JURY OF TWELVE (12) IS DEMANDED ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES IS REQUIRED

Transcription

1 MARCIANO & MACAVOY, P.C. BY: KEVIN R. MARCIANO, ESQUIRE BY: PATRICK D. MACAVOY, ESQUIRE ID NOS / W. Front Street Media, PA (610) JURY OF TWELVE (12) IS DEMANDED ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES IS REQUIRED Attorneys for Plaintiff Filed and Attested by PROTHONOTARY 15 DEC :17 pm J. OSTROWSKI THE FIERBERG NATIONAL LAW GROUP, PLLC BY: DOUGLAS E. FIERBERG, ESQUIRE BY: DOUGLAS C. MELCHER, ESQUIRE Admitted Pro Hac Vice Attorneys for Plaintiff Fifth Floor Centurion Center 2001 L Street, NW Washington, DC (202) dfierberg@tfnlgroup.com dmelcher@tfnlgroup.com : RICHARD A. BRAHAM, Administrator : PHILADELPHIA COUNTY of the ESTATE OF : COURT OF COMMON PLEAS MARQUISE A. BRAHAM : th Street : Rosedale, NY : : Plaintiff, : : v. : August Term, 2015 : THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE : UNIVERSITY, a Non-Profit : Educational Corporation : No S. Broad Street, Suite 110 : The Navy Yard : Philadelphia, PA : and : 1

2 KARLY BISH, Individually and as an : agent of The Pennsylvania State University : 405 Toby Road : Kersey, PA : and : MARIA A. MOSLEY, Individually and as an : agent of The Pennsylvania State University : 713 Mary Street : Houtzdale, PA : and : THE GRAND CHAPTER OF PHI SIGMA : KAPPA, a Delaware Non-Profit Corporation : 2925 East 96th Street : Indianapolis, IN : Serve: The Corporation Trust Company : Corporation Trust Center : 1209 Orange Street : Wilmington, DE : and : IOTA SEPTATON CORPORATION OF : PHI SIGMA KAPPA FRATERNITY, : a Pennsylvania Non-Profit Corporation, : Individually and as an agent of The Grand : Chapter of Phi Sigma Kappa : 129 E. 24th Avenue : Altoona, PA : and : ERIC TRAISTER, Individually and as : an agent of The Grand Chapter of Phi Sigma : Kappa and Iota Septaton Corporation of Phi : Sigma Kappa Fraternity : 68 Oak Ridge Drive : Voorhees, NJ : and : JOHN DOES 1-100, Individually and as : agents of The Grand Chapter of Phi Sigma : Kappa and Iota Septaton Corporation of Phi : Sigma Kappa Fraternity : 129 E. 24th Avenue : Altoona, PA : And : 2

3 ANDREW O CONNOR, Individually and as : an agent of The Grand Chapter of Phi Sigma : Kappa and Iota Septaton Corporation of Phi : Sigma Kappa Fraternity : 519 Bonsall Road : Ridley Park, PA : : Defendants. : COMPLAINT 2O Other Personal Injury NOTICE TO DEFEND "NOTICE" "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 are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by 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 other 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, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP." THIS OFFICE MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAL SERVICES TO ELIGIBLE PERSONS AT A REDUCED FEE FOR NO FEE. Philadelphia Bar Association Lawyer Referral and Information Service One Reading Center Philadelphia, PA (215) TTY (215) "AVISO" "Le han demando a usted en la corte. Si usted quiere defenderse de estas demandas expuestas en las páginas siguientes, usted tiene veinte (20) diás de plazo al partir de la fecha de la demanda y la notificación. Hace falta asentar una comparencia escrita o en persona o con un abogado y entregar a la corte en forma escrita sus defensas o sus objeciones a las demandas en contra de su persona. Sea avisado que si usted no se defiende, la corte tomará medidas y puede continuar la demanda en contra suya sin previo aviso o notificación. Además, la corte puede decidir a favor del demandante y requiere que usted cumpla con todas las provisiones de esta demanda. Usted puede perder dinero o sus propiedades u otros derechos importantes para usted. "LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN AGOGADO INMEDIATAMENTE. SI NO TIENE ABOGADO O SI NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICIO, VAYA EN PERSONA O LLAME POR TELEFONO A LA OFICINA CUYA DIRECCION SE ENCUENTRA ESCRITA ABAJO PARA AVERIGUAR DONDE SE PUEDE CONSEGUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL." ESTA OFICINA PUEDE PODER PROVEER DE USTED LA INFORMACIÓN SOBRE LAS AGENCIAS QUE PUEDEN OFRECER SERVICIOS JURÍDICOS A LAS PERSONAS ELEGIBLES EN UN HONORARIO REDUCIDO PARA NINGÚN HONORARIO. Asociacion de Licenciados de Filadelfia Servicio de Referencia e Informacion Legal One Reading Center Philadelphia, PA (215) TTY (215)

