IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

Civil Division

A.E., C.J., C.K., C.S., C.C., D.F., E.D.,

J.R., J.G., J.T., J.F., J.S., K.C., K.P., M.M.,
N.B., R.L., S.S., T.M., T.J., T.P., X.F., No.:
Z.B.,
PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT
Plaintiffs,
Code:
vs.
Filed on Behalf of Plaintiffs:
THE SUMMIT SCHOOL, INC. operating
under the fictitious name SUMMIT
Counsel of Record for this Party:
ACADEMY,
JASON E. LUCKASEVIC, ESQUIRE
Defendant.
Pa I.D. No.: 85557

GOLDBREG, PERSKY & WHITE, P.C.

11 Stanwix St., Suite 1800
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
Phone: (412) 471-3980

jluckasevic@[Link]

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

Civil Division

A.E., C.J., C.K., C.S., C.C., D.F., E.D., J.R.,

J.G., J.T., J.F., J.S., K.C., K.P., M.M., N.B., No.:
R.L., S.S., T.M., T.J., T.P., X.F., Z.B,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

THE SUMMIT SCHOOL, INC. operating

under the fictitious name SUMMIT
ACADEMY,

Defendant.

NOTICE TO DEFEND

You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the

following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint and Notice

were served, by entering a written appearance personally or by an attorney and filing in writing

with the court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that

if you fail to do so, the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you

by the court without further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint or for any claim or

relief requested by the plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you.

YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO

NOT HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, THEN YOU SHOULD GO TO

OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU

CAN GET LEGAL HELP:

THE ALLEGHENY COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION

11th FLOOR KOPPERS BUILDING
436 SEVENTH AVENUE
PITTSBURGH, PA 15219

2
 TELEPHONE 412-261-5555

YOU MUST RESPOND TO THIS COMPLAINT WITHIN TWENTY (20) DAYS

OR A JUDGMENT FOR THE AMOUNT CLAIMED MAY BE ENTERED AGAINST YOU

BEFORE THE HEARING. IF YOU DO NOT APPEAR FOR THE HEARING, THE CASE

MAY BE HEARD IMMEDIATELY BEFORE A JUDGE. THERE IS NO RIGHT TO A

TRIAL DE NOVO ON APPEAL FROM A DECISION ENTERED BY A JUDGE.

3
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA

A.E., C.J., C.K., C.S., C.C., D.F., E.D., J.R.,

J.G., J.T., J.F., K.C., K.P., M.M., N.B., R.L.,
S.S., T.M., T.J., T.P., X.F., Z.B,

Plaintiffs,

vs. Civil Action No.:

THE SUMMIT SCHOOL, INC. operating

under the fictitious name SUMMIT
ACADEMY,

Defendant.

PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT

AND NOW, comes the Plaintiffs, by and through their undersigned counsel, Jason E.

Luckasevic, Esquire; and the law firm of Goldberg, Persky & White, P.C., and files the following

Complaint in Civil Action, averring as follows:

PARTIES

1. Given the sensitive nature of the claims made by Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs A.E., C.J., C.K.,

C.S., C.C., D.F., E.D., J.R., J.G., J.T., J.F., J.S., K.C., K.P., M.M., N.B., R.L., S.S., T.M., T.J.,

T.P., X.F., Z.B. are filing their Complaints under a pseudonym initial to protect their identity.

Pennsylvania recognizes the need to protect the identity of sexual assault victims pursuant to 42

Pa. C.S.A. § 5988. The legislative intent of this statute reflects the public policy commitment

within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to publicly protect the identity of victims of sexual

abuse. The Defendants will not be prejudiced in this proceeding as the identity of each individual

Plaintiff will be provided confidentially during litigation.

2. Defendant, THE SUMMIT SCHOOL, INC. is a non-profit corporation organized and

4
operating pursuant to the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. At all times relevant hereto,

Defendant THE SUMMIT SCHOOL, INC. was acting independently, and by and through the

actions of its employees who were acting within the course and scope of their employment.

3. Defendant THE SUMMIT SCHOOL, INC. operates within the Commonwealth of

Pennsylvania under the fictitious name SUMMIT ACADEMY. Hereinafter, the Defendant shall

be referred to as “Summit Academy.”

4. Defendant Summit Academy maintains a principal address of 564 Forbes Ave., Ste

1208, Pittsburgh, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania 15219.

5. All claimants were born after November 26, 1989, and are currently under the age of

fifty-five (55). Their claims therefore are not barred by any Statute of Limitations within the

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

6. As set forth more fully below, Plaintiffs assert their state law claims for negligence,

negligent supervision, negligent hiring, training, and retention, gross negligence, breach of

fiduciary duty, and negligence per se.

7. Plaintiffs seek compensatory and punitive damages for the injuries they have

suffered, as well as reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs and disbursements in bringing this action.

VENUE

8. Venue lies within this judicial district since some of the individuals identified herein

live in Allegheny County and the actions perpetrated against these individuals occurred within the

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

9. Furthermore, Defendant Summit Academy maintains a principal address of 564

Forbes Ave., Ste 1208, Pittsburgh, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania 15219. The placement of

5
Plaintiffs took place in Allegheny County and the hiring, monitoring, oversight, and policies

associated with the operation of the Defendant’s facility originated in Allegheny County.

FACTS

Sexual Abuse of Minors at Juvenile Residential Institutional Facilities

History and Tolerance of Sexual Abuse at Summit Academy

10. For decades, children detained at Summit Academy suffered sexual abuse at the

hands of guards, counselors, and agents of Defendant, all while Defendant has had knowledge of,

and turned a blind eye to, this culture of abuse. 1 The sexual abuse at juvenile detention facilities

operated has ranged from inappropriate strip searches to rape using violent physical force. 2

Defendant’s agents have had inappropriate and criminal sexual relationships with children at

Summit Academy, oftentimes involving bribery and grooming. Children detained at Summit

Academy were regularly offered contraband—such as cigarettes, candy, drugs, and alcohol—or

privileges in exchange for sexual favors. 3 The pervasive and persistent abuse, including sexual

abuse, at juvenile detention facilities has been publicly reported on for years. The culture of abuse

nonetheless continues to be a reality for children detained in facilities to this day.

11. Children who are sexually abused in juvenile detention facilities like Summit

Academy rarely file grievances against staff due to fear of retaliation or knowing that they will not

be believed. 4 Children at juvenile detention facilities like Summit Academy know that they cannot

1
See, e.g., U.S. Dep’t of Just., Bureau of Justice Statistics, Sexual Victimization in Juvenile Facilities
Reported by Youth, 2008-09 (Jan. 2010), available at [Link]
2
See U.S. Dep’t of Just., Proposed National Standards to Prevent, Detect, and Respond to Prison Rape
Under the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) at 15 (Jan. 2011), available at
[Link]
3
See, e.g., U.S. Dep’t of Just., Bureau of Justice Statistics, Sexual Victimization in Juvenile Facilities
Reported by Youth, 2008-09 at 14 (Jan. 2010), [Link]
4
See Jana Allen et. al., ‘It’s never OK’: Sexual abuse persists in juvenile facilities despite years of reform,
Kids Imprisoned – News21, (Aug. 21, 2020) available at [Link]
juvenile-detention-facilities/

6
trust facility staff, who regularly engage in physical abuse of the children charged to their care. 5

When they do witness or learn of sexual assaults, staff members at juvenile detention facilities like

Summit Academy look the other way and allow it to continue. 6 Sexual abuse at juvenile detention

facilities like Summit Academy therefore goes severely underreported. 7

12. According to a 2010 report from the U.S. Department of Justice, 13% percent of

youth in juvenile facilities are sexually abused, most often by the staff of the facility. 8

13. In 2008-09, the U.S. Department of Justice conducted a study that found that 88% of

youth who reported staff sexual misconduct reported more than one incident, with 27% reporting

more than ten. 9

14. In another study conducted by the U.S. Department of Justice that examined

substantiated instances of sexual abuse at juvenile detention facilities between 2013 and 2018

found that most juvenile detention staff who sexually victimized children faced no legal

repercussions for their actions. 10

5
Id.
6
Id.
7
See Robert W. Dumond, The Impact of Prisoner Sexual Violence: Challenges of Implementing Public
Law 108-79 – The Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003, 32 J. LEGIS. 142, 147 (2006) (“To fully understand the
implications of the BJS study, one must recognize that of all categories of crime, rape and sexual violence are
known to be one of the most underreported, making an accurate assessment of its occurrence difficult.”).
8
Jeremy Travis, Reflections on Juvenile Justice Reform in New York, 56 N.Y.L.S. Law Rev. 1318 at 1322
(2011-12) available at
[Link] Melissa
Sickmund, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Juveniles in Residential Placement, 1997–2008 (2010), available at
[Link]
9
See U.S. Dep’t of Just., Proposed National Standards to Prevent, Detect, and Respond to Prison Rape
Under the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA) at 6 (Jan. 2011), available at
[Link]
10
See Emily D. Buehler, U.S. Dep’t of Just., Substantiated Incidents of Sexual Victimization Reported by
Juvenile Justice Authorities, 2013–2018 (Mar. 2023) available at [Link]

7
 15. This study found that more than 27% of children who were abused by staff were

subject to actions that could be viewed as punishment, such as being issued a disciplinary report,

losing privileges, being placed in a separate housing unit, or confined to their cell or room. 11

16. The study also concluded that the majority of the cases involving staff victimizing

youth were more serious in nature: 68% involved sexual misconduct, which the study defined as

indecent exposure, intentionally touching sexual areas, and actions up through completed sexual

acts.

