civil suit

PAVAN PARIKH HAMILTON COUNTY CLERK OF COURTS COMMON PLEAS DIVISION ELECTRONICALLY FILED October 3, 2025 03:08 PM PAVAN PARIKH Clerk of Courts Hamilton County, Ohio CONFIRMATION 1704446 EMILY LIVINGSTON A 2504883 vs. LAVONTEZ DAVIS FILING TYPE: INITIAL FILING (IN COUNTY) WITH NO JURY DEMAND PAGES FILED: 11 EFR200 E-FILED 10/03/2025 3:08 PM / CONFIRMATION 1704446 / A 2504883 / COMMON PLEAS DIVISION / IFI INTHE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO EMILY LIVINGSTON © CasENO. clo Hochscheid Law, LLC : 810 Sycamore St. Sth Floor : Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 © JUDGE: Plain, : © COMPLAINT ESTATE OF JASON MCKINNON : clo Hochscheid Law, LLC : 810 Sycamore St, 5th Floor : Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 : Plaine, : LAVONTEZ DAVIS : 900 Sycamore St. : IMS #1775641 : Cincinnati, OH 45202 : Defendant. : SHIMYA BERRY : i : Defendant. : DOORDASH, INC. : 303 2 Street, South Tower : Suite $00 : San Francisco, CA 94017 : Defendant. : Now come the Plaintiffs, Emily Livingston, individually and as the representative of the Estate of her late husband, Jason McKinnon ("Plaintiff"), by and through counsel, and for their E.FILED 100312025 308 PM / CONFIRMATION 170446 / A 2504883 / COMMON PLEAS DIVISION / FI Complaint against Defendants, Lavontez Davis, Shimya Berry, and DoorDash, Inc. ("Defendants"), state as follows: PARTIES 1. Plaintiff Emily Livingston, individually and as the representative of the Estate of her late husband, Jason McKinnon, is a resident of Hamilton County, Ohio, and may be served with process ¢/o Hochscheid Law LLC, 810 Sycamore Street, Sth Floor, Cincinnati, Ohio 45202. 2. Defendant Lavontez Davis ("Davis") is currently incarcerated at the Hamilton County Justice Center, located at 900 Sycamore Street, JMS #1775641, Cincinnati, Ohio 45202. Prior to the incident, Davis resided at 3078 Glenmore Avenue, Apt. 1, Cincinnati, Ohio 45238. 3. Defendant Shimya Berry ("Berry") is resident of Hamilton County, Ohio, with an address ot SE Cincinnati, Ohio I 4. Defendant DoorDash, Inc. is incorporated in the State of Delaware, with its principal place of business at 303 2nd Street, South Tower, Suite 800, San Francisco, California 94017. DoorDash regularly conducts business within the State of Ohio and has availed itself of Ohio law by contracting with Ohio businesses to provide food delivery services and by employing drivers who accept delivery assignments through its mobile application. 5. Venue s proper in Hamilton County pursuant to Civ.R. 3(B)(6) because the cause: of action arose in Hamilton County, Ohio. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 6. On or about October 4, 2023, Plaintiff Livingston was walking back to her vehicle with her husband, Jason McKinnon, from an FC Cincinnati ("FCC") soccer match when they observed Defendant Berry attempting to drive the wrong way on a one-way street 7. Concemed for his safety and the safety of others, Jason McKinnon shouted to Defendant Berry that she was driving the wrong way on a one-way street. Berry stopped her car E-FILED 10/03/2025 3.08 PM / CONFIRMATION 1704446 / A 2504883 / COMMON PLEAS DIVISION / IF and responded verbally. A verbal exchange ensued, during which Berry became upset and verbally abusive. 8. The argument escalated when Defendant Davis, a passenger in Berry’s car, exited the vehicle and approached Plaintiffs McKinnon and Livingston. Davis struck Jason McKinnon, and a physical altercation ensued. 9. The altercation escalated when Davis placed Jason McKinnon in a chokehold while Plaintiff Livingston and bystanders begged him to stop. During the struggle, Berry also exited the vehicle and physically assaulted both Jason McKinnon and Plaintiff Livingston. 10. Eventually, Davis released McKinnon from the chokehold, returned to the car with Berry, and fled the scene. At the time of the altercation, Defendants were on duty delivering DoorDash orders. Immediately after fleeing, they picked up a DoorDash order from City Bird eatery and delivered it. Berry had been driving to the restaurant to pick up that order at the time of the altercation and chose to drive the wrong way on the one-way street because it was faster. Berry was operating as an associate of DoorDash and driving her vehicle on its behalf. 