4 JURY OF TWELVE (12) IS DEMANDED ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES IS REQUIRED MARCIANO & MACAVOY, P.C. BY: KEVIN R. MARCIANO, ESQUIRE BY: PATRICK D. MACAVOY, ESQUIRE ID NOS / W. Front Street Media, PA (610) Attorneys for Plaintiff THE FIERBERG NATIONAL LAW GROUP, PLLC BY: DOUGLAS E. FIERBERG, ESQUIRE BY: DOUGLAS C. MELCHER, ESQUIRE Admitted Pro Hac Vice Attorneys for Plaintiff Fifth Floor Centurion Center 2001 L Street, NW Washington, DC (202) dfierberg@tfnlgroup.com dmelcher@tfnlgroup.com : RICHARD A. BRAHAM, Administrator : PHILADELPHIA COUNTY of the ESTATE OF : COURT OF COMMON PLEAS MARQUISE A. BRAHAM : th Street : Rosedale, NY : : Plaintiff, : : v. : August Term, 2015 : THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE : UNIVERSITY, a Non-Profit : Educational Corporation : No S. Broad Street, Suite 110 : The Navy Yard : Philadelphia, PA : and : 2

5 KARLY BISH, Individually and as an : agent of The Pennsylvania State University : 405 Toby Road : Kersey, PA : and : MARIA A. MOSLEY, Individually and as an : agent of The Pennsylvania State University : 713 Mary Street : Houtzdale, PA : and : THE GRAND CHAPTER OF PHI SIGMA : KAPPA, a Delaware Non-Profit Corporation : 2925 East 96th Street : Indianapolis, IN : Serve: The Corporation Trust Company : Corporation Trust Center : 1209 Orange Street : Wilmington, DE : and : IOTA SEPTATON CORPORATION OF : PHI SIGMA KAPPA FRATERNITY, : a Pennsylvania Non-Profit Corporation, : Individually and as an agent of The Grand : Chapter of Phi Sigma Kappa : 129 E. 24th Avenue : Altoona, PA : and : ERIC TRAISTER, Individually and as : an agent of The Grand Chapter of Phi Sigma : Kappa and Iota Septaton Corporation of Phi : Sigma Kappa Fraternity : 68 Oak Ridge Drive : Voorhees, NJ : and : JOHN DOES 1-100, Individually and as : agents of The Grand Chapter of Phi Sigma : Kappa and Iota Septaton Corporation of Phi : Sigma Kappa Fraternity : 129 E. 24th Avenue : Altoona, PA : And : 3

6 ANDREW O CONNOR, Individually and as : an agent of The Grand Chapter of Phi Sigma : Kappa and Iota Septaton Corporation of Phi : Sigma Kappa Fraternity : 519 Bonsall Road : Ridley Park, PA : : Defendants. : COMPLAINT Plaintiff, RICHARD A. BRAHAM, administrator of the ESTATE OF MARQUISE A. BRAHAM, through his attorneys, for his Complaint against the above-referenced Defendants, states as follows: Introduction 1. This is a death case arising from violent hazing Marquise A. Braham suffered during his freshman year at Pennsylvania State University ( Penn State ), Altoona, and the absolute failure by Penn State and its employees to stop the brutal hazing, to intervene to protect Marquise as his physical and emotional health were visibly deteriorating, or to notify his family and obtain the assistance Marquise authorized and needed when numerous Penn State staff directly observed him to be in extreme, dangerous psychological crisis. As a result, Marquise took his own life by jumping from the roof of the Long Island Marriott Hotel in Uniondale, New York. 2. Marquise regularly and directly made Penn State staff aware of the fact he was being physically hurt and hazed by brothers in the Phi Sigma Kappa Fraternity ( Phi Sig ). By December 2013, Penn State staff knew Marquise had been hazed for months, including, among other things, being forced to consume gross amounts of alcohol, chug bottles of Listerine, swallow live fish, fight fellow pledges; being burned with candle wax, deprived of sleep for 89 4

7 hours, locked in a room with other pledges, alcohol, and a trashcan to catch their vomit; having a gun held to his head; and being forced to kill, gut, and skin animals. 3. Penn State staff knew Marquise was suffering physically, psychologically, and academically. Rather than intervene, report, and prevent such illegal misconduct from continuing, as required by Pennsylvania law and Penn State s own policies and procedures, Penn State disregarded this information, failed to act, and actually counseled Marquise over a period of months to endure the hazing, telling him, among other things: You poor thing... Your keeping a good spirit tho. Keep your chin up boo!!... Stay strong little buddy. You are almost done and you ve been so strong. Your kicking ass!=). 4. By March 2014, Penn State staff observed that Marquise was in a dangerous psychological crisis as a result of being hazed. Upon information and belief, Penn State staff finally reported their concerns about Marquise s health and circumstances to senior administrators at Penn State. No action was taken to protect Marquise, intervene, or advise his family of his crisis, despite Marquise having executed FERPA waivers, and Penn State s own privacy policies authorizing Penn State to communicate directly with his family concerning emergency health matters. 5. Marquise left Penn State s campus, went to confession before a priest to repent for his fraternity sins, and took his own life, leaving his family forever devastated and searching for answers. Marquise s family brought their questions to Penn State, but Penn State kept secret from them the fact that multiple Penn State employees knew and reported to Penn State administrators he was in dangerous psychological crisis as a result of hazing immediately prior to his suicide, and that they negligently or recklessly failed to take any action to protect him or advise the family of this emergency so that the family could save Marquise s life. 5