17. While the U.S. Department of Justice Report focused on substantiated reports of

sexual abuse, experts in the field note that “only a minuscule percentage of the overall incidents

of sexual abuse [are reported]; most kids in custody who endure abuse don’t speak out, and those

who do usually see their reports go nowhere.” 12

18. Defendant was aware or should have been aware that sexual abuse of children by

facility staff was a persistent and prevalent problem in their juvenile detention facilities, including

Summit Academy. For decades, Defendant has been made aware of the ongoing sexual abuse of

children in their care through various investigations and reports and through numerous allegations

by children at Summit Academy, extensive media reporting, and criminal proceedings against their

employees and agents.

19. Documented and publicized abuse, and reports of conditions known to be likely to

lead to abuse, at Summit Academy include:

a. In 2017, a Summit Academy Special Education teacher was

fired after accusations became public that she was engaging in
sexual acts in the classroom with Summit Academy students;
and,

11
Id.
12
See Tami Abdollah, Juvenile detention staff who sexually victimized children face few legal sanctions,
study says, USA Today, (Apr. 1, 2023) available at [Link]
juvenile-detention-staff-who-abused-children-faced-no-legal-action/11571406002/

8
 b. In April 2013, a former Summit Academy physician pled guilty
to sexually abusing two Summit Academy students since
working at Summit Academy since the early 2000s. The
physician was a serial abuser who had previously abused
children while working as a Boy Scout leader in the 1980s and
1990s.

a. Defendant’s Duty to Plaintiffs

20. At all times relevant and material hereto, the Defendant was responsible for providing

for the care, protection and safety of children placed in Summit Academy.

21. Defendant was responsible for oversight and monitoring of Summit Academy to

ensure compliance with applicable city, state, and federal laws.

22. Defendant was responsible for ensuring that the rights of children placed at Summit

Academy were not violated and that children placed in Summit Academy continued to enjoy all

the fundamental rights and freedoms children have outside of juvenile detention centers. This

included the basic right to be treated with dignity, the right to be free of cruel and inhumane

treatment, and the right to be free from physical and sexual abuse.

23. Upon information and belief, Defendant was responsible for developing policies and

procedures to prevent the sexual abuse of children in its legal custody.

24. Upon information and belief, Defendant was responsible for performing database

and/or background checks on prospective employees and agents of Summit Academy.

25. At all times relevant and material hereto, Pennsylvania authorized Defendant to

inspect and supervise Summit Academy in the interest of protecting the life, health, safety, and

comfort of the children placed in juvenile detention.

26. At all times relevant and material hereto, Pennsylvania law authorized Defendant to

investigate all reported child abuse allegations at Summit Academy.

9
 27. At all times relevant and material hereto, Defendant had a non-delegable duty to use

reasonable care in the investigation, licensing, supervision and/or monitoring of Summit Academy

and to develop or implement programs, guidelines, procedures and/or training to prevent the abuse

of children placed within Summit Academy.

28. At all times relevant and material hereto, Defendant provided child welfare, child

protective care, and childcare services.

29. At all times relevant and material hereto, Defendant was the legal guardian and/or

custodian of Plaintiffs and owed Plaintiffs a duty of reasonable care to protect them from

foreseeable harms.

30. At all times relevant and material hereto, Defendant owed a non-delegable duty to

Plaintiffs to use reasonable care to protect the safety, care, well-being and health of Plaintiffs while

they were under its care and custody. Defendant’s duties encompassed reasonable care in the

supervision of children in its agents’ custody and control, as well as reasonable care in the

selection, retention and supervision of individuals working at Summit Academy.

31. At all times relevant and material hereto, Defendant owed a non-delegable duty to

exercise reasonable care in the training of employees and/or agents in the prevention of sexual

abuse and protection of the safety of children in its care, custody and/or control.

32. At all times relevant and material hereto, the Defendant owed a non-delegable duty

to establish and implement policies and procedures in the exercise of reasonable care for the

prevention of sexual abuse and protection of the safety of children in its care, custody and/or

control.

33. At all times relevant and material hereto, Defendant owed non-delegable duties to

children in juvenile detention, including without limitation:

10
 a. To evaluate and investigate all reports of child abuse and/or
neglect;

b. To investigate all relevant conditions of the juvenile detention

centers that might affect the child;

c. To ensure that children residing in a juvenile detention center

are supervised at all times by authorized adult caregivers;

d. To report and investigate all known incidents of sexual abuse or

aggression occurring in the juvenile detention center;

e. To ensure that children were not left in dangerous conditions,

including being subjected to sexual, emotional or physical
abuse.

34. Defendant is legally responsible for the acts, omissions and negligence of its agents,

employees and entities with which it retains and/or contracts with to render juvenile detention and

other custodial services, including without limitation, at Summit Academy.

35. Defendant is legally responsible for the acts, omissions and negligence of the agents,

employees and entities carrying out its non-delegable duties, including without limitation, at

Summit Academy.

b. Sexual Abuse of Plaintiffs at Summit Academy

36. For decades, counselors, guards, and agents of the Defendant Summit Academy have

subjected children, including the individual Plaintiffs and others, to sexual abuse and harassment.

37. The institution, with knowledge of the actions of its employees and/or a willful

ignorance to these actions, has turned a blind eye to this culture of abuse.

38. The sexual abuse at these facilities, and as detailed herein, ranges from inappropriate

strip searches to rape using physically violent force.

39. The employees of the Defendant institution have had, and continue to have,

11
inappropriate and criminal sexual relationships with children at the facility.

40. These relationships are oftentimes predicated on grooming, bribery, and threats.

41. Children at the Defendant’s institution are regularly offered contraband or privileges

in exchange for sexual favors.

42. Other children are threatened with punishment, physical harm, and the threat of

individuals not believing their recitation of the abuse by the authority figures at the institution.

43. This culture of pervasive and persistent abuse has been reported publicly for decades.

44. Despite its pervasiveness, the culture continues with children at the institution scared

to file grievances or claims against their abusers for fear of retaliation or knowing they will not be

believed.

45. Knowing that the agencies responsible for overseeing their institution do not have

the resources to curtail this behavior, the employees at the institutions abuse the system to commit

repeated sexual abuse against these individuals without any repercussions.

c. Facts Specific to Individual Plaintiffs at Summit Academy

Plaintiff _A.E.

46. Plaintiff “A.E.” was housed at Summit Academy, a facility owned and/or operated

by The Academy Schools, for approximately nine to ten months in 2014 to 2015, when he was

approximately 17 years old.

47. Plaintiff A.E. was born in 1997 thus there is no issue associated with the Statute of

Limitations related to his claims.

12
 48. Plaintiff A.E. was sexually abused by an individual known as Miss Kelsey (“Abuser

Kelsey” or “Abuser”). At the relevant times herein, Abuser Kelsey was a teacher at Summit

Academy and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

49. Plaintiff A.E. was also sexually abused by an individual known as Tyler (“Abuser

Tyler” or “Abuser”). At the relevant times herein, Abuser Tyler was a counselor at Summit

Academy and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

50. The sexual abuse took place approximately two to three times a week while Plaintiff

A.E. was housed at Summit Academy. The abuse started one day when Abuser Kelsey made

Plaintiff A.E. stay after class in her classroom. After the other students left, Abuser Kelsey took

A.E. to a music room, where she suggestively touched A.E. overtop his clothing and asked if he

liked women.

51. Miss Kelsey took Plaintiff A.E. to the music room four or five more times, where she

would touch his genitals overtop and underneath of his clothing, and A.E. would be forced to touch

her genitals overtop and underneath her clothing as well.

52. The next time Abuser Kelsey brought Plaintiff A.E. to the music room, Abuser

Kelsey also brought in Abuser Tyler, she told A.E. that he would have to perform sexual acts with

the both her and Abuser Tyler now, or she would send another staff member, an individual named

Keith, to his room at night. A.E. refused, and he was later assaulted by Keith, resulting in A.E.

suffering a broken jaw, which required surgery to be corrected.

53. While Plaintiff A.E.’s jaw was broken, Abuser Kelsey still took him to the music

room, where she and Abuser Tyler would touch A.E.’s genitalia overtop and underneath of his

clothing. Abuser Kelsey would rape A.E. by inserting his penis into her vagina, while Abuser Tyler

also participated in the sexual acts.

13
 54. On at least one occasion, Abuser Kelsey forced Plaintiff A.E. to make out with her,

and while that was happening, Abuser Tyler would grope at A.E.’s penis underneath his clothing.

55. Abuser Kelsey and Abuser Tyler also prevented Plaintiff A.E. from going home for

Thanksgiving and Christmas, stating that they would not give him an opportunity to run away from

the sexual abuse.

56. Plaintiff A.E. told his aunt about the abuse while he was still being housed at Summit

Academy, but her attempts to report the abuse were dismissed by the staff.

57. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abusers were non-

consensual. At the relevant times herein, Plaintiff A.E. was a minor and could not legally consent.

58. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abusers were sexually abusing

children at Summit Academy, including Plaintiff A.E.

59. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff A.E., Abusers were not

being adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information and belief,

Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate Abuser enabled

the above-described sexual abuse.

Plaintiff C.J.

60. Plaintiff “C.J.” was housed at Summit Academy in approximately 2011 to 2012,

when he was approximately 14 to 15 years old.

61. Plaintiff C.J. was born in 1996 and thus has no issues related to the Statute of

Limitations associated with his claims.

