Filing # 87742769 E-Filed 04/10/2019 10:02:50 AM

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE 17th JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA

GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION

CASE NO.:

ANTHONY and JENNIFER MONTALTO, as Co-Personal Representatives of the Estate of GINA ROSE MONTALTO, Deceased, and Individually,

Plaintiffs, v. THE SCHOOL BOARD OF BROWARD COUNTY; the BROWARD SHERIFF’S OFFICE; SCOT PETERSON; and ANDREW MEDINA, and HENDERSON BEHAVIORAL HEALTH INC.,

Defendants. _______________________________________/

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiffs, ANTHONY MONTALTO and JENNIFER MONTALTO, as Co-Personal

Representatives of the Estate of GINA ROSE MONTALTO, Deceased, and individually, by and

through undersigned counsel, in accordance with the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, hereby file

their complaint against Defendants, THE SCHOOL BOARD OF BROWARD COUNTY, the

BROWARD SHERIFF’S OFFICE, SCOT PETERSON, ANDREW MEDINA, and HENDERSON

BEHAVIORAL HEALTH INC. As grounds therefore, Plaintiffs state:

Allegations as to all counts

1. This is a civil action arising out of a school shooting which occurred on Valentine’s Day

(February 14, 2018) at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.

2. On Valentine’s Day NIKOLAS CRUZ shot and killed seventeen students and teachers,

including fourteen-year-old, Decedent, GINA ROSE MONTALTO.

1

3. This is an action for damages in excess of $15,000.00 exclusive of interest, costs and

attorney’s fees, and is being brought pursuant to the Florida Wrongful Death Act, Florida

Statute 768.18 et seq.

4. Plaintiffs ANTHONY MONTALTO and JENNIFER MONTALTO are the natural parents

and statutory survivors of their daughter, GINA ROSE MONTALTO, who was murdered at

Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, on February 14, 2018.

5. ANTHONY MONTALTO and JENNIFER MONTALTO are also Florida residents, residing

in BROWARD County, and are (or will be) the duly appointed, qualified and acting Personal

Representatives of the Estate of GINA ROSE MONTALTO.

6. At all times material hereto, GINA ROSE MONTALTO was an invitee and student under the

direct guidance, supervision, control and instruction of the Defendant, THE SCHOOL

BOARD OF BROWARD COUNTY, and/or its agents, servants, and/or employees at

Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School located in Parkland, Broward County, Florida.

7. Plaintiffs have complied with the presuit notice requirements of Florida Statute 768.28 and

all applicable subparts thereto.

8. On or about February 14, 2018, shortly after 2:20PM, GINA ROSE MONTALTO was

intentionally and criminally shot to death by a certain Nikolas Cruz, within the confines of

Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High, and suffered bodily injury leading to GINA ROSE

MONTALTO’s death.

9. All conditions precedent to the bringing of this action have been complied with or waived.

Venue

10. The incident complained of occurred in Broward County, Florida.

11. Venue is proper in Broward County, Florida.

2

COUNT I NEGLIGENCE CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANT THE SCHOOL BOARD OF BROWARD COUNTY

12. Plaintiffs readopt and re-allege all prior allegations contained in Paragraphs 1-11.

13. THE SCHOOL BOARD OF BROWARD COUNTY (“SBBC”) is a political subdivision of

the STATE OF FLORIDA. SBBC is the division of the County government responsible for

the operation, management, budgeting, and all other aspects of the Broward County Public

School System, including Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School.

14. At all times material, Defendant SBBC, through its agents and employees including Co-

Defendant ANDREW MEDINA, owed a duty to its students, employees, licensees, and

invitees, to exercise reasonable and ordinary care to maintain its premises, including Marjorie

Stoneman Douglas High School, in a condition reasonably safe for use by its students,

employees, licensees, and invitees, including GINA ROSE MONTALTO. In particular,

Defendant had a duty to take such precautions as were reasonably necessary to protect its

students, licensees, and invitees, including GINA ROSE MONTALTO, from reasonably

foreseeable criminal attacks on the premises.