8 6. Plaintiff brings this action pursuant to Pennsylvania s Survival Act, 42 Pa.C.S. 8302, and Pennsylvania s Wrongful Death Act, 42 Pa.C.S. 8301, to recover damages for the devastating injuries and death needlessly caused by the tortious misconduct of each of the Defendants as further alleged below. Parties 7. Plaintiff, Richard A. Braham, is Marquise s natural father and a resident of New York. 8. The Surrogate s Court of New York, Queens County, appointed Plaintiff as the sole administrator of Marquise s Estate by decree issued on September 9, 2014 (File No ). 9. Plaintiff filed with the Office of the Register of Wills of Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania an exemplified copy of the decree and an affidavit as specified by 20 Pa.C.S. 4101, on September 1, 2015 (File No. F ), thereby enabling him to serve as personal representative in proceedings before this Court. 10. As personal representative, Plaintiff has the right to bring survival claims on behalf of the Estate pursuant to Pennsylvania s Survival Act, 42 Pa.C.S. 8302, and wrongful death claims on behalf of the beneficiaries of the Estate pursuant to Pennsylvania s Wrongful Death Act, 42 Pa.C.S The statutory beneficiaries under the Wrongful Death Act are Plaintiff and Marquise s natural mother, Marie-Yves Braham, both of whom reside at th Street, Rosedale, New York

9 12. Defendant Penn State is a non-profit educational corporation which is incorporated under the laws of Pennsylvania. Penn State maintains its headquarters at 201 Old Main, University Park, PA Defendant Penn State regularly conducts business in Philadelphia County. 14. Defendant Karly Bish s legal residence is at 405 Toby Road, Kersey, Pennsylvania At all relevant times, Ms. Bish was an employee of Defendant Penn State and acted as an agent of, and within the scope of her agency with, Defendant Penn State. 15. Defendant Maria A. Mosley s legal residence is at 713 Mary Street, Houtzdale, Pennsylvania, At all relevant times, Ms. Mosley was an employee of Defendant Penn State and acted as an agent of, and within the scope of her agency with, Defendant Penn State. 16. Defendant The Grand Chapter of Phi Sigma Kappa ( Grand Chapter ) is a nonprofit corporation which is incorporated under the laws of Delaware. Grand Chapter maintains its headquarters at 2925 East 96th Street, Indianapolis, IN Grand Chapter is the principal of Defendant Iota Septaton Corporation of Phi Sigma Kappa Fraternity. 17. Defendant Grand Chapter recruits members, regularly conducts business, and has established and operates numerous fraternity chapters, throughout Pennsylvania, including in Philadelphia County (University of Pennsylvania). 18. Defendant Iota Septaton Corporation of Phi Sigma Kappa Fraternity ( Iota Septaton ) is a non-profit corporation which is incorporated under the laws of Pennsylvania. Iota Septaton maintains its headquarters at 129 E. 24th Avenue, Altoona, PA Iota Septaton is an agent of Grand Chapter. 7

10 19. Defendant Eric Traister s legal residence is at 68 Oak Ridge Drive, Voorhees, New Jersey At all relevant times, Mr. Traister was president and a member of Defendant Iota Septaton and acted as an agent of, and within the scope of his agency with, Defendants Grand Chapter and Iota Septaton. 20. Defendant Andrew O Connor s legal residence is at 519 Bonsall Road, Ridley Park, Pennsylvania At all relevant times, Mr. O Connor was vice-president and a member of Defendant Iota Septaton and acted as an agent of, and within the scope of his agency with, Defendants Grand Chapter and Iota Septaton. Jurisdiction and Venue 21. This Court has original jurisdiction over this civil action pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S This Court has general personal jurisdiction over Defendant Penn State pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S because Defendant Penn State is incorporated under the laws of Pennsylvania and carries on a continuous and systematic part of its general business within Pennsylvania. 23. This Court has general personal jurisdiction over Defendants Bish and Mosley pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S because they are domiciled in Pennsylvania, or, alternatively, specific personal jurisdiction pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S because they caused tortious injury by acts or omissions in Pennsylvania. 24. This Court has general personal jurisdiction over Defendant Grand Chapter pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S because it carries on a continuous and systematic part of its general business within Pennsylvania, or, alternatively, specific personal jurisdiction pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S because it caused tortious injury by acts or omissions in Pennsylvania. 8

11 25. This Court has general personal jurisdiction over Defendant Iota Septaton pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S because it is incorporated under the laws of Pennsylvania and carries on a continuous and systematic part of its general business within Pennsylvania. 26. This Court has general personal jurisdiction over Defendant O Connor pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S because he is domiciled in Pennsylvania. 27. This Court has specific personal jurisdiction over Defendants Traister and O Connor pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S because they caused tortious injury by acts or omissions in Pennsylvania. 28. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to Pa.R.C.P because Defendants Grand Chapter and Penn State regularly conduct business in Philadelphia County, and Defendant Grand Chapter s actions, inactions and negligence, as alleged herein, are governed by Grand Council, and a member thereof specifically, Ed Kovacs resides and conducts business for Grand Chapter and its Pennsylvania chapters, including Defendant Iota Septaton, in Philadelphia County. Marquise s Background 29. Marquise was the oldest child of his parents and was deeply devoted to both his immediate and extended family. He was a reverent Catholic and devoted to his faith throughout his childhood and adult life. 30. Marquise attended and graduated from Kellenberg Memorial High School in Uniondale, New York, where he excelled academically and consistently made the honor roll. 31. While in high school, Marquise participated in a Christian student youth group, a program for mentoring elementary school students, and the varsity track and field team. 9

