SUM-200(A)

CASE NUMBER:
SHORT TITLE:
Lewis v. YCM Baseball Group, LLC, et al.

INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE

This form may be used as an attachment to any summons if space does not permit the listing of all parties on the summons.
If this attachment is used, insert the following statement in the plaintiff or defendant box on the summons: "Additional Parties
Attachment form is attached."

List additional parties (Check only one box. Use a separate page for each type of party.):

Plaintiff Defendant Cross-Complainant Cross-Defendant

Page 1 of 1
Page 1 of 1
Form Adopted for Mandatory Use
Judicial Council of California ADDITIONAL PARTIES ATTACHMENT
SUM-200(A) [Rev. January 1, 2007] Attachment to Summons
 1 hereby complain and allege as follows:

2 JURISDICTION AND VENUE

3 1. This is an unlimited case, over which this Court has jurisdiction. The total amount

4 of damages sought by PLAINTIFF exceeds $25,000.

5 2. This Court has personal jurisdiction over DEFENDANTS because at all times

6 mentioned herein, DEFENDANTS resided, were organized, existed in, or conducted business in the

7 State of California and the County of Sacramento.

8 3. In addition, venue is proper in the County of Sacramento as DEFENDANTS, or some

9 of them, reside and/or have principal place of business in the County of Sacramento.

10 PARTIES

11 4. PLAINTIFF is a resident of the County of San Francisco, State of California.

12 5. Defendant THOMAS D. LININGER (herein referred to as “LININGER”) is a

13 resident of the County of Sacramento, State of California and an owner of YCM BASEBALL

14 GROUP, LLC., a California limited liability company.

15 6. Defendant JOHN JOSEPH CASSIDY, JR. (herein referred to as “CASSIDY”) is a

16 resident of the County of Yuba, State of California and an owner of YCM BASEBALL GROUP,

17 LLC., a California limited liability company.

18 7. Defendant AL MONTNA (herein referred to as “MONTNA”) is a resident of the

19 County of Yuba, State of California and an owner of YCM BASEBALL GROUP, LLC., a California

20 limited liability company.

21 8. Defendants LININGER, CASSIDY and MONTNA individually and through their

22 company, YCM BASEBALL GROUP, LLC, (herein referred to as “YCM”) a California limited

23 liability company, leased the baseball field known as Bryant Field from the CITY OF

24 MARYSVILLE.

25 9. Defendant YCM BASEBALL GROUP, LLC., is a California limited liability

26 company that leased the baseball field known as Bryant Field from the CITY OF MARYSVILLE.

27 10. The CITY OF MARYSVILLE was the owner of Bryant Field, 1431 C Street,

28
2
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
 1 Marysville, California, where the subject incident took place.

2 11. The true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate or otherwise,

3 of Defendants DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, are unknown to PLAINTIFF at this time, who

4 therefore sues said defendants by such fictitious names. When the true names and capacities of said

5 Defendants are ascertained, they will be inserted into the complaint by way of amendment.

6 12. PLAINTIFF is informed and believe, and based thereon alleges, that each Defendant

7 designated herein as a “Doe” is responsible in some manner for each other DEFENDANT’s acts

8 and omissions and for the resulting injuries and damages to PLAINTIFF, as alleged herein.
9 13. PLAINTIFF is informed and believe, and based thereon alleges, that
10 DEFENDANTS, each and all of them, agreed with one another, and gave each other substantial

11 assistance and encouragement to commit the acts and omissions described herein, which resulted in

12 harm and damage to PLAINTIFF.

13 14. All references in this complaint to “DEFENDANTS” shall, unless stated otherwise,
14 be deemed to include all “Does” defendants as well as all of the DEFENDANTS named above.

15 FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

16 15. PLAINTIFF incorporates by reference all allegations contained in Paragraphs 1

17 through 14, inclusive, in this Complaint as if the same had been set forth fully below.

18 16. On or about June 10, 2021, PLAINTIFF was playing baseball for the Palo Alto Oaks

19 at Bryant Field in the City of Marysville which was controlled, owned and leased by

20 DEFENDANTS.

21 17. While running to catch a ball in left field, PLAINTIFF’s foot tripped over a mat that

22 was negligently left in the field of play by DEFENDANTS and fell headfirst into an unpadded

23 fence/wall directly next to the mat. The incident described above shall hereinafter be referred to as

24 the “SUBJECT INCIDENT”.