15. At all times material, Defendant SBBC was aware, or should have been aware, of numerous

acts of violence or threats of violence by Nikolas Cruz against other persons within the

Broward County school system and others. In the days, weeks, months and years preceding

the subject incident, while Mr. Cruz was (putatively) under various levels of disciplinary

control by the Defendant SBBC, Mr. Cruz openly expressed a fascination with firearms

and/or other weapons capable of inflicting serious bodily injury or death. Such threats made

by Nikolas Cruz included, but are not limited to a specific threat to “shoot up the school” in

February 2016. This information was provided to Defendant SBBC viz. its school resource

officer, Co-Defendant and Broward Sherriff Office Deputy SCOT PETERSON.

3

16. Despite the long history of Nikolas Cruz’s threats, of which the Defendant was or should

have been seriously concerned, Defendant SBBC failed to take reasonable measures to

address the foreseeable risk that Nikolas Cruz posed to invitees upon the subject premises,

including GINA ROSE MONTALTO.

17. At all times material, Defendant SBBC, through its agents and employees, knew or in the

exercise of reasonable care should have known that there had been numerous criminal acts

and attacks perpetrated on students and employees at numerous high schools, middle schools,

and other schools throughout the State of Florida and the United States, and that further

criminal acts and attacks were reasonably likely to be perpetrated on the Defendant’s

students, employees, licensees, and invitees unless the Defendant took reasonable steps to

provide proper security for such individuals.

18. The Defendant SBBC, through its agents and employees, was in an exclusively superior

position to students such as GINA ROSE MONTALTO, to take the measures necessary to

provide for security on school premises.

19. At the above mentioned time and place, Defendant, SBBC, by and through its agents and

employees, breached its duty to exercise ordinary and reasonable care for the safety and

protection of the students, employees, licensees, and invitees, including GINA ROSE

MONTALTO, through the following acts of omission or commission:

a. Failing to provide adequate security for its students, employees, licensees, and

invitees, including Decedent, GINA ROSE MONTALTO;

b. Failing to warn its students, parents of students, employees, licensees, and invitees,

including GINA ROSE MONTALTO, of the nature and character of the threat posed

by Nikolas Cruz, when it knew or in the exercise of reasonable care should have

known that Nikolas Cruz had a significant history of making threats of violence,

4

including threats of violence involving the use of firearms, at school;

c. Failing to adequately police, patrol, guard, deter, and otherwise provide reasonable

protection for its students, employees, licensees, and invitees, when Defendant knew

or should have known of foreseeable criminal acts;

d. Failing to reasonably hire and/or retain and/or supervise adequate security personnel

to patrol and/or monitor the premises of Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School,

thereby protecting its students, employees, licensees, and invitees, including GINA

ROSE MONTALTO;

e. Failing to have proper procedures in place for hiring, training, and/or supervising

school resource officers, monitors, police officers or other staff responsible for school

security;

f. Failing to have a sufficient number of security guards in visible areas to deter crime,

thereby protecting its students, employees, licensees, and invitees, including GINA

ROSE MONTALTO;

g. Failing to have adequate mechanisms for security personnel, staff, employees,

students and others within the school community to report real threats or other

security concerns against themselves or others;

h. Failing to properly train employees, administrators, guards and/or other employees to

adequately supervise the campus in such a way that would prevent acts of violence;

i. Failing to implement or follow adequate security policies, security measures, and

security procedures necessary to protect GINA ROSE MONTALTO and other

students, employees, licensees, and invitees;

j. Failing to take additional security measures after being put on notice that the security

measures in force were inadequate;

5

k. Failing to adequately provide an overall security plan that would meet the known

industry standards and customs for safety in schools;

l. Failing to adequately screen or monitor those entering the premises for the possession

of weapons;

m. Failing to implement reasonable crime prevention through environmental design

concepts which would have hardened Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School

against foreseeable violent crime such as the subject incident;

n. Acting or failing to act consistently with the relevant policies, procedures, guidelines

and training relating to the protection of human life that were in effect at the time of

the shooting.

20. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant SBBC, GINA ROSE

MONTALTO suffered bodily harm on February 14, 2018 from an assault and battery on the

subject school premises which caused her death, and her Estate and survivors have suffered

and will continue to suffer damages into the future, including as the applicable law may

provide:

a. Past and future mental pain and suffering of ANTHONY MONTALTO, who is the

father of GINA ROSE MONTALTO;

b. Past and future mental pain and suffering of JENNIFER MONTALTO, who is the

mother of GINA ROSE MONTALTO;

c. Past and future loss of Decedent’s support and services;

d. The prospective net accumulations of the Estate of GINA ROSE MONTALTO;

e. The expense of medical care and funeral arrangements due to the death of GINA

ROSE MONTALTO; and

f. Any and all other damages which the applicable law allows.

6

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, ANTHONY MONTALTO and JENNIFER MONTALTO, as Co-

Personal Representatives of the Estate of GINA ROSE MONTALTO, and individually, sue the

Defendant, THE SCHOOL BOARD OF BROWARD COUNTY, and demand judgment against the

Defendant for all damages recoverable under the laws of Florida and further demands a trial by jury

on all issues so triable as of right by a jury. COUNT II

NEGLIGENCE CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANT BROWARD SHERIFF’S OFFICE

21. Plaintiffs readopt and re-allege all prior allegations contained in Paragraphs 1-11.

22. BROWARD SHERIFF’S OFFICE (Hereinafter “BSO”) is a political subdivision of the

STATE OF FLORIDA. BSO is a licensed Florida law enforcement agency with jurisdiction

that includes Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School.

23. On February 14, 2018, Defendant BSO undertook to respond to reports of shots fired at

Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School. BSO officers and agents, including Co-Defendant

SCOT PETERSON, were performing an operational-level function as the shooting unfolded,

which involved the activation of a preexisting BSO policy relating to active shooter

situations. One of the longstanding requirements upon which students, faculty and staff are

trained, is to shelter in place under a “lockdown,” and wait for law enforcement to clear the

scene. The BSO policy on active shooter situations in schools mandates that officers’ first

priority is to stop the killing. Officers must go directly to the sounds of the gunfire and

attempt to neutralize the attacker. These BSO operational mandates did not involve the

exercise of any type of quasi-legislative discretion.

24. At all times material, BSO negligently implemented its policies and procedures by failing to

immediately enter, locate, and neutralize Nikolas Cruz, the shooter who murdered GINA

7

ROSE MONTALTO and 16 other students on February 14, 2017, when it had the capability

to carry out this operational mandate to an active shooter situation. BSO placed employees,

staff, and students, including GINA ROSE MONTALTO, in a foreseeable, highly vulnerable

zone of risk by failing to follow the aforementioned policy, and by instead, waiting outside

the school for an inordinate amount of time as the shots rang out inside the school.

25. This failure increased the risk of harm to GINA ROSE MONTALTO by inducing the victims

of the mass shooting, who would have otherwise exercised self-help or taken other steps to

protect themselves to forebear from doing so, which caused or contributed substantially to

the death of GINA ROSE MONTALTO and others.

26. As a result of BSO’s failure to act in a manner consistent with the safety of everyone in the

school, including GINA ROSE MONTALTO, Nikolas Cruz was able to carry out a

prolonged murderous attack within Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School, which resulted

in the shooting death and murder of GINA ROSE MONTALTO and her classmates.

27. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant BSO, GINA ROSE

MONTALTO suffered bodily harm on February 14, 2018 from an assault and battery on the

subject school premises which caused her death, and her Estate and survivors have suffered

and will continue to suffer damages into the future, including as the applicable law may

provide:

a. Past and future mental pain and suffering of ANTHONY MONTALTO, who is the

father of GINA ROSE MONTALTO;

b. Past and future mental pain and suffering of JENNIFER MONTALTO, who is the

mother of GINA ROSE MONTALTO;

c. Past and future loss of Decedent’s support and services;

d. The prospective net accumulations of the Estate of GINA ROSE MONTALTO;

8

e. The expense of medical care and funeral arrangements due to the death of GINA

ROSE MONTALTO; and

f. Any and all other damages which the applicable law allows.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, ANTHONY MONTALTO and JENNIFER MONTALTO, as Co-

Personal Representatives of the Estate of GINA ROSE MONTALTO, and individually, sue the

Defendant, THE BROWARD SHERIFF’S OFFICE, and demand judgment against the Defendant for

all damages recoverable under the laws of Florida and further demands a trial by jury on all issues so

triable as of right by a jury.

COUNT III WILLFUL AND WANTON NEGLIGENCE CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANT SCOT PETERSON

28. Plaintiffs readopt and re-allege all prior allegations contained in Paragraphs 1-11.

29. At all times material, SCOT PETERSON was a sworn law enforcement officer with

BROWARD COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT, and was a School Resource Officer

(“SRO”) at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School.

30. At all times material, SCOT PETERSON’s duties as SRO at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas

High School included, inter alia, performing law enforcement functions within the school

setting, and providing assistance to THE SCHOOL BOARD OF BROWARD COUNTY in

protecting and securing the school plant and its occupants.

31. On February 14, 2018, Defendant SCOT PETERSON undertook to respond to reports of

shots fired at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School. SCOT PETERSON was performing

an operational-level function as the shooting unfolded, which involved the activation of a

preexisting BSO policy relating to active shooter situations. One of the longstanding

requirements upon which students, faculty and staff are trained, is to shelter in place under a

9

“lockdown,” and wait for law enforcement to clear the scene. The BSO policy on active

shooter situations in schools mandates that officers’ first priority is to stop the killing.

Officers must go directly to the sounds of the gunfire and attempt to neutralize the attacker.

These BSO operational mandates did not involve the exercise of any type of quasi-legislative

discretion.

32. At all times material, SCOT PETERSON wantonly and willfully disregarded BSO policies

and procedures by not immediately entering or attempting to enter the high school for the

purpose of locating and neutralizing Nikolas Cruz, the shooter who murdered GINA ROSE

MONTALTO and 16 other students on February 14, 2017, when he had the duty and

capability to carry out this operational mandate in an active shooter situation. SCOT

PETERSON wantonly and willfully placed employees, staff, and students, including GINA

ROSE MONTALTO, in a foreseeable, highly vulnerable zone of risk by wantonly and

willfully failing to follow the aforementioned policy, and by instead, waiting outside the

school for an inordinate amount of time as the shots rang out inside the school.

33. SCOT PETERSON’s actions (and inactions) increased the risk of harm to GINA ROSE

MONTALTO by inducing the victims of the mass shooting, who would have otherwise

exercised self-help or taken other steps to protect themselves to forebear from doing so,

which caused or contributed substantially to the death of GINA ROSE MONTALTO and

others. Further, SCOT PETERSON, in a manner exhibiting bad faith and extraordinary

recklessness, wantonly and willfully ordered via radio transmission a lockdown of the school

which precluded students from leaving (while he failed to enter as required by procedure),

while almost simultaneously, ordering other responding officers to not even approach the

situs of the shooting, much less enter as established BSO policy required, thus prolonging the

killing spree that continued inside. These commands, individually and collectively, were a

10

gross departure from BSO operating procedures in response to active shooter situations such

as this.

34. On numerous occasions prior to February 14, 2018, SCOT PETERSON further wantonly and

willfully failed to investigate or share relevant information of which he was aware regarding

the dangerousness of Nikolas Cruz with appropriate agencies and authorities that were in a

superior position to take prophylactic measures to guard against the threat Nikolas Cruz

posed to the entire school community, including GINA ROSE MONTALTO and her

classmates.