12 32. Marquise worked as a camp counselor and volunteered at the Winthrop University Hospital and the Parker Jewish Geriatric Institute. 33. Marquise was awarded a partial academic scholarship to attend Penn State Altoona beginning the fall semester of During Marquise s freshman year, he began studying bio-medical engineering but sought to change his major to physical therapy so he could more directly help people. He also joined the Residence Halls Association and became Secretary of that organization as he sought to become a Resident Assistant for the following academic year, consistent with his desire to be of service to others. The Brutal Hazing of Marquise and Penn State s Knowledge Thereof 35. In September 2013, at the start of Marquise s freshman year, he began the process of joining, or pledging, Phi Sig through its local chapter at Penn State Altoona, Defendant Iota Septaton. 36. The process of pledging, and subsequent membership activities, were authorized, controlled, directed, organized, participated in, or planned by Defendants Grand Chapter, Iota Septaton, Traister, and O Connor. 37. As part of the pledging process, Marquise was subjected to violent hazing, including but not limited to: a. The locked in ceremony, which involved forced drinking of alcohol. (Specifically, Marquise and other pledges were locked in an attic, then taken to the basement where there were two kegs of beer and two large trash cans in the middle of the room. The pledges were ordered to drink beer until they filled the two trash cans with vomit. At least one officer of Defendant Iota Septaton was 10

13 present at all times to order them to drink. The pledges were then returned to the attic, cycling back and forth for two days, with little rest or food.); b. Choosing between snorting a line of cocaine or being sodomized, while being videotaped; c. Committing theft and trespass; d. Killing, gutting, and skinning animals; e. Forcing the pledges to fight one another, resulting in concussions and hospitalization of one pledge; f. Extreme sleep deprivation; g. Forced consumption of alcohol, revolting combinations of food, bottles of Listerine, and goldfish; h. Forced calisthenics and physical exertion, including rolling a keg up a steep hill and then drinking it; i. Having guns pointed at their heads; and j. Having hot wax dripped on their backs until they consumed a bottle of liquor. 38. The hazing of Marquise and his fellow pledges began in early October 2013, and, by the end of that month, Marquise was sharing details of what was happening to him with a Resident Assistant in his dormitory, Defendant Bish, engaging her by text on October 31, 2013, to bid on him in an auction to prevent him from being the pledge who raised the least amount of money. Ms. Bish asked what would happen if he were the pledge who raised the least amount of money, and Marquise replied, I can t tell you but it s nothing good lol. I ll tell you another time when I m not surrounded by brothers. 11

14 39. On November 3, 2013, Marquise texted Ms. Bish: I think we re going to do the milk challenge this upcoming week because we all messed up last week. I m not sure if I m Ready for that haha. Ms. Bish replied, Your gonna throw up. Its better to just chug and get it over with then go the whole hour feeling yucky. 40. Marquise went on to inform Ms. Bish, I feel like I ve done so much that it can t get any worse but it always does lol. Ms. Bish replied, yes it will get worse. I m sorry to say hahaha but it will. Marquise then stated: When I first started to pledge I didn t think I would be doing the stuff that I m doing right now. And how do u know it s going to get worse? Ms. Bish replied, I know sigma pi got worse. And yours is worse than theirs so I can only imagine hahaha. 41. The next day, Marquise informed Ms. Bish he was forced to eat shaving cream sprinkled with tobacco dip and a live goldfish and forced to chug vinegar followed by milk to curdle in their stomachs. Marquise complained that his stomach felt like it was on fire, and Ms. Bish recommended he eat something to soak up all that shit and [b]read will help. 42. Marquise was forced to kill, gut, and skin a squirrel. He texted a photo of the carcass to Ms. Bish, who replied, Yummy!!!! She asked whether the dissection was for a class, and Marquise told her it was for the frat. 43. At one point, Marquise texted I expected worse last night, but that s bit what s worrying me. The president and the sentinel almost got into a fist fight over how we were being hazed. The pres thinks that we aren t being punished enough and since he has the say, I think we re fucked. 44. During hell week, when Marquise was required to be at the Chapter house at all times unless in class, and a professed eighty-nine hours without sleep, Marquise texted Ms. Bish, 12

15 I m try to stay awake haha. Ms. Bish responded, Hahahaha try harder!! Can you text while you are there? Marquise then replied, I ve been through stuff and ik [I know] for a fact it s only going to get worse for me. And yeah I can text pretty often at the house. Unless I m getting hazed of course. Ms. Bish replied, You poor thing... Your keeping a good spirit tho. Keep your chin up boo!! 45. Ms. Bish continued to condone the hazing of Marquise, even as he told her he was being required to fight. Marquise texted, I hear the worst is pretty much over.. All ik [I know] is that we fight tn [tonight]. I ll feel much better if I tell you everything. When I m a brother. I ll try to make it. Ms. Bish replied, I don t even know what to say. I m so sorry boo. You make me so proud of how strong you are... Keep chugging along boo. Marquise later texted Ms. Bish he thought he had sustained a concussion, to the point of fearing he would fall into a coma were he to fall asleep, and he was taking another pledge to the hospital. Ms. Bish replied, Stay strong little buddy. You are almost done and you ve been so strong. Your kicking ass! =) hope the tea helped. 46. When Marquise was required to consume a bottle of Yukon Jack whiskey, he asked Ms. Bish about it and she replied, you ll be okay. You ll just puke a lot. And it ll burn. Later, Marquise texted: Just finished my bottle, first one to finish o Too. I ll see you tomorrow if I m lace. Then he texted Alive. Ms. Bish replied,: Haha your cute. Goodnight =). 47. As part of his class to become an RA, Marquise submitted to Defendant Mosley a journal entry in which Marquise admitted that abusive alcohol consumption was negatively affecting his health, stating I simply drink more than any human being should and I can see it taking its toll on me. Ms. Mosley noted on his journal, How will you balance this w/the RA 13

