Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Location: <<CourtRoomNumber>>
Judge: Calendar, H
FILED
3/15/2024 11:06 AM
IRIS Y. MARTINEZ
CIRCUIT CLERK
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS
COOK COUNTY, IL
COUNTY DEPARTMENT, LAW DIVISION
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
2022L003763
Calendar, H
ROBERT BRONSTEIN, individually, and as ) 26839237
Independent Administrator of the Estate of Nathan )
Bronstein, a minor; Deceased; ) Case No. 2022 L 003763
ROSELLENE BRONSTEIN, )
individually, and as Next Friend of M.B. and S.B., ) Hon. Scott D. McKenna
minors, )
) Calendar H
Plaintiffs, )
vs. ) JURY DEMAND
)
LATIN SCHOOL OF CHICAGO, an Illinois )
not-for-profit corporation, et al., )
)
Defendants. )
Defendant David Koo spent more than a decade on the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) at
the Latin School of Chicago (“Latin”), serving as the Board Chair for his last two years. Koo was
Board Chair for the 2021-2022 school year when Nate Bronstein: (i) attended the school,
(ii) reported to school personnel about cyberbullying by Latin students, including members of the
JV basketball team on which Koo’s son also played,1 (iii) shared that he was in distress with
emotional and psychological injury, (iv) was turned away and victim-blamed, and (v) shortly
thereafter died by suicide.2 Koo came to learn about these terrible events no later than three days
1
There is no allegation in the Third Amended Complaint (“TAC”) that Koo’s son engaged in cyberbullying
of Nate. However, the fact that Koo’s son was a teammate of and bystander to the many of the students
who did bully Nate is highly relevant to the claims against Koo as it contributes to his conflict of interest.
2
To avoid duplication, Plaintiffs incorporate by reference herein the following sections of “Plaintiffs’
Omnibus Opposition to Motions Dismiss the Third Amended Complaint” (“Omnibus Opp.”) responding to
the motions to dismiss filed by the eight other defendants in this case: Background, Legal Standard,
At that moment in time, Chairman Koo had no proper option but to direct Latin to comply
with the law, including Illinois’ Bullying Prevention Act (the “Act”), which mandates
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
investigation into reported bullying and informing parents of the investigation, and to conduct a
separate investigation into the conduct of Latin employees, including Head of School Randall
Dunn, who had blatantly violated the Act and their duties to inform Nate’s parents, Plaintiffs
Robert and Rosellene Bronstein, of the cyberbullying and Nate’s reported injury.
Koo not only failed to take these steps but instead, in the interest of protecting Latin’s
reputation above all else and serving the conflicting interest of individual wrongdoers, Koo
adopted and directed a strategy calculated to protect certain individuals’ self-interests (including
his own) without regard for Latin’s institutional duties and obligations.3 This strategy included
efforts to conceal the truth from the Bronsteins while simultaneously having Dunn present a false
narrative about Latin’s conduct and to blame the grieving parents. Koo’s conduct is alleged to be
extreme and outrageous and known to Koo to have a high probability of causing severe emotional
distress to the Bronsteins. Further, Plaintiffs allege that Koo’s conduct did, in fact, cause both
Mr. and Mrs. Bronstein extreme emotional distress, supporting the Bronsteins’ claim against Koo
Separately, Koo’s failures are not limited to his direct conduct following Nate’s death, but
also include his contribution—including by his failure to act in the best institutional interests of
the school—to Latin’s unfair practices impacting the Bronsteins when Nate was a student as well
as following his death, for which the Bronsteins seek recovery for unfair practices under Illinois’
Argument—Section VIII (ICFA-Unfair Practices), Section IX (IIED-Survival Claim (legal standards only))
and Section X (IIED-All Defendants). (Omnibus Opp. at 2-14, 93-96, 101-07.)
3
The individual self-interests include those Latin agents who failed Nate (Dunn and other named defendants
here) and the students who cyberbullied Nate (who were teammates of Koo’s son).
2
Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act (the “ICFA”) as it applies to private
Koo argues in his motion to dismiss that these claims are subject to Section 2-615 dismissal
for pleading deficiencies. To the contrary, the Bronsteins plead myriad facts in more than sufficient
substance and detail that demonstrate the culture, practices, failures and legal non-compliance at
Latin, what Koo knew (and should have known based on his position on the Board), and Koo’s
failures of duty following Nate’s death, all of which caused harm to the Bronsteins.4
Koo also argues speciously that his tortious conduct is protected by the litigation privilege.
In effect, Koo argues that if he engages in wrongdoing himself in order to orchestrate a cover-up
and makes misrepresentations to third parties about the Latin’s wrongdoing—knowing that his
conduct has a high probability of causing harm to another—he acts with impunity so long as the
matter may later become the subject of litigation. Koo thus posits groundlessly that even the
Lastly, for his Section 2-619 motion, Koo argues that he is immune from liability under
§108.70 of the Illinois General Not for Profit Corporations Act of 1986, 805 ILCS 105/101.01, et
seq. (the “NPC Act”). That section, however, expressly excludes willful and wanton conduct from
the scope of its immunity; the Bronsteins have alleged willful and wanton conduct by Koo here.
Accordingly, this Court should deny the entirety of Koo’s section 2-619.1 motion.