35. As a result of SCOT PETERSON’s deliberate failures to act in a manner consistent with the

safety of everyone in the school, including GINA ROSE MONTALTO, Nikolas Cruz was

able to carry out a prolonged murderous attack within Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High

School, which resulted in the shooting death and murder of GINA ROSE MONTALTO and

her classmates and teachers.

36. Defendant, PETERSON’s acts and omissions, as set forth herein, were committed in bad

faith or with malicious purpose or in a manner exhibiting wanton and willful disregard of

human rights, safety, or property.

37. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of Defendant SCOT PETERSON, GINA

ROSE MONTALTO suffered bodily harm on February 14, 2018 from an assault and battery

on the subject school premises which caused her death, and her Estate and survivors have

suffered and will continue to suffer damages into the future, including as the applicable law

may provide:

a. Past and future mental pain and suffering of ANTHONY MONTALTO, who is the

father of GINA ROSE MONTALTO;

b. Past and future mental pain and suffering of JENNIFER MONTALTO, who is the

11

mother of GINA ROSE MONTALTO;

c. Past and future loss of Decedent’s support and services;

d. The prospective net accumulations of the Estate of GINA ROSE MONTALTO;

e. The expense of medical care and funeral arrangements due to the death of GINA

ROSE MONTALTO; and

f. Any and all other damages which the applicable law allows.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, ANTHONY MONTALTO and JENNIFER MONTALTO, as Co-

Personal Representatives of the Estate of GINA ROSE MONTALTO, and individually, sue the

Defendant, SCOT PETERSON, and demand judgment against the Defendant for all damages

recoverable under the laws of Florida and further demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable as of

right by a jury.

COUNT IV WILLFUL AND WANTON NEGLIGENCE CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANT ANDREW MEDINA

38. Plaintiffs readopt and re-allege all prior allegations contained in Paragraphs 1-11.

39. At all times material, ADNREW MEDINA was an employee, a campus monitor and baseball

coach, with THE SCHOOL BOARD OF BROWARD COUNTY assigned to Marjorie

Stoneman Douglas High School.

40. At all times material, ANDREW MEDINA’s duties as a school monitor at Marjorie

Stoneman Douglas High School included providing assistance to THE SCHOOL BOARD

OF BROWARD COUNTY in protecting and securing the school and its occupants.

41. On February 14, 2018, Defendant, ANDREW MEDINA, was the first person at Marjorie

Stoneman Douglas High School to see the shooter, NIKOLAS CRUZ. Defendant,

MEDINA, immediately recognized the shooter to be “the crazy boy” who was previously

expelled from the school campus.

12

42. Defendant, MEDINA saw NIKOLAS CRUZ get out of the Uber car carrying the large, black

bag and walk, in MEDINA’S words, “south of Holmberg ... on the [MSD] campus through

the bike rack gate.... He’s bee-lining. He’s got his head down. He’s on a mission.... He’s

walking with a purpose.” MEDINA looped around in his golf cart to follow NIKOLAS

CRUZ. MEDINA saw that NIKOLAS CRUZ was heading to Building 12. MEDINA called

the security guard/fellow coach David Taylor on the school radio and warned Taylor “got a

suspicious subject on campus. Got a black bag in his hands. Keep your eyes open because I

think he’s going into your building. So...be careful.

43. When Medina first “heard the shots, he told [SCOT PETERSON]” – presumably over the

school radio – “there’s some crazy shots going on,” according to MEDINA. MEDINA

heard, he said, “at least 15 bangs....And it was loud. Like, you could kind of feel the

percussion coming out of that building, the echo coming out of the doors of the building. It

was ... loud. It was kind of... surreal to really hear.” MEDINA remarked that, “when I’m

coming to get [SCOT PETERSON], [SCOT PETERSON is] already walking out of the thing

like ready to come down. So I pick [SCOT PETERSON] up on my golf cart and then

somebody yells on the radio, ‘oh, it sounds like fireworks.’ And somebody said, ‘those ain’t

fireworks.’ And once we get to ... the front by the building [12] we heard the shots again.