62. Plaintiff C.J. was sexually abused by several individuals, including one known as

Bryson (“Abuser Bryson” or “Abuser”). At the relevant times herein, Abuser Bryson was a staff

member at Summit Academy and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

14
 63. The sexual abuse took place on approximately 6 separate occasions while Plaintiff

C.J. was housed at Summit Academy. The sexual abuse took place each time Plaintiff C.J. was

sent to the sanction unit of the facility. Bryson, and other staff members in charge of searching

kids who entered the unit, would conduct a strip search on Plaintiff C.J.

64. Bryson would use this search as an opportunity to grope at Plaintiff C.J.’s penis,

testes, and buttocks underneath of his clothing.

65. Bryson and the other staff members would threaten Plaintiff C.J. with physical

violence if he did not comply with the searches.

66. Plaintiff C.J. reported the sexual abuse to a staff member at Summit Academy, but

nothing was done about the report or the abuse.

67. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abuser Bryson and

others were non-consensual. At the relevant times herein, Plaintiff C.J. was a minor and could not

legally consent.

68. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abuser Bryson and others were

sexually abusing children at Summit Academy, including Plaintiff C.J.

69. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff C.J., Abuser Bryson was

not being adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information and

belief, Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate Abuser

Bryson and others enabled the above-described sexual abuse.

Plaintiff C.K.

70. Plaintiff “C.K.” was housed at Summit Academy in approximately 2016 to 2017,

when he was approximately 15 to 16 years old.

15
 71. Plaintiff C.K. was born in 2001 and thus has no issues associated with the Statute of

Limitations associated with his claims.

72. Plaintiff C.K. was sexually abused by a staff member at Summit Academy who

served as an employee/agent of the Defendants (“Abuser John Doe” or “Abuser”). 13

73. The sexual abuse took place on approximately 6 separate occasions while Plaintiff

C.K. was housed at Summit Academy. Abuser John Doe would wait until he could get Plaintiff

C.K. alone and take him to the bathrooms, where the Abuser knew there were no cameras to

witness his actions.

74. Once there, Abuser John Doe would expose his genitals to Plaintiff C.K. and

masturbate in front of him. Plaintiff C.K. would be forced to touch Plaintiff C.K.’s penis and

perform oral sex on him. Abuser John Doe would also touch Plaintiff C.K.’s penis overtop of and

underneath of his clothing.

75. Abuser John Doe threatened Plaintiff C.K. that if he told anyone about the sexual

abuse, he would be beaten up by other kids, that Abuser John Doe would abuse him more, and that

Abuser John Doe would make sure that he would stay in the facility longer.

76. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abuser John Doe were

non-consensual. At the relevant times herein, Plaintiff C.K. was a minor and could not legally

consent.

77. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abuser John Doe was sexually abusing

children at Summit Academy, including Plaintiff C.K.

13
At the relevant times herein, Abuser John Doe could be described as a mixed-race male in his early 30s
approximately 5’8” tall with scruffy facial hair. He was the staff member on Plaintiff C.K.’s floor that would give
him his phone to make outside calls.

16
 78. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff C.K., Abuser John Doe

was not being adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information

and belief, Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate

Abuser John Doe enabled the above-described sexual abuse.

Plaintiff C.C.

79. Plaintiff “C.S.” was housed at Defendant’s Summit Academy between 2006 and 2008

when he was approximately 15 years old.

80. Plaintiff C.S. was born in 1990 and thus has no issue associated with his Statute of

Limitations related to his claims.

81. Plaintiff C.S. was sexually abused by an individual known as Coach M. (“Abuser

M.” or “Abuser”). At the relevant times herein, Abuser M. was the football coach at Summit

Academy and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

82. The sexual abuse took place on multiple occasions while Plaintiff C.S. was housed at

Summit Academy. Abuser M. forced the football team to take group showers and attempted to

touch C.S.’s genitals.

83. After Plaintiff C.S. stood his ground about Abuser M. touching him, Abuser M.

disallowed C.S. from playing in an important football game and frequently had him stay behind

and clean.

84. Plaintiff C.S. was also sexually abused by an unnamed individual (“Abuser John Doe

5” or “Abuser”). 14 At the relevant times herein, Abuser John Doe 5 was a staff member who served

as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

14
At the relevant times herein, Abuser John Doe 5 could be described as a Black male, approximately 6’2”, bald,
chubby, with big lips, and always chewing tobacco.

17
 85. The sexual abuse took place on multiple occasions while Plaintiff C.S. was housed at

Summit Academy. Abuser John Doe 5 frequently would touch and grab C.S.’s hands and

shoulders. Abuser John Doe 5 attempted to recruit C.S. to the first floor, where Abuser John Doe

5 promised C.S. he could get C.S. whatever he wanted. After C.S. moved to the first floor, Abuser

John Doe 5 frequently came into C.S.’s room and tried to touch C.S.’s buttocks and C.S. had to

fight him off.

86. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abusers were non-

consensual. At relevant times herein, Plaintiff C.S. was a minor and could not legally consent.

87. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abusers were sexually abusing

children at Summit Academy, including Plaintiff C.S.

88. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff C.S., Abusers were not

adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information and belief,

Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate Abusers directly

enabled the above-described abuse.

Plaintiff C.C.

89. Plaintiff “C.C.” was housed at Defendant Summit Academy for six months in 2006

and 2007 when he was approximately 15 to 16 years old.

90. Plaintiff C.C. was born in 1991 and thus has no issues with the Statute of Limitations

related to his claims.

91. Plaintiff C.C. was sexually abused by an individual known as Bob B. (“Abuser Bob”

or “Abuser”). 15 At the relevant times herein, Abuser Bob was a Shift Leader at Summit Academy

and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

15
At the relevant times herein, Abuser Bob could be described as a tall white male who was bald and wore glasses.

18
 92. The sexual abuse took place on multiple occasions while Plaintiff C.C. was housed

at the Summit Academy Herman facility. When C.C. got in trouble, Abuser Bob would send C.C.

on a bus to the Summit Academy Pittsburgh facility. Abuser Bob forced C.C. to spend the bus ride

naked, both on the way to Pittsburgh and back to Herman.

93. Plaintiff C.C. was also sexually abused by an unnamed individual (Abuser John Doe

3” or “Abuser”). At the relevant times herein, Abuser John Doe 3 was a doctor at the Summit

Academy Herman facility and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

94. Abuser John Doe 3 was treating an injury to C.C.’s leg and began touching C.C.’s

penis without consent. Abuser John Doe 3 rubbed a cream on C.C.’s penis.

95. Plaintiff C.C. reported Abuser John Doe 1 to his Parole Officer, but the Parole Officer

called him a gay slur and told C.C.’s next facility about the incident and that C.C. was a [gay slur].

96. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abusers were sexually abusing

children at the Summit Academy Herman facility, including Plaintiff C.C.

97. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff C.C., Abusers were not

adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information and belief,

Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate Abusers directly

enabled the above-described abuse.

Plaintiff E.D.

98. Plaintiff “E.D.” was housed at Summit Academy, a facility owned and/or operated

by The Academy Schools, for six months in 2015 when he was approximately 15 or 16 years old.

99. Plaintiff E.D. was born in 1999 thus there is no issue with the Statute of Limitations

associated with his claims.

19
 100. Plaintiff E.D. was sexually abused by an individual known as Jenna (“Abuser Jenna”

or “Abuser”). At the relevant times herein, Abuser Jenna was a teacher at Summit Academy and

served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

101. The sexual abuse took place on five or six separate occasions while Plaintiff E.D. was

housed at Summit Academy. Abuser Jenna and E.D. began a sexual relationship that included

touching each other’s genitals under their clothing. Abuser Jenna would have E.D. masturbate her,

and she would masturbate E.D.

102. Abuser Jenna told E.D. if he reported the sexual abuse, she would make it look like

it was his fault and cause him to extend his stay at Summit Academy.

103. Plaintiff E.D. was also sexually abused by an individual known as Rich M. (Abuser

Rich M.” or “Abuser”). At the relevant times herein, Abuser Rich M. was a supervisor at Summit

Academy and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

104. The sexual abuse took place on two to five separate occasions while Plaintiff E.D.

was housed at Summit Academy. Abuser Rich M. would perform strip searches on E.D. while

making comments about his genitals and fondling his penis and scrotum over and under his

clothing.

105. Plaintiff E.D. was also sexually abused by an individual known as Coach M. (“Abuser

M.” or “Abuser”). At the relevant times herein, Abuser M. was the football coach at Summit

Academy and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

106. The sexual abuse took place almost every day while Plaintiff E.D. was housed at the

Summit Academy facility. Abuser M. touched and groped E.D.’s buttocks.

107. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abusers were non-

consensual. At relevant times herein, Plaintiff E.D. was a minor and could not legally consent.

20
 108. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abusers were sexually abusing

children at Summit Academy, including Plaintiff E.D.

109. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff E.D., Abusers were not

adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information and belief,

Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate Abusers directly

enabled the above-described abuse.

Plaintiff D.F.

110. Plaintiff “D.F.” was housed at Summit Academy on two separate occasions, the first

occasion was in approximately 2012 to 2013, when he was approximately 16 years old. The second

occasion was in approximately 2013 to 2014 or 2015, when Plaintiff D.F. was approximately 17

years old

111. Plaintiff D.F. was born in 1996 and thus has no issues with the Statute of Limitations

related to his claims.

112. Plaintiff D.F. was sexually abused by an individual known as Melissa or “Missy”

(“Abuser Melissa” or “Abuser”). 16 At the relevant times herein, Abuser Melissa was a staff

member at Summit Academy and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

113. The sexual abuse took place on approximately 3 separate occasions while Plaintiff

D.F. was housed at Summit Academy. Abuser Melissa would get Plaintiff D.F. and take him to a

place where they would be alone. Once there, Abuser Melissa would expose herself to Plaintiff

D.F., masturbating in front of him. Plaintiff D.F. was forced to touch Abuser Melissa’s buttocks

16
At the relevant times herein, Abuser Melissa could be described as a short white woman.

21
and breasts overtop of her clothing, and Abuser Melissa would touch Plaintiff D.F.’s penis overtop

and underneath of his clothing.

114. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abuser Melissa were

non-consensual. At the relevant times herein, Plaintiff D.F. was a minor and could not legally

consent.

115. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abuser Melissa was sexually abusing

children at Summit Academy, including Plaintiff D.F.

116. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff D.F., Abuser Melissa was

not being adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information and

belief, Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate Abuser

Melissa enabled the above-described sexual abuse.

Plaintiff J.R.

117. Plaintiff “J.R.” was housed at Summit Academy from approximately May to

November 2014, when he was approximately 17 years old.

118. Plaintiff was born in 1996 and thus has no issue with the Statute of Limitations related

to his claims.

119. Plaintiff J.R. was sexually abused by a teacher and golf coach at Summit Academy

who served as an employee/agent of the Defendants. (“Abuser John Doe 1” or “Abuser”). 17

120. The sexual abuse took place one time while Plaintiff J.R. was housed at Summit

Academy. Plaintiff J.R. and Abuser John Doe 1 were play wrestling in Abuser John Doe’s

classroom in front of Plaintiff J.R.’s classmates. During this fight, Abuser John pushed his fingers

17
At the relevant times herein, Abuser John Doe 1 could be described as a chubby white male approximately 5’10”
tall with dark brown almost black hair.

22
deep into Plaintiff J.R.’s buttocks overtop of Plaintiff J.R.’s clothing, coming close to penetrating

his anus.

121. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abuser John Doe 1

were non-consensual. At the relevant times herein, Plaintiff J.R. was a minor and could not legally

consent.

122. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abuser John Doe 1 was sexually

abusing children at Summit Academy, including Plaintiff J.R.

123. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff J.R., Abuser John Doe 1

was not being adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information

and belief, Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate

Abuser John Doe 1 enabled the above-described sexual abuse.

Plaintiff J.G.

124. Plaintiff “J.G.” was housed at the Defendant’s facility in 2016 and 2017.

125. Plaintiff J.G. was born in 2000 and thus has no issue with the Statute of Limitations

associated with his claims.

126. Plaintiff J.G. was sexually abused by an individual known as Arthur (“Abuser

Arthur” or “Abuser”). At the relevant times herein, Abuser Arthur was a Team Leader at Summit

Academy and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

127. The sexual abuse took place following a visit home on a home pass while Plaintiff

J.G. was housed at Summit Academy. Abuser Arthur took J.G. into a room with multiple showers,

strip searched J.G. and forced him to bend over, touch the ground, and cough. Abuser Arthur then

touched J.G.’s genitals and all over his body. After forcing J.G. to shower in cold water for 60-90

seconds, Abuser Arthur used a metal detector wand to touch and move J.G.’s penis around.

23
 128. Plaintiff J.G. was also sexually abused by an individual known as Anthony (“Abuser

Anthony” or “Abuser”). 18 At the relevant times herein, Abuser Anthony was a Floor 3 Team

Leader at Summit Academy and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

129. Abuser Anthony sexually abused J.G. in substantially the same manner described

above on one occasion.

130. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abusers were non-

consensual. At relevant times herein, Plaintiff J.G. was a minor and could not legally consent

131. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abusers were sexually abusing

children at Summit Academy, including Plaintiff J.G.

132. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff J.G., Abusers were not

adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information and belief,

Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate Abusers directly

enabled the above-described abuse.

Plaintiff J.T.

133. Plaintiff “J.T.” was housed at Summit Academy in approximately 2014 to 2015,

when he was approximately 17 years old.

134. Plaintiff was born in 1996 and thus has no issue associated with his Statute of

Limitations related to his claims.

135. Plaintiff J.T. was sexually abused by an individual known as Jim (“Abuser Jim” or

“Abuser”). 19 At the relevant times herein, Abuser Jim was a staff member at Summit Academy

and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

18
At the relevant times herein, Abuser Anthony could be described as a light-skinned Black male, heavy-set, with
curly hair and a big beard.
19
At the relevant times herein, Abuser Jim is believed to have been the 4th floor supervisor at Summit Academy.

24
 136. The sexual abuse took place on a daily basis while Plaintiff J.T. was housed at

Summit Academy. Abuser Jim would grope Plaintiff J.T.s testicles overtop of and underneath his

clothing. Abuser Jim would also expose himself to Plaintiff J.T. and threatened to stick his penis

in J.T.’s mouth to make him stop talking.

137. On at least one occasion, Abuser Jim forced Plaintiff J.T. to walk, while naked, from

one end of a hallway to another while all the other boys watched him. Plaintiff J.T. was not allowed

to cover himself in any way, as he was forced to keep his hands in the air.

138. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abuser Jim were non-

consensual. At the relevant times herein, Plaintiff J.T. was a minor and could not legally consent.

139. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abuser Jim was sexually abusing

children at Summit Academy, including Plaintiff J.T.

140. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff J.T., Abuser Jim was not

being adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information and belief,

Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate Abuser Jim

enabled the above-described sexual abuse.

Plaintiff J.F.

141. Plaintiff “J.F.” was housed at Summit Academy, a facility owned and/or operated by

The Academy Schools in approximately 2006 or 2007 when he was approximately 14 or 15 years

old.

142. Plaintiff J.F. was born in 1992 thus there is no issue with the Statute of Limitations

related to his claims.

25
 143. Plaintiff J.F. was sexually abused by an unnamed individual (“Abuser John Doe 4”

or “Abuser”). At the relevant times herein, Abuser John Doe 4 was a math teacher at Summit

Academy and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

144. The sexual abuse took place on a daily basis while Plaintiff J.F. was housed at

Summit Academy. Abuser John Doe 4 would take the students to the library and beckon J.F. to

come into hidden areas of bookshelves with him. Abuser John Doe 4 would then touch J.F. on his

penis and buttocks over the clothes. Abuser John Doe 4 also unsuccessfully attempted to put his

hand down the back of J.F.’s pants. Abuser John Doe 4 frequently “ball tapped” J.F. by smacking

J.F.’s penis and testicles with his hand while walking by.

145. Abuser John Doe 4 told Plaintiff J.F. that if J.F. told anyone about the sexual abuse,

Abuser John Doe 4 would hurt J.F., or John Doe 4 would have other students hurt J.F.

146. During a court hearing, Plaintiff J.F. told the Court and his guardian that he did not

feel safe at Summit Academy and that he was being sexually abused. He was subsequently sent

home instead of back to Summit Academy.

147. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abusers were non-

consensual. At relevant times herein, Plaintiff J.F. was a minor and could not legally consent.

148. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abuser John Doe 4 was sexually

abusing children at Summit Academy, including Plaintiff J.F.

149. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff J.F., Abuser John Doe 4

was not adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information and

belief, Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate Abuser

John Doe 4 directly enabled the above-described abuse.

26
Plaintiff J.S.

150. Plaintiff “J.S.” was housed at Summit Academy, a facility owned and/or operated by

The Academy Schools sometime between 2015 and 2017, when he was between approximately

15 and 17 years old.

151. Plaintiff J.S. was born in 2000 thus there is no issue with the Statute of Limitations

related to his claims.

152. Plaintiff J.S. was sexually abused by an unnamed individual (“Abuser Jane Doe 1”

or “Abuser”). At the relevant times herein, Abuser Jane Doe 1 was a teacher at Summit Academy

and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

153. The sexual abuse took place on multiple occasions while Plaintiff J.S. was housed at

Summit Academy. Abuser Jane Doe 1 would walk past J.S. in the classroom and grope his penis

on top of his clothing. J.S. witnessed Abuser Jane Doe 1 grope other male juveniles’ genitals in

the classroom as well.

154. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abuser Jane Doe 1

were non-consensual. At the relevant times herein, Plaintiff J.S. was a minor and could not legally

consent.

155. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abuser Jane Doe 1 was sexually

abusing children at Summit Academy, including Plaintiff J.S.

156. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff J.S., Abuser Jane Doe 1

was not adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information and

belief, Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate Abuser

Jane Doe 1 directly enabled the above-described abuse.

27
Plaintiff K.C.

157. Plaintiff “K.C.” was housed at the Defendant’s facility for six to nine months is

approximately 2011 or 2012.

158. Plaintiff was born in 1991 and thus has no issue associated with his Statute of

Limitations associated with his claims.

159. Plaintiff K.C. was sexually abused by an unnamed individual (“Abuser John Doe 3”

or “Abuser”). 20 At the relevant times herein, Abuser John Doe 3 was the head football coach at the

Summit Academy Herman facility and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

160. The sexual abuse took place two to three times per week while Plaintiff K.C. was

housed at the Summit Academy facility. Abuser John Doe 3 would slap and grope K.C.’s buttocks

in the locker room. Additionally, whenever K.C. was restrained, Abuser John Doe 3 would fondle

and grab his penis and scrotum. If K.C. shouted or indicated that it hurt, Abuser John Doe 3 would

make it hurt more.

161. Additionally, Abuser John Doe 3 would order K.C. not to talk about what was going

on every time K.C. made a call home. When K.C. fought back after being sexually groped in a

restraint, Abuser John Doe 3 revoked his home pass for Christmas.

162. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abuser John Doe 3

was non-consensual. At relevant times herein, Plaintiff K.C. was a minor and could not legally

consent.

163. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abuser John Doe 3 was sexually

abusing children at the Summit Academy Herman facility, including Plaintiff K.C.

20
At the relevant times herein, Abuser John Doe 3 could be described as a short black male with glasses.

28
 164. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff K.C., Abuser John Doe

3 was not adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information and

belief, Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate Abuser

John Doe 3 directly enabled the above-described abuse.

Plaintiff K.P.

165. Plaintiff “K.P.” was housed at Summit Academy from approximately October 2009

to December 2011, when he was approximately 14 to 16 years old.

166. Plaintiff K.P. was born in 1995 and thus has no issue with the Statute of Limitations

associated with his claims.

167. Plaintiff K.P. was sexually abused by an individual known as Mr. M. (“Abuser M.”

or “Abuser”). At the relevant times herein, Abuser M. was a staff member at Summit Academy

and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

168. The sexual abuse took place approximately every day after wrestling practice while

Plaintiff K.P. was housed at Summit Academy. In the shower room after practice, Abuser M., other

wrestling staff members, and fellow students would touch Plaintiff K.P.’s buttocks and genitalia

while he was unclothed. On at least one occasion, Abuser M. digitally raped Plaintiff K.P. by

inserting his finger into his anus.

169. Plaintiff K.P. was threatened by Abuser M. that if he told anyone, Plaintiff K.P. would

be beaten up by other students, made out to be a liar, and kicked off the wrestling team.

170. Plaintiff K.P. tried to report the abuse to other staff members and students, but they

did not believe him.

171. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abuser M. were non-

consensual. At the relevant times herein, Plaintiff K.P. was a minor and could not legally consent.

29
 172. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abuser M. was sexually abusing

children at Summit Academy, including Plaintiff K.P.

173. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff K.P., Abuser M. was not

being adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information and belief,

Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate Abuser M.

enabled the above-described sexual abuse.

Plaintiff M.M.

174. Plaintiff “M.M.” was housed at Summit Academy, a facility owned and/or operated

by The Academy Schools, in approximately 2012 to 2013, when he was approximately 16 years

old.

175. Plaintiff M.M. was born in 1996 and thus has no issue with the Statute of Limitations

related to his claims.

176. Plaintiff M.M. was sexually abused by a night shift staff member and coach at

Summit Academy who served as an employee/agent of the Defendants (“Abuser John Doe” or

“Abuser”). 21

177. The sexual abuse took place on a daily basis while Plaintiff M.M. was housed at

Summit Academy. On the first occasion, Abuser John Doe came into Plaintiff M.M.’s room at

night and rubbed M.M’s legs. When M.M. resisted, Abuser John Doe threatened M.M. with not

being able to play sports and not being able to go home on a home pass.

178. The abuse gradually intensified, Abuser John Doe would continue to come into

Plaintiff M.M.’s room, and he would expose his genitals to M.M., masturbate in front of M.M.,

21
At the relevant times herein, Abuser John Doe could be described as an older white male with smaller facial
features.

30
and force M.M. to touch Abuser John Doe’s penis overtop and underneath his clothing. Abuser

John Doe would also touch M.M.’s penis overtop and underneath of his clothing, and on more

than one occasion, inserted his fingers into M.M.’s anus.

179. On one occasion, Abuser John Doe told Plaintiff M.M. that if M.M. performed oral

sex on him, he would get M.M. a home pass after the next football game. M.M. complied, but

Abuser John Doe did not ensure that M.M. was given a home pass.

180. Plaintiff M.M. was also sexually abused by another night shift staff member at

Summit Academy who served as an employee/agent of the Defendants

(“Abuser John Doe 2” or “Abuser”). 22

181. Abuser John Doe 2 sexually abused Plaintiff M.M. in substantially the same manner

as described above on substantially the same occasions.

182. Abuser John Doe 2 would offer Plaintiff M.M. prohibited items, such as chewing

tobacco, cigarettes, and candy if Plaintiff M.M. complied with the abuse.

183. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abusers were non-

consensual. At the relevant times herein, Plaintiff M.M. was a minor and could not legally consent.

184. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abusers were sexually abusing

children at Summit Academy, including Plaintiff M.M.

185. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff M.M., Abusers were not

being adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information and belief,

Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate Abusers enabled

the above-described sexual abuse.

22
At the relevant times herein, Abuser John Doe 2 could be described as a heavy-set, older white male with a scruffy
beard who chewed a lot of tobacco.

31
Plaintiff N.B.

186. Plaintiff “N.B.” was housed at Defendant Summit Academy from approximately

August 2016 to March 2017, when he was approximately 16 years old.

187. Plaintiff N.B. was born in 2000 and thus has no issue associated with the Statute of

Limitations related to his claims.

188. Plaintiff N.B. was sexually abused by an individual known as Hannah (“Abuser

Hannah” or “Abuser”). 23 At the relevant times herein, Abuser Hannah was an art teacher at Summit

Academy and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

189. The sexual abuse took place approximately two to three times a week while Plaintiff

N.B. was housed at Summit Academy. Abuser Hannah would pull N.B. out of class to do art

sessions. Once they were alone, Abuser Hannah would hug N.B. and grab his genitals both overtop

and underneath his clothing. Abuser Hannah would then take N.B.’s shirt off and kiss his lips,

ears, chest and stomach. Abuser Hannah would then force N.B. to touch her private parts and put

N.B.’s finger into her vagina.

190. Abuser Hannah would threaten Plaintiff N.B. that if he reported the abuse, she would

stop him from playing on the football team and make is so that he could not get a home pass. If

N.B. endured the abuse, Abuser Hannah would let N.B. use her computer to access Facebook.

191. Plaintiff N.B. was also sexually abused by another individual known as Jessica N.

(“Abuser Jessica” or “Abuser”). 24 At the relevant times herein, Abuser Jessica was an IEP teacher

at Summit Academy and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

23
At the relevant times herein, Abuser Hannah could be described as a skinny, 22-year-old female with blonde hair,
approximately 5’5” tall and she had a tattoo.
24
At the relevant times herein, Abuser Jessica could be described as a female with an average build in her 30s. She
had brown hair, wore glasses, and she had star-shaped tattoos on her ankle and arms.

32
 192. The sexual abuse took place daily while Plaintiff N.B. was housed at Summit

Academy. Abuser Jessica would sit on N.B.’s lap and grab his genitals while telling him how much

she wanted him. She would show her breasts to N.B. and masturbate him on multiple occasions.

193. Abuser Jessica would threaten Plaintiff N.B. that if he reported the abuse, she would

stop him from playing on the football team and make is so that he could not get a home pass. If

N.B. endured the abuse, Abuser Jessica would provide N.B. with outside food.

194. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abusers were non-

consensual. At the relevant times herein, Plaintiff N.B. was a minor and could not legally consent.

195. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abusers were sexually abusing

children at Summit Academy, including Plaintiff N.B.

196. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff N.B., Abusers not being

adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information and belief,

Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate Abusers enabled

the above-described sexual abuse.

Plaintiff R.L.

197. Plaintiff Rafael Lopez (“R.L.”) was housed at a facility owned and/or operated by

Summit Academies in 2005 and 2006.

198. Plaintiff R.L. was born in 1990 and thus has no issue with the Statute of Limitations

associated with his claims.

199. Plaintiff R.L. was sexually abused by an individual known as Coach M. (“Abuser

M.” or “Abuser”). At the relevant times herein, Abuser M. was the football coach at Summit

Academy and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

33
 200. The sexual abuse took place approximately twice per week while Plaintiff R.L. was

housed at Summit Academy. Abuser M. fondled R.L.’s genitals and forced him to touch Abuser

M.’s genitals. Abuser M. also forced R.L. to perform oral sex on him and penetrated him anally

with his penis.

201. Abuser M. told R.L. he would speak to the Judge and get his sentence lengthened if

R.L. told anyone about the sexual abuse.

202. Plaintiff R.L. was also sexually abused by another unnamed man (“Abuser John Doe

1” or “Abuser”). 25 At the relevant times herein, Abuser John Doe 1 was a staff member who served

as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

203. Abuser John Doe 1 sexually abused R.L. in substantially the same manner as

described above on substantially the same occasions.

204. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abusers were non-

consensual. At relevant times herein, Plaintiff R.L. was a minor and could not legally consent.

205. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abusers were sexually abusing

children at Summit Academy, including Plaintiff R.L.

206. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff R.L., Abusers were not

adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information and belief,

Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate Abusers directly

enabled the above-described abuse.

Plaintiff S.S.

207. Plaintiff “S.S.” was housed at Summit Academy, a facility owned and/or operated by

The Academy Schools, from 2012 to 2013, when he was approximately 17 years old.

25
At the relevant times herein, Abuser John Doe 1 could be described as a white male.

34
 208. Plaintiff S.S. was born in 1995 and thus has no issue associated with the Statute of

Limitations associated with his claims.

209. Plaintiff S.S. was sexually abused by an individual known as Bill (“Abuser Bill” or

“Abuser”). 26 At the relevant times herein, Abuser Bill was a floor supervisor at Summit Academy

and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

210. The sexual abuse took place once while Plaintiff S.S. was housed at Summit

Academy. Abuser Bill screamed at S.S. to exit the shower, opened the shower door, and stood and

watched S.S. until he finished showering. S.S. begged Abuser Bill to close the door, but Abuser

Bill would not move.

211. Plaintiff S.S. witnessed Abuser Bill take other juvenile males into private rooms and

the juvenile males would come out badly beaten, one with his eyes swollen shut, so S.S. was afraid

of Abuser Bill and would thus agree to do anything asked of Abuser Bill.