11. As a result of the altercation, Jason McKinnon was transported to the hospital, where he later died from the injuries inflicted by Defendant Davis. Davis is currently facing trial for Murder, with proceedings set to begin on November 3, 2025. COUNT 1 – NEGLIGENT HIRING (DOORDASH) 12. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference Paragraphs 1 to 11 as if fully rewritten herein. 13. Defendant DoorDash, Inc. owed a duty to exercise reasonable care in hiring, screening, and supervising individuals who deliver food on its behalf. 14. DoorDash breached this duty by failing to conduct a reasonably thorough background investigation into Defendant Berry’s qualifications, fitness, and propensity for safe conduct. E-FILED 10/03/2025 3:08 PM / CONFIRMATION 1704446 / A 2504883 / COMMON PLEAS DIVISION / IFI 15. DoorDash further breached its duty by failing to implement and enforce policies restricting unauthorized passengers during deliveries. 16. DoorDash also failed to adequately monitor Berry’s performance while she was logged into the DoorDash platform. 17. Reasonable delivery service companies in the industry impose restrictions on passengers and monitor drivers’ conduct to protect the public; DoorDash failed to meet this standard. 18. DoorDash knew or, in the exercise of reasonable care, should have known that permitting unvetted drivers and passengers to operate under its platform created an unreasonable risk of violence and harm to the public. 19. These failures created an unreasonable risk of harm to the public, including Plaintiffs. 20. As a result of these failures, Plaintiffs suffered injuries, including the fatal injuries to Jason McKinnon and the physical and emotional injuries to Plaintiff Livingston. COUNT 2 – NEGLIGENCE / GROSS NEGLIGENCE (BERRY AND DOORDASH) 21. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference Paragraphs 1 to 20 as if fully rewritten herein. 22. Defendant Berry owed a duty to Plaintiffs and the public to operate her motor vehicle lawfully and reasonably, including compliance with Ohio traffic laws prohibiting wrong￾way driving under O.R.C. § 4511.32. 23. Defendant Berry breached that duty by driving the wrong way on a one-way street, failing to maintain reasonable control of her vehicle, and failing to exercise ordinary care for the safety of others. 24. Defendant Berry further breached her duty by exiting her vehicle and physically assaulting Plaintiffs, thereby escalating the danger she had already created. E-FILED 10/03/2025 3:08 PM / CONFIRMATION 1704446 / A 2504883 / COMMON PLEAS DIVISION / IFI 25. Defendant Berry’s negligent and grossly negligent conduct directly and proximately caused the fatal injuries to Jason McKinnon and the physical and emotional injuries to Plaintiff Livingston. 26. Defendant Berry’s decision to drive the wrong way on a one-way street was a substantial factor leading to the confrontation and altercation that resulted in Jason McKinnon’s death. 27. At all relevant times, Defendant Berry was logged into the DoorDash platform and performing deliveries on behalf of DoorDash. 28. Defendant Berry operated as an agent and employee of DoorDash, within the scope of her duties as a DoorDash driver. 29. DoorDash derived a direct business benefit from Berry’s conduct while she was logged into its platform and performing deliveries. 30. By reason of this agency and employment relationship, DoorDash is vicariously liable for the negligent and grossly negligent acts and omissions of Defendant Berry committed in the course of delivering food orders. 31. As a result of the negligence and gross negligence of Defendants Berry and DoorDash, Plaintiff Livingston has suffered physical injury, emotional distress, medical expenses, loss of income, and ongoing pain and suffering, and the Estate of Jason McKinnon has suffered damages including wrongful death. COUNT 3 – NEGLIGENCE / GROSS NEGLIGENCE (DAVIS) 32. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference Paragraphs 1 to 31 as if fully rewritten herein. 33. Defendant Davis owed a duty to Plaintiffs to act reasonably and to refrain from conduct that created an unreasonable risk of serious physical harm to others. E-FILED 10/03/2025 3:08 PM / CONFIRMATION 1704446 / A 2504883 / COMMON PLEAS DIVISION / IFI 34. Defendant Davis breached that duty by exiting Berry’s vehicle and initiating a violent confrontation with Jason McKinnon. 35. Defendant Davis further breached his duty by striking Jason McKinnon, placing him in a chokehold, and continuing the assault despite pleas from Plaintiff Livingston and bystanders. 