4
While the allegations pled in the TAC more than adequately state claims against Koo, this is the first
complaint in this action to be addressed by the Court and leave to amend any claim deemed deficient by
the Court should be allowed here. See, e.g., Davis v. Village of Maywood, 2023 IL App (1st) 211373, ¶ 8,
13, 45 (error in refusing leave to amend on first allegations reviewed by court).
3
BACKGROUND5
Koo served as a trustee on the Board of Trustees of Latin from July 1, 2009 to June 30,
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
2022, with only a one-year pause in 2018-2019. (TAC, ¶ 73; Koo Mot., Ex. A at ¶ 3.) Koo served
as the Chair of the Board (“Board Chair”) from July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2022, which was before
and during Nate’s attendance at Latin through six months following Nate’s death. (Id.)
Koo had a conflict of interest in his role as Board Chair because he had a child enrolled at
the school while serving as Chair. (Id. ¶¶ 73-76.) Koo’s son was a member of the same JV
basketball team with Nate, and Koo’s son was part of the Hoop Dreams group chats used by the
team and used by some team members to cyberbully Nate. (Id. ¶¶ 73, 431.)
‘[B]oards should appoint chairs who do not have children who are currently
enrolled in the school’ so that the Board ‘[c]hair[] can lead and make decisions
without raising questions about possible conflicts that might affect their own
children’ and so that ‘[t]here will never be any question ... about the chair’s ability
to make decisions that are free from the impact on the chair’s children.’ Id.
(Id. ¶ 75 (quoting The Board Chair Handbook, an essential Guide for Board Leaders at
Independent Schools, NAIS Trustee Series, John Creeden, 2019 by the NAIS, at 59).)
To “take[] care to separate the interests of the school from the specific needs of a
particular child or constituency,” which would include, parents (of which Koo was
5
The TAC is too voluminous to summarize fully herein. However, Plaintiffs incorporate the Background
section from the Omnibus Opposition, see n. 2, and set out a general background addressing Koo
specifically.
4
one), his child, his child’s teammates, other parents, school employees and school
administrators;
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
To “assure that the school and the board operate in compliance with applicable laws
and regulations, minimizing exposure to legal action”;
To (as Board Chair) oversee hiring and termination of the Head of School.
(TAC, ¶¶ 6-7, 74-75, 83 and n. 15; Exhibit 1 (NAIS Principles of Good Practice, Board of Trustees)
During most of Koo’s tenure as a Trustee, Randall Dunn was the Head of School at Latin.
(TAC, ¶¶ 6-7, 73; Koo Mot., Ex. A at ¶ 3.) In his position as a long-time Latin Trustee and
eventually Board Chair, Koo knew of Dunn’s failures of leadership no later than the 2016-2017,
school year, specifically including Dunn’s failure to address and ensure mental health and
emotional safety for the students of the school. (Id. ¶¶ 21-70, 76-78, 80, and Ex. B.) Koo knew of
Dunn’s “no parents” practices, his creation of a chaotic environment, his contribution to, and
enablement of, a bullying culture at Latin, and his actions in firing the Head of the Upper School
following her reported concerns to Dunn about his handling of student safety, including with
respect to their mental health and emotional wellness. (Id.) Koo was on notice to remove Dunn as
6
The NAIS Principles of Good Practice are referenced in the TAC at ¶ 83, n.15 and found at
https://www.nais.org/learn/principles-of-good-practice/board-of-trustees/ and the pdf provided, which is
attached hereto as Exhibit 1. See Leach v. Dep’t of Empl. Sec., 2020 IL App (1st) 190299, ¶ 44 (“Information
on websites and in public records are sufficiently reliable such that judicial notice may be taken.”); K. Miller
Constr. Co., Inc. v. McGinnis, 238 Ill. 2d 284, 291 (2010) (judicial notice on motion to dismiss).
5
the Head of School based on everything Koo knew about Dunn’s failures of leadership at Latin.
(Id. ¶¶ 79-80.)
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
Koo took no action to remove, or attempt to remove, Dunn as Head of School; Dunn instead
remained in the position during the 2021-2022 school year. (Id. ¶¶ 7, 79-80.)
Illinois’ Bullying Prevention Act (the “Act”) mandates that, as part of the effort to prevent
and mitigate “physical, psychological, and emotional harm to students” caused by bullying, all
school “shall create, maintain, and implement a policy on bullying,” and further that schools must,
upon receiving an allegation of bullying, (a) promptly inform parents and guardians of all students
involved, and (b) conduct an investigation and keep parents informed of the investigation. 105
During the 2021-2022 school year, Latin was not in compliance with the Act. (TAC, ¶¶ 84,
588-623.) Dunn knew that Latin was not in compliance by September 2021 when the Illinois State
Board of Education (the “ISBE”) notified Latin (through Dunn) that it did not have a compliant
bullying prevention policy. (Id.) Dunn, through his assistant, communicated with the ISBE and
generally delayed efforts to get a compliant bullying policy in place, including resisting inclusion
of the parental notice provisions as required. (Id.) Latin did not adopt a compliant bullying
prevention policy until May 2022 and, even then, it did so only for a short time—enough to get an
approval from the ISBE before it returned to a non-compliant policy. (Id. ¶¶ 624, 628-31.)