16 position? How will you role model to your students? Defendant Bish knew such alcohol consumption was directly related to, and required by, the hazing Marquise was enduring. Marquise s Psychological Crisis 48. The next semester, having been initiated and now a member of Phi Sig, Marquise was elected to the executive board position of secretary of Defendant Iota Septaton, which required him to be present for the hazing of the next class of pledges. The hazing of the new pledge class began with the locked in ceremony, which took place on or about February 24-26, Marquise s continued membership in Phi Sig was conditioned upon his participation in this hazing. He struggled deeply with having to witness and participate in the hazing of others. 50. Within days of the lock-in ceremony, Marquise texted Ms. Bish on March 4, 2014, I ve just been going through some stuff recently and it s affecting my schoolwork. Ms. Bish texted later, I m just worried about you baby Quise... That s all. 51. On March 5, 2014, Marquise texted a friend from home, I m just hanging in here haha. Hazing season just started so I m kinda glad to go back home. Some of this shit is just hard to watch when you re a brother. 52. On March 6, 2014, Marquise texted Ms. Bish, I just never thought I would get to the point where I needed counseling. That just isn t me uk [you know]. Sometimes I just feel like I m falling apart... Ms. Bish responded, You just have a lot more serious things going on than I do right now... I am worried about you. I didn t know it was this bad. You almost cried a few times =(. Marquise then replied, Looks like we re in this together. I just really 14

17 hate showing emotions. I don t even remember the last time I came close to crying like that. I can t stand talking about myself or my past uk [you know] it hurts. 53. The dialogue continued with Ms. Bish stating, I know it does Quise. But this isn t something you can bottle up... Marquise replied, Idk [I don t know] Kar. I ll see. Ms. Bish replied, No I m not suggesting this. I m telling you. I m worried as fuck about you... Marquise agreed to go to counseling upon return from spring break and suggested he was not really that bad, to which Ms. Bish texted, Lie to yourself all you want. 54. Upon information and belief, on March 7, 2014, Defendants Bish and Mosley reported to their supervisor that they believed Marquise was in a state of dangerous psychological crisis. Upon information and belief, they or their supervisor forwarded this information to Penn State s Dean of Student Activities but no action was taken to intervene, get Marquise immediate help, or inform Marquise s parents of his psychological crisis, despite Marquise having signed a waiver allowing Penn State to communicate directly with his parents regarding his academic and health issues. Moreover, Penn State s health policy provides: It is the policy of the University to render emergency assistance to students who are seriously injured, suffer serious illness, or experience other personal emergencies while attending the University, and to notify and assist the families of students who have died, are seriously ill or injured, are missing or experience other personal emergency situations. Under such policy, Penn State assures parents that it will inform them about a student emergency with or without the student s actual consent. The purpose of such policy and regulation is to protect a particular class of students, of which Marquise was a member. 55. Marquise left Penn State for spring break on March 7, Once home, Marquise wept when telling his aunt he needed to confess his fraternity sins. 15

18 56. The hazing endured by Marquise, and then the hazing of others which he was required to witness as a condition of being a member of Phi Sig, debased Marquise s strong Catholic principles and desire to help others so severely, Marquise confessed to his priest, I have sinned, and told him he had been marked by the fraternity. 57. On March 14, 2014, the day before Marquise was to return to Penn State Altoona and rejoin the fraternity hazing, Marquise jumped to his death from the roof of the Long Island Marriott Hotel in Uniondale, New York, which is an eleven-story building. 58. Following Marquise s death, Penn State investigated allegations of hazing involving members and pledges of Iota Septaton during the academic year, and, based on its findings, revoked its recognition Defendants Grand Council and Iota Septaton for a period of six years. Upon information and belief, Penn State learned that its personnel had observed and warned senior administrator s at Penn State about Marquise s psychological crises as a result of the hazing shortly before his death, but Penn State kept this information secret from the family, leaving them in the dark and exacerbating their suffering ever since his death. Pennsylvania s Anti-Hazing Law 59. Pennsylvania s anti-hazing law, 24 P.S , criminalizes hazing. 60. The anti-hazing law defines hazing as: [a]ny action or situation which recklessly or intentionally endangers the mental or physical health or safety of a student... for the purpose of initiation or admission into or affiliation with, or as a condition for continued membership in, any organization operating under the sanction of or recognized as an organization by an institution of higher education. 61. The anti-hazing law states that hazing includes, but is not limited to: any brutality of a physical nature, such as whipping, beating, branding, forced calisthenics, exposure to the elements, forced consumption of any food, liquor, drug or other substance, or any other forced physical activity which could adversely affect the physical health and safety of the individual. 16