36. Defendant Davis’s conduct was grossly negligent, reckless, and undertaken with wanton disregard for human life. 37. As a result of Defendant Davis’s conduct, Jason McKinnon sustained fatal injuries and Plaintiff Livingston sustained physical injuries and severe emotional trauma. 38. Defendant Davis’s negligent, grossly negligent, and reckless conduct entitles Plaintiffs to compensatory and punitive damages. COUNT 4 – ASSAULT (BERRY AND DAVIS) 39. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference Paragraphs 1 to 38 as if fully rewritten herein. 40. Defendants, acting individually and in concert, intentionally placed Jason McKinnon and Plaintiff Livingston in reasonable apprehension of immediate harmful or offensive physical contact. 41. Defendant Davis did so by aggressively approaching, striking, and choking Jason McKinnon. 42. Defendant Berry did so by verbally abusing, exiting her vehicle, and physically attacking both Jason McKinnon and Plaintiff Livingston. 43. As a result of Defendants’ actions, Jason McKinnon suffered imminent fear and harm that culminated in his death, and Plaintiff Livingston suffered imminent fear and harm resulting in physical injury and severe emotional distress. E-FILED 10/03/2025 3:08 PM / CONFIRMATION 1704446 / A 2504883 / COMMON PLEAS DIVISION / IFI 44. Defendants’ conduct constitutes assault under Ohio law, including O.R.C. § 2903.13, and Plaintiffs are entitled to damages. COUNT 5 – BATTERY (BERRY AND DAVIS) 45. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference Paragraphs 1 to 44 as if fully rewritten herein. 46. Defendants, acting individually and in concert, intentionally and unlawfully made harmful and offensive physical contact with Jason McKinnon and Plaintiff Livingston. 47. Defendant Davis escalated the confrontation by physically attacking and strangling Jason McKinnon. 48. Defendant Berry escalated the confrontation by physically striking and attacking both Jason McKinnon and Plaintiff Livingston. 49. As a result of Defendants’ intentional conduct, Jason McKinnon suffered fatal injuries, and Plaintiff Livingston suffered serious physical and emotional injuries. 50. Defendants’ conduct constitutes battery under Ohio common law as recognized in Ohio courts, and Plaintiffs are entitled to compensatory and punitive damages. COUNT 6 – NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS (BERRY AND DAVIS) 51. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference Paragraphs 1 to 50 as if fully rewritten herein. 52. Defendants owed Plaintiff Livingston a duty to refrain from engaging in negligent, reckless, or wanton conduct that could foreseeably cause severe emotional harm. 53. Defendants breached this duty by initiating, aiding, and escalating physical violence that resulted in the death of Jason McKinnon in the presence of his spouse. 54. As a result of Defendants’ conduct, Plaintiff Livingston suffered immediate and severe emotional distress at the scene of the altercation. E-FILED 10/03/2025 3:08 PM / CONFIRMATION 1704446 / A 2504883 / COMMON PLEAS DIVISION / IFI 55. Plaintiff Livingston continues to suffer severe and debilitating emotional distress, mental anguish, and trauma as a foreseeable result of witnessing her husband’s violent death and experiencing physical injury herself. 56. Defendants’ conduct constitutes negligent infliction of emotional distress under Ohio law, and Plaintiff Livingston is entitled to damages. COUNT 7 – INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS (BERRY AND DAVIS) 57. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference Paragraphs 1 to 56 as if fully rewritten herein. 58. Defendants engaged in extreme and outrageous conduct by initiating, aiding, and escalating physical violence in a public setting, culminating in the strangulation and death of Jason McKinnon in the presence of his spouse. 59. Defendants’ conduct was intentional and undertaken with the purpose of causing severe emotional distress to Plaintiff Livingston, or with knowledge that such distress was substantially certain to result. 60. As a result of Defendants’ intentional and outrageous conduct, Plaintiff Livingston suffered immediate and severe emotional trauma. 61. Plaintiff Livingston continues to suffer severe, lasting, and debilitating emotional distress and mental anguish as a foreseeable result of Defendants’ conduct. 