212. Plaintiff S.S. was also sexually abused by an unnamed individual (“Abuser John Doe

4” or “Abuser”). 27 At the relevant times herein, Abuser John Doe 4 was a case worker who served

as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

213. The sexual abuse took place once while Plaintiff S.S. was housed at Summit

Academy. Abuser John Doe 4 spanked S.S. on his buttocks while passing him in the hallway. S.S.

asked Abuser John Doe 4 why he would do that, and Abuser John Doe 4 laughed.

214. When Plaintiff S.S. told his mother about the two incidents, Abuser John Doe 4 took

away his phone privileges and did not allow S.S. to come out of his room. Additionally, Abuser

Bill punched S.S. in retaliation for this reporting.

26
At the relevant times herein, Abuser Bill could be described as a large White male who looked like he was in the
Army.
27
At the relevant times herein, Abuser John Doe 4 could be described as a tall, chubby, Black male in his late 20’s
or early 30’s, with a big build, approximately 220-250 pounds.

35
 215. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abusers were non-

consensual. At relevant times herein, Plaintiff S.S. was a minor and could not legally consent.

216. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abusers were sexually abusing

children at Summit Academy, including Plaintiff S.S.

217. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff S.S., Abusers were not

adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information and belief,

Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate Abusers directly

enabled the above-described abuse.

Plaintiff T.M.

218. Plaintiff “T.M.” was housed at Summit Academy for approximately 10 to 11 months

between 2014 and 2016, when he was approximately 15 to 16 years old.

219. Plaintiff T.M. was born in 1998 and thus has no issue with the Statute of Limitations

associated with his claims.

220. Plaintiff T.M. was sexually abused by an individual known as Mr. Jack (“Abuser

Jack” or “Abuser”). At the relevant times herein, Abuser Jack was the math teacher, assistant

wrestling coach, and head track coach at Summit Academy, and served as an employee/agent of

the Defendants.

221. The sexual abuse took place on one occasion while Plaintiff T.M. was housed at

Summit Academy. Plaintiff T.M. would regularly get called out of class early by one of his coaches

to get an extra solo workout in. On this occasion, Abuser Jack was the coach who called Plaintiff

T.M. out of class and the two went to the wrestling/workout room. Towards the end of the workout,

Abuser Jack told Plaintiff T.M to do squats. While Plaintiff T.M. completed the workout, Abuser

Jack groped Plaintiff T.M. over his clothing, rubbing over his chest, back, legs and buttocks.

36
 222. Plaintiff T.M. did not report the abuse, as Abuser Jack had threatened him with

having his time extended and had him kicked off the track team following the incident of sexual

abuse.

223. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abuser Jack were non-

consensual. At the relevant times herein, Plaintiff T.M was a minor and could not legally consent.

224. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abuser Jack was sexually abusing

children at Summit Academy, including Plaintiff T.M.

225. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff T.M., Abuser Jack was

not being adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information and

belief, Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate Abuser

Jack enabled the above-described sexual abuse.

Plaintiff T.J.

226. Plaintiff “T.J.” was housed at a Defendant Summit Academy in approximately 2008

or 2009.

227. Plaintiff T.J. was born in 1992 and thus has no issue associated with the Statute of

Limitations associated with his claims.

228. Plaintiff T.J. was sexually abused by an individual known as Big Reese (“Abuser

Reese” or “Abuser”). 28 At the relevant times herein, Abuser Reese was a staff member at the

Summit Academy Pittsburgh facility and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

229. The sexual abuse took place while Plaintiff T.J. was housed at the Summit Academy

facility. Abuser Reese entered T.J.’s room on multiple occasions, telling T.J., “I want you, I’m

28
At the relevant times herein, Abuser Reese could be described as a black male with dread locks and a large build.

37
gonna get you.” One night Abuser Reese entered T.J.’s room, unbuckled his pants, and attempted

to rip off T.J.’s clothing. Abuser Reese grabbed and fondled T.J.’s penis and buttocks atop and

underneath of T.J.’s clothing. T.J. fought back and caused a commotion, alerting another staff

member, which is when the sexual abuse ceased.

230. The other staff member allowed T.J. to sleep in the day room, which had security

cameras, but took no action in reporting Abuser Reese’s behavior. When T.J was asked to return

to his previous room he threatened to kill himself rather than return.

231. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abuser Reese were

non-consensual. At relevant times herein, Plaintiff T.J. was a minor and could not legally consent.

232. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abuser Reese was sexually abusing

children at the Summit Academy Pittsburgh facility, including Plaintiff T.J.

233. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff T.J., Abuser Reese was

not adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information and belief,

Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate Abuser Reese

directly enabled the above-described abuse.

Plaintiff T.P.

234. Plaintiff “T.P.” was housed at Summit Academy, a facility owned and/or operated by

The Academy Schools in 2015, when he was approximately 14 years old.

235. Plaintiff T.P. was born in 2000 thus there is no issue with the Statute of Limitations

related to his claims.

38
 236. Plaintiff T.P. was sexually abused by an unnamed individual (“Abuser John Doe 2”

or “Abuser”). At the relevant times herein, Abuser John Doe 2 was a wrestling coach at Summit

Academy and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

237. The sexual abuse took place two to three times per week while Plaintiff T.P. was

housed at the Summit Academy facility. The sexual abuse took place in the wrestling room of the

facility. Abuser John Doe 2 would approach T.P. from behind and grab his buttocks. Abuser John

Doe 2 also rubbed on T.P.’s penis and buttocks. Plaintiff T.P. told Abuser John Doe 2 to stop. On

one occasion when T.P. stood up to Abuser John Doe 2, Abuser John Doe 2 came up behind T.P.

and slammed him on his face into the concrete floor.

238. Plaintiff T.P. reported the sexual abuse to the Principal of Summit Academy, but

nothing changed.

239. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abuser John Doe 2

were non-consensual. At relevant times herein, Plaintiff T.P. was a minor and could not legally

consent.

240. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abuser John Doe 2 was sexually

abusing children at Summit Academy, including Plaintiff T.P.

241. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff T.P., Abuser John Doe 2

was not adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information and

belief, Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate Abuser

John Doe 2 directly enabled the above-described abuse.

39
Plaintiff X.F.

242. Plaintiff “X.F.” was housed at Summit Academy, a facility owned and/or operated

by The Academy Schools from approximately 2020 to 2021, when he was approximately 15 years

old.

243. Plaintiff X.F. was born in 2005 thus there is no issue associated with the Statute of

Limitations related to his claims.

244. Plaintiff X.F. was sexually abused by an individual known as Mike B. (“Abuser

Mike” or “Abuser”). At the relevant times herein, Abuser Mike was a Floor Counselor at Summit

Academy and served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

245. The sexual abuse took place every day while Plaintiff X.F. was housed at Summit

Academy. Abuser Mike would pull open the shower curtain while X.F. was showering, smack and

grab his buttocks, and pin X.F. on the floor. At other times, Abuser Mike made sexual comments

and sometimes dry-humped X.F. and grabbed X.F.’s testicles and buttocks.

246. Plaintiff X.F. reported the sexual abuse to a counselor known as Dane, but nothing

came of it. Other staff members informed X.F. that Dane would never take any action regarding

the sexual abuse.

247. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abuser Mike were

non-consensual. At the relevant times herein, Plaintiff X.F. was a minor and could not legally

consent.

248. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abuser Mike was sexually abusing

children at Summit Academy, including Plaintiff X.F.

249. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff X.F., Abuser Mike was

not being adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information and

40
belief, Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate Abuser

Mike enabled the above-described sexual abuse.

Plaintiff Z.B.

250. Plaintiff “Z.B.” was housed at Summit Academy in approximately 2008 to 2009,

when he was approximately 15 to 16 years old.

251. Plaintiff Z.B. was born in 1993 and thus has no issue associated with the Statute of

Limitations for his claims.

252. Plaintiff Z.B. was sexually abused by an individual known as Jen (“Abuser Jen” or

“Abuser”). At the relevant times herein, Abuser Jen was a staff member at Summit Academy and

served as an employee/agent of the Defendants.

253. The sexual abuse took place approximately every other weekend while Plaintiff Z.B.

was housed at Summit Academy. The first incident occurred when Plaintiff Z.B. and Abuser Jen

were having a conversation when Abuser Jen then initiated sexual contact with Plaintiff Z.B.,

grabbing his genitals over and underneath his clothing. Following this first incident, the abuse

escalated to include Abuser Jen performing oral sex on Plaintiff Z.B.

254. The above-described sexual contact and/or acts perpetrated by Abuser Jen were non-

consensual. At the relevant times herein, Plaintiff Z.B. was a minor and could not legally consent.

255. Defendants knew, or should have known, that Abuser Jen was sexually abusing

children at Summit Academy, including Plaintiff Z.B.

256. At the time of the above-described sexual abuse of Plaintiff Z.B., Abuser Jen was not

being adequately supervised, monitored, or surveilled by Defendants. Upon information and belief,

Defendants’ failure to supervise, discipline, remove, and/or otherwise investigate Abuser Jen

enabled the above-described sexual abuse.

41
 d. Facts Common to All Plaintiffs at Summit Academy

257. PERPETRATORS used their positions of authority over Plaintiffs, as agents of

Defendant, to calculatedly manipulate and groom Plaintiffs during Plaintiffs’ time as juvenile

detainees at Summit Academy as described above.

258. PERPETRATORS sexually, physically, and/or emotionally abused Plaintiffs, while

they were minors during the period described above.