Given his position as Board Chair, Koo knew or should have known that during the 2021-
2022 school year, Latin was not in compliance with the Act. (Id. ¶ 84.) As Board Chair, Koo either
directed, endorsed, or tacitly approved that Latin remain non-compliant with the Act for an entire
school year. (Id. ¶¶ 84, 588-623.) This is evidenced by Koo rubber-stamping yet another non-
6
compliant bullying prevention policy on February 26, 2022, without inclusion of a strong and clear
parental notice mandate because even after Nate’s death, Koo—in the power and position of Board
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
Chair—was not concerned about student safety, but only practice that give space to protect Latin’s
Koo Learned That Nate Reported Cyberbullying and That Latin Failed to Respond as
Mandated by the Act No Later Than the Weekend Following Nate’s Death
Nate died on January 13, 2022. (TAC, ¶¶ 406, 411.) By January 14, 2022, Latin
administrators were learning of Nate’s death. (Id. ¶¶ 412-414.) At a meeting on January 15, 2022,
Latin’s communications director, Katie O’Dea, who was also a member of its crisis response team,
inquired whether Nate had been bullied and, upon learning he was, asked why his parents were
That weekend, members of Latin’s crisis response team—including Dunn and Kristine Von
Ogden, who both knew about the bullying and the decision not to inform the Bronsteins before
Nate’s death,7—communicated about the response to Nate’s death, but excluded O’Dea from
further communications that weekend. (Id. ¶ 431; see also id. ¶¶ 418-20, 424-27 (Latin did not
follow its normal crisis response protocol).) Board Chair Koo, however, was personally involved
in these communications. (Id. ¶¶ 431-32, 502.) Indeed, weeks later when Mr. Bronstein questioned
Dunn about who on the Board had advised Dunn on the handling of matters related to Nate’s
While Koo may have known about the cyberbullying prior to Nate’s death, it is alleged that
he definitively knew about the cyberbullying and Latin’s failed response to it no later than the
weekend following Nate’s death. (Id.) It is also alleged that Koo actively participated with Dunn
7
See Omnibus Opposition, Background, incorporated herein by reference at n.2.
7
in creating and confirming a cover-up plan to protect Latin’s reputation above all else. (Id. ¶¶ 81,
Board Chair Koo made the decision to cover for Dunn and other wrongdoers (Von Ogden,
Bridget Hennessy, Anneliese Kranz, Jane Knoche) involved with the decision not to notify the
Bronsteins of the Nate’s cyberbullying report and injury before Nate’s suicide by (a) not
conducting the required investigations under the Act and best practices, see infra, and (b) allowing
the initial wrongdoers and Shelley Greenwood to manage the situation instead, wherein they—
with Koo’s approval—ignored reports and information coming in from parents and students about
Nate, withheld information from the Bronsteins (both before and after they learned about the
cyberbullying), sent the Latin community misleading communications, encouraged the Latin
community not to speak to the Bronsteins, and spread a grassroots message meant to influence
public opinion about the Bronteins as “at fault” and not as another victim of the Latin experience.8
(Id. ¶¶ 480-81 (agreement), 445-449 (disregard of parent and son providing evidence of
cyberbullying), 450-65 (report of KYS message), 466-79, 486-547 (Dunn’s blame the Bronsteins’
Koo also himself participated in the misleading messaging both to the Bronsteins and third
parties. (Id. ¶¶ 466-472, 550, 756.) As one example, Rob Bronstein contacted Koo on January 20,
2022, regarding a cryptic that Dunn sent to all Upper School Families, without consulting the
Bronsteins. (Id. ¶¶ 466-468.) At that time, Koo knew about the cyberbullying of Nate and the Latin
Defendants’ failures to Nate, but pitilessly mentioned nothing to Rob Bronstein. (Id. ¶¶ 466-472.)
Another example involving a third party involves Koo’s communications with Rye
Country Day School’s (“RCDS”) Board, where Dunn had already planned to transfer upon
8
That experience, also known to Koo, are amply described in the publicly posted Survivors of Latin
testimonies. (TAC, Ex. B.)
8
completion of the 2021-2022 school year. (Id. ¶¶ 7, 559-62.) In February 2022, members of the
RCDS Board communicated with Koo regarding Dunn’s conduct after the RCDS Board received
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
an email from a former Latin faculty member. (Id. ¶ 560-61.) In response, Koo maligned the
reporting former faculty member and the Bronsteins, claiming they are difficult or crazy and that
Nate was at fault, and that no one at Latin had done anything wrong. (Id. ¶ 562-66.)
At Latin, image and reputation are the first and highest priorities. (Id. ¶¶ 16-21, 38-43.)
When these priorities conflict with student well-being and protection or even following the law,
Latin puts image and reputation first. (Id. ¶ 20; see also id. ¶¶ 21, 27-55, 38-43, 588-623, Ex. B;
Omnibus Opp. at 2-12.) Koo, having spent more than a decade on Latin’s Board and having served
as Board Chair, necessarily knew of, and supported, this skewed priority. (E.g., TAC, ¶ 81.) That
imbalance was evident to Koo from the culture, practices and stated experiences of students
attending Latinand Koo’s extensive dealings with Dunn. (E.g., Id. ¶¶ 22--82.)
