XXXX

LAKE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
CASE NO: ____________

XXXX,
Plaintiff

v.
XXX
NAME],
Defendants.

COMPLAINT

1. COMES NOW Plaintiff SHEDRICK NORTHERN, with this complaint
against the Defendants, and alleges as follows:
PARTIES

2. Plaintiff , SHEDRICK NORTHERN, is an individual of address 2810 Double
XXXX3. Defendant, PEDCOR AFFORDABLE MANAGEMENT, INC is a company
organised and operates in Indiana. The address for the said Defendant is One Pedcor Square
XXXX.
4. Defendant XXXX FIRE DEPARTMENT is a fire department located
at address XXXX

5. Defendant XXX is an individual of address [ENTER ADDRESS].
Upon Plaintiff’s information and belief, the said Defendant was a fireman at the XXXFire Department.
6. Defendant XXX is an individual of address [ENTER
ADDRESS]. Upon Plaintiff’s information and belief, the said Defendant was an Apartment
manager at Master’s Apartments.
7. Defendant JOHN [ENTER SECOND NAME] is an individual of address
[ENTER ADDRESS]. Upon Plaintiff’s information and belief, the said Defendant was a
maintenance worker at Master’s Apartments.
8. Defendant XXX[ENTER SECOND NAME] is an individual of address
[ENTER ADDRESS]. Upon Plaintiff’s information and belief, the said Defendant was a
maintenance worker at Master’s Apartments.

JURISDICITON AND VENUE

9. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under IC 33-29-1.5-2(1), which
provides for original jurisdiction in all civil cases.
10. Venue is proper in this Court as Plaintiff and/or Defendant is subject to
personal jurisdiction in this state. Plaintiff and/or Defendant lives within the jurisdiction of
this Court. Besides, a substantial part of the acts and omissions forming the basis of these
claims occurred in the Northern District of Indiana and arose from the actions or inactions of
the Defendant.

FACTS

11. On XXXX, Plaintiff entered his apartment and heard the sound of
water coming from the laundry closet. When Plaintiff opened his apartment closet, water
poured out from the upstairs apartment. Plaintiff called the leasing office, but no one
answered the phone. Finally, Plaintiff called his upstairs neighbor Kim to tell her that water

was leaking from her apartment. She stated that her toilet was over-flooding and that she
notified the leasing office about the issue, and they told her that maintenance was on lunch
and would come over there when done. Exhibit 4- Audio recording of Plaintiff reporting
the issue with the leaking laundry closet.
12. Plaintiff then went to the leasing office to complain about the toilet water in
his unit from his neighbor Kim’s apartment. Alicia, who works in the leasing office, acted
like she wasn’t aware of what was going on. Alicia said that she would inform maintenance
about the water leak in Plaintiff’s apartment.
13. An hour or so later, Plaintiff saw maintenance go into his upstairs neighbor
Kim’s apartment to fix the issue that she was having with her toilet over-flooding. When
Plaintiff saw maintenance leave her apartment, Plaintiff thought that maintenance would
come in and fix the leak caused by his neighbor’s toilet over-flooding after they left his
neighbor’s apartment.
14. When Plaintiff noticed that maintenance was gone and never came downstairs
to inspect the water leak in his apartment, Plaintiff called Kim and asked her whether
maintenance came in to fix her toilet. Kim said they came and fixed her toilet, and she told
them that water from her apartment had flooded into Plaintiff’s laundry closet. She said
maintenance told her that they would deal with Plaintiff later as if Plaintiff health and life
were worthless.
15. Approximately four hours later, XXX came into Plaintiff’s
apartment to look at the ceiling water leak. Exhibit 5- Video recording of XXXX.
They both said that the water had dried up, and it was nothing that they saw that was
dangerous or could cause Plaintiff any issues. Plaintiff asked them whether they thought the
water was still in the ceiling from his neighbor’s toilet over-flooding. Again, they both stated