25 18. The impact with the fence resulted in a right hemispheric brain stroke, the dissection

26 of his carotid artery, traumatic brain injury and other neurological injuries which will require

27 lifetime medical care.

28
3
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
 1 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

2 GENERAL NEGLIGENCE

3 (Against Defendants YCM, LININGER, CASSIDY, MONTNA and DOES 1-25)

4 19. PLAINTIFF hereby incorporates by reference all paragraphs hereinabove as if fully

5 set forth in detail below.

6 20. At all relevant times, Defendants YCM, LININGER, CASSIDY, MONTNA and

7 DOES 1-25, were under a duty to make the playing surface of Bryant Field safe for PLAINTIFF

8 and all the other players playing on June 10, 2021.

9 21. At all relevant times, Defendants YCM, LININGER, CASSIDY, MONTNA and
10 DOES 1-25, carelessly and negligently leased, operated, managed, maintained, entrusted, and

11 controlled Bryant Field in such a way as to proximately cause the SUBJECT INCIDENT and

12 PLAINTIFF’S injuries.

13 22. Defendants YCM, LININGER, CASSIDY, MONTNA and DOES 1-25, negligently
14 hired, trained, retained, managed, directed, instructed and/or supervised their agents and/or

15 employees, the result of which legally and directly caused the SUBJECT INCIDENT and

16 PLAINTIFF’S injuries and damages.

17 23. Defendants YCM, LININGER, CASSIDY, MONTNA and DOES 1-25, and their
18 employees and agent’s negligence resulted in a mat on the field of play directly next to an unpadded

19 and dangerous fence/wall.

20 24. Defendants YCM, LININGER, CASSIDY, MONTNA and DOES 1-25, and their

21 employees and agent’s failure to remove unexpected tripping hazards from the field of play, such

22 as the mat, or to pad their hard, sharp and dangerous fence resulted in the SUBJECT INCIDENT

23 and PLAINTIFF’S injuries.

24 25. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence, carelessness and recklessness of

25 the DEFENDANTS, and each of them, inclusive, PLAINTIFF has been hurt and injured to his body

26 and person. PLAINTIFF suffered serious and permanent injuries all of which have caused, and

27 continue to cause pain, suffering and nervousness which were a direct and proximate result of the

28
4
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
 1 negligence of the DEFENDANTS, and each of them, inclusive. The PLAINTIFF required medical

2 consultation, care and treatment from physicians and has undergone x-rays, examinations and other

3 diagnostic tests and treatments, and the PLAINTIFF will, in the future, require medical

4 consultations and the care and treatment of physicians, surgeons as well as additional x-rays,

5 examinations and other diagnostic tests and treatments to cure and correct the effects of injuries

6 suffered by PLAINTIFF all in an amount which is presently unknown to the PLAINTIFF herein

7 but, the PLAINTIFF believe, and thereon alleges, that said damages and injuries are in an amount

8 which exceeds the minimal jurisdictional limit of the court of unlimited jurisdiction.
9 26. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence, carelessness and recklessness of
10 the DEFENDANTS, and each of them, inclusive, PLAINTIFF has suffered loss of wages.

11 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

12 PREMISES LIABILITY

13 (Against Defendants YCM, LININGER, CASSIDY, MONTNA and DOES 1-25)

14 27. PLAINTIFF hereby incorporates by reference all paragraphs hereinabove as if fully

15 set forth in detail below.

16 28. Defendants YCM, LININGER, CASSIDY, MONTNA and DOES 1-25 leased,

17 occupied, controlled Bryant Field in Marysville on or about the time of the SUBJECT INCIDENT.

18 29. At the time and place of the SUBJECT INCIDENT and prior to the SUBJECT

19 INCIDENT, Defendants YCM, LININGER, CASSIDY, MONTNA and DOES 1-25 were negligent

20 in the use or maintenance of Bryant Field in Marysville.

21 30. PLAINTIFF was harmed as a result of the Defendants YCM, LININGER,

22 CASSIDY, MONTNA and DOES 1-25’s negligence.

23 31. Defendants YCM, LININGER, CASSIDY, MONTNA and DOES 1-25’s failed to

24 use reasonable care to keep Bryant Field in a reasonably safe condition and failed to use reasonable

25 care to discover any unsafe conditions, or to warn others regarding unsafe conditions.