Koo’s actions toward the Bronsteins would have been entirely different if he were doing
anything other than protecting Latin’s reputation by concealing the wrongdoing of its agents. (E.g.,
id. ¶¶ 88-90.) To start, Koo would not have engaged in communications with third parties,
including RCDS, meant to give a false or misleading impression about the circumstances and/or
to promote Latin’s disparaging messages about Mrs. Bronstein and Nate. (Id. ¶¶ 550, 559-62, 756.)
Further, Koo would have taken action to ensure Latin’s immediate compliance with the Act by
insisting on the adoption of a compliant bullying prevention policy and by conducting the
investigation into Nate’s bullying report as well as the “kill yourself” (KYS) report made by a
student after Nate’s death. (Id. ¶¶ 445-449 (disregard of parent and son providing evidence of
9
cyberbullying), 450-65 (report of KYS message), 588-623 (failure to have compliant bullying
Koo also would have taken action to ensure Latin investigated the conduct of its agents—
Dunn, Von Ogden, Hennessy, Kranz and Knoche—and their conduct in this matter. (Id. ¶¶ 88-89.)
The NAIS advises that the Board of a school hire an independent third party to conduct
investigations into issues of child safety and well-being, and to not rely on employees and officers
because of the inherent conflict of interest of employees. (Id. ¶ 88.) Specifically, the NAIS explains
rely on the advice and opinions of an employee or officer of the corporation if the
trustee believes that person to be reliable and competent. However, greater care
should be exercised with respect to the latter because of the inherent self-
interest of management and other compensated employees. This is one of the
areas where the Penn State report would suggest that school boards balance the
gravity of their responsibility to a vulnerable community with the board’s trust and
delegation of authority to management. Where issues of child safety and well-
being are concerned, boards must remain aware of the risks and strengths of
a school’s programs and stay well-informed about any issues that arise in this
area. Indeed, the ongoing reporting of past abuse cases independent schools has
caused many schools to hire third-party investigators to ensure that investigations
and follow-up steps are not tainted by internal conflicts of interest.”
(Id. citing Trustee’s Guide to Fiduciary Responsibilities at 11-12 (emphasis added).) Koo ignored
this directive recklessly and intentionally because he had already made the decision and/or it was
ingrained as his practice, to ignore, overlook, allow, and conceal the wrongdoing of Dunn and
ARGUMENT
Koo argues there is no claim stated against him because certain allegations in the TAC are
made on information and belief. (Koo Mot. at 6-7.) Allegations can, however, be stated on
10
information and belief, particularly when “certain relevant facts of a cause of action will not be
known to the plaintiff” who is then “forced to present allegations that are based on information and
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
belief, particularly when the necessary facts are within the defendant’s sole knowledge.” In re
Reicher, 2021 IL App (2d) 200454, ¶ 42. This is certainly the case here where so much information
is known to the Defendants, who have engaged in a concerted effort to withhold anything and
everything they possibly can from the Bronsteins even when they had a duty to provide the
information. “In such circumstances, a complaint which is as complete as the nature of the case
allows is sufficient.” Id. (internal citations and quotations omitted). Further, all of the “belief”
allegations are based on facts otherwise alleged in the more than 600 paragraphs of fact allegations
in the TAC. (See Omnibus Opp. at 13-14 and Ex. A (tracing information and belief allegations to
II. THE BRONSTEINS STATE AN IIED CLAIM AGAINST KOO (COUNT VI).
The Bronsteins incorporate by reference the legal standards and arguments set out in the
Omnibus Opposition regarding Count VI for IIED pled against Koo and other defendants.
(Omnibus Opp. at 95-96, 101-07; TAC ¶¶ 716-734.) Otherwise, the Bronsteins ask this Court to
consider the additional facts specific to Koo, which are set forth above. (See Background, supra.)
These allegations support that Board Chair Koo engaged in a concerted and purposeful effort to
avoid his duties to Latin as an institution—which had he complied, would have benefitted rather
than harmed the Bronsteins—in order to protect the “reputation” of Latin, which is nothing more
than protecting specific constituencies who are themselves wrongdoers, including the student
cyberbullies and the individual Latin Defendants who had engaged in tortious and wrongful
9
Regardless, should this Court determine more is required, it is appropriate only to allow amendment,
particularly here when this is the first testing of a pleading by the Court. E.g., Golly v. Eastman (In re Estate
of DiMatteo), 2013 IL App (1st) 122948, ¶ 84.
11
conduct toward Nate. (Id.) Aiding and abetting the wrongdoers is not a legitimate objective for a
Board Chair Koo also engaged in intentional conduct aimed to promote a false and
misleading message to third parties about the Bronsteins and Nate to further cover up the
wrongdoing of Latin agents and to negatively influence public opinion about the Bronteins by
presenting them as “at fault” when they have been victims of Latin’s agents. (See Background,
supra.) All of Koo’s conduct here—particularly in light of (a) Koo’s position of power over the
and (b) how susceptible the Bronsteins were (and still are) to emotional distress given that their
son died by suicide and they found out after the fact that he was cyberbullied by Latin students,
reported it to the school and the school denied the cyberbullying and victim blamed Nate—is
sufficiently pled to be extreme and outrageous. See, e.g., Doe v. Calumet City, 161 Ill. 2d 374, 392
(1994); Kolegas v. Heftel Broadcasting Corp., 154 Ill. 2d 1, 20-21 (1992); Graham v.