that everything looked safe and dry. They only looked in the closet with a flashlight but never
took the light cover off to see if it was water in the ceiling or ceiling light.
16. On XXXX, Plaintiff contacted the Valparaiso fire department and
explained that water was leaking into his laundry area ceiling light from his upstairs
neighbor’s toilet flooding. Plaintiff stated to the fire department operator that he believes it
was a fire hazard. Although the XXXX fire department operator said that he would send
Valparaiso fire department inspector XXX to check out the issue, he stated that Kurt
wouldn’t be back for days. He noted that water leaking into the ceiling light fixture wasn’t a
safety issue. But Valparaiso fire department inspector XXX would inspect the light
fixture leak. Unfortunately, that never happened until Plaintiff called the fire department back
complaining about the water in his ceiling that poured into his face on April 11, 2022. Water
leaking through a light fixture can cause a fire. It’s common for moisture to trigger the
electrical charge in the fixture and cause it to spark, which could lead to a fire breaking out.
17. On April 05, 2022, Plaintiff met XXXX about the new lease. In
that rental lease agreement, it says that the Owner will not be held responsible for the death,
injury, illness and/or mental impairment of any resident caused and/or aggravated by any
prior injury or illness of the resident, whether known or unknown, through the use of any
amenities. Owner, its employees, agents, administrators, successors and assigns, of and from
any and all manner of actions, suits, debts, accounts, damages, judgments, executors, claims,
or demands whatsoever in law or equity, or otherwise that resident, resident’s heirs,
executors, or administrators hereafter can, shall or may have, against Owner, for upon or by
reason of any injury resident may sustain or incur. Exhibit 1- The Masters Lease
Agreement. XXX said that everything was fixed and safe in Plaintiff’s
apartment. Despite Plaintiff constantly complaining about electric current coming through his
bedroom walls at night and sometimes doing the day.

18. On XXX, the Defendant sent Plaintiff a Notice to Quit, stating that it
would terminate the lease on the ground of Plaintiff’s alleged non-compliance with the terms
of the lease. Exhibit 2- Notice to Quit.
19. On XXX, Plaintiff had an inspection with the Northwest community
action inspector Marcella Escamilla. Plaintiff informed her about the ceiling leak in the
laundry room closet. Exhibit 6- Video recording of water coming from the ceiling. She
asked Plaintiff whether he thought it was still water in the ceiling light. Plaintiff told her that
maintenance said that it was dry and safe. Marcella said she had to ensure that everything was
safe in the laundry room closet. Marcella asked Plaintiff if he could unscrew the ceiling light
fixture so she could make sure that everything was safe. First, she turned off the electricity
for the laundry room closet. When Plaintiff unscrewed the ceiling light cover, approximately
a gallon of dirty old toilet water splashed into Marcella and Plaintiff’s face. Some of the water
got into Plaintiff’s ears.
20. Marcella Escamilla called the Masters apartments manager, XXXX told Marcella that maintenance came to Plaintiff’s apartment on XXXX 2, and saw that nothing was wrong with the ceiling light fixture in the closet.
However ,ZZZ told XXX that she told Plaintiff to unscrew the closet ceiling light
fixture, and water had poured all over her and Plaintiff when he unscrewed the ceiling light
cover. Plaintiff having diabetes and having high blood pressure makes it easy for him to catch
infections, leading to health problems that could cause serious health issues. Additionally,
Marcella told XXX that Plaintiff would not be able to turn the electricity back on until
maintenance fixed the leak in Plaintiff’s apartment.
21. XXXX came to Plaintiff’s apartment with XXXX, the
same two maintenance men who lied and said that the laundry closet ceiling leak was safe
and theirs nothing to worry about. XXXX suggested that the light bulbs just needed

