Preview
DISTRICT COURT, CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER,
STATE OF COLORADO
DATE FILED: April 23, 2024 2:45 PM
FILING ID: 1271F53A89775
Court Address: CASE NUMBER: 2024CV31232
1437 Bannock Street
Denver, CO 80202
Phone Number: 720-606-2300
Plaintiff:
MARY ELIZABETH ENMANN, an individual 5Court Use Only5
v.
Defendants:
MONACO SOUTH OWNER, LLC, a foreign limited
liability company; GRAND PEAKS PROPERTY
MANAGEMENT, INC., a Colorado corporation
Plaintiff’s Attorney:
Justin A. Dillmore, Esq. #50942 Case No.:
DILLMORE LAW LLC
3000 Lawrence Street, #35 Division:
Denver, Colorado 80210
Phone: 720-934-4284
Facsimile: 720-257-0647
Email: justin@dillmorelaw.com
CIVIL COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND
The Plaintiff, Mary Elizabeth Enmann, by and through her undersigned attorney,
Dillmore Law LLC, hereby submits her Civil Complaint and Jury Demand and asserts:
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1. At all times relevant to this action, Plaintiff Mary Elizabeth Enmann (hereinafter
“Plaintiff”) resided in Colorado.
2. Upon information and belief, at all times relevant to this action, Monaco South
Owner, LLC (hereinafter “Defendant Monaco”) is a foreign limited liability
company organized in the State of Delaware.
3. Upon information and belief, at all times relevant to this action, Grand Peaks
Property Management, Inc. (hereinafter “Defendant Grand Peaks”) is a Colorado
corporation.
4. Pursuant to C.R.S. § 13-1-124(1)(b), this Court has personal jurisdiction over the
Defendant Monaco because they committed one or more tortious acts in the state
of Colorado.
5. Pursuant to C.R.S. § 13-1-124(1)(b), this Court has personal jurisdiction over the
Defendant Grand Peaks because they committed one or more tortious acts in the
state of Colorado.
6. Pursuant to Colo. Const. Art. VI, § 9(1), this Court has subject matter jurisdiction
over this matter since this Court has original jurisdiction in all civil cases.
7. Pursuant to C.R.C.P. 98(c)(5), venue is proper in City and County of Denver
District Court.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
8. Plaintiff incorporates herein by this reference the allegations set forth with
specificity in preceding paragraphs of this Civil Complaint and Jury Demand, as
if set forth verbatim.
9. On April 25, 2022, Plaintiff was a tenant at Monaco South whose address is 2280
S Monaco Parkway, Denver, CO 80222.
10. On April 25, 2022, Plaintiff was walking on the sidewalk on East Iliff Avenue,
between South Monaco and Oneida Street in Denver, Colorado.
11. Upon information and belief, Defendant Monaco owned the property, Monaco
South Apartments, adjacent to sidewalk East Iliff Avenue, between South Monaco
and Oneida Street in Denver, Colorado.
12. Defendant Monaco was responsible for the maintenance and repair of said
sidewalk.
13. Upon information and belief, Defendant Grand Peaks owned the property,
Monaco South Apartments, adjacent to sidewalk East Iliff Avenue, between South
Monaco and Oneida Street in Denver, Colorado.
14. Defendant Great Peaks was responsible for the maintenance and repair of said
sidewalk.
15. On that date and location, Plaintiff was walking on said sidewalk when a defect in
the sidewalk caused her to fall on the sidewalk.
16. The Plaintiff fell on the sidewalk and sustained injuries.
17. The Plaintiff was not negligent in any way regarding this injury.
2
18. The Plaintiff was an invitee for purposes of this injury and lawsuit.
19. The Defendant Monaco was a landowner for purposes of this injury and lawsuit.
20. The Defendant Grand Peaks was a landowner for purposes of this injury and
lawsuit.
21. The Defendant Monaco owed the Plaintiff a duty of reasonable care to protect the
Plaintiff against known dangers or dangers that the Defendant might have
discovered in the exercise of reasonable care.
22. The Defendant Grand Peaks owed the Plaintiff a duty of reasonable care to
protect the Plaintiff against known dangers or dangers that the Defendant might
have discovered in the exercise of reasonable care.
