk management services" to public entities.

on investment" for its members.

Company, Inc. is authorized to transact business in the state of Illinois.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

transactions and tortious acts alleged herein occurred in Illinois.

2-101, as DuPage County is the residence of Defendants.

Field & Co., 139 Ill.2d 455,463 (1990)).

public."); Marriage of Newton, 2011 IL App (1st) 090683, ,r 39 (agreement, acquiescence, or

The Federal Occupational Safety & Health Act

enact national safety standards by regulation. See 29 U.S.C. § 655.

from the hazards identified in the hazards assessment."

useful life and disposal of the PPE."

entry procedures required." 29 CFR 1910.146(g)(2).

entry] by preparing an entry permit" "[b ]efore entry is authorized."

42. 29 CFR 1910.146(k)(3)(i) requires, where permit-required confined space entry is

another point ... for the successful removal of the entrant."

energy controls are acquired by employees."

The Illinois Occupational Safety & Health Act

harm to its employees." 820 ILCS 219/20.

federal [OSH Act] ..." 820 ILCS 219/25.

Westmont's Pattern of Violating Employee-Safety Regulations

issues in this lawsuit.

October 2021 Citation

2021 ILOSHA Citation"].

January 2022 Citation

54. The January 19, 2022 ILOSHA Citation recalled that:

On or about July 28, 2021 while conducting an inspection of the

Abatement documentation is required for the above-mentioned

June 2023 Citation

and Notification of Penalty (June 26, 2023).

to caught-in and asphyxiation hazards.

entry permit on record was from 2017." Emphasis added.

did not implement the means, procedures and practices necessary

"exposing employees to multiple physical hazards."

received training related to permit-required confined space entry."

harness with a retrieval line."

by January 2022 and even as of June 2023.

Stephen May's Role in the Village of Westmont's OSHA Violations

67. Stephen May is a professional engineer licensed in the State of Illinois.