19 and any activity which would subject the individual to extreme mental stress, such as sleep deprivation, forced exclusion from social contact, forced conduct which could result in extreme embarrassment, or any other forced activity which could adversely affect the mental health or dignity of the individual, or any willful destruction or removal of public or private property. 62. The anti-hazing law states that any activity constituting hazing upon which the initiation or admission into or affiliation with or continued membership in an organization is directly or indirectly conditioned shall be presumed to be forced activity, the willingness of an individual to participate in such activity notwithstanding. 63. The anti-hazing law requires institutions of higher education, such as Penn State, to adopt and enforce written policies prohibiting students or other persons associated with any organization operating under the sanction of or recognized as an organization by the institution from engaging in any activity which can be described as hazing. Upon information and belief, Defendants Bish and Mosley were mandated to report suspected hazing to Penn State administrators, who, along with Defendants Bish and Mosley, were mandated to take reasonable action to prevent hazing and protect students from being hazed and the effects thereof. Penn State s Deceptive Statements 64. Penn State publicly reports on its website and documentary material that it has one of the largest Greek communities in North America. Penn State publicly states in such materials that it prohibits hazing in accordance with express requirements of Pennsylvania law. 65. Penn State states as fact only positive, promotional information to students and families about Greek organizations, presumably for the purpose of convincing students to join these organizations and become committed, valuable alumni. 17

20 66. Penn State s documentary material labels the actual and dangerous risks facing students pledging fraternities as constituting myths, expressly stating to parents and students: For many parents, the fraternity and sorority community reminds them of images of the movie Animal House. There are many myths about the fraternity and sorority community, but the reality is that men and women in fraternities and sororities are committed to their academics, volunteer their time in the community, develop and strengthen their leadership skills, and form a campus network with other fraternity and sorority members. 67. Statistics, insurance claims analyses, studies and reports, and widely known incidents of catastrophic injury and death have for decades demonstrated the foreseeable risk of dangerous injury and death from hazing. It is widely reported and well known among universities and Greek organizations that at least one student has died in fraternity pledge activities every year since Upon information and belief, Penn State has had numerous incidents of dangerous hazing and misuse of alcohol in fraternities on its campus, and has chosen to exclude this truthful information from its documentary materials. 68. In the late 1980s, the Fraternity Information and Programming Group ( FIPG ), a different consortium of Greek organizations organized to coordinate their risk management strategies and assist each other in the purchase of insurance, widely published that fraternities and sororities were ranked by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners as the sixth worst risk for insurance companies just behind hazardous waste disposal companies and asbestos contractors. 69. In 1997, the National Interfraternity Council ( NIC ), then comprising 66 Greek national organizations with 5500 chapters on 800 campuses throughout the United States and Canada, analyzed certain risks associated with Greek organizations and housing and concluded that improper fraternity oversight of alcohol was frighteningly pervasive. The NIC passed a Resolution encouraging its member fraternities to pursue alcohol-free chapter facilities. 18

21 70. Penn State had, at all times relevant hereto, access to and specialized knowledge of information, research, campus judiciary proceedings, and other credible information confirming a staggering number of serious risk management violations, injuries and deaths from Greek activities, substantial flaws in the self-management system thereof, and the foreseeable risk of further injury and death should Greek activities, traditions, and risk management strategies on its campus continue without meaningful change. Upon information and belief, Penn State also had specific knowledge of serious past misconduct, risk management violations, and disciplinary proceedings involving Iota Septaton and its members, but did not disclose such truthful information to the public, including to Marquise and his family. 71. Despite such knowledge, Penn State advised students and parents that alleged misconduct and related risks involving Greek organizations were myths. Despite such knowledge, Penn State chose not to timely and accurately report any information about the incidents of hazing, risk management violations and other fraternity misconduct. 72. Penn State s statements about fraternities and the services they and the university provide regarding hazing, alcohol abuse, risks, and the safety of students seeking to join them are unfair and deceptive, as those phrases are defined in the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law. Penn State s fails to disclose any, let alone accurate, information about the serious risks students face when joining Greek organizations from hazing, alcohol abuse and other prevalent, dangerous misconduct. COUNT I Survival Claim for Negligence Against Defendant Penn State 73. The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are realleged and incorporated herein. 19

22 74. This claim is brought by Plaintiff in his capacity as personal representative of the Estate of Marquise A. Braham against Defendant Penn State pursuant to Pennsylvania s Survival Act, 42 Pa.C.S. 8302, to recover all damages legally appropriate thereunder. 75. Plaintiff claims on behalf of the Estate all damages suffered by said Estate by reason of the death of Marquis A. Braham, as well as for the physical and mental pain and suffering that Marquis A. Braham underwent prior to his death. 76. Plaintiff claims on behalf of the Estate the past and future loss of earnings and earning capacity sustained as a result of the death of Marquis A. Braham. 77. Defendants Grand Chapter and Iota Septaton operated under the sanction of and were recognized as organizations by Defendant Penn State. 78. Defendant Penn State retained significant authority and control over Defendants Grand Chapter and Iota Septaton, up to and including but not limited to the ability to suspend or to prohibit all of their operations and activities at Penn State Altoona. 79. Defendant Penn State knew or should have known that members of Defendant Iota Septaton would engage and did engage in hazing and that hazing intentionally and recklessly inflicts emotional distress on all participants in hazing, including but not limited to persons specifically targeted by hazing and persons required to otherwise participate in hazing. 80. Defendant Penn State owed statutory and common law duties, including but not limited to assumed duties, to prevent members of Defendant Iota Septaton from engaging in hazing and to protect pledges and members of Defendant Iota Septaton from hazing. 81. Defendant Penn State owed a statutory duty under Pennsylvania s anti-hazing law, 24 P.S , to prevent members of Defendant Iota Septaton from engaging in hazing and to protect pledges and members of Defendant Iota Septaton from hazing. 20

