IN THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT FOR STATE OF TENNESSEE OF HAMILTON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT ZYAIRA MATEEN, deceased, by her next of kin and parents, Jasmine Mateen and Qadir © Mateen; ZASMYN MATEEN, by her next a friends, parents and natural guardians, Jasmine Mateen and Qadir Mateen; ZACAUREE’A BROWN, a minor, by her next friend, parent and natural guardian, = a Jasmine Mateen; JASMINE MATEEN, ea . " i individually; and QADIR MATEEN, siarpoeariy ar B: individually, Wcl44 3s Plaintiffs, — v. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED. DURHAM SCHOOL SERVICES, L-P.; DURHAM HOLDING II, LLC; NATIONAL EXPRESS, LLC; and JOHNTHONY WALKER, Defendants. COMPLAINT COME NOW, Plaintiffs and file this Complaint against Defendants showing this Honorable Court as follows: Parties, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE 1 Plaintiff Jasmine Mateen is the mother of Zyaira Mateen, a deceased minor, and the mother of Zasmyn Mateen and Macauree’A Brown, minors. At all times relevant, Zyaira Mateen, Zasmyn Mateen and Macauree’A Brown were in the care and custody of their mother, Plaintiff Jasmine Mateen. 2. Plaintiff Qadir Mateen is the father of Zyaira Mateen, a deceased minor, and the father ofZasmyn Mateen, a minor. At all times relevant, Zyaira Mateen and Zasmyn Mateen were in the care and custody of their father, Plaintiff Qadir Mateen. 3. Plaintiffs Jasmine Mateen, Qadir Mateen, Zasmyn Mateen and Macauree’A Brown are citizens and residents of Hamilton County, Tennessee. The deceased minor, Zyaira Mateen was, at the time of her death, a citizen and resident of Hamilton County, Tennessee. 4, Defendant Durham School Services, LP is a Delaware limited partnership with its principal place of business in the State of Ilinois. 5. Defendant Durham School Services, LP is registered to and does transact business within the State of Tennessee, and may be served through its registered agent, CT Corporation System at 800 S. Gay Street, Suite 2021, Knoxville, TN 37929. 6. Defendant Durham School Services, LP is subject to the jurisdiction of this Court. 7. Defendant Durham Holding Il, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business in the State of Illinois. 8 Defendant Durham Holding Il, LLC may be served through its registered agent, CT Corporation System at 208 South LaSalle Street, Suite 814, Chicago, IL 60604. 9. Defendant Durham Holding Il, LLC is a general partner in Defendant Durham SchoolServices, LP and is therefore liable for the acts and omissions of Defendant Durham School Services, LP. 10. ‘At all times relevant hereto, Defendant Durham Holding Il, LLC, directly and/or indirectly, (a) transacted business in Tennessee; (b) contracted to supply services or things in Tennessee; (c) caused tortious injury by an act or omission in Tennessee; and/or (d) caused tortious injury in Tennessee by an act or omission outside this state, and regularly did or solicited business, or engaged in a persistent course of conduct, or derived substantial revenue from goods used or consumed or services rendered in Tennessee, i. Defendant Durham Holding Hl, LLC is subject to the jurisdiction of this Court under Tennessee’s Long Arm Statute, T.C.A. § 20-2-223 and under other provisions of Tennessee law. 12. For brevity, Defendants Durham School Services and Durham Holding II, LLC will be jointly referred to herein as “Defendant Durham.” 13, Defendant National Express, LLC (hereinafter “National Express”) is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business in the State of Illinois. 14, Defendant National Express may be served through its registered agent. CT Corporation ‘System at 208 South LaSalle St., Suite 814, Chicago, IL 60604, 15. On information and belief, and at all times relevant, Defendant National Express directlyand/or indirectly, (a) transacted business in Tennessee; (b) contracted to supply services or things in Tennessee; (c) caused tortious injury by an act or omission in Tennessee; and/or (d) caused tortious injury in Tennessee by an act or omission outside this state, and regularly did or solicited business, or engaged in a persistent course of conduct, or derived substantial revenue from goods used or consumed or services rendered in Tennessee. 16. Defendant National Express is subject to the jurisdiction of this Court under Tennessee’s Long Arm Statute, T.C.A. § 20-2-223 and under other provisions of Tennessee law. 17. Defendant Johnthony Walker is a resident and citizen of Tennessee. 18. Defendant Walker may be served at the Hamilton County jai! where he is currently incarcerated. 19. Defendant Walker is subject to the jurisdiction of this Court. 20. This action involves injuries, damages and a death arising from a school bus collision that occurred on November 21, 2016, in Hamilton County, Tennessee. 21. ‘This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action. 22. ‘Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to Tennessee Code Ann. § 20-4-101, because the cause of action arose in Hamilton County, Tennessee.Facts 23, Plaintiffs incorporate by reference the allegations contained in the above-numbered paragraphs as if each were fully set forth herein. 24, On November 21, 2016, Zyaira Mateen, Zasmyn Mateen and Macauree’A Brown were student-passengers on a school bus operated by Defendant Walker travelling on Talley Road in Chattanooga, Hamilton County, Tennessee. 25. ‘At the time, Defendant Walker was an agent and/or employee of Defendants Durham and/or ‘National Express. 26. The subject school bus operated by Defendant Walker was owned and/or operated by Defendants Durham and/or National Express. 20. Defendant Walker operated the subject school bus in a negligent manner. 28, Defendant Walker was operated the school bus at a speed in excess of the applicable speed limit, 29. Defendant Walker operated the schoo! bus in a reckless and dangerous manner. 