26 32. Specifically, Defendants YCM, LININGER, CASSIDY, MONTNA and DOES 1-

27 25’s despite their knowledge that they were operating a baseball field where players would be

28
5
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
 1 running at high rates of speed while looking in the air for baseballs, allowed a tripping hazard in the

2 field of play directly next to an unpadded hard, and sharp fence/wall.

3 33. The likelihood of harm was extremely great as players on the field while catching

4 baseballs are not expecting tripping hazards in the field of play, such as the subject mat. As such

5 players are expected to be running at high rates of field while looking in the air.

6 34. Anytime you have young baseball players running at high rates of speed near

7 unexpected tripping hazards that are dangerously close to hard, sharp and unpadded fences, the

8 likelihood of harm is extremely high and the seriousness of such harm is extremely severe.
9 35. Defendants YCM, LININGER, CASSIDY, MONTNA and DOES 1-25’s should
10 have known about this condition through the course of usual inspection of the field that they

11 operated and leased. These defendants failed to do such inspections.

12 36. These defendants knew or should have known, after all they operate a baseball team,
13 that the conditions described above, an unexpected mat tripping hazard in the field of play, next to

14 an unpadded, hard and sharp wall, created a high risk of harm.

15 37. The difficulty of protecting against such a risk of harm is low – these defendants
16 could have removed the mat, or padded the wall – either fix probably prevents the SUBJECT

17 INCIDENT.

18 38. It is alleged that these defendants created the above-described dangerous condition,

19 the unexpected mat next to the unpadded, sharp/dangerous fence, and then failed to inspect for and

20 then correct this dangerous condition for some period of time before the SUBJECT INCIDENT.

21 39. It is alleged that these defendants had notice, actual or constructive, of the above-

22 described dangerous condition, the unexpected mat next to the unpadded, sharp/dangerous fence.

23 40. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence, carelessness and recklessness of

24 the DEFENDANTS, and each of them, inclusive, PLAINTIFF has been hurt and injured to his body

25 and person. PLAINTIFF suffered serious and permanent injuries all of which have caused, and

26 continue to cause pain, suffering and nervousness which were a direct and proximate result of the

27 negligence of the DEFENDANTS, and each of them, inclusive. The PLAINTIFF required medical

28
6
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
 1 consultation, care and treatment from physicians and has undergone x-rays, examinations and other

2 diagnostic tests and treatments, and the PLAINTIFF will, in the future, require medical

3 consultations and the care and treatment of physicians, surgeons as well as additional x-rays,

4 examinations and other diagnostic tests and treatments to cure and correct the effects of injuries

5 suffered by PLAINTIFF all in an amount which is presently unknown to the PLAINTIFF herein

6 but, the PLAINTIFF believe, and thereon alleges, that said damages and injuries are in an amount

7 which exceeds the minimal jurisdictional limit of the court of unlimited jurisdiction.

8 41. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence, carelessness and recklessness of
9 the DEFENDANTS, and each of them, inclusive, PLAINTIFF has suffered loss of wages.

10 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

11 DANGEROUS CONDITION OF PUBLIC PROPERTY

12 (Against Defendant CITY OF MARYSVILLE and DOES 26-50)

13 42. PLAINTIFF incorporates by reference the above paragraphs as if fully set forth in

14 detail below.

15 43. Upon information and belief, PLAINTIFF alleges that:

16 a. Defendant CITY OF MARYSVILLE and DOES 26-50 owned or controlled Bryant

17 Field.

18 b. That Bryant Field was in a dangerous condition at the time of the injury, as described

19 above, an unexpected tripping hazard mat next to an unpadded hard and sharp fence

20 in an area where ball players are expected to be running at high rates of speed while

21 looking in the air;

22 c. That the dangerous condition created a reasonably foreseeable risk of the kind of

23 injury that occurred;

24 d. That negligent or wrongful conduct of the City of Marysville’s employee acting

25 within the scope of employment created the dangerous condition; or that the City of

26 Marysville had notice of the dangerous condition for a long enough time to have

27 protected against it;

28
7
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
 1 e. That PLAINTIFF was harmed;

2 f. That the dangerous condition was a substantial factor in causing the harm.