Commonwealth Edison Co., 318 Ill. App. 3d 736, 745 (1st Dist. 2000); see also Kornick v.
10
Koo’s cited authorities (Koo Mot. at 9-10) are factually distinguishable: e.g., Kahn v. American Airlines,
266 Ill. App. 23d 726 (1st Dist. 1994) (allegations involving an airline security operation where the
passenger was sold a stolen ticket and arrested, but prosecution was later dropped, but not due to a finding
of innocence); Public Finance Corp. v. Davis, 66 Il. 2d 85 (1976) (allegations of creditor repeatedly
contacting debtor); Tabora v. Gottlieb Mem. Hosp., 279 Ill. App. 3d 108 (1st Dist. 1996) (allegations of
hospital giving anesthesiologist false performance reviews and revoking privileges). Koo claims his
conduct was passive (when it was not), citing Adams v. Sussman & Hertzberg, Ltd., 292 Ill. App. 3d 30, 40
(1st Dist. 1997) (Koo Mot. at 8, 9), but that case does not hold that “passive conduct” cannot support an
IIED claim, but only used passive to reference to failing to notify a prosecutor of newly discovered evidence.
Koo also claims that he did not want the Bronsteins to find out about his concealment (Koo Mot. at 11),
which is warped and improperly attempts to contradict the factual allegations of the TAC through argument.
Koo cites Cangemi v. Advocate South Suburban Hosp., 364 Ill. App. 3d 446, 470 (1st Dist. 2006), but that
case involved comment about the size of the baby’s head being the reason for caesarean section when it
was actually fetal distress, which the mother learned 20 years later when her child was preparing for college.
Finally, Koo claims the Bronsteins have had no emotional distress beyond the loss of their son. This is an
arrogant statement that Koo should have to prove through evidence, as was done in the case he cited. (Koo
Mot. at 12 (citing Taliani v. Resurreccion, 2018 IL App (3d) 160327, ¶ 28 (decided at summary judgment).)
12
III. THE BRONSTEINS STATE AN UNFAIR PRACTICES CLAIM AGAINST KOO
(COUNT VI).
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
For their Count VII – ICFA unfair practices claim (TAC, ¶¶ 747-761), the Bronsteins allege
that Koo’s conduct offends public policy, was unfair, immoral, unethical, oppressive and
unscrupulous, and caused substantial injury to consumers in violation of the ICFA. (Id. ¶¶ 754-
760.) Under his leadership, Koo allowed Latin to become the school run by Dunn with deplorable
practices that far from protecting children, placed them at risk particularly when they face a
situation of student conflict, bullying or sexual assault. (E.g., id. ¶¶ 21-70, 76-78, 80, 755, and Ex.
B.) Koo acted maliciously and with actual knowledge the Bronsteins would be harmed by
concealing the truth about Nate’s experience and reports of bullying, and by publicizing and/or
otherwise promoting Latin’s self-serving narrative to Latin personnel, to the Latin community, to
the RCDS community, and/or to the larger public, including that Bronsteins were difficult, Nate
was no angel, Nate was a Parker student and his death was not on Latin’s watch. (Id. ¶ 756.)
Koo erroneously argues that the Bronsteins do not allege that Koo was engaged in trade or
commerce. (Koo Mot. at 14.) Koo misses the point, as he is being sued in his capacity as Trustee
and Board Chair of Latin, which is involved in trade or commerce,11 and Koo’s trustee status brings
him within the scope of a person who may be sued under the ICFA. See 815 ILCS 505/1(c), (f)
and 10a (action may be brought against “person” who violates ICFA, which is defined to include
agents, directors, trustees of entity engaged in trade or commerce). Koo otherwise asserts
arguments similar to those addressed in the Omnibus Opposition at 93-94, incorporated herein,
and reflecting that he also misunderstands: (a) the elements of an ICFA unfair practices claim,
which is different from a deceptive acts claim, (b) the Bronsteins are entitled to emotional distress
11
See Scott v. Ass’n for Childbirth at Home, Int’l, 88 Ill. 2d 279, 285 (1981); Brody v. Finch Univ. of Health
Scis./The Chi. Med. Sch., 298 Ill. App. 3d 146, 158 (2d Dist. 1998).
13
damages as part of a total award, see Morris v. Harvey Cycle & Camper, Inc., 392 Ill. App. 3d
399, 403 (1st Dist. 2009) (Koo Mot. at 15-16), and (c) in pleading an ICFA claim, “the required
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
allegation of proximate cause is minimal since that determination is best left to the trier of fact.”
Pappas v. Pella Corp., 363 Ill. App. 3d 795, 805 (1st Dist. 2006), citing Connick v. Suzuki Motor
IV. KOO DOES NOT MEET HIS BURDEN OF ESTABLISHING ANY LITIGATION
PRIVILEGE HERE.
“protect Koo’s conduct” after Plaintiffs retained counsel on February 3, 2022. (Koo Mot. at 16.)
