Hearing Date: 9/27/2019 9:30 AM - 9:30 AM

Courtroom Number: 2305

Location: District 1 Court FILED
Cook County, IL 5/30/2019 11:12 AM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS DOROTHY BROWN
CIRCUIT CLERK
FIRST DISTRICT, CHANCERY DIVISION
COOK COUNTY, IL
FILED DATE: 5/30/2019 11:12 AM 2019CH06589

2019CH06589
)
CARITINA RODRIGUEZ, RANYA ATRACHE, ) 5230598
MELISSA BATTERSBY, )
SHANE PRENTICE-WALZ, )
PATRICIA SCARDINA, and MATTHEW URIBE, )
)
Plaintiffs, ) Case No.: 2019CH06589
) Judge:
v. )
)
3108 N MILWAUKEE LLC, )
3108 N MILWAUKEE MZ LLC, )
PEAK PROPERTIES, LLC, )
ACF MAINTENANCE AND REMODELING, )
MICHAEL ZUCKER, and FLORIN PAVEL, )
)
Defendants. )

PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT IN CHANCERY

INJUNCTION/TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

NOW COME Plaintiffs, Caritina Rodriguez, Ranya Atrache, Melissa Battersby, Shane

Prentice-Walz, Patricia Scardina, and Matthew Uribe (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), by and through

their attorneys, the Community Activism Law Alliance, and for their Complaint, state as follows:

INTRODUCTION

1. The safety, security, and stability of a family’s home are priceless. Plaintiffs are tenants

who have suffered from dangerous and harmful building conditions, disruptive and

unauthorized construction activity, and retaliation at the hands of their landlord. Plaintiffs

seek to protect themselves and their families by obtaining an injunction requiring

Defendants – owners, managers, and contractors – to fulfill their legal responsibilities.

Plaintiffs also seek other relief for the damages they have suffered.

2. The building currently located at 3108-3116 N. Milwaukee Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60618 with

Page 1 of 21
 Property Index Number 13-26-109-002-0000 (“the Building”) is a 34-unit building in the Avondale

neighborhood. Current tenants in the Building include families with young children and elderly
FILED DATE: 5/30/2019 11:12 AM 2019CH06589

residents.

3. Plaintiffs formed a tenants union to address harmful building conditions and to provide mutual

support. As the Building’s owners and managers pushed forward with unauthorized construction,

tenants worked together to ensure that owners and managers followed the law.

4. Recognizing the need to protect the homes of families across Chicago, the City of

Chicago passed the Residential Landlord and Tenant Ordinance (“RLTO”), in order to

“protect and promote the public health, safety and welfare of its citizens” and “to

establish the rights and obligations of the landlord and the tenant in the rental of dwelling

units.” This ordinance is incorporated into the Municipal Code of the City of Chicago

(the “Code”), § 5–12–010 et seq.

5. Plaintiffs seek to prevent and remedy unauthorized construction in their building, threats

of violence, harmful building conditions, and retaliation against RLTO-protected

activities.

PARTIES

6. Plaintiff Ranya Atrache (“Atrache”) currently resides at the Building, and has lived there

since 2014. She lives with her three daughters, ages 5, 13, and 17.

7. Plaintiff Melissa Battersby (“Battersby”) currently resides at the Building, and has lived

there since 2018. She lives with her daughter, age 9.

8. Plaintiff Shane Prentice-Walz (“Prentice-Walz”) currently resides at the Building, and

has lived there since 2014.

Page 2 of 21
 9. Plaintiff Caritina Rodriguez (“Rodriguez”) currently resides at the Building, and has lived

there since 2018. She is a 73-year-old senior who suffers from mobility problems due to a
FILED DATE: 5/30/2019 11:12 AM 2019CH06589

fall.

10. Plaintiff Patricia Scardina (“Scardina”) currently resides at the Building, and has lived

there since 2015.

11. Plaintiff Matthew Uribe (“Uribe”) currently resides at the Building, and has lived there

since 2014.

12. Defendant 3108 N Milwaukee LLC is a limited liability company based in the State of

Illinois, a tenant-in-common of the Building, and an “Owner” and “Landlord” under the

RLTO. Code § 5-12-030(b), (c).