23 82. The purpose of the anti-hazing law is to protect students from hazing. 83. At all relevant times, Marquise was within the class of persons intended to be protected by the anti-hazing law. 84. Defendant Penn State breached its statutory and common law duties by, among other things: a. Failing to accurately state and warn students and families of the dangers of hazing; b. Failing to properly intervene, stop the hazing of Marquise, and discipline members of Defendant Iota Septaton; c. Failing to properly implement or enforce laws, rules, and policies against hazing; d. Failing to properly supervise Defendant Iota Septaton and its members; e. Relying on untrained agents to manage and supervise Defendant Iota Septaton, its activities, and the enforcement of laws, rules, and policies against hazing; f. Failing to properly train its staff to recognize the dangers of hazing and take appropriate action to protect students; and g. Relying on untrained or unreliable agents to monitor campus life. 85. As a direct and proximate result of the negligent acts and omissions of Defendant Penn State, Marquise was subjected to intentional and reckless infliction of emotional distress resulting in extreme emotional distress and, ultimately, death by suicide. 86. Defendant Penn State is jointly and severally liable for Marquise s injuries and death because it and/or its agents acting within the scope of their authority: 21

24 a. Committed tortious acts or omissions in concert with other Defendants or pursuant to a common design; b. Knew that other Defendants conduct constituted a breach of duty and gave substantial assistance or encouragement to the others so to conduct themselves; or c. Gave substantial assistance to other Defendants in accomplishing a tortious result and their own conduct, separately considered, constituted a breach of duty to Marquise. 87. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant Penn State, jointly and severally, as follows: (1) compensatory damages in excess of $50,000; (2) punitive damages in the maximum amount allowable by law and proven at trial; (3) all costs associated with this action; and (4) any other and further relief that is just and appropriate, including but not limited to delay damages pursuant to Pa.R.C.P COUNT II Survival Claim for Negligence Against Defendant Penn State 88. The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are realleged and incorporated herein. 89. This claim is brought by Plaintiff in his capacity as personal representative of the Estate of Marquise A. Braham against Defendant Penn State pursuant to Pennsylvania s Survival Act, 42 Pa.C.S. 8302, to recover all damages legally appropriate thereunder. 90. Plaintiff claims on behalf of the Estate all damages suffered by said Estate by reason of the death of Marquise A. Braham, as well as for the physical and mental pain and suffering that Marquise A. Braham underwent prior to his death. 91. Plaintiff claims on behalf of the Estate the past and future loss of earnings and earning capacity sustained as a result of the death of Marquise A. Braham. 22

25 92. Defendant Penn State knew or should have known that Marquise was in a state of emotional crisis and needed prompt medical attention to protect his emotional health and physical safety. 93. At all relevant times, Defendant Penn State was authorized to intervene by directly providing medical treatment to Marquise, advising Marquise s parents about his hazing and psychological crisis, or by warning Marquise s parents of his need for attention and care. 94. Defendant Penn State owed common law duties, including but not limited to assumed duties, to intervene to protect Marquise s health and safety. 95. Defendant Penn State breached its duties by, among other things: a. Failing to obtain prompt medical attention for Marquise; and b. Failing to tell Marquise s parents about the hazing, his psychological crisis, and warn them of his need for prompt attention and care. 96. Had Marquise s parents been told about the hazing and warned of Marquise s psychological crisis, they would have promptly obtained the medical attention that Marquise desperately needed. 97. As a direct and proximate result of the negligent acts and omissions of Defendant Penn State, Marquise left campus in dangerous psychological distress and committed suicide. Marquise s damages also include but are not limited to conscious pain and suffering, lost earnings, lost retirement and social security income, and medical expenses. 98. Defendant Penn State is jointly and severally liable for Marquise s injuries and death because it and/or its agents acting within the scope of their authority: a. Committed tortious acts or omissions in concert with other Defendants or pursuant to a common design; 23

26 b. Knew that other Defendants conduct constituted a breach of duty and gave substantial assistance or encouragement to the others so to conduct themselves; or c. Gave substantial assistance to other Defendants in accomplishing a tortious result and their own conduct, separately considered, constituted a breach of duty to Marquise. 99. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant Penn State, jointly and severally, as follows: (1) compensatory damages in excess of $50,000; (2) punitive damages in the maximum amount allowable by law and proven at trial; (3) all costs associated with this action; and (4) any other and further relief that is just and appropriate, including but not limited to delay damages pursuant to Pa.R.C.P COUNT III Survival Claim for Violation of the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law Against Defendant Penn State 100. The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are realleged and incorporated herein This claim is brought by Plaintiff in his capacity as personal representative of the Estate of Marquise A. Braham against Defendant Penn State pursuant to Pennsylvania s Survival Act, 42 Pa.C.S. 8302, to recover all damages legally appropriate thereunder Plaintiff claims on behalf of the Estate all damages suffered by said Estate by reason of the death of Marquise A. Braham, as well as for the physical and mental pain and suffering that Marquise A. Braham underwent prior to his death Plaintiff claims on behalf of the Estate the past and future loss of earnings and earning capacity sustained as a result of the death of Marquise A. Braham As alleged above, Defendant Penn State made deceptive statements regarding Greek organizations, Greek communities, and hazing. 24