“The issue of absolute privilege is treated as an affirmative defense that may be raised and
determined in a section 2-619 motion.” Johnson v. Johnson & Bell, Ltd., 2014 IL App (1st) 122677,
¶ 15. To be decided on a 2-615 motion (as Koo seeks here), the pleadings must reveal the basis for
The litigation privilege for party litigants—as opposed to attorneys who have a much
broader privilege—can only be applied when “Illinois policy would be furthered by doing so.”
O’Callaghan, 2015 IL App (1st) 142152, ¶¶ 25, 27; Kurczaba v. Pollock, 318 Ill. App. 3d 686,
706 (1st Dist. 2000) (privilege “applied sparingly and confined to cases where the public service
and administration of justice require immunity”). While there is no policy furthered here, no
privilege should even be considered. The allegations against Koo, Greenwood, Hagerman and the
Latin Defendants are not that they caused harm through a filing in this case, or through the
discovery process, or anything related to the litigation process, it is about failing to comply with
the law, lying to conceal wrongdoing, and engaging in communications with third parties. “Illinois
has never extended the privilege to cover out-of-court communications to other persons.”
14
V. THE ILLINOIS NOT FOR PROFIT CORPORATIONS ACT DOES NOT APPLY
TO WILLFUL AND WANTON CONDUCT.
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
Koo he has immunity as a Trustee under Illinois’ NPC Act, 805 ILCS 105/101.01 et seq.
Koo cites Section 108.70 of the Act, but that provision does not apply when there is “willful or
wanton conduct.” 805 ILCS 105108.70(a) (emp. added). Because the Bronsteins allege willful
and wanton conduct, (see Background, supra) the Act does not provide a basis to dismiss the
Bronsteins’ claims. See Doe-3 v. McLean County Unit Dist. No. 5 Bd. of Dirs., 2012 IL 112479, ¶
19; Schlafly Trust v. Cori, 512 F. Supp. 3d 916, 930-931 (E.D. Mo. Jan. 7, 2021) (denying motion
to dismiss based on immunity under NPC Act because complaint alleged willful and wanton
conduct); Momans v. St. John’s Northwestern Military Academy, Inc., 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
5129, *26 (N.D. Ill. April 20, 2000) (defendants not fraudulently joined where complaint alleged
willful and wanton conduct and a jury could find against them on fraud claims despite NPC Act
CONCLUSION
For all the reasons stated herein, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court deny
Defendant Koo’s motion, and grant such other and further relief as this Court deems just.
12
In arguing for dismissal, Koo cites Spencer v. Ill. Cmty. Action Ass’n, 164 F. Supp. 2d 1056, 1064-1065
(C.D. Ill. 2001) (Koo Mot. 17). In that case, however, the court determined on summary judgment that the
privilege applied, after the plaintiff admitted that defendants did not “disregard her safety[.]”).
15
Danielle J. Gould Todd F. Flood
Victoria R. Collado Flood Law, PLLC
Alex D. Marks 155 W. Congress Street, Suite 603
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
16
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
1
EXHIBIT
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
1
ADMISSIONS
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
2
ATHLETICS
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
3
ATHLETICS
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
COACHES
1 Coaching is teaching: Coaches are, foremost, teachers. In this
spirit, coaches have a strong collegial relationship with other
educators and contribute to the school’s understanding of the
whole child.
2 Coaches have an understanding of the developmental needs of
the children with whom they work.
3 Coaches design and implement activities that improve the
knowledge and skills of all participants.
4 Coaches are aware of the physical abilities of their athletes
and do their best to keep the athletes safe while encouraging
students to reach new levels of achievement.
5 Coaches maintain the appropriate skills to teach their sport(s)
and provide appropriate first aid to an injured athlete.
6 Coaches mentoring athletic teams and events are role models
for the behavior expected of all spectators and participants at
any athletic event.
4
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
5
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
6
BUSINESS OFFICERS
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
7
EARLY CHILDHOOD
EDUCATION
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
PREAMBLE 1 Early childhood educators and all personnel who interact with
The following principles provide young children have appropriate training, understanding, and
common ground for interaction knowledge regarding the developmental characteristics of this
between independent school age group.
professionals and their many
constituents (parents, students, 2 Early childhood educators recognize that play is the work of
colleagues at other schools, and young children.
the public). The NAIS Principles
of Good Practice for member 3 Early childhood educators build on children’s natural curiosity
schools define high standards and to promote a love of learning.
ethical behavior in key areas of
school operations to guide schools 4 Early childhood educators prepare the environment so that
in becoming the best education
communities they can be, to embed
children learn through active exploration and discovery.
the expectation of professionalism,
and to further our sector’s core
5 Early childhood educators recognize the importance of outdoor
values of transparency, excellence, play and provide appropriate time and equipment.
and inclusivity. Accordingly,
membership in NAIS is contingent 6 Early childhood educators design programs that develop the
upon agreement to abide by large and small motor skills of young children.
the spirit of the PGPs.
7 Early childhood educators engage parents as partners in
OVERVIEW understanding the unique characteristics and needs of young
children.
Early childhood education
emphasizes the development 8 Early childhood educators, in observing and interpreting
of the whole child, providing for
children’s behavior, use bias-free assessment tools based on
each child’s social, emotional,
physical, and intellectual needs. developmental norms.