62. Defendants’ conduct constitutes intentional infliction of emotional distress under Ohio law, and Plaintiff Livingston is entitled to compensatory and punitive damages. COUNT 8 – WRONGFUL DEATH (ALL DEFENDANTS) 63. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference Paragraphs 1 to 62 as if fully rewritten herein. 64. Defendants’ wrongful acts directly and proximately caused the death of Jason McKinnon. E-FILED 10/03/2025 3:08 PM / CONFIRMATION 1704446 / A 2504883 / COMMON PLEAS DIVISION / IFI 65. Defendant Davis’s physical assault and strangulation of Jason McKinnon, aided and abetted by Defendant Berry, caused fatal injuries that resulted in his death shortly after the altercation. 66. At the time of the altercation, Jason McKinnon had no preexisting injuries or conditions that would have otherwise led to his death. 67. As a result of Defendants’ wrongful acts, Plaintiff Livingston, as surviving spouse, has suffered pecuniary losses, loss of support, loss of companionship, and severe emotional suffering. 68. Pursuant to Ohio’s wrongful death statute, R.C. § 2125.02, Plaintiffs are entitled to recover damages for the full measure of losses suffered by the Estate of Jason McKinnon and his statutory beneficiaries. COUNT 9 – CRIMINAL ACT LIABILITY (DAVIS) 69. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference Paragraphs 1 to 68 as if fully rewritten herein. 70. Defendant Berry aided and abetted Defendant Davis by driving him away from the scene of the assault, thereby making herself complicit under O.R.C. § 2923.03 in the criminal acts committed by Davis. 71. Defendant Davis has been charged in Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas, Case No. B2305106, with Strangulation, two counts of Murder, and Felonious Assault arising out of the October 4, 2023 incident that resulted in Jason McKinnon’s death. 72. These criminal acts caused direct injury, including Jason McKinnon’s death and the consequential loss of consortium to Plaintiff Livingston. 73. Civil liability may be imposed for damages resulting from criminal acts even if the defendants are not charged or convicted in criminal court. E-FILED 10/03/2025 3:08 PM / CONFIRMATION 1704446 / A 2504883 / COMMON PLEAS DIVISION / IFI 74. As a result of Defendants’ criminal conduct, Plaintiffs suffered damages, including the wrongful death of Jason McKinnon and injuries to Plaintiff Livingston. COUNT 10 – LOSS OF CONSORTIUM (ALL DEFENDANTS) 75. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference Paragraphs 1 to 74 as if fully rewritten herein. 76. As a result of Defendants’ negligent, reckless, and intentional actions described above, Plaintiff Livingston has suffered the loss of consortium of her husband, Jason McKinnon. 77. Plaintiff Livingston’s loss of consortium includes the deprivation of companionship, comfort, love, solace, services, and support that Jason McKinnon provided during his lifetime. 78. Plaintiff Livingston has suffered, and will continue to suffer, damages as a result of this loss of consortium, for which she is entitled to recovery. COUNT 11 – PUNITIVE DAMAGES (ALL DEFENDANTS) 79. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference Paragraphs 1 to 78 as if fully rewritten herein. 80. Defendants’ conduct, including but not limited to intentional physical violence, gross negligence, and reckless disregard for human life, was malicious, willful, wanton, and demonstrated a conscious disregard for the rights and safety of others. 81. Such conduct justifies the imposition of punitive damages under Ohio law to punish Defendants and deter similar conduct in the future. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendants as follows: A. Award compensatory damages in an amount to be determined at trial; B. Award punitive damages; C. Award costs of this action; E-FILED 10/03/2025 3:08 PM / CONFIRMATION 1704446 / A 2504883 / COMMON PLEAS DIVISION / IFI D. Award reasonable attorney’s fees as permitted by law, including but not limited to those authorized under R.C. § 2315.21 and other applicable statutes or common law grounds; E. Award such other relief as the Court deems just and proper. Respectfully Submitted, /s/ Tabitha M. Hochscheid Tabitha M. Hochscheid (0065172) Attorney for Plaintiff Hochscheid Law LLC 810 Sycamore Street; 5th Floor Cincinnati, OH 45202 513-338-1818 phone 513-263-9046 fax tmh@hochscheidlaw.com E-FILED 10/03/2025 3:08 PM / CONFIRMATION 1704446 / A 2504883 / COMMON PLEAS DIVISION / IFI