Shaconta Fox's appeal against a Chicago bar has brought to light significant questions about the responsibilities of establishments in protecting patrons from foreseeable harm. On October 8, 2024, Shaconta Fox filed an appeal in the Appellate Court of Illinois, First Judicial District, challenging a summary judgment granted in favor of Food and Drink Chicago, Inc., doing business as DrinkHaus Bar & Grill. The case stems from an incident on October 26-27, 2018, where Fox alleges she was assaulted by another patron outside the bar.
The incident began when Fox visited DrinkHaus with her family. During their visit, an altercation erupted involving Ademuyiwa “Michael” Ogundeyi and his wife inside the bar. According to testimonies, Ogundeyi waited outside after being escorted out by security. As Fox and her group left the premises, Ogundeyi allegedly attacked them, resulting in serious injuries to Fox. Despite the presence of security personnel who witnessed the unfolding events, no intervention occurred. This lack of action forms the crux of Fox's argument that DrinkHaus failed its duty to protect patrons from foreseeable harm.
Fox's initial complaint was filed on October 19, 2020, followed by an amended version on December 16, 2020. She argues that it was reasonably foreseeable for DrinkHaus that Ogundeyi could cause harm due to his previous conduct inside the bar. Despite this foreseeability and security presence during the altercation outside, no efforts were made to prevent or mitigate the violence that ensued.
During discovery, depositions revealed conflicting accounts of what transpired both inside and outside DrinkHaus. While some witnesses testified seeing Ogundeyi act aggressively towards DuPleiss—Fox’s sister-in-law—others noted that security guards did not intervene despite being armed and observing the situation closely.
In response to these allegations, DrinkHaus moved for summary judgment on July 8, 2022. They argued that they had no duty to protect Fox from a third party's criminal actions because Ogundeyi’s behavior was not reasonably foreseeable—a motion granted by Judge Daniel A. Trevino based on two key points: Fox’s lack of involvement in the initial altercation inside and her decision to engage in the conflict outside.
However, Fox contends this ruling misapplies existing law regarding foreseeability and duty of care owed by businesses to their patrons. Her appeal emphasizes that even if she chose to intervene during the external altercation for familial protection reasons, it does not negate DrinkHaus’s responsibility for failing to anticipate potential threats posed by Ogundeyi after he was removed from their premises.
The appellate court must now consider whether genuine issues of material fact exist concerning DrinkHaus’s duty towards its patrons under such circumstances—a determination crucial for deciding if summary judgment was appropriate or if further proceedings are warranted.
Representing Shaconta Fox is attorney Robert G. Black from Naperville-based Law Offices of Robert G. Black P.C., while Stacy D. Fulco from Bodell Bove LLC represents Food and Drink Chicago Inc., d/b/a Drinkhaus Bar & Grill. The case is presided over by Honorable Judge Daniel A. Trevino under Case ID No. 20L11127.