Early childhood programs are
developmentally appropriate in that 9 Early childhood educators promote equity and justice by
they are based on an understanding creating a community that fosters respect, understanding, and
of general patterns of growth in an appreciation of differences.
the early years as well as children’s
individual development.
8
EDUCATION OF
INTERNATIONAL
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
STUDENTS
IN INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS
9
EDUCATION OF
INTERNATIONAL
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
STUDENTS
IN INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS
10
ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL EDUCATORS
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
11
ENVIRONMENTAL
SUSTAINABILITY
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
12
EQUITY AND JUSTICE
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
13
FINANCIAL AID
ADMINISTRATION
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
PREAMBLE 1 The school adheres to all applicable local, state, and federal
The following principles provide laws and regulations, including antitrust laws and those
common ground for interaction that require nondiscriminatory practice in administering
between independent school its financial aid policies.
professionals and their many
constituents (parents, students, 2 The school operates within the context of both short- and
colleagues at other schools, and long-range financial aid budget and policy goals.
the public). The NAIS Principles
of Good Practice for member 3 The school uses objective research to measure the effectiveness
schools define high standards and of its progress toward its goals, and communicates the
ethical behavior in key areas of
school operations to guide schools
outcomes to its constituents as appropriate.
in becoming the best education
communities they can be, to embed
4 The school provides clear and transparent information to
the expectation of professionalism, families through outreach, education, and guidance on all
and to further our sector’s core aspects of its financial aid process and the factors that influence
values of transparency, excellence, admission and aid eligibility.
and inclusivity. Accordingly,
membership in NAIS is contingent 5 The school determines eligibility for admission without regard
upon agreement to abide by to a student’s application for financial aid.
the spirit of the PGPs.
6 The school commits to providing financial aid dollars to
OVERVIEW applicants who demonstrate that their family resources are
Recognizing that each family insufficient to meet all or part of the total educational costs.
bears the primary responsibility
for financing a student’s education 7 The school continues to provide support to students as long as
costs, NAIS’s Principles of they demonstrate financial need.
Good Practice for Financial Aid
Administration are designed to 8 The school maintains the same standards of behavior and
serve as guideposts in developing academic performance for recipients of financial aid as it does
professional policies and orderly for nonrecipients.
procedures among schools.
Through these principles, NAIS 9 The school enacts documented procedures that ensure a fair,
affirms its belief that the purpose consistent, and equitable assessment of each family’s ability to
of a financial aid program is to
provide monetary assistance
contribute toward educational expenses.
to those students who cannot
afford the cost of attending an
10 The school makes and communicates financial aid decisions in
independent school. Furthermore, a manner that allows families to make timely, careful, and fully
these principles reflect the informed enrollment decisions.
standards of equity and fairness
NAIS embraces and reassert NAIS’s
ongoing commitment to access Continued on next page
and diversity.
14
FINANCIAL AID
ADMINISTRATION
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
15
FUNDRAISING
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
16
EDUCATING FOR
GLOBAL CITIZENSHIP
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
AND INTERNATIONAL
MINDEDNESS
17
HEAD SEARCHES
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
18
HEAD SEARCHES
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
19
HEADS OF SCHOOL
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
20
HIRING PROCESS
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
21
HIRING PROCESS
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
22
INDEPENDENT
SCHOOL TRUSTEES
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
23
MIDDLE SCHOOL
EDUCATORS
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
24
PARENTS
WORKING WITH SCHOOLS
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
25
PARENTS
WORKING WITH SCHOOLS
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
3 The school seeks and values the parents’ perspective on the student.
26
SECONDARY SCHOOL
EDUCATORS
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
27
TEACHERS AND
SUPERVISORS
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
OF TEACHERS
PREAMBLE TEACHERS
The following principles provide 1 The teacher has a thorough knowledge appropriate for his
common ground for interaction or her teaching assignment and stays abreast of recent
between independent school
professionals and their many
developments in the field.
constituents (parents, students,
colleagues at other schools, and
2 The teacher uses a variety of teaching techniques suitable to the
the public). The NAIS Principles age and needs of the students and subject matter being taught.
of Good Practice for member
schools define high standards and 3 The teacher establishes positive relationships with students,
ethical behavior in key areas of which, while recognizing the differing roles of adult and child,
school operations to guide schools are characterized by mutual respect and good will.
in becoming the best education
communities they can be, to embed 4 The teacher collaborates with colleagues and the school’s
the expectation of professionalism, leadership in the design and implementation of curriculum
and to further our sector’s core
within the context of the school’s overall program and mission.
values of transparency, excellence,
and inclusivity. Accordingly, 5 The teacher initiates growth and change in his or her own
membership in NAIS is contingent
upon agreement to abide by intellectual and professional development, seeking out
the spirit of the PGPs. conferences, courses, and other opportunities to learn.