30. Defendants Walker's operation of the school violated one or more Tennessee criminalstatutes and his actions constituted a felony. 31. {As a direct and proximate result of Defendant Walker's negligent and wrongful acts and omissions, he lost control of the schoo! bus, thereby causing it to overtum and strike a tree. 32, As a direct and proximate result of Defendant Walker's negligent and wrongful acts and omissions, Zyaira Mateen suffered physical, emotional and psychological injuries and damages, and ultimately died. 33. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant Walker's negligent and wrongful acts and omissions, Jasmine Mateen and Qadir Mateen have permanently lost the companionship, affection, consortium and love of their daughter, Zyaira Mateen, 34, As a direct and proximate result of Defendant Walker's negligent and wrongful acts and omissions, Zasmyn Mateen suffered physical, emotional and psychological injuries and damages. 35. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant Walker's negligent and wrongful acts and omissions, Macauree’A Brown suffered physical, emotional and psychological injuries and damages. 36. ‘As a direct and proximate result of Defendant Walker's negligent and wrongful acts and omissions, Jasmine Mateen and Qadir Mateen incurred medical expenses for the care and treatment of their minor children, Zyaira Mateen and Zasmyn Mateen.37. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant Walker’s negligent and wrongful acts and omissions, Jasmine Mateen incurred medical expenses for the care and treatment of her minor child, Macauree’A Brown, Count I NEGLIGENCE, GROSS NEGLIGENCE AND RECKLESSNESS OF WALKER 38. Plaintiffs incorporate herein by reference all preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if each were fully set forth herein in their entirety. 39. Defendant Walker was negligent, grossly negligent, reckless and negligent per se in the operation of the school bus at issue in the following ways: @ ©) © @ © o Failing to exercise due care; Exceeding the speed limit, Driving too fast for conditions; Failing to maintain his lane of travel; Violating state commercial vehicle safety regulations and Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations; and Otherwise failing to operate the school bus in a safe and prudent manner in view of the conditions that existed at the time of the incident. 40. ‘The subject collision and Plaintiffs’ damages as alleged herein were the direct and proximate result of the negligence, gross negligence, recklessness and negligence per se of Defendant Walker.al, Defendant Walker is liable to Plaintiffs for all damages allowed by law for the injuries, damages and losses set forth herein, COUNT T— NEGLIGENCE, GROSS NEGLIGENCE, RECKLESSNESS OF DURHAM AND NATIONAL EXPRESS 42. Plaintiffs incorporate herein by reference all preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if cach were fully set forth herein in their entirety. 4B. ‘At all times material hereto, Defendant Walker was an employee or agent of Defendants Durham and/or National Express. 44, ‘Atall times material hereto, Defendant Walker was acting within the course and scope of his employment or agency with Defendants Durham and/or National Express. 45. Defendants Durham and/or National Express are liable for the actions and omissions of Defendant Walker pursuant to the doctrine of respondeat superior and/or other agency principles. 46. ‘tall times material hereto, Defendant Walker was operating a commercial motor vehicle as the statutory employee of Defendants Durham and/or National Express, which are responsible and liable for Walker’s acts and omissions as his statutory employer. 47. Defendant(s) Durham and/or National Express were also independently negligent, grossly negligent and reckless and negligent per se in the following ways:@ (b) © @ © © @® (h) ‘Negligently hiring or contracting with Defendant Walker to drive the bus at issue; Negligently training Defendant Walker; Negligently entrusting Defendant Walker to operate a bus; Negligently retaining Defendant Walker to drive the bus at issue; Negligently qualifying Defendant Walker as a commercial driver; Failing to supervise Defendant Walker; Otherwise violating state and/or federal Jaws, rules regulations governing motor carriers; and Otherwise failing to act as a reasonably prudent company under the circumstances. 48. The subject collision and Plaintiffs’ damages as alleged herein were the direct and proximate result of the vicarious and direct/independent negligence, gross negligence, recklessness and negligence per se of Defendants Durham and/or National Express. 49. Defendants Durham and/or National Express are liable to Plaintiffs for all damages allowed by law for the injuries, damages and losses set forth herein. Count IH Puntrive DAMAGES 50. Plaintiffs incorporate herein by reference all preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if cach were fully set forth herein in their entirety. Si. Defendants’ acts and omissions were malicious, intentional, fraudulent and/or reckless.52. Defendants are liable to the Plaintiff for punitive damages to punish, penalize and deter ‘Defendants from similar conduct in the future. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray that the following relief be granted: (a) ) © @ © oO A trial by jury; For Summons and Complaint to issue against each Defendant; For judgment against each Defendant for the damages set forth herein; For judgment against each Defendant for punitive damages as shown to be fair and appropriate at the trial of this case; Court costs, discretionary costs, and prejudgment interest; and For all such further and general relief which this Court deems just and proper. Dated on January __, 2017. Locklear, BBR #028598 Cara Welsh, BPR # 020553 Attorney for Plaintiffs Of Counsel for Cash, Krugler & Fredericks, LLC PO Box 4548 Chattanooga, TN 37405 Telephone: 423.436.1529 Facsimile: 866.927.2074 10