13. Defendant 3108 N Milwaukee MZ LLC is a limited liability company based in the State

of Illinois, a tenant-in-common of the Building, and an “Owner” and “Landlord” under

the RLTO. Id.

14. Defendant Peak Properties, LLC is a limited liability company based in the State of

Illinois, and is a “Landlord” as defined under the RLTO. Code § 5-12-030(b). Peak

Properties has represented itself as the “Property Management Company” to tenants, and

has demanded and collected rents from tenants at the Building.

15. Defendant Michael Zucker is founder and CEO of Peak Properties, LLC, and a

“landlord” under the RLTO. Id.

16. Defendant ACF Maintenance and Remodeling, LLC (“ACF Maintenance”) is a limited

liability company based in the state of Illinois, and is a general contractor hired by the

owners and/or landlords for construction activities at the Building.

Page 3 of 21
 17. Defendant Florin Pavel (“Pavel”) is Principal of ACF Maintenance and Remodeling, and

general contractor on the construction project at the Building.

FILED DATE: 5/30/2019 11:12 AM 2019CH06589

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

18. This court is vested with jurisdiction over this matter and the parties, as all of the parties

reside in Illinois, have conducted business in Illinois, and/or have their principal place of

business in Illinois.

19. Venue is proper in this court pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-101 as all parties reside in or have

conducted business within Cook County, Illinois and at all relevant times the transactions

and occurrences giving rise to this Complaint took place within Cook County, Illinois.

20. An actual controversy exists between the parties to this proceeding.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Defendants Failed to Meet Their Obligations as Landlords

21. Plaintiffs range from 26 to 73 years old. Plaintiff Uribe is recovering from a surgery that

his limited his mobility. Plaintiff Rodriguez suffers from mobility problems due to a fall.

22. The health and safety of Plaintiffs and their families are threatened by conditions in the

Building’s individual apartment units and common areas.

23. For example, rats scurry above the ceiling of Plaintiff Battersby’s unit, leaving droppings

that fall through ceiling cracks into her kitchen. Defendants 3108 N Milwaukee LLC,

3108 N Milwaukee MZ LLC, and Peak Properties, LLC (collectively, Property-

Defendants) have failed to repair Battersby’s unit to protect her and her 9-year-old

daughter from these unsanitary conditions.

24. A bath towel and a piece of cardboard were all that stood between Plaintiffs Prentice-

Walz and Uribe’s apartment and Chicago’s harsh weather. After strong winds pushed

Page 4 of 21
 their window into the unit in February 2019, breaking the glass, Prentice-Walz and Uribe

reinserted the window frame and rigged the towel and cardboard to protect their unit and
FILED DATE: 5/30/2019 11:12 AM 2019CH06589

their personal belongings therein. Prentice-Walz and Uribe requested a repair for their

broken window on or around February 26, 2019. They hoped that the window would be

repaired before Uribe was admitted for surgery and began his recovery process. Instead,

Property-Defendants waited more than two months to repair the window, eventually

replacing the window on or around May 3, 2019.

25. Around December 2018, Plaintiff Rodriguez’s kitchen sink filled with dirty water, and

she was forced to bring in water from outside. Plaintiff Atrache has experienced similar

dirty water backups in her unit as recently as May 2019. Atrache worries for her health,

and the health of her three daughters. Property-Defendants knew or should have known

about these conditions, but have not made repairs sufficient to protect Rodriguez and

Atrache from future harms.

26. During Chicago’s polar vortex in late January 2019, Melissa Battersby’s family could not

keep warm in their apartment. The thermostat never exceeded 62 degrees, and the

apartment felt much colder. On or around late January 2019, the Building’s former

managers received Battersby’s requests for assistance, but did nothing. Property-

Defendants know or should know about this issue, but have not fixed it, by improving her

unit’s insulation, addressing issues with the heating system, or providing heating units.

27. The Building has failed five Department of Buildings Inspections since 2011 (See

Exhibit A.)