3 44. It is alleged that Defendant CITY OF MARYSVILLE and DOES 26-50 had the

4 ability to prevent, fix or guard against the dangerous condition. And it is believed that the CITY

5 OF MARYSVILLE and DOES 26-50 treated the property as if it was there own.

6 45. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence, carelessness and recklessness of

7 the DEFENDANTS, and each of them, inclusive, PLAINTIFF has been hurt and injured to his body

8 and person. PLAINTIFF suffered serious and permanent injuries all of which have caused, and
9 continue to cause pain, suffering and nervousness which were a direct and proximate result of the

10 negligence of the DEFENDANTS, and each of them, inclusive. The PLAINTIFF required medical

11 consultation, care and treatment from physicians and has undergone x-rays, examinations and other

12 diagnostic tests and treatments, and the PLAINTIFF will, in the future, require medical
13 consultations and the care and treatment of physicians, surgeons as well as additional x-rays,

14 examinations and other diagnostic tests and treatments to cure and correct the effects of injuries

15 suffered by PLAINTIFF all in an amount which is presently unknown to the PLAINTIFF herein

16 but, the PLAINTIFF believe, and thereon alleges, that said damages and injuries are in an amount

17 which exceeds the minimal jurisdictional limit of the court of unlimited jurisdiction.

18 46. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence, carelessness and recklessness of

19 the DEFENDANTS, and each of them, inclusive, PLAINTIFF has suffered loss of wages.

20

21

22 ///

23

24

25

26 ///

27

28
8
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
 1 PRAYER FOR DAMAGES

2 WHEREFORE, PLAINTIFF prays for judgment against all DEFENDANTS and DOES 1-

3 50 as follows:

4 1. For all general/economic and special/non-economic damages in excess of the minimum

5 jurisdiction for an unlimited civil case, the exact amount according to proof;

6 2. For all loss of financial earnings, past and future, according to proof;

7 3. For all costs of suit, according to proof;

8 4. For loss of enjoyment of life, and other general damages, past and future, according to proof;
9 5. All statutorily allowed damages; and
10 6. For such other and further relief as this Court deems proper.
11
Dated: November 2, 2021 Respectfully submitted:
12

13 BD&J, PC
OLIVIER A. TAILLIEU
14 MARTIN KANAREK

15

16
By:
17 Attorneys for Plaintiff, AKHEEM LEWIS

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28
9
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
 1 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