to be changed and nothing else. However, XXX said that the whole ceiling light needed to
be changed. Maintenance only replaced the ceiling light instead of removing the wet ceiling
that could potentially turn into mold from the water damage. Plaintiff thought that
maintenance would replace the ceiling, mainly since it was toilet water and water was in the
ceiling for more than two weeks. Mold thrives in damp, humid conditions; even if it’s a minor
leak, it can lead to mold infestation if not fixed timely. Maintenance never dried out the area;
they only put a new light fixture in the Plaintiff’s apartment. Unfortunately, maintenance once
again didn’t do their job. Any moisture trapped in your ceiling can cause mold infestation and
structural damage. Marcella still passed the apartment despite knowing that the ceiling could
cause Plaintiff health problems from mold. The water was in the ceiling for approximately
two weeks, enough time to generate mold.
22. Plaintiff has been complaining about the issue for over seven months.
Unfortunately, the Master Apartments manager or staff never sent an electrician to see what
was causing the problem. The Master Apartments ignored Plaintiff for months. Plaintiff is not
the only tenant that complains about XXX poor attitude and management, the
Master’s apartment maintenance staff, and the XXX management company. For instance,
Plaintiff’s neighbor with two small children complained to XXXX about her smoke detector
having water damage. She called the fire department to make sure everything was safe.
Unfortunately, when the fire department took down her smoke detector, it was full of water.
The Master’s apartment maintenance workers replaced the smoke detector but never checked
to see if it was mold in her ceiling, which could lead to her and her children being sick from
mold exposure.
23. On April 22, 2022, Plaintiff went into the Master Apartment leasing office to
discuss issues with the 30-day notice balance he received from the leasing office. Exhibit 3-
Audio recording of Plaintiff’s visit at the leasing office. Plaintiff told XXXX

that she ensured Plaintiff that everything in his apartment unit was safe when they were going
over the lease. In response ,XXXX lied and said she wasn’t aware of the leak until the
XXX community action inspector Marcella Escamilla informed her on XXXX.
Additionally, XXX said that maintenance took care of the leak when Plaintiff first
complained about the leak in his laundry room closet. Plaintiff explained to XXX what
happened when maintenance workers XXX came to his apartment to inspect the
leak in his closet. Plaintiff told XXX that when maintenance came over there, they said
that the water had dried up and everything was safe after Plaintiff informed them that much
water was coming from his laundry room ceiling. XXXX said every work order was
detailed, maintenance addressed and fixed the issue, and closed the work order. Plaintiff told
XXX that she committed a crime when backdated Plaintiff’s lease.
CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
COUNT 1

Breach of implied duty of good faith and fair dealing
(Against Pedcor Affordable Management, Inc.)
24. The preceding paragraphs are fully incorporated herein.
25. First, a contractual relationship existed between Plaintiff and Defendant.
Notably, the parties had entered a lease agreement for Plaintiff’s apartment.
26. Part of the implied duties of the Defendant included the duty to ensure
Plaintiff’s enjoyment of the apartment is not impeded by nuisance such as the leaking toilet
water.
27. When Plaintiff noticed the issue of the ceiling water leak, he notified the
Defendant. However, Defendant failed to address the issue, thus exposing Plaintiff to health
and fire risks. The impact of the Defendant’s inattention can be seen from the incidence when

Plaintiff unscrewed the ceiling light cover, and approximately a gallon of dirty old toilet
water splashed into Marcella and Plaintiff’s face. Some of the water even got into Plaintiff’s
ears.
28. As a result of the Defendant’s inaction, Plaintiff is exposed to health and fire
hazard. Notably, Plaintiff has diabetes and high blood pressure. This makes it easy for him to
catch infections, leading to health problems that could cause serious health issues. Further,
the leaking water may cause fire. It is for this reason that Marcella told XXX that Plaintiff
would not be able to turn the electricity back on until maintenance fixed the leak in Plaintiff’s
apartment. It follows; Defendant should be held liable for the breach of the said implied duty
of good faith and fair dealing.