6 The teacher is self-aware and self-monitoring in identifying
OVERVIEW
and solving student, curricular, and school problems. At the
Entrusted with the education of same time, the teacher knows the mission and policies of the
children, the independent school school and, when questions or concerns arise, raises them with
teacher promotes the best interests
of the child within the context of
appropriate colleagues and supervisors.
the school’s philosophy. Those who
7 The teacher serves his or her school outside the classroom in
supervise teachers are responsible
for the quality of teaching and for a manner established by the individual school and consistent
promoting growth in those who with the responsibilities of a professional educator. For example,
teach. The following principles teachers often serve as advisers, coaches, or activity sponsors.
provide guidelines for teachers
and supervisors of teachers. 8 The teacher participates in the establishment and maintenance
of an atmosphere of collegial support and adherence to
professional standards.
9 The teacher welcomes supervision in the context of clearly
defined and well communicated criteria of evaluation.
28
TEACHERS AND
SUPERVISORS
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
OF TEACHERS
Continued from previous page
SUPERVISORS OF TEACHERS
1 The supervisor has thorough knowledge appropriate to his
or her supervisory assignment and stays abreast of recent
developments in the field. The supervisor also exemplifies in his
or her own work with faculty members the qualities that he or
she hopes to develop in the faculty.
2 The supervisor develops and administers a comprehensive
system of hiring, consistent with the policies of the school,
which results in the appointment of the best-qualified
candidate and a well-informed match between school and
teacher. Throughout the hiring and supervisory processes, the
supervisor values racial, cultural, and gender diversity.
3 The supervisor ensures that faculty members new to the school
receive orientation and support sufficient for them to work
effectively and with confidence that they are carrying out the
educational mission, policies, and procedures of the school.
4 The supervisor ensures that teachers are informed of both praise
and criticism of their work and that useful support and assistance
are available to each teacher to improve the quality of teaching.
5 The supervisor makes available to all faculty members on an
equitable basis whatever resources the school can provide for
professional growth and development, both inside and outside
the school.
6 The supervisor encourages and challenges teachers to initiate
curricular improvement by providing the necessary time
and resources and by creating structures to foster faculty
collaboration on curriculum development.
29
TEACHERS AND
SUPERVISORS
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
OF TEACHERS
Continued from previous page
30
TEACHING
AND LEARNING
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
PREAMBLE LEADERSHIP
The following principles provide 1 The school regularly evaluates its use of technology to support
common ground for interaction its mission, goals, and program.
between independent school
professionals and their many 2 School leadership incorporates technology considerations into
constituents (parents, students,
colleagues at other schools, and
strategic planning and creates a sustainable financial model for
the public). The NAIS Principles its technology commitments.
of Good Practice for member
schools define high standards and 3 The school’s technology leader is a member of one of the school
ethical behavior in key areas of leadership teams and has the training, authority, and support
school operations to guide schools needed to influence key areas of policy development, decision
in becoming the best education making, budget, and management.
communities they can be, to embed
the expectation of professionalism, 4 The school ensures that faculty, staff, and students have
and to further our sector’s core
equitable access to the technologies they need to support the
values of transparency, excellence,
and inclusivity. Accordingly, school’s mission, goals, and program.
membership in NAIS is contingent
upon agreement to abide by 5 The school recognizes that any innovative teaching and
the spirit of the PGPs. learning exploration, including technology innovation,
often requires significant support for faculty professional
OVERVIEW development and flexibility in schedule and program.
Digital technologies provide 6 School leadership establishes school-wide expectations and
increasingly powerful tools and provides ongoing professional development regarding the
offer a variety of educational
opportunities that can improve
integration of educational technology into the school curriculum.
teaching and learning. These
principles offer crucial guidelines
7 School leadership, academic leadership, and technology
for administrators, teachers, and leadership work together to ensure the development,
technology staff in planning and implementation, and evaluation of technology at the school.
managing the role of technology
in independent schools. 8 School leadership regularly investigates and evaluates
how emerging technologies impact, or may impact, the
sustainability of their academic and financial models.
31
TEACHING
AND LEARNING
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
32
TEACHING
AND LEARNING
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
33
TEACHING
AND LEARNING
FILED DATE: 3/15/2024 11:06 AM 2022L003763
DIGITAL ETHICS
1 The school engages in ethical business practices in its digital
technology initiatives, including considering the public purpose
opportunities of online course offerings that extend beyond its
own school community.
2 The school adheres to the NAIS Principles of Good Practice
for Admissions in its online courses and “in establishing
policies, procedures, and goals for student recruitment and
enrollment, the school makes inclusivity a central tenet, while
also complying with local, state, and federal laws.”
3 The school operates under a clear set of practices/guidelines
for maintaining privacy, confidentiality, and security in its use
of digital technology.
4 The school develops a responsible-use policy that is framed
in the positive, flexible enough to accommodate changes in
technology, and frequently reviewed.
5 Educators teach, model, and expect safe, healthy, ethical, legal,
and responsible use of digital resources and social media by
students and parents.
6 The school develops a policy regarding faculty and student
interactions on social media sites.
7 The school provides up-to-date information on fair use,
copyright, and Creative Commons information and requires
compliance by faculty, staff, and students.
8 The school establishes a curriculum-based digital citizenship/
digital responsibility program that includes ongoing
discussions of online behavior, cyberbullying, and respectful
and legal use of online tools.
9 The school stays current on issues, events, and concerns related
to online behavior and digital citizenship and informs faculty,
students, and parents when appropriate.
34