The mother of a man who was killed while exiting a Metrolink train in March 2019 seeks default judgment against the suspect for allegedly refusing to respond to the wrongful death lawsuit.
Plaintiff Diedra Smith filed a motion for default judgment against defendant Catrell Dent through attorney Phillip Baldwin of Scroggins Law Office in Granite City.
Smith claims Dent was served with the complaint on March 4, 2021, but “refuses to answer said complaint and currently is in default thereof.”
Dent was charged with aggravated unlawful use of a weapon and first degree murder of Lundy Blue, 18, at a Bi-State Development platform in East St. Louis on March 18, 2019.
The Major Case Squad report states that deputies were dispatched to the 5th and Missouri Avenue Metrolink platform at approximately 10:48 p.m. Blue was located nearby and transported to St. Louis University Hospital, where he later died.
According to a press release, Blue was shot either on the platform or on the train and then ran across the parking lot towards Broadway Ave. Blue and Dent were allegedly on the westbound train at the same time. Dent later went to the East St. Louis Police Department wanting to speak with investigators about the murder.
Smith, Blue’s mother, filed a wrongful death complaint in March 2021 in St. Clair County Circuit Court against Dent, Bi-State Development Agency, doing business as Metrolink, Securitas Security Services USA Inc., and St. Clair County Transit District.
According to the complaint, Blue was a passenger on a Metrolink train on March 18, 2019, when he was allegedly shot “numerous times” and killed by Dent as he exited the train.
Smith alleges St. Clair County Transit District is liable because it is responsible for funding and budgeting the Metrolink’s activity.
She alleges Metrolink had knowledge of previous criminal attacks on its trains and platforms but failed to protect Blue.
Smith claims Securitas was contracted to provide security services for Metrolink’s trains and platforms and “owed a duty to exercise the highest degree of care to protect the plaintiff from reasonably foreseeable criminal attacks on its premises by third parties.” She adds that Securitas allegedly allowed a customer to bring a loaded gun on the Metrolink, failed to alert the decedent of the dangers and failed to post a security guard at the train exits.
Securitas answered the complaint through attorney Michael Cerulo of Baty Otto Coronado PC in St. Louis. In its affirmative defenses, it argues that it was not contracted to provide security services at the 5th and Missouri Metrolink platform.
The defendant argues that it did not have a special relationship with Blue, did not owe a legal duty to prevent the criminal attacks of third parties, and the criminal activity was not reasonably foreseeable.
“Securitas and its employees and agents are not liable to plaintiff or plaintiff’s decedent for the reason that it properly performed all it was required to do by the terms of this Securitas’ contract or agreement with defendant Metrolink and followed reasonable and proper procedures at and around the time of the incident,” the answer states.
The defendant also argues that any alleged injuries, “which Securitas specifically denies,” the injuries were caused by the negligence of third parties, including Blue, Dent, and Metrolink. Securitas claims it is “neither liable nor responsible” for the third parties.
“Further answering and by way of affirmative defense, Securitas states upon information and belief that the damages alleged to have been sustained by decedent were a result, rendered in favor of plaintiff and against Securitas should be decreased in proportion to decedent’s own contributory fault and/or negligence,” the answer states.
Bi-State Development filed a motion for involuntary dismissal of the complaint through attorney Donald O’Keefe of Gausnell O’Keefe & Thomas LLC in St. Louis. It argues that the complaint is barred on the basis of the one year statute of limitations under the Local Government and Governmental Employees Tort Immunity Act.
“The purpose of the one-year limitation period … is to encourage early investigation into a claim against a local governmental entity when the matter is still fresh, witnesses are available, and conditions have not materially changed,” the motion stated. “Such an investigation permits prompt settlement of meritorious claims and allows governmental entities to plan their budgets in light of potential liabilities.”
Bi-State Development also argues that the Tort Immunity Act provides immunity for claims alleging it failed to provide police or security protection.
“Neither a local public entity nor a public employee is liable for failure to establish a police department or otherwise provide police protection service or, if police protection service is provided, for failure to provide adequate police protection or service, failure to prevent the commission of crimes, failure to detect or solve crimes, and failure to identify or apprehend criminals,” the motion stated.
Smith answered Bi-State Development’s motion for involuntary dismissal on Sept. 3, 2021. She argues that the Metropolitan Transit Authority Act requires the defendant to protect employees and users of public transportation facilities against crime and unsafe conditions.
St. Clair County Circuit Judge Chris Kolker has scheduled a jury trial to begin on Oct. 31.
St. Clair County Circuit Court case number 21-L-196