259. During their tenure, staff members, servants, representatives and/or ostensible agents

hired, certified, assigned, retained, supervised, managed, overseen, directed, administrated,

trained, and/or otherwise controlled by and for Defendant, PERPETRATORS were serial

molesters and sexual, physical, and/or emotional abusers of children, including Plaintiffs.

260. PERPETRATORS committed acts of abuse and molestation against Plaintiffs.

261. At all material times hereto, Defendant knew or should have known that

PERPETRATORS sexually, physically, and/or emotionally abused children and/or were not fit to

serve as staff members, teachers, employees, agents, servants, representatives and/or ostensible

agents.

262. At all material times hereto, Defendant knew or should have known that

PERPETRATORS abused Plaintiffs and/or other children at Summit Academy.

263. The above-described PERPETRATORS engaged in forcible compulsion or threat of

forcible compulsion of each Plaintiff during and in order to facilitate each occasion of sexual abuse,

as the above-described PERPETRATORS committed their sexual abuse by use of physical,

intellectual, moral, emotional or psychological force, either express or implied.

42
 264. At all material times hereto, Defendant took no action and/or or failed to timely and

adequately take action to warn or otherwise protect children of Summit Academy, including

Plaintiffs, from PERPETRATORS.

265. At all times material hereto, as a result of the sexual, physical, and/or emotional abuse

by PERPETRATORS, Plaintiffs have suffered from extreme difficultly navigating intimate

relationships, and they have experienced and continue to experience bouts of anger, difficulties

when involved in relationships and attempting to be intimate in the context of these relationships.

266. As a result of the sexual, physical, and/or emotional abuse set forth above, Plaintiffs

suffered great, permanent harm, including but not limited to, the following: severe emotional

distress, extreme trauma, depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms,

suicidal ideations, humiliation, embarrassment, fear, shame, emotional dissociation, and/or loss of

self-esteem and self- worth, all of which has and/or will continue to require counseling, therapy,

and/or other treatment.

267. Also, as a result of the sexual, physical, and/or emotional abuse set forth above and

its consequential trauma and harm, Plaintiffs have suffered a severe impairment and disruption of

their enjoyment of life, identity, intimacy with loved ones, sexuality, and/or belief structure,

including, but not limited to, the impairment and disruption of their relationship with members of

their families, friends, acquaintances, and/or others.

268. Also, as a result of the sexual, physical, and/or emotional abuse set forth above and

its consequential trauma and harm, the Plaintiffs suffered from destructive and dysfunctional

behaviors, including, but not limited to, addictions (i.e. alcohol and/or drugs) and/or other mental

health issues, all of which have required and/or will require counseling, therapy, and/or other

treatment.

43
 269. Also, as a result of the sexual, physical, and/or emotional abuse set forth above and

its consequential trauma and harm, the Plaintiffs have incurred significant past loss of wages and

future loss of earning capacity to their permanent detriment.

270. Other victims’ declarations and/or revelations of their experiences with sexual,

physical, and/or emotional abuse and corresponding damages caused by such abuse prompted

Plaintiffs to realize they are not alone, and to acknowledge, address, and/or discover the connection

between their abuse and their corresponding emotional distress, social dysfunction and/or other

damages and to speak out concerning same.

271. Now, in conformity with Pennsylvania law, Plaintiffs bring the within action for

damages.

272. As alleged in greater detail herein above and/or below, all of Plaintiffs’ severe,

permanent, and ongoing harm and damages were caused by the culpable acts and/or omissions of

Defendant.

273. As set forth more fully herein, the negligence, gross negligence, recklessness, and/or

punitive behavior of the Defendant was a direct and proximate cause of harm and damages to

Plaintiffs.

274. Plaintiffs’ injuries and/or damages were caused solely by the negligence, gross

negligence, recklessness, and/or punitive behavior of the Defendant, as set forth more fully herein,

and were not caused or contributed thereto by any negligence, gross negligence, recklessness

and/or punitive behavior on the part of the Plaintiffs.

44
 COUNT 1 – NEGLIGENCE
Plaintiffs
v.
Defendant Summit Academy
275. The previous paragraphs set forth above are incorporated herein by reference.

276. Defendant and its staff members had a duty to report child abuse when a reasonable

belief exists it occurred, and the Defendant breached this duty and failed to notify the proper

authorities about the Plaintiff's abuse as required by 55 Pa.C.S.A. § 3680 et seq; 5 Pa.C.S.A. §

3800 et seq; and all applicable child abuse reporting requirement laws related to mandatory abuse

reporters and applicable to Defendant’s facility.

277. The recklessness, negligence and/or carelessness of Defendant by and through their

actual or apparent staff, teachers, counselors, employees, agents, servants, representatives, and/or

ostensible agents hired, certified, assigned, retained, supervised, managed, overseen, directed,

administrated, and/or otherwise controlled by and for said Defendant, consisted of, among other

things, the following:

a. Failing to properly screen Summit Academy staff, teachers,

counselors, employees, agents, servants, representatives, and
ostensible agents adequately before placing them in close
contact with children;
b. Failure to properly investigate complaints of sexual, physical,
and/or emotional abuse, inappropriate behavior and/or abusive
behavior;
c. Minimizing, ignoring, or excusing inappropriate or questionable
behavior and/or misconduct by Summit Academy staff,
teachers, counselors, employees, agents, servants,
representatives, and ostensible agents over a period of months,
years and/or decades;
d. Failure to properly and/or adequately warn judges, probation
officers, court officials, law enforcement, parents, children,
community members, and/or the public at large, including, but

45
 not limited to, Plaintiffs and similarly situated children, and their
parents and/or family members, regarding the inappropriate
behavior and/or misconduct of PERPETRATORS, and/or
abusive staff, teachers, counselors, employees, agents, servants,
representatives, and/or ostensible agents, despite knowledge of
the dangers they presented and the harmful and complicit culture
and environment created by such failures to warn;
e. Assigning Summit Academy staff, teachers, counselors,
employees, agents, servants, representatives, and/or ostensible
agents known to have engaged in questionable and/or
inappropriate behavior or misconduct and/or known to be
pedophiles and/or sexual predators and/or physical abusers,
including but not limited to, PERPETRATORS, and/or staff
members, to a position within Summit Academy where said
individual(s) had regular contact with children;
f. Failure to report criminal activity, including child abuse, to
appropriate law enforcement agencies and/or authorities;
g. Negligent failure to provide a safe environment and protective
culture to children within the campus, resident halls, bathrooms,
classrooms, and/or external locations operated, visited, and/or
owned by Defendant;
h. Failure to establish, implement, and maintain proper and
effective policies and procedures to prevent sexual, physical,
and/or emotional abuse of and/or abusive behavior toward
children;
i. Negligently maintaining custody, supervision and protection of
children placed in their care by virtue of their legal authority;
j. Failure to properly train Summit Academy staff, teachers,
counselors, employees, agents, servants, representatives, and/or
ostensible agents to identify signs of child molestation or
inappropriate sexually related behavior to children and/or
physical and/or emotional abuse of children by fellow
employees, associates, and/or individuals within its control,
oversight, supervision, and/or ostensible control;
k. Negligent reliance on persons who claimed they could treat child
molesters and/or sexually abusive individuals;
l. Negligent retention of and/or failure to terminate
PERPETRATORS and/or staff members, and/or sexually
inappropriate and/or abusive individuals from or associated
Summit Academy, promoting a culture and environment of

46
 complicity, denial and deception regarding child abuse at
Summit Academy;
m. Failure to exercise due care under the relevant circumstances, as
it pertains to the preceding and subsequent subsections, and to
be considered as a whole;
n. Recklessly, negligently and/or carelessly failing to observe,
manage, direct, oversee, and supervise the relationship between
Plaintiffs and PERPETRATORS and/or staff members;
o. Recklessly, negligently and/or carelessly failing to have proper
and effective policies and procedures to require adequate
observation, management, oversight, and supervision of the
relationship between Summit Academy staff, including, but not
limited to, PERPETRATORS, and/or staff members and the
Plaintiffs;
p. Recklessly, negligently and/or carelessly failing to recognize the
conduct of PERPETRATORS, and/or staff members and
behavior prior to the events in question and/or as described
herein as creating a risk of sexual, physical, and/or emotional
abuse toward children, including, but not limited to, Plaintiffs;
q. Recklessly, negligently and/or carelessly failing to have proper
policies and procedures to require adequate observation,
management, oversight, and supervision of Plaintiffs and
PERPETRATORS and/or staff members;
r. Failing to investigate complaints that PERPETRATORS and/or
staff members was behaving inappropriately and/or touching
children inappropriately, including, but not limited to, Plaintiffs;
s. Recklessly, negligently and/or carelessly failing to identify
PERPETRATORS and/or staff members as a sexual, physical,
and/or emotional abuser;
t. Recklessly, negligently and/or carelessly failing to investigate
behavior of PERPETRATORS and/or other staff members that
put the Defendant on notice and/or should have placed
Defendant on notice that PERPETRATORS and/or staff
members was/were and/or might have been an abuser, potential
pedophile and/or sexual predator;
u. Recklessly, negligently and/or carelessly failing to identify
PERPETRATORS and/or staff members as a potential
pedophile and/or sexual predator;

47
 v. Failing to detect a rampant and open culture of sexual, physical,
and/or emotional abuse of children in Summit Academy’s care;
w. Failing to stop a rampant and open culture of sexual, physical,
and/or emotional abuse of children in Summit Academy’s care;
x. Violating the Juvenile Justice Act, 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 6327(a),
pertaining to juveniles being housed in a location “where the
child is apt to be abused by other children” 42 Pa.C.S. §§
6327(a);
y. Facilitating an environment where residents were encouraged to
sexually, physically, and/or emotionally abuse other residents;
z. Threatening Summit Academy residents with physical and/or
sexual harm in an attempt to prevent them from reporting abuse,
and/or threatening punishment (e.g., home passes) if the abuse
was reported;
aa. Refusing to allow parents of Summit Academy residents
reasonable access to their children;
bb. Preventing Summit Academy residents from seeking
appropriate medical attention for injuries caused by Summit
Academy staff;
cc. Preventing Summit Academy residents from honestly disclosing
the causes of their injuries to medical personnel;
dd. Violating state standards for juvenile correctional facilities.
278. Defendant was negligent under the facts as detailed within this Complaint in that the

Defendant failed to use that degree of care, precaution and vigilance which a reasonably prudent

person or entity would use under the same or similar circumstances, including, but not limited to,

the negligent affirmative acts detailed in this Complaint which a reasonably prudent person or

entity would not have done, and also the negligent omission or failure to act and/or take precautions

as detailed in this Complaint which a reasonably prudent person or entity would have done or taken

under these circumstances.