Pop, pop, pop. That’s when [SCOT PETERSON] was like, ‘get out of here.’ And he

jumped off and he ran to his own way and he told me ‘just to go back to the front of the

school.’” MEDINA adds that “when [SCOT PETERSON] heard the shots, that’s when he

was like, ‘we got a shooter on...campus....’”

44. Defendant, MEDINA, did not follow one of the longstanding requirements upon which

students, faculty and staff are trained to call a “Code Red” when there is suspicious activity,

including hearing gun-shots fired.

13

45. Defendant, MEDINA, owed a duty to all the students, faculty, and staff at Marjorie

Stoneman Douglas, including but not limited to GINA ROSE MONTALTO, to monitor the

campus for dangerous and unusual activity, to alert the appropriate authorities when a

dangerous or unusual activity occurs, and to call a “Code Red” alarm when appropriate.

46. MEDINA breached this duty and his failure increased the risk of harm to GINA ROSE

MONTALTO by inducing the victims of the mass shooting, who would have otherwise

exercised self-help or taken other steps to protect themselves to forebear from doing so,

which caused or contributed substantially to the death of GINA ROSE MONTALTO and

others.

47. At all times material, ANDREW MEDINA wantonly and willfully disregarded THE

SCHOOL BOARD OF BROWARD COUNTY policies and procedures by not immediately

calling a “Code Red” when he had the duty and capability to carry out this operational

mandate in an active shooter situation. ANDREW MEDINA wantonly and willfully placed

employees, staff, and students, including GINA ROSE MONTALTO, in a foreseeable, highly

vulnerable zone of risk by wantonly and willfully failing to follow the aforementioned policy,

and by instead, waiting outside the school for an inordinate amount of time as the shots rang

out inside the school.

48. ANDREW MEDINA actions (and inactions) increased the risk of harm to GINA ROSE

MONTALTO by inducing the victims of the mass shooting, who would have otherwise

exercised self-help or taken other steps to protect themselves to forebear from doing so,

which caused or contributed substantially to the death of GINA ROSE MONTALTO and

others.

49. As a result of ANDREW MEDINA’s deliberate failures to act in a manner consistent with

the safety of everyone in the school, including GINA ROSE MONTALTO, Nikolas Cruz was

14

able to carry out a prolonged murderous attack within Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High

School, which resulted in the shooting death and murder of GINA ROSE MONTALTO and

her classmates and teachers.

50. Defendant, MEDINA’s acts and omissions, as set forth herein, were committed in bad faith

or with malicious purpose or in a manner exhibiting wanton and willful disregard of human

rights, safety, or property.

51. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of Defendant ANDREW MEDINA, GINA

ROSE MONTALTO suffered bodily harm on February 14, 2018 from an assault and battery

on the subject school premises which caused her death, and her Estate and survivors have

suffered and will continue to suffer damages into the future, including as the applicable law

may provide:

a. Past and future mental pain and suffering of ANTHONY MONTALTO, who is the

father of GINA ROSE MONTALTO;

b. Past and future mental pain and suffering of JENNIFER MONTALTO, who is the

mother of GINA ROSE MONTALTO;

c. Past and future loss of Decedent’s support and services;

d. The prospective net accumulations of the Estate of GINA ROSE MONTALTO;

e. The expense of medical care and funeral arrangements due to the death of GINA

ROSE MONTALTO; and

f. Any and all other damages which the applicable law allows.