COUNT 2

Breach of the common law implied warrant of habitability
(Pedcor Affordable Management, Inc.)
29. The preceding paragraphs are fully incorporated herein.
30. In Indiana, a tenant can prevail against a landlord who failed to keep the
apartment building safe for use.
31. The implied warrant of habitability implies that the home should be free from
unsafe conditions (bad wiring, lack of running water, leaking sewerage, holes in the floor,
etc.), substantial infestation of rats or cockroaches, or other such problems that significantly
hinder its habitability.
32. In the instant action Plaintiff raised the issue of the ceiling water leak from the
toilet above Plaintiff’s apartment. He the notified the Defendant. However, Defendant failed
to address the issue, thus exposing Plaintiff to health and fire risks. The impact of the
Defendant’s inattention can be seen from the incidence when Plaintiff unscrewed the ceiling

light cover, and approximately a gallon of dirty old toilet water splashed into Marcella and
Plaintiff’s face. Some of the water even got into Plaintiff’s ears.
33. As a result of the Defendant’s inaction, Plaintiff is exposed to health and fire
hazard. Notably, Plaintiff has diabetes and high blood pressure. This makes it easy for him to
catch infections, leading to health problems that could cause serious health issues. Further,
the leaking water may cause fire. It is for this reason that XXXXe that Plaintiff
would not be able to turn the electricity back on until maintenance fixed the leak in Plaintiff’s
apartment. It follows; Defendant should be held liable for the breach of the said implied duty
of good faith and fair dealing.

COUNT 3
Breach of IC 32-31-8 et seq.
(XXX Affordable Management, Inc.)
34. The preceding paragraphs are fully incorporated herein.
35. Landlords have a statutory obligation to deliver the rental premises in a safe,
clean, and habitable condition. Further, a landlord is obligated to provide and maintain the
following in good and working condition: sanitary systems, plumbing systems, heating, and
ventilating and air conditioning systems.
36. In the instant action, the said Defendant had a duty to maintain the plumbing
and sanitary system in a good and safe condition, pursuant to IC 32-31-8(5).
37. Plaintiff raised the issue of the ceiling water leak from the toilet above
Plaintiff’s apartment. He then notified the Defendant. However, Defendant failed to address
the issue, thus exposing Plaintiff to health and fire risks. The impact of the Defendant’s
inattention can be seen from the incidence when Plaintiff unscrewed the ceiling light cover,
and approximately a gallon of dirty old toilet water splashed into Marcella and Plaintiff’s
face. Some of the water even got into Plaintiff’s ears.

38. As a result of the Defendant’s inaction, Plaintiff is exposed to health and fire
hazard. Notably, Plaintiff has diabetes and high blood pressure. This makes it easy for him to
catch infections, leading to health problems that could cause serious health issues. Further,
the leaking water may cause fire. It is for this reason that XXXX told XXXX that Plaintiff
would not be able to turn the electricity back on until maintenance fixed the leak in Plaintiff’s
apartment. It follows; Defendant should be held liable for the breach of the said implied duty
of good faith and fair dealing.

COUNT 4

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
(Against all Defendants)

39. The preceding paragraphs are fully incorporated herein.
40. The conducts of the Defendants as set forth above were extreme, and
outrageous.
41. The Defendants ought to have reasonably known that their actions and/or
inactions would cause severe harm on Plaintiff. Notably, Defendants ought to have known
that failure to address the leaking toilet water would pose a serious health and fire risk to
Plaintiff.
42. Defendants filed to consider the adverse effects of their actions and/or
inactions on Plaintiff.
43. As a result of the Defendants’ inaction, Plaintiff is exposed to health and fire
hazard. Notably, Plaintiff has diabetes and high blood pressure. This makes it easy for him to
catch infections, leading to health problems that could cause serious health issues. Further,
the leaking water may cause fire. It is for this reason that Marcella told XXXX that Plaintiff
would not be able to turn the electricity back on until maintenance fixed the leak in Plaintiff’s

apartment. Defendant should be held liable for the breach of the said intentional infliction of
emotional distress.

COUNT 5
Declaratory Judgment
(Against all Defendants)

44. The preceding paragraphs are fully incorporated herein.
45. There now exists, between the parties hereto, a dispute and controversy to
which the Plaintiff and the Defendants are entitled to have a declaration of their rights and
further relief relating to the facts and circumstances as set forth in this action.
46. The dispute is whether the Defendants are liable for failing to address and/or
promptly attend to the issue of the leaking toilet water from the ceiling.
47. Plaintiff respectfully request this Honorable Court issue a declaratory
judgment declaring that the actions and/or inactions of the Defendant’s actions and/or
inactions are blameworthy, and issue appropriate remedies thereof.