279. The actions of PERPETRATORS and/or staff members as described herein are

evidence of negligence per se attributable to the Defendant.

48
 280. Defendant is vicariously liable for both the negligent and intentional acts of

PERPETRATORS and/or staff members, their employee(s), where it is widely known that there

is vulnerability of children and a public policy to protect said children from victimization, and

imposes responsibility upon those individuals and institutions in the best position to know of and

stop the abuse to said children, such as the Defendant herein.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, each individually, demand judgment against Defendant in an

amount in excess of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00), exclusive of prejudgment interest, costs

and damages for pre-judgment delay, punitive damages, and such other legal and equitable relief

as the Court deems appropriate.

COUNT 2 – NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION

Plaintiffs
v.
Defendant Summit Academy
281. The previous paragraphs set forth above are incorporated herein by reference.

282. Defendant knew or should have known of the need to observe, manage, direct,

oversee, train, and/or supervise staff, teachers, counselors, employees, agents, servants,

representatives, and/or ostensible agents in their relationships with young children properly and

effectively.

283. Defendant knew or should have known of the particular risk posed by

PERPETRATORS and/or staff members based on, among other things, their inappropriate and/or

questionable conduct, their history of sexually, physically, and/or emotionally abusing children,

and/or their behavior indicative of an intent to isolate, groom, and/or facilitate sexually contacting

and/or abusing a young minor child, including the abuse of Plaintiffs by PERPETRATORS.

49
 284. The negligence, carelessness, and/or recklessness of Defendant for the conduct of

their actual or apparent staff members, teachers, counselors, employees, agents, servants,

representatives, and/or ostensible agents, in the hiring, certifying, assigning, observation,

retaining, supervision, management, oversight, direction, administration, training, and/or

otherwise control of PERPETRATORS and/or other staff members consists of one or more of the

following:

a. Negligent certifying, assigning, observation, retaining,

supervision, management, oversight, direction, administration,
and/or otherwise control of staff and/or teachers in the employ
of Summit Academy and/or Defendant;
b. Failing to use due care in certifying, assigning, observation,
retaining, supervision, management, oversight, direction,
administration, and/or otherwise control of PERPETRATORS
and/or staff members and the relationship of PERPETRATORS
and/or other staff members with Plaintiffs; and
c. Failing to investigate and supervise PERPETRATORS and/or
staff members and their relationships with Plaintiffs.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, each individually, demand judgment against Defendant in an

amount in excess of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00), exclusive of prejudgment interest, costs

and damages for pre-judgment delay, punitive damages, and such other legal and equitable relief

as the Court deems appropriate.

COUNT 3 – NEGLIGENT HIRING, TRAINING, AND RETENTION

Plaintiffs
v.
Defendant Summit Academy

285. The previous paragraphs set forth above are incorporated herein by reference.

286. Defendant knew and/or should have known prior to and/or contemporaneous with the

relevant time frame during which Plaintiffs were sexually abused by PERPETRATORS and/or

50
staff members that Plaintiffs and other young children affiliated and/or associated with Summit

Academy were vulnerable to and potential victims of sexual, physical, and/or emotional abuse.

287. Defendant also knew and/or should have known prior to and/or contemporaneous

with the relevant time frame during which Plaintiffs were sexually abused by PERPETRATORS

and/or staff members that the access to vulnerable youths, together with the trust and authority

placed in staff and/or teachers, which makes working at a juvenile residential care/detention

facility an enticing profession for sexual predators, and/or individuals seeking to abuse and exploit

children.

288. Defendant owed a duty to exercise reasonable care in the hiring, certifying,

assignment, control, selection, training, and/or retention of staff, teacher, counselors, employees,

agents, servants, representatives, and/or ostensible agents, situated in and/or located at Summit

Academy and specifically a duty to be on high look out for possible pedophiles, sexual predators,

and individuals seeking to abuse and exploit children.

289. Defendant failed to exercise reasonable care in the hiring, certifying, assignment,

control, selection, training, and/or retention of PERPETRATORS and/or staff members as staff

members, teachers, employees, agents, servants, representatives and/or ostensible agents, among

other things, the following:

a. Failing to conduct a thorough and proper background check of

PERPETRATORS and/or other staff members;

b. Failing to thoroughly and reasonably investigate

PERPETRATORS and/or staff members’ sexual and/or criminal
history;

c. Failing to learn of or investigate PERPETRATORS and/or staff

members’ history of sexual impropriety with children and their
proclivity to sexually assault children;

51
 d. Failing to conduct a thorough and proper interview with
PERPETRATORS and/or staff members;

e. Failing to investigate whether PERPETRATORS and/or staff

members had any inappropriate sexual interest in children;

f. Failing to train staff members to recognize the signs of child sex

abuse and to prevent it;

g. Failing to train staff members to properly report suspicions of

child sexual abuse;

h. Failing to use due care in the selection of PERPETRATORS

and/or staff members as a staff and/or teacher rendering
academic, rehabilitation, and/or delinquent services, and/or all
other services rendered when standing in loco parentis and/or
interacting with children;

i. Failing to use due care in the retention of PERPETRATORS

and/or staff members as a staff members and/or teachers
rendering academic, rehabilitation, and/or delinquent services,
and/or all services rendered when standing in loco parentis
and/or interacting with children;

j. Recklessly, negligently and/or carelessly failing to adequately

check the background of PERPETRATORS and/or staff
members, before hiring them as a staff member and/or teacher
rendering academic, rehabilitation, and/or delinquent services,
and/or all services rendered when standing in loco parentis
and/or interacting with children; and

k. Recklessly, negligently and/or carelessly failing to have policies

and procedures in place to screen staff and/or teachers for the
possibility of being sexual predators and/or physical and/or
emotional abusers.

WHEREFORE Plaintiffs, each individually, demand judgment against Defendant in an

amount in excess of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00), exclusive of prejudgment interest, costs

and damages for pre-judgment delay, punitive damages, and such other legal and equitable relief

as the Court deems appropriate.

52
 COUNT 4 – GROSS NEGLIGENCE
Plaintiffs
v.
Defendant Summit Academy
290. The previous paragraphs set forth above are incorporated herein by reference.

291. Defendant was grossly negligent under the facts as detailed within this Complaint in

that Defendant acted with complete disregard of the rights, safety, and well-being of others; in a

palpably unreasonable manner; in an outlandish fashion; and/or failed to exercise slight care or

diligence under these circumstances.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, each individually, demand judgment against Defendant in an

amount in excess of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00), exclusive of prejudgment interest, costs

and damages for pre-judgment delay, punitive damages, and such other legal and equitable relief

as the Court deems appropriate.

COUNT 5 – BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY

Plaintiffs
v.
Defendant Summit Academy

292. The previous paragraphs set forth above are incorporated herein by reference.

293. By virtue of their status as owners and/or supervisors of Summit Academy, a juvenile

residential care facility, Defendant bore a fiduciary relationship to Plaintiffs and other children and

persons at Summit Academy.

294. Defendant had fiduciary duties to avoid harming children and to protect them from

harm at the hands of staff, teachers, employees, agents, servants, representatives, and/or ostensible

agents hired, certified, assigned, retained, supervised, managed, overseen, directed, administrated,

and/or otherwise controlled by and for Defendant.

53
 295. Defendant breached their fiduciary duties by acting or failing to act in accordance

with their fiduciary duties and/or as alleged in this Complaint.

296. Plaintiffs suffered the above-averred harms and damages as a result of Defendant’s

breach of their fiduciary duty.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, each individually, demand judgment against Defendant in an

amount in excess of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00), exclusive of prejudgment interest, costs

and damages for pre-judgment delay, punitive damages, and such other legal and equitable relief

as the Court deems appropriate.

COUNT 6 – NEGLIGENCE PER SE

Plaintiffs
v.
Defendant Summit Academy

297. The previous paragraphs set forth above are incorporated herein by reference.

298. Summit Academy was licensed by the Pennsylvania Department of Human Services

(“PA-DHS”) to operate a residential and educational facility for minors placed in its custody by

courts and government agencies. Thus, Summit Academy is subject to the Pennsylvania Juvenile

Justice Act, 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 6301, et. seq. As such, Summit Academy, at all relevant times, was

acting under the color of state law.

299. Section 6327(a) of the Pennsylvania Juvenile Justice Act provides: “Under no

circumstances shall a child be detained…where the child is apt to be abused by other children.”

300. As alleged above, Summit Academy violated the Pennsylvania Juvenile Justice Act

when it allowed, forced, directed, encouraged, knowingly ignored, and/or created an environment

in which Plaintiff were apt to be abused by other children.

54