23. The Defendants breached their duty owed to the Plaintiff.
24. The Plaintiff sustained economic damage as a direct and proximate cause of the
Defendants’ breach of its duty owed to the Plaintiff.
25. The Plaintiff sustained non-economic damage as a direct and proximate cause of
the Defendants’ breach of its duty owed to the Plaintiff.
26. The Plaintiff sustained permanent impairment and/or disfigurement as a direct and
proximate cause of the Defendants’ breach of its duty owed to the Plaintiff.
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
Statutory Premises Liability
Pursuant to C.R.S. § 13-21-115
27. Plaintiff incorporates herein by this reference the allegations set forth with
specificity the preceding paragraphs of this Civil Complaint and Jury Demand, as
if set forth verbatim.
28. Defendant Monaco is a landowner for purposes of this injury and lawsuit because
it is an authorized agent or a person in possession of the property and a person
legally responsible for the condition of property or for the activities conducted or
circumstances existing on the property and/or adjacent to the property.
29. Plaintiff is an invitee because she entered or remained on the Property to transact
business in which the Plaintiff and Defendant Monaco are mutually interested or
who entered or remained on the property in response to Defendant Monaco’s
express or implied representation that the Plaintiff is requested, expected, or
intended to enter or remain on the property and/or adjacent to the property.
30. Defendant Monaco owed the Plaintiff a duty of reasonable care to protect the
Plaintiff against known dangers or dangers that the Defendant Monaco might
3
have discovered in the exercise of reasonable care on its property and/or adjacent
property.
31. Defendant Monaco breached its duty owed to the Plaintiff.
32. The Plaintiff sustained economic damage as a direct and proximate cause of
Defendant Monaco’s breach of its duty owed to the Plaintiff.
33. The Plaintiff sustained non-economic damage as a direct and proximate cause of
Defendant Monaco’s breach of its duty owed to the Plaintiff.
34. The Plaintiff sustained permanent impairment and/or disfigurement as a direct and
proximate cause of Defendant Monaco’s breach of its duty owed to the Plaintiff.
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
Statutory Premises Liability
Pursuant to C.R.S. § 13-21-115
35. Plaintiff incorporates herein by this reference the allegations set forth with
specificity the preceding paragraphs of this Civil Complaint and Jury Demand, as
if set forth verbatim.
36. Defendant Grand Peaks is a landowner for purposes of this injury and lawsuit
because it is an authorized agent or a person in possession of the Property and a
person legally responsible for the condition of property or for the activities
conducted or circumstances existing on the property and/or adjacent to the
property.
37. Plaintiff is an invitee because she entered or remained on the Property to transact
business in which the Plaintiff and Defendant Grand Peaks are mutually interested
or who entered or remained on the property in response to Defendant Grand
Peaks’ express or implied representation that the Plaintiff is requested, expected,
or intended to enter or remain on the property and/or adjacent to the property.
38. Defendant Grand Peaks owed the Plaintiff a duty of reasonable care to protect the
Plaintiff against known dangers or dangers that the Defendant Grand Peaks might
have discovered in the exercise of reasonable care on its property and/or adjacent
property.
39. Defendant Grand Peaks breached its duty owed to the Plaintiff.
40. The Plaintiff sustained economic damage as a direct and proximate cause of
Defendant Grand Peaks’ breach of its duty owed to the Plaintiff.
41. The Plaintiff sustained non-economic damage as a direct and proximate cause of
Defendant Grand Peaks’ breach of its duty owed to the Plaintiff.
4
42. The Plaintiff sustained permanent impairment and/or disfigurement as a direct and
proximate cause of Defendant Grand Peaks’ breach of its duty owed to the
Plaintiff.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Mary Elizabeth Enmann, prays for judgment against
Monaco South Owner, LLC and Grand Peaks Property Management, Inc., in an
amount to be determined by a jury at trial, for compensatory damages in an amount
sufficient to compensate for the losses described above, for special damages in an amount
to be determined at trial, and for costs, expert witness fees, attorney fees, filing fees,
prejudgment interest, post-judgment interest, and such further relief as the Court may
deem just and proper.
Plaintiff does hereby DEMAND A TRIAL BY JURY.
Dated this 23rd day of April 2024.
Respectfully submitted,
DILLMORE LAW LLC
/s/Justin A. Dillmore
Justin A. Dillmore
Attorney for Plaintiff
Plaintiff’s Address:
6875 East Iliff Avenue
Apt. 337
Denver, CO 80224
5
Preview
DISTRICT COURT, CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, STATE OF COLORADO DATE FILED: April 23, 2024 2:45 PM FILING ID: 1271F53A89775 Court Address: CASE NUMBER: 2024CV31232 1437 Bannock Street Denver, CO 80202 Phone Number: 720-606-2300 Plaintiff: MARY ELIZABETH ENMANN, an individual 5Court Use Only5 v. Defendants: MONACO SOUTH OWNER, LLC, a foreign limited liability company; GRAND PEAKS PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, INC., a Colorado corporation Plaintiff’s Attorney: Justin A. Dillmore, Esq. #50942 Case No.: DILLMORE LAW LLC 3000 Lawrence Street, #35 Division: Denver, Colorado 80210 Phone: 720-934-4284 Facsimile: 720-257-0647 Email: justin@dillmorelaw.com CIVIL COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND The Plaintiff, Mary Elizabeth Enmann, by and through her undersigned attorney, Dillmore Law LLC, hereby submits her Civil Complaint and Jury Demand and asserts: JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. At all times relevant to this action, Plaintiff Mary Elizabeth Enmann (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) resided in Colorado. 2. Upon information and belief, at all times relevant to this action, Monaco South Owner, LLC (hereinafter “Defendant Monaco”) is a foreign limited liability company organized in the State of Delaware. 3. Upon information and belief, at all times relevant to this action, Grand Peaks Property Management, Inc. (hereinafter “Defendant Grand Peaks”) is a Colorado corporation. 4. Pursuant to C.R.S. § 13-1-124(1)(b), this Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendant Monaco because they committed one or more tortious acts in the state of Colorado. 5. Pursuant to C.R.S. § 13-1-124(1)(b), this Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendant Grand Peaks because they committed one or more tortious acts in the state of Colorado. 6. Pursuant to Colo. Const. Art. VI, § 9(1), this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this matter since this Court has original jurisdiction in all civil cases. 7. Pursuant to C.R.C.P. 98(c)(5), venue is proper in City and County of Denver District Court. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 8. Plaintiff incorporates herein by this reference the allegations set forth with specificity in preceding paragraphs of this Civil Complaint and Jury Demand, as if set forth verbatim. 9. On April 25, 2022, Plaintiff was a tenant at Monaco South whose address is 2280 S Monaco Parkway, Denver, CO 80222. 10. On April 25, 2022, Plaintiff was walking on the sidewalk on East Iliff Avenue, between South Monaco and Oneida Street in Denver, Colorado. 11. Upon information and belief, Defendant Monaco owned the property, Monaco South Apartments, adjacent to sidewalk East Iliff Avenue, between South Monaco and Oneida Street in Denver, Colorado. 12. Defendant Monaco was responsible for the maintenance and repair of said sidewalk. 13. Upon information and belief, Defendant Grand Peaks owned the property, Monaco South Apartments, adjacent to sidewalk East Iliff Avenue, between South Monaco and Oneida Street in Denver, Colorado. 14. Defendant Great Peaks was responsible for the maintenance and repair of said sidewalk. 15. On that date and location, Plaintiff was walking on said sidewalk when a defect in the sidewalk caused her to fall on the sidewalk. 16. The Plaintiff fell on the sidewalk and sustained injuries. 17. The Plaintiff was not negligent in any way regarding this injury. 2 18. The Plaintiff was an invitee for purposes of this injury and lawsuit. 19. The Defendant Monaco was a landowner for purposes of this injury and lawsuit. 20. The Defendant Grand Peaks was a landowner for purposes of this injury and lawsuit. 21. The Defendant Monaco owed the Plaintiff a duty of reasonable care to protect the Plaintiff against known dangers or dangers that the Defendant might have discovered in the exercise of reasonable care. 22. The Defendant Grand Peaks owed the Plaintiff a duty of reasonable care to protect the Plaintiff against known dangers or dangers that the Defendant might have discovered in the exercise of reasonable care. 23. The Defendants breached their duty owed to the Plaintiff. 24. The Plaintiff sustained economic damage as a direct and proximate cause of the Defendants’ breach of its duty owed to the Plaintiff. 25. The Plaintiff sustained non-economic damage as a direct and proximate cause of the Defendants’ breach of its duty owed to the Plaintiff. 