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs, ANTHONY MONTALTO and JENNIFER MONTALTO, as

Co-Personal Representatives of the Estate of GINA ROSE MONTALTO, and individually, sue the

Defendant, ANDREW MEDINA, and demand judgment against the Defendant for all damages

recoverable under the laws of Florida and further demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable as of

15

right by a jury.

COUNT V NEGLIGENCE CLAIM AGAINST HENDERSON BEHAVIORAL HEALTH INC.

52. Plaintiffs readopt and re-allege all prior allegations contained in Paragraphs 1-11.

53. Defendant, HENDERSON BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, INC., (hereafter “HENDERSON”) is

a Florida not for profit corporation that was at all times material hereto licensed to do and

doing business in Broward County, Florida, the mission of which includes providing

healthcare, housing, and hope for 30,000 persons of all ages with behavioral health

conditions in Florida through care, supported employment, advocacy, and housing.

54. HENDERSON, its employees, agents, independent contractors and/or counselors, therapists,

case managers, and mental health personnel had interactions either with CRUZ and/or his

mother on the following occasions, including but not limited to: October 6, 2009, October 8,

2009, October 16, 2009, December 3, 2009, March 9, 2010, January 15, 2013, April 15,

2013, May 2, 2013, May 10, 2013, May 21, 2013, May 22, 2013, June 4, 2013, June 26,

2014, July 3, 2013, September 19, 2013, October 19, 2013, October 29, 2013, November 1,

2013, November 5, 2013, February 18, 2014, February 19, 2014, February 26, 2014, March

20, 2014, April 11, 2014, April 11, 2014, April 11, 2014, April 15, 2014, May 9, 2014, May

20, 2014, June 10, 2014, June 24, 2014, July 1, 2014, July 7, 2014, August 27, 2014,

September 8, 2014, September 9, 2014, September 22, 2014, November 5, 2014, December

10, 2014, December 23, 2014, December 17, 2014, December 23, 2014, February 12, 2015,

March 9, 2015, April 2, 2015, June 23, 2015, August 11, 2015, August 18, 2015, January

2016, February 5, 2016, September 23, 2016, September 28, 2016, September 29, 2016,

October 26, 2016, November 8, 2016, November 22, 2016, December 20, 2016, and

December 27, 2016.

16

55. CRUZ received behavioral healthcare services through a variety of HENDERSON’s

programs, including but not limited to: Family Counseling Enhancement Program (“FCE”),

Youth General Case Management (“YGCM”), Wrap Around Case Management (“WACM”),

Family Intervention Team Program (“FIT”), Responding Effectively to Adolescents and

Children in Home and Crisis Services (“REACH”), Youth and Family Services (“YFS”),

Families Involved Together (“FIT”) and Youth Emergency Services Team (“YES”).

56. HENDERSON first began providing behavioral healthcare services to CRUZ in October of

2009 when CRUZ was just eleven years old and in the 4th grade at Coral Springs Elementary.

57. CRUZ was also evaluated by a counselor with HENDERSON in January 2013 where the

counselor determined that he did not warrant hospitalization for mental health evaluation.

He was sent to HENDERSON after an incident where he threw his mother against a wall

because she took an X-box video game away from him.

58. HENDERSON further provided care for CRUZ on September 28, 2016 after a student

reported to SRO Deputy SCOT PETERSON that CRUZ, while depressed, had cut himself

and ingested gasoline in an attempt to kill himself. The student further stated that CRUZ

wanted to buy a gun for hunting, had drawn a swastika on his backpack next to the words “I

hate n-----s”.

59. On that occasion, counselors from HENDERSON advised police that NIKOLAS CRUZ

“was not a risk to harm himself or anyone else” because he was on a treatment plan for

ADHD, depression, and autism.

60. HENDERSON owed a duty to the students, faculty, and staff at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas,

including Decedent, GINA ROSE MONTALTO, to properly care for, treat, and evaluate

CRUZ.