27 105. Marquise was aware of and relied on Defendant Penn State s deceptive statements in choosing to pledge and become a member of Phi Sig Had Defendant Penn State not made deceptive statements, either Marquise would have chosen on his own initiative not to pledge or his parents would have affirmatively prevented Marquise from pledging As a direct and proximate result of Defendant Penn State s deceptive conduct, Marquise was subjected to vicious hazing, suffered extreme psychological distress, and committed suicide. Marquise s damages also include but are not limited to conscious pain and suffering, lost earnings, lost retirement and social security income, and medical expenses. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant Penn State, jointly and severally, as follows: (1) compensatory damages in excess of $50,000; (2) three times the amount of actual damages, pursuant to 73 P.S ; (3) costs and reasonable attorneys fees, pursuant to 73 P.S ; (4) equitable relief compelling Penn State to cease engaging in unfair and deceptive acts or practices; and (5) any other and further relief that is just and appropriate, including but not limited to delay damages pursuant to Pa.R.C.P COUNT IV Survival Claim for Negligence Against Defendants Bish and Mosley 108. The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are realleged and incorporated herein This claim is brought by Plaintiff in his capacity as personal representative of the Estate of Marquise A. Braham against Defendants Bish and Mosley pursuant to Pennsylvania s Survival Act, 42 Pa.C.S. 8302, to recover all damages legally appropriate thereunder. 25

28 110. Plaintiff claims on behalf of the Estate all damages suffered by said Estate by reason of the death of Marquise A. Braham, as well as for the physical and mental pain and suffering that Marquise A. Braham underwent prior to his death Plaintiff claims on behalf of the Estate the past and future loss of earnings and earning capacity sustained as a result of the death of Marquise A. Braham Defendants Bish and Mosley knew or should have known that members of Defendant Iota Septaton subjected Marquise to hazing and forced him to watch hazing of others, and that such conduct intentionally and recklessly inflicted emotional distress on Marquise Defendants Bish and Mosley knew or should have known that Marquise was in a state of emotional crisis and needed prompt medical attention to protect his emotional health and physical safety Defendants Bish and Mosley owed common law duties, including but not limited to assumed duties, to intervene to protect Marquise from hazing and to protect his emotional health and physical safety Defendants Bish and Mosley breached their duties by, among other things: a. Encouraging Marquise to continue with pledging and membership in Defendant Iota Septaton notwithstanding the hazing and his state of emotional crisis; b. Failing to timely report the hazing to supervisors or other persons who could take action to stop it; and c. Failing to follow through on their reports of Marquise s psychological crisis to ensure he obtained the intervention and care he required and that they were obligated to provide under the circumstances. 26

29 116. As a direct and proximate result of the negligent acts and omissions of Defendants Bish and Mosley, Marquise was subjected to hazing resulting in severe and dangerous psychological distress and, ultimately, his death by suicide. Marquise s damages also include but are not limited to conscious pain and suffering, lost earnings, lost retirement and social security income, and medical expenses Defendants Bish and Mosley are jointly and severally liable for Marquise s injuries and death because they: a. Committed tortious acts or omissions in concert with other Defendants or pursuant to a common design; b. Knew that other Defendants conduct constituted a breach of duty and gave substantial assistance or encouragement to the others so to conduct themselves; or c. Gave substantial assistance to other Defendants in accomplishing a tortious result and their own conduct, separately considered, constituted a breach of duty to Marquise. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendants Bish and Mosley, jointly and severally, as follows: (1) compensatory damages in excess of $50,000; (2) punitive damages in the maximum amount allowable by law and proven at trial; (3) all costs associated with this action; and (4) any other and further relief that is just and appropriate, including but not limited to delay damages pursuant to Pa.R.C.P COUNT V Survival Claim for Negligence Against Defendants Grand Chapter and Iota Septaton 118. The allegations in the preceding paragraphs are realleged and incorporated herein. 27

30 119. This claim is brought by Plaintiff in his capacity as personal representative of the Estate of Marquise A. Braham against Defendants Grand Chapter and Iota Septaton pursuant to Pennsylvania s Survival Act, 42 Pa.C.S. 8302, to recover all damages legally appropriate thereunder Plaintiff claims on behalf of the Estate all damages suffered by said Estate by reason of the death of Marquise A. Braham, as well as for the physical and mental pain and suffering that Marquise A. Braham underwent prior to his death Plaintiff claims on behalf of the Estate the past and future loss of earnings and earning capacity sustained as a result of the death of Marquise A. Braham Defendant Iota Septaton is chartered by and an agent of Defendant Grand Chapter which retains significant control over Defendant Iota Septaton though its Constitution, bylaws, rules, policies, procedures, and monetary support. Defendant Grand Chapter also controls and manages Defendant Iota Septaton through the use of consultants, staff, and alumni advisors Defendants Grand Chapter and Iota Septaton knew or should have known that members of Defendant Iota Septaton would engage and did engage in hazing and that hazing intentionally and recklessly inflicts emotional distress on all participants in hazing, including but not limited to persons specifically targeted by hazing and persons required to watch hazing Defendants Grand Chapter and Iota Septaton owed statutory and common law duties, including assumed duties, to prevent members of Defendant Iota Septaton from engaging in hazing and to protect pledges and members of Defendant Iota Septaton from hazing Defendants Grand Chapter and Iota Septaton breached their duties by, among other things: 28