26. The Plaintiff sustained permanent impairment and/or disfigurement as a direct and proximate cause of the Defendants’ breach of its duty owed to the Plaintiff. FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF Statutory Premises Liability Pursuant to C.R.S. § 13-21-115 27. Plaintiff incorporates herein by this reference the allegations set forth with specificity the preceding paragraphs of this Civil Complaint and Jury Demand, as if set forth verbatim. 28. Defendant Monaco is a landowner for purposes of this injury and lawsuit because it is an authorized agent or a person in possession of the property and a person legally responsible for the condition of property or for the activities conducted or circumstances existing on the property and/or adjacent to the property. 29. Plaintiff is an invitee because she entered or remained on the Property to transact business in which the Plaintiff and Defendant Monaco are mutually interested or who entered or remained on the property in response to Defendant Monaco’s express or implied representation that the Plaintiff is requested, expected, or intended to enter or remain on the property and/or adjacent to the property. 30. Defendant Monaco owed the Plaintiff a duty of reasonable care to protect the Plaintiff against known dangers or dangers that the Defendant Monaco might 3 have discovered in the exercise of reasonable care on its property and/or adjacent property. 31. Defendant Monaco breached its duty owed to the Plaintiff. 32. The Plaintiff sustained economic damage as a direct and proximate cause of Defendant Monaco’s breach of its duty owed to the Plaintiff. 33. The Plaintiff sustained non-economic damage as a direct and proximate cause of Defendant Monaco’s breach of its duty owed to the Plaintiff. 34. The Plaintiff sustained permanent impairment and/or disfigurement as a direct and proximate cause of Defendant Monaco’s breach of its duty owed to the Plaintiff. SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF Statutory Premises Liability Pursuant to C.R.S. § 13-21-115 35. Plaintiff incorporates herein by this reference the allegations set forth with specificity the preceding paragraphs of this Civil Complaint and Jury Demand, as if set forth verbatim. 36. Defendant Grand Peaks is a landowner for purposes of this injury and lawsuit because it is an authorized agent or a person in possession of the Property and a person legally responsible for the condition of property or for the activities conducted or circumstances existing on the property and/or adjacent to the property. 37. Plaintiff is an invitee because she entered or remained on the Property to transact business in which the Plaintiff and Defendant Grand Peaks are mutually interested or who entered or remained on the property in response to Defendant Grand Peaks’ express or implied representation that the Plaintiff is requested, expected, or intended to enter or remain on the property and/or adjacent to the property. 38. Defendant Grand Peaks owed the Plaintiff a duty of reasonable care to protect the Plaintiff against known dangers or dangers that the Defendant Grand Peaks might have discovered in the exercise of reasonable care on its property and/or adjacent property. 39. Defendant Grand Peaks breached its duty owed to the Plaintiff. 40. The Plaintiff sustained economic damage as a direct and proximate cause of Defendant Grand Peaks’ breach of its duty owed to the Plaintiff. 41. The Plaintiff sustained non-economic damage as a direct and proximate cause of Defendant Grand Peaks’ breach of its duty owed to the Plaintiff. 4 42. The Plaintiff sustained permanent impairment and/or disfigurement as a direct and proximate cause of Defendant Grand Peaks’ breach of its duty owed to the Plaintiff. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Mary Elizabeth Enmann, prays for judgment against Monaco South Owner, LLC and Grand Peaks Property Management, Inc., in an amount to be determined by a jury at trial, for compensatory damages in an amount sufficient to compensate for the losses described above, for special damages in an amount to be determined at trial, and for costs, expert witness fees, attorney fees, filing fees, prejudgment interest, post-judgment interest, and such further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. Plaintiff does hereby DEMAND A TRIAL BY JURY. Dated this 23rd day of April 2024. Respectfully submitted, DILLMORE LAW LLC /s/Justin A. Dillmore Justin A. Dillmore Attorney for Plaintiff Plaintiff’s Address: 6875 East Iliff Avenue Apt. 337 Denver, CO 80224 5