61. The Florida Mental Health Act of 1971 (commonly referred to as the “Baker Act”) allows for

17

the involuntary and temporary institutionalization and examination of an individual for up to

72 hours. It can be initiated by judges, law enforcement officials, physicians or mental health

professionals. HENDERSON had at least three opportunities to “Baker Act” CRUZ and thus

render him unable to legally purchase the gun he used in the tragedy, but HENDERSON

failed to do so each time.

62. Throughout HENDERSON’s provision of behavioral health services to CRUZ,

HENDERSON failed to effectively treat CRUZ for depression and in fact provided treatment

to CRUZ which exacerbated and fueled his depression, and substantially contributed to

causing his violent tendencies and behavior, inclusive of his mass shooting at MSDHS.

63. Throughout HENDERSON’s provision of behavioral health services to CRUZ,

HENDERSON failed to diagnose CRUZ with antisocial personality disorder (psychopathy),

dissocial personality disorder (sociopathy) and/or conduct disorder, and thus failed to treat

CRUZ’s psychopathy, sociopathy and/or conduct disorder.

64. Throughout HENDERSON’s provision of behavioral health services to CRUZ,

HENDERSON recorded CRUZ’s medication regimen for the purposes of medication

management and failed to properly coordinate and supervise the medicinal care of CRUZ.

65. HENDERSON knew or should have known that CRUZ was depressed and suffered from

antisocial personality disorder (psychopathy), dissocial personality disorder (sociopathy),

and/or conduct disorder, that their provision of services were making things worse, and that

CRUZ posed a risk of harm to the students, teachers and administrators of MSDHS given the

circumstances, including his conditions and violent tendencies and behavior.

66. HENDERSON failed to warn the students, teachers and administrators of MSDHS that

CRUZ posed a risk of harm to them.

18

67. HENDERSON further failed to properly inform SBBC and school officials regarding

CRUZ, or participated with SBBC and school officials in the improper mainstreaming of

CRUZ into MSDHS, which led to CRUZ being improperly transferred to MSDHS – a school

that he could not handle and for which he was not suitable.

68. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of Defendant HENDERSON, GINA ROSE

MONTALTO suffered bodily harm on February 14, 2018 from an assault and battery on the

subject school premises which caused her death, and her Estate and survivors have suffered

and will continue to suffer damages into the future, including as the applicable law may

provide:

a. Past and future mental pain and suffering of ANTHONY MONTALTO, who is the

father of GINA ROSE MONTALTO;

b. Past and future mental pain and suffering of JENNIFER MONTALTO, who is the

mother of GINA ROSE MONTALTO;

c. Past and future loss of Decedent’s support and services;

d. The prospective net accumulations of the Estate of GINA ROSE MONTALTO;

e. The expense of medical care and funeral arrangements due to the death of GINA

ROSE MONTALTO; and

f. Any and all other damages which the applicable law allows.

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs, ANTHONY MONTALTO and JENNIFER MONTALTO, as

Co-Personal Representatives of the Estate of GINA ROSE MONTALTO, and individually, sue the

Defendant, HENDERSON BEHAVIORAL HEALTH INC., and demand judgment against the

Defendant for all damages recoverable under the laws of Florida and further demands a trial by jury

on all issues so triable as of right by a jury.

19

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiffs demand a trial by jury of all issues triable as of right by a jury.

DATED this 10th day of April, 2019.

GROSSMAN ROTH YAFFA COHEN, P.A. Attorneys for Plaintiffs 2525 Ponce de Leon Blvd., Suite 1150 Coral Gables, Florida 33134 Tel.: (305) 442-8666 Fax: (305) 285-1668 E-Mail: aag@grossmanroth.com

By: /s/ Manuel A. Arteaga-Gomez STUART Z. GROSSMAN Fla. Bar No.: 156113 ANDREW B. YAFFA Fla. Bar No.: 897310 MANUEL A. ARTEAGA-GOMEZ Fla. Bar No.: 18122 WILLIAM P. MULLIGAN Fla. Bar No.: 106521

20