Filing # 111495283 E-Filed 08/09/2020 01:04:23 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR LEE COUNTY, FLORIDA, CIVIL ACTION COUNTS Enea Sees CIVIL ACTION, TRAVIASIA BLANKS, Plaintiff, vs. CASE NO, LANIKATISLAND RESORT, INC. «dba LANI KAI ISLAND RESORT, Defendant a COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL ‘COMES NOW the Plait, Traviasia Blanks, by and through the undersigned counsel and ‘hereby sus the Defendant, Lani Kai Island Resort, ne dba Lani Ka sand Resort andalegesthe following 1. This js an action for damages that exceed the Cout’s $30,000.00 minimum Jisictional init 2 The Plaintiff, Traviasi Blanks, sa resident of Lee County, Forda, 3. Atal times material hereto, the Defendant, Lani Kai [sland Resort, Ine, db Lani Kai sland Resor, was a Florida corporation, duly authorize to conduct business in Lee County, Florida 4. Atall mes material hereto, the Defendant, Lani Kei Island Resor, nc. ib Lani ai Island Resort, ovned the hotel, property, parking lt, buldings, and improvements located at 400 Estero Boulevard, Fort Myers Beach, Florida, which is known as the Lani Ka sland Resort Ihereinaer tobe refered toa the subject premises). 5. Atal times material hereto, the Defendant, Lani Kai Island Resort, Ine. ibe Lani Kai [sland Resort, was in charge ofthe day-to-day operations of the hotel and resort located at 1400Estero Boulevard, Fort Myers Beach, Florida, which i known a the Lani Kai, Island Reso and hada duty to properly maintain said premises and to make sad premises safe forthe guests, vistors, and employees. 6 TheDefendantknew, orinthe exerise of reasonable care should have known ofthe cviinal activity oscuringon the subject premises and/or having the potetial andlor opportunity to eur on the subject premises or its immediate vicinity. 7, TheDefendanthad actual or constructive notice orknowledgeofahistoyoferiminal aesivity in and about the subject premises prior othe incident in question, 8. TheDefendant knew or should have recognized the likelihood tha criminal wetvity Which would endanger the guests, visitors, and employees ofthe subject premises 9, The Defendant knew or should have recognized tha security measures at th time of te incident complained of herein were either non-existent, lacking, inadequate andor were not being performed as expected or intended. 10. The Defendant knew or should have recognized tht the secur measures ead implemented on the subject premises at the time of the incident complained of hetein were inadequate and unreasonable due tothe reasonably foreseeable risks presented herein 11, On July 15, 2020, Traviasia Blanks was on the subject premises asa guest ofthe Defendant. ‘More specifically, Travisia Blanks was the guest of Jordan Pillip, who was an ‘employee and a paying hotel questa he subject premises, 12, On July 15,2020, Traviasia Blanks was shot atthe subject premises for unprovoked and unknown reasons 13, Prioeto July 15,2020, sucha gunshot was reasonably foreseeable bythe Defendant, as result ofthe following+ During the three (3) years prior tothe subject incident a substantial amount of violentcriminal activity, including assaults, batteries, and the discharge of firearms, had occurred on the subject premises, ‘The subject premises are located in an tea where a substantial amount of Violent criminal activity, including assaults, batteries, andthe discharge of firearms, had occured inthe previous three (3) years; * Defendant had actual or constructive knowledge of prior similar erminal attacks and other eriminal behavior in, on and/or near the subject premises within the previous thtee (3) years, + Defendant had actual or constructive knowledge of prior similar criminal incidents or episodes on persons within one (I) square mile of the subject, premises; Defendant had actual or constructive knowledge thatthe subjec premises, because ofits location and previous criminal incident history, both on the subject premises and in the immediate surrounding areas, posed « clear security risk tothe guests, visitors, and employees a the subject premises; ‘There had been previous complaints by Defendant's guests, visitors, and ‘employees that security in or about te subject premises was needed: and + Based upon all ofthe applicable surrounding circumstances 14, Because attacks by third persons upon guests, visitors and employees atthe subject premises were reasonably foreseeable, the Defendant had an obligation and duty to exercise reasonable cae to protect te guests, visitors, and employees from such attacks. 15. The Defendant breached is obligstion and duty based upon the following + The Defendant failed to have any security measures to protect the guests, visitors, and employees from criminal attacks; + The Defendant failed to install security gate/fence atthe subject premises; The Defendant failed to implement a crime watch program andor neighborhood watch program: + ‘The Defendant failed to have adequate security personnel, security procedures, and security equipment; + The Defendant failed to have adequate lighting on the subject premises; * The Defendant failed to wam of prior criminal activity on the subject premises; + The Defendant failed to establish or enforce intemal procedures and safeguards to protect guests, visitors, and employees from criminal atacks; + The Defendant failed to utilize adequate video surveillance and/or closed circuit television surveillance of the subject premises to deter criminal activity: + ‘The Defendant failed to erect waming signs in order to deter criminal activity; + The Defendant fsiled to control and adequately supervise the subjectpremises; ‘The Defendant failed to adequately become apprised of the extent of the problem of criminal acts which occurred on ot near the subject premises and to take reasonable preventative ations; ‘The Defendant failed to oversee and/or supervise existing security measures {0 insure that such measures were being adequately performed: ‘The Defendant failed to improve any existing security measures which the Defendant knew or though the exercise of reasonable eare should have ‘known were inadequate and/or ineffective and/or were being inefficiently performed or executed; and ‘The Defendant failed to provide adequate taining toemployees charged with ‘the responsibility of providing security to guest, visitors, and employees, ‘As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant's negligence, Travisia Blanks suffered bodily injuries and resulting pain and suffering, disability, mental anguish, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, the expense of medical care and treatment, loss ofthe ability t eatn ‘money, and an aggravation of a preexisting condition, The losses ate permanent and continuing in ‘nature and Traviasia Blanks will suffer the losses in the future. The Defendant is responsible and liable for these camages rosulting feom the shooting of Travisia Blanks, |AND F ‘TRIAI WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff hereby demands judgments for damages against the Defendant and a Trial by Jury ofall issues so triable ‘THE NORTH LAW FIRM, P.A, Attorneys forthe Plantf 14241 Metro Parkway, Suite 200 ort Myers, Florida 33912 (239) 337-1191, Primary: jrobertnorth@thenosthlawfim org Secondary: mikelkinser@thenorthlawfim.org elg@thenorthlawfirm org