COUNT 6
NEGLIGENCE

(Against Defendants Valparaiso fire department, XXXX)
48. The preceding paragraphs are fully incorporated herein.
49. A legal duty existed between the said Defendants and Plaintiff.
50. First, the Valparaiso fire department had a duty to ensure there was no risk of
fire caused by the leaking toilet water at the Plaintiff’s residence. Next, XXXX, who
worked as a fireman for the XXXX department was duty bound to ensure Plaintiff
was not exposed to a fire hazard from the leaking toilet water at the ceiling. XXXX
Community Action, as a social services organization and was therefore duty bound to ensure

Plaintiff’s concerns of her inhabitable living environment was addressed. XXXX,
as the inspector for Northwest was duty bound to conduct timely inspection of the health and
fire hazards at Plaintiff’s house. Lastly, XXX, as maintenance workes for Masters
Apartments, were obligated to identify any fault with the aparments and work on it.
51. However, the Defendants breached their duties in diverse ways. First, when
Plaintiff contacted the Masters Apartments to raise concerns about the leaking toilet water
from the neighbor’s apartment, XXXX were sent. However, they failed to conduct
proper investigations of Plaintiff’s claims and concluded briefly that the water would dry up,
only for Plaintiff to find that the water had accumulated on the light fixture.
52. Next, on XXXX, Plaintiff contacted the XXXX fire department
and explained that water was leaking into his laundry area light fixture, and further stated that
it was a fire hazard. Although the XXXX fireman said that he would send XXXX to
check out the issue, he stated that Kurt would not be back for a couple of days, as if
Plaintiff’s life was not in danger. The fireman said that water leaking into the laundry room
light fixture was not a safety issue. But they still would come in and check it out.
Unfortunately, they did not come into check it. Plaintiff called them after toilet water had
poured into his face on XXX.
53. As a result of the Defendants’ inaction, Plaintiff is exposed to health and fire
hazard. Notably, Plaintiff has diabetes and high blood pressure. This makes it easy for him to
catch infections, leading to health problems that could cause serious health issues. Further,
the leaking water may cause fire. It is for this reason that Marcella told XXXX that Plaintiff
would not be able to turn the electricity back on until maintenance fixed the leak in Plaintiff’s
apartment. Defendant should be held liable for the breach of the said intentional infliction of
emotional distress.

54. Had the Defendants not breached their duties, Plaintiff would not have
suffered the injuries alleged above.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff is entitled to damages from the Defendants, and he
hereby prays that judgment be entered in his favor and against the Defendants as follows:
i. Declaratory relief;
ii. Actual damages for the blameworthy conduct of the Defendant as alleged herein to
the maximum extent permitted under the law;
iii. Punitive damages;
iv. Interest as provided by law;
v. An award of fees and costs;
vi. Such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.

Respectfully submitted:

Dated: __________

______________________________
XXXX.
Pro se

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

I, XXXX, hereby certify that on [ENTER DATE], copies of the
foregoing Complaint have been sent to the Defendant in the following address:

DEFENDANT PEDCOR’S AGENT FOR SERVICE OF SUMMONS:

XXX
DEFENDANT VALPARAISO FIRE DEPARTMENT

XXXX

______________________________
XXX
Pro se

APPENDIX

Exhibit 1- The Masters Lease Agreement

Exhibit 3- Audio recording of Plaintiff’s visit at the leasing office

Plaintiff has attached the audio recording with this filing.

Exhibit 4- Audio recording of Plaintiff reporting the issue with the leaking laundry

closet
Plaintiff has attached the audio recording with this filing

Exhibit 5- Video recording of John and Calvin

Plaintiff has attached the video recording with this filing

Exhibit 6- Video recording of water coming from the ceiling

Plaintiff has attached the video recording with this filing

At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, The LegalPen will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible. You can send us your quick enquiry ( here )