28. On February 20, 2018, the Building was cited for 6 building code citations (Inspection

#10972763, see Exhibit B,) including the following citations:

Page 5 of 21
 a. Failed to maintain the exterior walls of a building or structure free from holes,

breaks, loose or rotting boards or timbers and any other conditions which might
FILED DATE: 5/30/2019 11:12 AM 2019CH06589

admit rain or dampness to the walls.

b. Failed to maintain cornice in good repair and free from cracks and defects.

c. Failed to maintain interior walls and ceilings free from holes or cracks.

d. Replace broken, missing or defective window panes.

e. Failed to maintain all exit signs illuminated when building is occupied and

otherwise maintain exit signs in good condition.

f. Failed to provide partitions and walls of at least one hour fire resistance in

multiple dwelling buildings to separate every dwelling from all other parts of the

building.

29. As described above, tenants continue to suffer from the same conditions that led to

building code violations being cited in February 2018, including conditions admitting

rain into apartment units, holes and cracks in ceilings, and failure to replace or

unreasonable delays in replacing broken window panes.

30. Today, an exit sign and emergency lights in the Building are still unlit, endangering

tenants in the event of a fire or power failure.

31. Plaintiffs have called the City of Chicago’s “311” line on multiple occasions to report

unaddressed building conditions issues. For example, Plaintiff Uribe called on April 29,

2019 to report the broken window in his unit, a lighting issue in common areas of the

building, and construction debris and trash in the building.

The Building’s New Owners and Managers Are Subject to the RLTO

Page 6 of 21
 32. Two LLC’s, 3108 N Milwaukee LLC and 3108 N Milwaukee MZ LLC, became tenants-

in-common in the ownership of the Building on or around February 13, 2019.

FILED DATE: 5/30/2019 11:12 AM 2019CH06589

33. Peak Properties, LLC gave notice to tenants at the Building that it served as the new

Building property manager on or around February 20, 2019.

34. On February 21, 2019, 3108 N Milwaukee LLC and 3108 N Milwaukee MZ LLC

recorded a deed for the Building with the Cook County Recorder of Deeds (Doc. No.

1905208187.)

35. The Building contains 34 dwelling units, and upon information and belief, the Building’s

owners do not reside in the Building.

36. The Building is subject to the terms and provisions of the City of Chicago Municipal

Code Title 5, Chapter 12, “Residential Landlord and Tenant Ordinance” (hereinafter,

“RLTO”).

Reckless and Illegal Construction Work Endangers Tenants

37. Even though many tenants remain in the Building, Defendants 3108 N Milwaukee LLC;

3108 N Milwaukee MZ LLC; Peak Properties, LLC; ACF Maintenance and Remodeling;

Michael Zucker; and Florin Pavel (collectively, “Defendants,”) have engaged in or

authorized extensive construction work, directly or through their agents.

38. Workers have left construction debris blocking the exit of an occupied apartment.

39. Plaintiffs have been unable to open their windows, due to extensive dust from the

construction. Plaintiff Atrache was unable to open the back door of her apartment without

admitting substantial amounts of dust into her apartment.

40. Since on or around May 7, 2019, there is no working electric light in the back staircase

behind Plaintiff Atrache’s unit. Plaintiff Atrache uses this staircase to take out the trash.

Page 7 of 21
 Property-Defendants knew or should have known of this hazard, because construction

continued in the apartment next to Plaintiff Atrache’s unit, which shares access to the
FILED DATE: 5/30/2019 11:12 AM 2019CH06589

back staircase.

41. Workers have begun work before 8 am on multiple occasions, disrupting tenants and their

families.

42. Construction has caused unsanitary conditions and safety risks. Entrances to the Building

have been left open, allowing pests and birds to enter the Building. Animal feces have

accumulated throughout the Building. Tenants feel unsafe knowing that anyone can enter

the common areas of the Building.

43. As construction continued, workers failed to ensure the safety of tenants, including young

children. Unoccupied apartments were left unsecured, with electric conduits hanging

from the ceiling and sections of the floorboards missing. Workers passed large pieces of

wood across an open gangway between buildings where tenants take out the trash,

without scaffolding or other measures to protect tenants.

44. Defendants have failed to maintain the structural integrity of the Building. As of Monday

May 27, 2019 a portion of the Building’s brick wall lay collapsed on top of a roof above

a hallway, where it has lain for weeks.

45. On Tuesday, May 14, 2019 city inspector Skala visited the Building. The inspector found

that contractors had exceeded the scope of their work permits, and posted a stop work

order on a front entrance to the Building. The order stated: “Stop All Work By All

Trades.” (See Exhibit C).

46. On Tuesday May 14, 2019, after Inspector Skala posted the stop work order, workers

continued construction work at the Building, including the use of power tools.

Page 8 of 21
 47. On Friday May 17, 2019, after the stop work order was posted, a worker engaged in

plumbing work in an unoccupied apartment at the Building.

FILED DATE: 5/30/2019 11:12 AM 2019CH06589

48. On Friday May 17, 2019, workers continued to work at the Building, clearing

construction debris.

Defendants Retaliated Against Tenants

49. On Wednesday March 20, 2019, Caritina Rodriguez hosted a meeting for tenants at her

apartment in the Building. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss forming a tenants

union at the Building for advocacy and mutual support.

50. As the meeting was starting, Defendant Michael Zucker entered Rodriguez’s apartment.

When asked why he was there, Zucker said that he was a tenant of the Building as of 5

minutes ago, and that the meeting was public. Zucker stated that he believed that tenants

would get a worse deal if they participated in the tenants union, and that he had seen

tenants get evicted in the past because tenant union organizers did not have the best

interests of the tenants at heart.

51. Eventually, Rodriguez asked Zucker to leave her apartment. Zucker responded to this

request by threatening to call the police. Zucker did not indicate why he would call the

police. When asked why he would call the police, Zucker left the meeting.

52. Fifteen days later, on April 4, 2019, Plaintiffs Ranya Atrache and Caritina Rodriguez

went to the Peak Properties office to pay rent. Peak Properties had previously alleged that

Atrache and Rodriguez’s leases had expired on March 31, 2019. Rodriguez brought a

money order for April rent.

53. At the Peak Properties office, Rodriguez attempted to pay April rent. Property Manager

Jonathan Blanco told Rodriguez that he would not take her check. Rodriguez asked why,

Page 9 of 21
 and was told that she would have to wait and go to court. Rodriguez asked if she could

stay just one or two additional months, but Jonathan Blanco told her no, and asked her to
FILED DATE: 5/30/2019 11:12 AM 2019CH06589

leave the office.

54. At the Peak Properties office, Blanco also told Plaintiff Atrache that he could not collect

any payment from her.

55. Rodriguez and Atrache left Peak Properties. Shortly afterward, at 12:21 pm, Property

Manager Jonathan Blanco called Ranya Atrache.

56. Blanco told Atrache that he had no problem with Atrache, and that Atrache could

continue paying rent month-to-month. He asked Atrache to pay April rent.

57. Plaintiff Battersby was also allowed to continue paying rent after her lease allegedly

expired.

58. On April 8, 2019, Peak Properties filed an eviction lawsuit against Rodriguez. Rodriguez

was not given an opportunity to renew her lease, even though she had attempted to pay

April rent and, as a 73-year-old woman with mobility problems, faces special hardships

in finding an apartment.

59. Michael Zucker spoke with Rodriguez at the March 20 tenants meeting, where Rodriguez

was identified as the host of the meeting and asked Zucker to leave.

60. Rodriguez, who hosted the tenants meeting, was evicted instead of being allowed to

continue renting after her lease allegedly expired. Atrache and Battersby, neither of

whom attended the March 20 tenants meeting, were both allowed to continue paying rent

instead of being evicted.

Page 10 of 21
 61. On information and belief, Peak Properties refused to renew Rodriguez’s lease and failed

to offer Rodriguez an extension because of her role in establishing a tenants union at the
FILED DATE: 5/30/2019 11:12 AM 2019CH06589

Building.

62. Plaintiffs have sought assistance from the community organization Somos Logan Square,

and continue to seek assistance from Somos Logan Square, to remedy code violations and

illegal landlord practices, including the conduct described in this Complaint.

63. Defendants have failed to ensure the health and welfare of tenants throughout the

construction process. Water service has been interrupted with no notice to tenants,

including during the week of May 6 to May 10, 2019.

64. On Tuesday May 14, 2019, Matthew Uribe told workers in the Building to leave after a

city inspector issued a stop work order. Uribe had heard power tools being used,

indicating that the stop work order was being ignored. General contractor Florin Pavel

confronted Uribe. Pavel told Uribe to “Mind your own business,” and threatened, “If you

touch that door, I’m going to break your hand.”

65. Matthew Uribe called the Chicago police after being threatened by Pavel, and left the

Building to wait for the police. Pavel followed Uribe outside. Pavel continued to harass

Uribe, saying, “You guys are stupid, this isn’t worth the money.” Pavel circled Uribe and

approached him, following Uribe when Uribe walked away. Plaintiff Patricia Scardina

encountered Pavel and Uribe outside the Building. Scardina stayed with Uribe, as she felt

that it was necessary to remain as a witness in case Pavel attacked Uribe.

66. Uribe subsequently filed a police report and requested a warrant for Pavel’s arrest.

COUNT I

VIOLATION OF THE RESIDENTIAL LANDLORD & TENANT ORDINANCE

(MATERIAL NONCOMPLIANCE WITH § 5–12–070)

Page 11 of 21
 67. Plaintiffs re-state and re-allege the paragraphs 1-66 as if fully set forth herein.
FILED DATE: 5/30/2019 11:12 AM 2019CH06589

68. Section 5–12–110 of the RLTO provides that material noncompliance with § 5–12–070 includes,

but is not limited to, the following circumstances, which are relevant to the material

noncompliance alleged by the Plaintiffs:

a. Failure to maintain the structural integrity of the building or structure or parts thereof;

b. Failure to provide or maintain in good working order a flush water closet, lavatory basin,

bathtub or shower, or kitchen sink;

c. Failure to provide heat or hot water in such amounts and at such levels and times as required

by the municipal code;

d. Failure to maintain the foundation, exterior walls, or exterior roof in sound condition and

repair, substantially watertight, and protected against rodents;

e. Failure to maintain windows, exterior doors, or basement hatchways in sound condition

and repair and substantially tight;

f. Failure to maintain stairways or porches in safe condition and sound repair;

g. Failure to prevent the accumulation of stagnant water;

h. Failure to exterminate insects, rodents, or other pests;

i. Failure to prevent the accumulation of garbage, trash, refuse, or debris as required by the

municipal code;

j. Failure to maintain plumbing facilities, piping, fixtures, appurtenances, and appliances in

good operating condition and repair; and

k. Failure to maintain the dwelling unit and common areas in a fit and habitable condition.

69. Plaintiffs have experienced problems that indicate material noncompliance with various obligations

imposed on landlords as identified in § 5–12–070 of the RLTO, including as described in the above

Page 12 of 21
 paragraphs.

70. Plaintiffs have notified Property-Defendants about this material noncompliance on multiple occasions,
FILED DATE: 5/30/2019 11:12 AM 2019CH06589

but Property-Defendants have failed to make required repairs to the Building.

71. Construction work by agents of Property-Defendants, including Defendant Pavel and Defendant ACF

Maintenance (“Contractor-Defendants”) has caused violations of § 5-12-070, and Plaintiffs will face

continuing violations of their rights under § 5-12-070 unless an injunction is issued.

72. Section 5–12–110(e) of the RLTO allows Plaintiffs to obtain injunctive relief and/or recover damages for

Property-Defendants’ material noncompliance with § 5–12–070 of the RLTO.

73. Section 5–12–110(f) of the RLTO provides for abatement of rent if possession of the Premises is not

delivered in compliance with the terms of the rental agreement or § 5–12–070 of the RLTO.

74. Property-Defendants have not delivered possession of the premises in compliance with the terms of the

rental agreement or § 5–12–070 of the RLTO, entitling Plaintiffs to rent abatement.

75. Section 5–12–110(c) of the RLTO provides that the tenant may recover damages for material

noncompliance with § 5–12–070 if the cost of such compliance does not exceed $500.00.

76. To the extent the multiple instances of material noncompliance at the Premises could be corrected by work

valued at $500.00 to less, Plaintiffs are entitled to damages for the material noncompliance with § 5–12–

070.

77. Section 5–12–110(f) of the RLTO permits tenants to recover damages based on the reduction in the fair

rental value of the dwelling unit once written notice is provided by the tenant to the landlord specifying

material noncompliance with § 5–12–070 that presents an immediate danger to the health and safety of

tenants, including failure to provide minimally adequate heat, electricity, and running water.

78. To the extent that Property-Defendants’ material noncompliance with § 5–12–070 have presented an

immediate danger to tenants’ health and safety, including leaving them without essential utility services

Page 13 of 21
 and exposing them to risks associated with significant construction work, and Property-Defendants have

received written notice about these conditions from tenants or from the City of Chicago as a direct result
FILED DATE: 5/30/2019 11:12 AM 2019CH06589

of tenants’ complaints, Plaintiffs are entitled to recover damages based on the reduction in the fair rental

value of their dwelling unit at the Building.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully pray that this Court:

A. Enter a temporary and permanent injunction prohibiting all Defendants from engaging in any

actions that violate the requirements of § 5–12–070;

B. Enter a temporary and permanent injunction prohibiting all Defendants from proceeding with

construction or renovation work, except as this court approves a construction plan that protects

Plaintiffs’ rights as tenants;

C. Award Plaintiffs damages for material non-compliance in accordance with §§ 5–12–070 and 5–

12–110(e) of the RLTO;

D. Order Property-Defendants to abate the rent of the Plaintiffs in accordance with §§ 5–12–070 and

5–12–110(b) of the RLTO;

E. Award Plaintiffs damages based on the reduction of the fair market rental value of the Building as

a result of Property-Defendants’ noncompliance with §§ 5–12–070, 5–12–110(c), and 5–12–

110(f)(2) of the RLTO;

F. Order Property-Defendants to bear the costs of this action, including Plaintiffs’ court costs and

attorney’s fees, pursuant to § 5–12–180 of the RLTO; and

G. Award such other relief as is fair and equitable.

COUNT II

VIOLATION OF THE RESIDENTIAL LANDLORD & TENANT ORDINANCE

(RETALIATION IN VIOLATION OF § 5-12-150)

79. Plaintiffs re-state and re-allege the paragraphs 1-66 as if fully set forth herein.

Page 14 of 21
 80. In violation of the RLTO, Code § 5–12–150, Defendants 3108 N Milwaukee LLC, 3108 N

Milwaukee MZ LLC, Peak Properties LLC, and Michael Zucker (“Retaliation-Defendants”)

FILED DATE: 5/30/2019 11:12 AM 2019CH06589

knowingly retaliated against Plaintiffs by threatening to bring a lawsuit for possession, bringing a

lawsuit for possession, refusing to renew a lease or tenancy, and decreasing residents’ services

because Plaintiffs have in good faith:

a. Complained of code violations applicable to the premises to a competent governmental

agency, elected representative or public official charged with responsibility for

enforcement of a building, housing, health or similar code, including the City of Chicago

Department of Buildings;

b. Sought the assistance of a community organization, including Somos Logan Square, to

remedy a code violation or illegal landlord practice, including noncompliance with the

Chicago Building Code;

c. Requested the landlord to make repairs to the Building as required by a building code,

health ordinance, other regulation, or the residential rental agreement;

d. Became members of a tenants union, and;

e. Exercised any right or remedy provided by law.

81. Plaintiffs’ protected actions pursuant to Code § 5–12–150 occurred within one year of the

retaliatory conduct.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully pray that this Court:

A. Enter a temporary and permanent injunction prohibiting Retaliation-Defendants from engaging in

any actions that violate the requirements of § 5–12–150;

B. Declare any Termination Notices against Plaintiffs invalid and enjoin the filing of any proceeding

based thereon as retaliatory conduct prohibited by § 5–12–150;

Page 15 of 21
 C. Award Plaintiffs statutory damages in an amount equal to and not more than two months’ rent or

twice the damages sustained by each tenant, whichever is greater;

FILED DATE: 5/30/2019 11:12 AM 2019CH06589

D. Grant Plaintiffs recovery of possession of their rental units, if applicable;

E. Order Retaliation-Defendants to bear the costs of this action, including Plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees

and court costs, as permitted under § 5–12–180; and

F. Award such other relief as is fair and equitable.

COUNT III

VIOLATION OF THE RESIDENTIAL LANDLORD & TENANT ORDINANCE

(INTERRUPTION OF TENANCY PROHIBITED UNDER § 5–12–160)

82. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference Paragraphs 1 through 66, above.

83. CRLTO Section 5–12–160 prohibits a landlord, or any person acting at the landlord’s direction, from

knowingly ousting or attempting to oust a tenant from a dwelling unit by interfering with water, plumbing,

heating, electricity service; by rendering a dwelling unit or personal property located therein inaccessible

or uninhabitable; or by blocking the entrance to any unit.

84. Property-Defendants violated § 5–12–160 by allowing unauthorized construction work to be conducted at

the Building. On information and belief, Property-Defendants knew that construction would interfere with

essential utility services for Building tenants and block an entrance to an occupied unit. These unlawful

attempted dispossessions include, but are not limited to:

a. Unauthorized construction work performed at the Building prior to and subsequent to

issuance of the Stop-Work Order on or around May 14, 2019;

b. Blocking the entrance to an occupied unit; and

c. Interruptions in water service.

85. A tenant may obtain injunctive relief and damages in the amount of two months’ rent or twice actual

damages, whichever is greater, for each violation of § 5–12–160.

Page 16 of 21
 WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully pray that this Court:

A. Grant temporary and permanent injunctive relief enjoining Property-Defendants from taking
FILED DATE: 5/30/2019 11:12 AM 2019CH06589

further actions that violate § 5–12–160 by ousting or attempting to oust Plaintiffs;

B. Award Plaintiffs damages in the amount of twice their monthly rent or twice their actual damages,

in an amount to be proved at trial, whichever is greater, for each attempted dispossession;

C. Order Property-Defendants to bear the costs of this action, including Plaintiffs’ court costs and

attorney’s fees, pursuant to § 5–12–180 of the RLTO; and

D. Award such other relief as is fair and equitable.

COUNT IV

BREACH OF WARRANTY OF HABITABILITY

86. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference Paragraphs 1 through 66, above.

87. Implied in all Illinois residential rental agreements, including the rental agreements between Plaintiffs and

Property-Defendants, is an implied warranty of habitability requiring substantial compliance with the

relevant building code (here, the Municipal Code of the City of Chicago)

88. The implied warranty of habitability is applicable against a lessor or owner of a residential unit where

latent defects thereabout interfere with the inhabitant’s reasonable expectation that the unit will be suitable

for habitation.

89. Since the commencement of Property-Defendants’ ownership and management of the Building, numerous

new and continuing violations of the Code have occurred that unreasonably and substantially interfere

with Plaintiffs’ rights to safe, habitable housing. These violations can be ascribed to Property-Defendants’

inaction, but also ongoing construction efforts that substantially diminish the fair market rental value of

units at the Building. These conditions include, but are not limited to:

a. Ongoing construction work at the Building, which has created noise and dust and interfered

Page 17 of 21
 with essential services to tenants’ units and common areas;

b. Deteriorating structural integrity of the Building, as evidenced by collapsing exterior walls;

FILED DATE: 5/30/2019 11:12 AM 2019CH06589

and

c. Interference with essential utility services at the Building, including providing adequate

heat and running water.

90. Property-Defendants and their agents have been notified in writing or verbally about these conditions

issues many times.

91. Additionally, Property-Defendants knew or should have known that their construction work would affect

the habitability of the Building.

92. By maintaining the Building in material noncompliance with the Code, Property-Defendants have caused

the value of Plaintiffs’ tenancy to be diminished, because the defective conditions reduced the use

Plaintiffs could make of their units, and/or because the defective conditions reduced the fair market rental

value of the units.

93. Plaintiffs were damaged by Property-Defendants’ violation of the implied warranty of habitability,

including through diminution of the value of their units beyond the rent claimed and paid for those units.

Plaintiffs are entitled to a refund in the amount of rent paid for any period beginning, including, or

subsequent to February 13, 2019, or whenever Property-Defendants gained legal ownership of the

Property.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully pray that this Court:

A. Grant Plaintiffs damages for Property-Defendants’ breach of the implied warranty of

habitability, in an amount to be proved at trial;

B. Award Plaintiffs punitive damages in an amount to be determined at trial; and

C. Order Property-Defendants to bear the costs of this action; and

Page 18 of 21
 D. Award such other relief as is fair and equitable.

COUNT V
FILED DATE: 5/30/2019 11:12 AM 2019CH06589

BREACH OF IMPLIED COVENANT OF QUIET ENJOYMENT

94. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference Paragraphs 1 through 66, above.

95. A covenant of quiet enjoyment is implied in all residential rental agreements, including the rental

agreements between Plaintiffs and Property-Defendants. Harassment and other conduct by a landlord

tending to make occupancy of the rented dwelling unit inhospitable may constitute breach of the covenant

of quiet enjoyment.

96. Property-Defendants have engaged in, authorized, and failed to prevent conduct tending to interfere with

Plaintiffs’ right to quiet enjoyment of the Building, including, but not limited to:

a. Allowing unauthorized construction work to be performed on the Building, both before

and after issuance of the City of Chicago’s Stop-Work Order;

b. Failing to prevent Florin Pavel from making threatening remarks to Plaintiff Uribe;

c. Causing termination of or otherwise interfering with utility services at the Building without

explanation; and

d. Failing to materially comply with maintenance requirements established by the Code.

97. The proper measure of damages for breach of the covenant of quiet enjoyment is the difference between

the rental amount the tenant agreed to pay and the actual fair market value of the premises as delivered,

together with any special damages directly and necessarily caused by Property-Defendants’ wrongful

conduct.

98. Plaintiffs are entitled to consequential damages and a reduction of the rental value of their unit caused by

Property-Defendants’ breach of the implied covenant of quiet enjoyment. These damages include a refund

to Plaintiffs in the amount of rent paid for any period beginning or subsequent to February 13, 2019, or

Page 19 of 21
 whenever Property-Defendants gained legal ownership of the Property.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully pray that this Court:

FILED DATE: 5/30/2019 11:12 AM 2019CH06589

A. Grant Plaintiffs damages for Property-Defendants’ breach of the implied covenant of quiet

enjoyment, in an amount to be proved at trial;

B. Order Property-Defendants to bear the costs of this action; and

C. Award such other relief as is fair and equitable

COUNT VI

ASSAULT (TORT)

99. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate by reference Paragraphs 1 through 66, above.

100. Defendant Florin Pavel threatened Matthew Uribe, saying, “If you touch that door, I’m going to break

your hand.” Defendant Pavel made this threat in agitation and anger.

101. Pavel threatened Uribe while on site at the Building in his role as General Contractor through Defendant

ACF Maintenance and Remodeling.

102. Uribe feared an imminent battery by Pavel, due to Pavel’s actions and manner. Uribe filed a police report

and requested a warrant for Pavel’s arrest.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully pray that this Court:

A. Grant damages to Plaintiff Uribe against Contractor-Defendants;

B. Grant punitive damages against Contractor-Defendants;

C. Order Contractor-Defendants to bear the costs of this action; and

D. Award such other relief as is fair and equitable.

Page 20 of 21
 Respectfully Submitted,

/s/ Wallace Hilke

FILED DATE: 5/30/2019 11:12 AM 2019CH06589

One of Plaintiffs’ Attorneys

Wallace Hilke
Staff Attorney
Community Activism Law Alliance
17 N. State Street, Suite 1380
Chicago, IL 60602
P: (312) 973-7308
F: (312) 999-0076
wally@calachicago.org
Atty No. 59980

Page 21 of 21