Motion to Disqualify Andrew T. Hays, Sarah E. Buck, Antonio Hays

8/10/2019 Motion to Disqualify Andrew T. Hays, Sarah E. Buck, Antonio Hays

1/7

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOISCOUNTY DEPARTMENT LAW DIVISION

Christopher Sto er !

!P "i#ti$$s, !! No% &'() CH'*+ -! .Tr"#s$erre/ $ro0 Ch"#1er2! to L"3!! 45/6e M17r"th

M"r8 Sto er, i#/i9i/5" 2 "#/ /:" ! Roo0 (-'+Ste" th C5es !De$1o# I#/5stries, LLC !(LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ARIZONA) !A#/re3 H"2s,i#/i9i/5" 2, ! D"te; No9% ((, &'()A#to#i" H"2s, i#/i9i/5" 2, ! S"r"h


2/7

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOISCOUNTY DEPARTMENT LAW DIVISION

Christopher Sto er !!

P "i#ti$$s, !! No% &'() CH'*+ -! .Tr"#s$erre/ $ro0 Ch"#1er2! to L"3!! 45/6e M17r"th

M"r8 Sto er, i#/i9i/5" 2 "#/ /:" ! Roo0 (-'+Ste" th C5es !De$1o# I#/5stries, LLC !(LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ARIZONA) !A#/re3 H"2s,i#/i9i/5" 2, ! D"te No9%(), &'() ! -;''"0A#to#i" H"2s, i#/i9i/5" 2, ! S"r"h


3/7

1 'he initia action was >ust +i ed on A-ri "1, "014 against the de+endants +or +raudu ent

misre-resentation, Con/ersion, +raud, intentiona in+ icted o+ emotiona stress, re ated

c aims arising +rom a +ami y re ationshi- .etween Christo-her Sto er 5, and his son

2ark Sto er 4! =y this action, Christo-her Sto er seeks, inter a ia, com-ensatory

damages, -uniti/e damages, and and attorney?s +ees and costs

" *n u y $, "014, % ainti++ amended its com- aint 8 E@hi:it ( 9 adding a t he law firm

which represents Mark Stoller, Hays Firm LLC, a Chicago law firm located at 55

W. Wacker Dri e, !" th Floor, Chicago, #llinois $%$%!, &ttorneys Andrew Hays,

indi/idua y, Antonia Hays Indi/idua y and Sarah =uck, indi/idua y AS F*7 A

&I6H' CA S& *F AC'I*) 8Aiding and a.etting and cons-iracy )1

3. The allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 63 above are incorporated by reference in this Count

Six fully restated herein.

. !ar" Stoller 3# o$ed a duty to his father# the Plaintiff# Christopher Stoller not to defraud hi%.

5 The &ays 'a$ fir%# (ndre$ &ays# (ntonia &ays and Sarah uc" $ere a$are if the duty that!ar" Stoller 3 o$ed to his disabled father# Christopher Stoller 6*# not to defraud hi% out of his

entire retire%ent funds of +6,#--- for all of the reasons previously stated herein.

1Aiding and abetting and conspiracy claims fnd their roots in criminal law. In thecivil context, they lead to liability or those who help other actors or a main actor(usually or lawyers it is the client) to commit some tort against a third party. Inpractice, this o ten involves a claim that the lawyer helped the client eithercommit a raud on a third party or breach some duty (usually a fduciary duty) to athird party. hen brought against lawyers, these in!concert liability claims, inmost "urisdictions, involve the ollowing elements# (1) a duty owed by the client toa third party$ (%) that the lawyer is aware o the duty owed by the client to thethird party$ (&) that the client breaches that duty and'or commits a tort againstthat third party$ ( ) that the lawyer is aware o the breach and'or tort committedby the client$ ( ) that the lawyer assists the client in committing the tort and'orbreach$ and (*) that the third party su+ers somedamage. Thornwood v. Jenner & Block , & .-.%d 1 (Ill.App. % &

!


4/7

6. &ays 'a$ fir%# (ndre$ &ays# (ntonia &ays and Sarah uc" "ne$ or should have "no$n

that their client !ar" Stoller breached that duty and or co%%itted a tort against his father# the

Plaintiff.

,. &ays 'a$ fir%# (ndre$ &ays# (ntonia &ays and Sarah uc" $ere and are a$are of breech

and or of the tort !ar" co%%itted against his father the plaintiff.

; &ays 'a$ fir%# (ndre$ &ays# (ntonia &ays and Sarah uc" have assisted their client !ar"

Stoller in co%%itting the tort and or breech and have conspired $ith hi% / .3

0. The Plaintiff Christopher Stoller has suffered da%ages.

1-. (fter (ttorney (ndre$ &ays and his fir% $as added to the a%ended co%plaint# Sara uc"

$rote a letter to Plaintiff2s counsel threatening to file a !otion for ule 13, Sanctions unless#

!s. &ays and his la$ fir% $ere re%oved fro% the co%plaint.

11 % ainti++ mo/es to dis


5/7

% ainti++ to de+raud the +ather out o+ G $,000

1" Thus# the 4efendants2 attorneys are barred fro% representing the 4efendant on the grounds

that they are all $itnesses and have an un$aveable conflict of interest no$ in defending !ar"

Stoller. ( 4C ule5s) 1., or ule 1.0.

13. (long $ith this !otion to 4is ualify# notices of depositions have been served upon these fact

$itnesses# &ays 'a$ fir%# (ndre$ &ays# (ntonia &ays and Sarah uc".

14 'his 2otions to dis


6/7

matters therein stated to .e on in+ormation and .e ie+, and as much matters, the undersigned certi+ies asa+oresaid that I /eri+y .e ie/e the same to .e true, and the attached documents are true and correctco-ies o+ the origina s

Christopher Sto er

& HI=I' 1


7/7

67* % & HI=I' "

$

Motion to Disqualify Andrew T. Hays, Sarah E. Buck, Antonio Hays

Documents

Transcript of Motion to Disqualify Andrew T. Hays, Sarah E. Buck, Antonio Hays