2 PLAINTIFF hereby demand a trial of all causes by jury.

4
Dated: November 2, 2021 Respectfully submitted:
5

6 BD&J, PC
OLIVIER A. TAILLIEU
7 MARTIN KANAREK

8
9
By:
10 Attorneys for Plaintiff, AKHEEM LEWIS

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28
10
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
 CM-010
INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO COMPLETE THE COVER SHEET
To Plaintiffs and Others Filing First Papers. If you are filing a first paper (for example, a complaint) in a civil case, you must
complete and file, along with your first paper, the Civil Case Cover Sheet contained on page 1. This information will be used to compile
statistics about the types and numbers of cases filed. You must complete items 1 through 6 on the sheet. In item 1, you must check
one box for the case type that best describes the case. If the case fits both a general and a more specific type of case listed in item 1,
check the more specific one. If the case has multiple causes of action, check the box that best indicates the primary cause of action.
To assist you in completing the sheet, examples of the cases that belong under each case type in item 1 are provided below. A cover
sheet must be filed only with your initial paper. Failure to file a cover sheet with the first paper filed in a civil case may subject a party,
its counsel, or both to sanctions under rules 2.30 and 3.220 of the California Rules of Court.
To Parties in Rule 3.740 Collections Cases. A "collections case" under rule 3.740 is defined as an action for recovery of money
owed in a sum stated to be certain that is not more than $25,000, exclusive of interest and attorney's fees, arising from a transaction in
which property, services, or money was acquired on credit. A collections case does not include an action seeking the following: (1) tort
damages, (2) punitive damages, (3) recovery of real property, (4) recovery of personal property, or (5) a prejudgment writ of
attachment. The identification of a case as a rule 3.740 collections case on this form means that it will be exempt from the general
time-for-service requirements and case management rules, unless a defendant files a responsive pleading. A rule 3.740 collections
case will be subject to the requirements for service and obtaining a judgment in rule 3.740.
To Parties in Complex Cases. In complex cases only, parties must also use the Civil Case Cover Sheet to designate whether the
case is complex. If a plaintiff believes the case is complex under rule 3.400 of the California Rules of Court, this must be indicated by
completing the appropriate boxes in items 1 and 2. If a plaintiff designates a case as complex, the cover sheet must be served with the
complaint on all parties to the action. A defendant may file and serve no later than the time of its first appearance a joinder in the
plaintiff's designation, a counter-designation that the case is not complex, or, if the plaintiff has made no designation, a designation that
the case is complex. CASE TYPES AND EXAMPLES
Auto Tort Contract Provisionally Complex Civil Litigation (Cal.
Auto (22)–Personal Injury/Property Breach of Contract/Warranty (06) Rules of Court Rules 3.400–3.403)
Damage/Wrongful Death Breach of Rental/Lease Antitrust/Trade Regulation (03)
Uninsured Motorist (46) (if the Contract (not unlawful detainer Construction Defect (10)
case involves an uninsured or wrongful eviction) Claims Involving Mass Tort (40)
motorist claim subject to Contract/Warranty Breach–Seller Securities Litigation (28)
arbitration, check this item Plaintiff (not fraud or negligence) Environmental/Toxic Tort (30)
instead of Auto) Negligent Breach of Contract/ Insurance Coverage Claims
Other PI/PD/WD (Personal Injury/ Warranty (arising from provisionally complex
Property Damage/Wrongful Death) Other Breach of Contract/Warranty case type listed above) (41)
Tort Collections (e.g., money owed, open Enforcement of Judgment
Asbestos (04) book accounts) (09) Enforcement of Judgment (20)
Asbestos Property Damage Collection Case–Seller Plaintiff Abstract of Judgment (Out of
Other Promissory Note/Collections County)
Asbestos Personal Injury/
Wrongful Death Case Confession of Judgment (non-
Product Liability (not asbestos or Insurance Coverage (not provisionally domestic relations)
toxic/environmental) (24) complex) (18) Sister State Judgment
Medical Malpractice (45) Auto Subrogation Administrative Agency Award
Medical Malpractice– Other Coverage (not unpaid taxes)
Physicians & Surgeons Other Contract (37) Petition/Certification of Entry of
Other Professional Health Care Contractual Fraud Judgment on Unpaid Taxes
Malpractice Other Contract Dispute Other Enforcement of Judgment
Real Property Case
Other PI/PD/WD (23)
Premises Liability (e.g., slip Eminent Domain/Inverse Miscellaneous Civil Complaint
and fall) Condemnation (14) RICO (27)
Intentional Bodily Injury/PD/WD Wrongful Eviction (33) Other Complaint (not specified
above) (42)
(e.g., assault, vandalism) Other Real Property (e.g., quiet title) (26)
Intentional Infliction of Declaratory Relief Only
Writ of Possession of Real Property Injunctive Relief Only (non-
Emotional Distress Mortgage Foreclosure harassment)
Negligent Infliction of Quiet Title
Emotional Distress Mechanics Lien
Other Real Property (not eminent
Other PI/PD/WD Other Commercial Complaint
domain, landlord/tenant, or
Case (non-tort/non-complex)
Non-PI/PD/WD (Other) Tort foreclosure)
Other Civil Complaint
Business Tort/Unfair Business Unlawful Detainer (non-tort/non-complex)
Practice (07) Commercial (31)
Miscellaneous Civil Petition
Civil Rights (e.g., discrimination, Residential (32) Partnership and Corporate
false arrest) (not civil Drugs (38) (if the case involves illegal Governance (21)
harassment) (08) drugs, check this item; otherwise, Other Petition (not specified
Defamation (e.g., slander, libel) report as Commercial or Residential) above) (43)
(13) Judicial Review Civil Harassment
Fraud (16) Asset Forfeiture (05) Workplace Violence
Intellectual Property (19) Petition Re: Arbitration Award (11) Elder/Dependent Adult
Professional Negligence (25) Writ of Mandate (02) Abuse
Legal Malpractice Writ–Administrative Mandamus Election Contest
Other Professional Malpractice Writ–Mandamus on Limited Court Petition for Name Change
(not medical or legal) Case Matter Petition for Relief From Late
Other Non-PI/PD/WD Tort (35) Writ–Other Limited Court Case Claim
Employment Review Other Civil Petition
Wrongful Termination (36) Other Judicial Review (39)
Other Employment (15) Review of Health Officer Order
Notice of Appeal–Labor
Commissioner Appeals
CM-010 [Rev. July 1, 2007] Page 2 of 2
CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET