Hearing Date: 4/9/2019 9:30 AM - 9:30 AM

Courtroom Number: N/A

Location: District 1 Court FILED
Cook County, IL 4/8/2019 1:12 PM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS DOROTHY BROWN
CIRCUIT CLERK
COUNTY DEPARTMENT, CHANCERY DIVISION
COOK COUNTY, IL
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

2019CH03041
VILLAGE OF MELROSE PARK,

Plaintiff, No. 19 CH 03041

v. Honorable Eve M. Reilly

PIPELINE HEALTH SYSTEM LLC, a

Delaware limited liability company, SRC
HOSPITAL INVESTMENTS II LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company,
PIPELINE WESTLAKE HOSPITAL LLC,
a Delaware limited liability company,
TWG PARTNERS LLC, an Illinois limited
liability company, NICHOLAS ORZANO,
an individual, and ERIC WHITAKER, an
individual,

Defendants.

PLAINTIFF’S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING

ORDER, PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION, AND EXPEDITED DISCOVERY

Plaintiff Village of Melrose Park (“Plaintiff” or “Village”), pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/11-

101 and 102, brings this motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction

against Defendants Pipeline-Westlake Hospital LLC and SRC Hospital Investments II LLC

(collectively referred to as “Pipeline”), and for leave to take expedited discovery. In support of

its motion, Plaintiff states as follows:

INTRODUCTION

This lawsuit seeks to hold a group of private equity firms and their principals accountable

for fraudulent statements they made in connection with their purchase of Westlake Hospital—a

critical safety net hospital located in Melrose Park with 230 beds and more than 600 employees.

Immediately after purchasing Westlake, Pipeline moved to close the hospital by filing the

1
 necessary application with the Illinois Health Facilities and Services Review Board (“Review

Board”). The response from the community was swift and intense. During the 6-hour long
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

Review Board hearing on March 11, 536 community members registered their opposition to the

closure and an additional 60 people testified in opposition to the closure. Just 3 people—all

employed by Pipeline—registered their support for the closure. After the hearing, more than 100

community members sent letters to the Review Board voicing their opposition to the closure, and

numerous community leaders—including State Representatives Kathleen Willis and Emanuel

Welch, State Senator Don Harmon, Cook County Commissioners Brandon Johnson and Jeff

Tobolski, and Congressman Jesus Garcia—also voiced their opposition to the closure and have

sent letters to the Cook County Department of Public Health requesting an investigation and

impact analysis.1 Pipeline’s application to close Westlake will be heard at the next Review Board

meeting on April 30, 2019, where it will either be granted, denied, or deferred.

Surprised by the community backlash, and no longer confident that the Review Board

will grant its application, Pipeline has decided to shut down Westlake unilaterally and without

Review Board approval. To close Westlake now, Pipeline has put together a plan to make it seem

to the Review Board and the community as though the hospital is short-staffed and cannot safely

care for its patients. That narrative is false—the reality is that Pipeline has fired numerous staff

members and refused to hire any new employees to replace them. Nonetheless, Pipeline is using

its false narrative to cut medical services, close medical units, refuse new patients, and to close

the hospital before the April 30 Review Board meeting. Pipeline’s premature closure of Westlake

is illegal and must be stopped immediately.

Closing Westlake prematurely will trigger a health and public safety crisis in Melrose

1 The opposition letters are attached as Group Exhibit A.

2
 Park. The Review Board process was implemented in large part to ensure that the “medically

underserved and indigent” have access to essential health care services. Illinois Health Facilities
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

Planning Act (“Planning Act”), 20 ILCS 3960/2. As the area’s only safety net hospital, Westlake

serves tens of thousands of socially and medically vulnerable populations, including Medicaid

beneficiaries and the uninsured. Many of the services provided by Westlake—especially with

respect to pregnancy, childbirth, and in-patient psychiatric care—are not provided anywhere else

in the area. Westlake is also on the front lines of the opioid crisis, operating the only in-patient

substance abuse facility in Melrose Park where patients can receive opioid dependence treatment

(including Suboxone, Vivitrol, and buprenorphine).

Nonetheless, the Village has learned that over the course of the past 7 days, Pipeline has

(i) directed its Chief Nursing Officer to tell the nurses and staff in multiple hospital units to find

new jobs because their departments were closing within 3 weeks—i.e., before the April 30

meeting even occurs; (ii) fired temporary agency nurses; (iii) instituted a hiring freeze; (iv)

transferred staff and equipment out of Westlake to other Pipeline-owned hospitals; and (v)

refused to schedule surgeries or admit patients. (Declaration of Shellye Pechulis [“Pechulis

Decl.”], attached hereto as Exhibit B, ¶¶ 6-11) When Plaintiff’s counsel reached out to Pipeline’s

counsel with these concerns, Pipeline’s counsel refused to confirm that they did not plan to close

Westlake prior to receiving approval from the Review Board. (E-mail Correspondence with

Pipeline’s Counsel, attached hereto as Exhibit C).

Pipeline told hospital staff that these cuts are necessary in the interest of patient safety.

(Pechulis Decl. ¶ 4.) But this completely ignores that it is Pipeline itself that is creating any

safety concerns: Pipeline made the cuts to staffing and supply levels, implemented a hiring

freeze, and moved critical equipment in order to bring about the supposedly unsafe conditions it

3
 is now pointing to as justification for closing the hospital. Like a landlord that constructively

evicts a tenant by shutting off the heat, turning off the water, or changing the locks, Pipeline has
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

created the supposedly dangerous conditions by firing staff and refusing to hire new employees.

As such, Plaintiff requests a TRO and preliminary injunction enjoining Pipeline from

closing—or creating the conditions that would require them to close—before the Review Board

approves their application. To be clear, the requested relief would only ensure Pipeline complies

with the process set out in the Planning Act—the Review Board, not Plaintiff, will ultimately

decide whether Pipeline’s application is granted or denied. Plaintiff similarly requests leave to

conduct limited expedited discovery aimed at identifying specifically how Pipeline is creating

the safety concerns it is using as the justification to turn away patients and discontinue services. 2

BACKGROUND

Westlake is a full-service hospital with 230 beds and more than 600 employees that

provides comprehensive medical services unique to the area, including Level II trauma services,

certified stroke and chest pain services, obstetrics, surgical, in-patient psychiatric care, and in-

patient detoxification. (Complaint [“Compl.”], ¶¶ 2-3.) Critically, Westlake is a “safety net”

hospital, meaning that it does not turn away patients who are unable to pay for medical care,

serves a large number of Medicaid patients, and provides reduced or free services to some

households below the Federal Poverty Level. (Id. ¶¶ 2-4.) As the only hospital in the area to

provide such services, thousands of low-income and medically vulnerable individuals depend on

Westlake for emergencies.

In 2018, Pipeline Health and TWG Partners, two private equity funds, reached an

2Based on this discovery, Plaintiff may request a modification of the preliminary injunction to
more precisely enjoin Pipeline from creating conditions that threaten patient safety.

4
 agreement to purchase Westlake from then-owner Tenet Healthcare. (Id. ¶ 5.) The purchase was

contingent upon the approval of the Review Board, which reviews change of ownership
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

applications to ensure compliance with the Planning Act. An applicant for such an exemption

must affirm, among other things, that no changes will be made to the facility’s existing charity

care policy. 20 ILCS 3960/8.5(a). Pipeline elected to pursue this route, deceiving the Review

Board, the Village of Melrose Park, and the community at large into believing that Pipeline

would not close the Hospital.

Pipeline and its agents have repeatedly promised Village officials, including the Mayor

and members of Village Council, that they would keep Westlake open and would not close it.

(Compl. ¶¶ 47-53.) Pipeline made similar representations to the Review Board when it promised:

A. “Westlake will continue to operate for the benefit of the residents of Chicago and the
greater Chicago area, including serving poor and underserved individuals through
Westlake’s charitable activities.”

B. The transaction “will result in no changes to the scope of services offered at

Westlake.”

C. Its Charity Care Policy “will remain in place for no less than two (2) years following
the consummation of the Transaction.”

D. Its Charity Care Policy “is not more restrictive than the current charity care policies at
Westlake.”

(Compl. ¶ 43) (emphasis added).

Relying on these representations, Plaintiff waived its right to oppose the change of

ownership application and waived its right to request a public hearing before the Review Board.

(Id. ¶¶ 10; 54-56.) The Village also agreed to assign Defendants a tax break through a

redevelopment agreement based on similar representations. (Id. ¶ 52.) Without opposition, the

change of ownership exemption was granted on November 11, 2018. (Id. ¶¶ 54-55.) But the

promises that Pipeline made were false. Just two weeks after the transaction was consummated,

5
 Pipeline announced that it intended to close down Westlake by June 2019. 3 To do so—as the

Planning Act requires before a facility can be closed, 20 ILCS 3960/5—Pipeline filed an
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

Application for Discontinuance with the Review Board on February 21, 2019, (id. ¶ 13), which

will be considered on April 30, at which time it will be granted, denied, or deferred.

In the last 7 days, however, Pipeline has attempted to sidestep the process set out in the

Planning Act in a bid to prematurely close Westlake. Pipeline has fired staff, told remaining staff

that the hospital will close before the Review Board issues a ruling, instituted a hiring freeze,

used “bypass” status to refuse admission to would-be patients even though beds were available,

and transferred certain employees to other hospitals. (Pechulis Decl. ¶¶ 6-11.) When Plaintiff’s

counsel sought confirmation that Pipeline would remain open until the Review Board rules on its

application, Pipeline refused to provide one. (See Ex. C.) Pipeline’s actions demonstrate that it is

not waiting for that decision and appears set to close the hospital by the end of April. This Court

should stop this manufactured takedown of Westlake and grant Plaintiff’s request for expedited

discovery into Pipeline’s actions to subvert the Planning Act’s process and objectives.

ARGUMENT

I. A TRO and Preliminary Injunction Are Required to Force Pipeline’s Compliance

with the Planning Act.

To prevent the irreparable harm caused by Defendant’s failure to follow the Planning

Act’s procedures and to preserve the status quo while the parties litigate the merits of this

lawsuit, Plaintiff seeks a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction from this Court. 4

3 Lisa Schencker, Melrose Park’s Westlake Hospital to close, reversing plans by new owner to
invest in 670-employee hospital, CHICAGO TRIBUNE (Feb. 17, 2019),
https://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-westlake-hospital-melrose-park-to-close-
20190216-story.html.
4 A temporary restraining order should be entered until this court has an opportunity to rule on
the preliminary injunction. See Peoples Gas Light & Coke Co. v. City of Chicago, 117 Ill. App.

6
 To obtain preliminary injunctive relief, a party must show: (1) a clearly ascertainable right in

need of protection; (2) that the party will suffer irreparable harm without protection of that right;
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

(3) that there is no adequate remedy at law; and (4) that there is a substantial likelihood of

success on the merits of the underlying action. Caro ex rel. State v. Blagojevich, 385 Ill. App. 3d

704, 708 (1st Dist. 2008). The Village satisfies each element, because Pipeline’s premature

closure of a hospital is precisely the situation these procedural mechanisms are meant to prevent.

A. The Village Has a Clearly Ascertainable Right to Require Pipeline to Follow

the Planning Act’s Process.

A preliminary injunction “prevent[s] a threatened wrong or continuing injury and

preserve the status quo with the least injury to the parties concerned.” Kalbfleisch ex rel.

Kalbfleisch v. Columbia Cmty. Unit Sch. Dist. Unit No. 4, 396 Ill. App. 3d 1105, 1113 (5th Dist.

2009). To do so in this case, the Village has the right to seek an order requiring Pipeline to

comply with the Planning Act. See Am. Fed’n of State, Cty. & Mun. Emps., Council 31 v. Ryan,

347 Ill. App. 3d 732, 738–39 (5th Dist. 2004) (hereinafter, “AFSCME”) (“Nowhere does the

[Planning] Act prevent anyone, even a home-rule unit, from maintaining an action for [an]

injunction to require compliance with the Planning Act.”) (quoting Am. Fed’n of State, Cty. &

Mun. Emps. Council 31 v. Ryan, 332 Ill. App. 3d 965, 967 (4th Dist. 2002) (Myerscough, J.,

dissenting)).5 See also Rochester Buckhart Action Grp. v. Young, 379 Ill. App. 3d 1030, 1034

3d 353, 355 (1st Dist. 1983) (noting a temporary restraining order may be entered to preserve the
status quo until a hearing is held on the motion for preliminary injunction). A temporary
restraining order issued with notice and a preliminary injunction issued with notice are
essentially the same type of relief and, whether referred to under either term, require the same
elements of proof. Jacob v. C & M Video, Inc., 248 Ill. App. 3d 654, 664 (5th Dist. 1993).
5 In 2004, the Fifth District adopted the rationale of Fourth District Justice Myerscough’s dissent
in a 2002 case, where Justice Myerscough rejected the idea that only the State had authority to
bring an injunction of this type. AFSCME, 347 Ill. App. 3d at 738–39. The Fifth District found
Justice Myerscough’s dissent better reasoned than the majority in the earlier case, as the Court
should here: Plaintiff’s ability to demand that Defendants follow the Planning Act’s process does

7
 (4th Dist. 2008) (“Here, the trial court found plaintiff had a clearly ascertainable right in need of

protection, namely the rights of citizens of Sangamon County and nearby residents to be afforded
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

the protections and procedural rights of the [Livestock Management Facilities] Act; irreparable

harm would result if an injunction did not issue; no adequate remedy at law or in equity existed;

and plaintiff showed a fair question it would succeed on the merits.”).

In AFSCME, the Fifth District considered whether a county could bring an action to force

a hospital owner—there, the State’s own Department of Human Services (“DHS”)—to comply

with the Planning Act’s permit process before closing a hospital. Id. at 735. DHS argued that the

Planning Act permits only the Review Board to regulate hospitals, not the local governments in

which the facilities sit. Id. at 736. The Court disagreed, holding that a county may “bring[] an

action to compel [DHS] to comply with the Planning Act” by seeking an appropriate permit

before closing a facility, id. at 739 (emphasis added), while the actual regulation of the

hospital—considering and issuing a permit—remains the exclusive province of the Board, id.

Just so here. The Village seeks to require Defendants comply with the Planning Act

before they close the Hospital; the Village does not, by this suit, seek to litigate whether the

exemption should or should not be issued. And as the Court observed in AFSCME, local

governments are uniquely interested in that protection: “Access to quality local mental health

services and the opportunity to participate in the permit process through public hearings . . . are

matters of public interest in which the people of Madison County have an interest.” AFSCME,

347 Ill. App. 3d at 741. The Village has that same interest in preventing entities from evading the

State procedure designed to protect the citizens of Melrose Park, regardless of what the ultimate

not denigrate the authority of the Review Board to apply the Act—precisely the opposite, as it
prevents a defendant from unilaterally acting outside the Board’s authority.

8
 decision may be.

B. Plaintiff’s Claims Are Likely To Succeed On The Merits.

FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

To demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits, the moving “party is not required to

make out a case which in all events will warrant relief at the final hearing.” C. G. Caster Co. v.

Regan, 43 Ill. App. 3d 663, 666 (1st Dist. 1976). Rather, a moving party is sufficiently likely to

succeed on the merits if it “raises a ‘fair question’ about the existence of [a] right and that the

court should preserve the status quo until the case can be decided on the merits.” Buzz Barton &

Assocs., Inc. v. Giannone, 108 Ill. 2d 373, 382 (1985). The Village’s likelihood of succeeding on

each of its causes of actions more than satisfies this requirement.

Foremost, the Village’s claim for a declaratory judgment that Pipeline must follow the

provisions of the Act (Compl. ¶ 113), is quite likely to succeed if Pipeline is presently closing the

hospital or modifying the services it is providing without the Review Board’s approval—a

violation of the Act. 20 ILCS 3960/5. And as the attached declaration demonstrates, there is

already significant evidence to suggest that Pipeline is doing just that:

1. Pipeline has abused the “bypass” designation by creating chronic understaffing so

that it could refuse to admit new patients. Pipeline is refusing to allow nurses that
want to work from doing so, cut temp nurses, and has instituted a hiring freeze so that
the problem it created cannot be solved.

2. Pipeline has directed its agents to cease paying for medications for Westlake’s
pharmacy. The pharmacy’s medications are used throughout the hospital and are not
being replenished.

3. The Chief Nursing Officer stated she intends to close one of Westlake’s two medical
surgery floors, and 16 patients have already been discharged as a result of this
directive.

4. Bariatric surgeries will no longer be scheduled as of April 10, and Obstetrics

Department nurses are being told their Department will shutter prior to April 30.

5. Nurses and surgery equipment are being permanently transferred out of Westlake to
West Suburban Hospital.

9
 6. Pipeline directed Emergency Room managers to transfer patients to outside facilities
once they are stabilized, even if Westlake is capable of providing the requisite level
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

of care.

(Pechulis Decl. ¶¶ 6-11).

The Planning Act is straightforward. No entity may “modify . . . a health care facility . . .

without first obtaining a permit or exemption from the State Board.” 20 ILCS 3960/5. A

modification includes any action that “substantially changes the scope or changes the functional

operation of the facility.” Id. Pipeline’s action to close floors, de-staff and de-supply the hospital

amounts to a substantial modification of Westlake aimed at a premature closing. The Village is

likely to succeed in obtaining a declaration that Pipeline must follow the process set out in the

Planning Act before it closes the facility.

The Village is equally likely to succeed on its remaining fraud and statutory claims.

(Compl. ¶¶ 68-108.) As set forth in the Complaint and above, Pipeline consistently represented

that Westlake would remain open. Based on these statements, the Village did not oppose

Pipeline’s change of ownership application. But with the acquisition complete, Defendants

nearly immediately announced their plans to shutter the hospital, inexplicably blaming factors

that were already known to them when they promised to keep the hospital open—i.e., a 20-year

trend toward outpatient and ambulatory care, and end-of-year financials that were shared with

Pipeline when it was still professing its intention to stay open. Simply put, Defendants made

false representations, intending that the Village rely on them; the Village did and suffered

damages because of it. In addition to this course of conduct showing the Village will likely

prevail on its fraud claims, it further illustrates how they are likely to additionally be held liable

under the Village’s municipal code sections aimed at regulating such fraud. Melrose Park Mun.

Code §§ 9.04.030; 9.08.02.

10
 C. Pipeline’s Conduct Has Caused—and Will Continue to Cause—Irreparable
Harm to Plaintiff For Which Plaintiff Lacks An Adequate Remedy At Law.
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

A plaintiff seeking preliminary injunctive relief must show that he or she is likely to incur

irreparable harm. “In this context, ‘irreparable harm’ does not mean injury that is beyond repair

or compensation in damages but, rather, denotes transgressions of a continuing nature.” Lucas v.

Peters, 318 Ill. App. 3d 1, 16 (1st Dist. 2000); Stenstrom Petroleum Servs. Grp., Inc. v. Mesch,

375 Ill. App. 3d 1077, 1096 (2d Dist. 2007). Once a protectable interest is established—as in this

case—the plaintiff is presumed to have been irreparably injured if the interest remains

unprotected. A-Tech Comput. Servs., Inc. v. Soo Hoo, 254 Ill. App. 3d 392, 400 (1st Dist. 1993).

The premature closing of a hospital would have a devastating impact on Melrose Park,

and is an action that is not easily undone. The point is not that such damages could never be

compensable, but that it will be inefficient and challenging: in order to preclude an equitable

remedy, the legal remedy “must be clear, complete, and as practical and efficient to the ends of

justice and its prompt administration as the equitable remedy.” Bio-Med. Labs., Inc. v. Trainor,

68 Ill. 2d 540, 549 (1977) (quoting K.F.K. Corp. v. Am. Cont’l Homes, Inc. 31 Ill. App. 3d 1017,

1021 (2d Dist. 1975)). Shuttering an institution like Westlake will cause immense disruption to

the web of services in the Village; evaluating those harms for a legal remedy is far more difficult

than preventing it in the first place. This principle is recognized in the familiar context of the

enforcement of non-compete relationships, where courts have recognized that “interruptions in

the continuity of business relationships” is a source of irreparable harm. Stenstrom Petroleum,

375 Ill. App. 3d at 1096. Pipeline’s effort to covertly close Westlake is continuing, the harm

created by it will be felt continuously, and will continue until the Court stops it.

Closing Westlake Hospital is the equivalent of ripping a hundred-year-old tree out by the

roots: the effects of the closure will be felt widely and in places both anticipated and not. For the

11
 Village, the increased burden on the Village’s emergency medical services poses an imminent

threat, as its ambulances have to transport patients to services farther afield, as usage increases
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

for opioid-dependent individuals’ whose treatment programs are interrupted or stopped

altogether, and for pregnant women who can no longer receive care nearby. The secondary

effects are hard to plan for as well—the scope and extent of the damages that will arise from the

void left by Westlake simply cannot be forecasted with any certainty.

Finally, a core purpose of the Planning Act is “to maintain and improve the provision of

essential health care services . . . to the medically underserved and indigent [and] to assure that

the . . . closure of health care services or facilities is performed in an orderly and timely manner,

and that these actions are deemed to be in the best interests of the public.” 20 ILCS 3960/2. By

unilaterally terminating Westlake’s essential health care services without authorization, Pipeline

is circumventing the Plaintiff’s and Melrose Park residents’ right to participate in the

administrative process by which the “best interests of the public” are determined. Id. The Review

Board will have a hearing on Pipeline’s discontinuance application on April 30. By closing the

hospital before that hearing, Pipeline evades that process, and the Village is irreparably

prevented from participating and shaping the administrative procedure designed to protect it and

Melrose Park’s residents. Pipeline’s subversion of the statutory scheme that regulates hospitals in

Illinois is alone sufficient for the Court to order Pipeline to comply with the process.

D. The Equities Balance in Favor of Granting a Preliminary Injunction.

In deciding whether to issue a preliminary injunction, the court must consider the impact

the relief may have on each party. Schweickart v. Powers, 245 Ill. App. 3d 281, 291 (2nd Dist.

1993). In balancing equities, the court should also consider the effect the injunction will have on

the public. Village of Bensenville v. City of Chicago, 389 Ill. App. 3d 446, 493 (2nd Dist. 2009).

12
 Here, the harms to Plaintiff outlined above outweigh any harm potentially incurred by Pipeline.

The public’s interest in an orderly procedure for closing hospitals is embodied in the Planning
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

Act, and supports an order requiring Pipeline not to close the Hospital until the full impact of

such a closure can be investigated by the Review Board. Plaintiff seeks nothing more than what

Pipeline must already do: Pipeline is prohibited from modifying or discontinuing Westlake’s

services until its application is granted.

It must be noted as well that Plaintiff sought to avoid seeking emergency relief by simply

asking Pipeline’s counsel what Pipeline’s intentions were before the Review Board ruled. (See

Ex. C.) They refused to provide Plaintiff with anything but a baldly evasive answer, leaving

Plaintiff with little option but to invoke the Court’s authority. (Id.) The equities favor Plaintiff.

II. Limited Expedited Discovery Is Appropriate to Confirm Pipeline Is Discontinuing

Services Based on Conditions It Has Created.

In Illinois, a party normally has 28 days to respond to an interrogatory or request for

documents. See Ill. S. Ct. Rs. 213(d), 214(a). These deadlines, however, may be expedited. See,

e.g., Hartnett v. Stack, 241 Ill. App. 3d 157, 164 (2d Dist. 1993) (noting order on plaintiff’s

motion to expedite, which required responses to interrogatories and requests for documents

within 17 days); see also Redelmann v. K.A. Steel Chems., Inc., 377 Ill. App. 3d 971, 976 (4th

Dist. 2007) (trial courts have discretion to control their own dockets and discovery schedules and

collecting cases). In determining whether to allow expedited discovery, “the court may determine

whether the likely burden or expense of the proposed discovery . . . outweighs the likely benefit,

taking into account the amount in controversy, the resources of the parties, the importance of the

issues in the litigation, and the importance of the requested discovery in resolving the issues.” Ill.

S. Ct. R. 201(c)(3). Here, Plaintiff seeks leave to conduct expedited discovery to protect the

13
 Village and its residents from potentially irreparable harm due to Westlake’s closure.6 Plaintiff’s

request for expedited discovery is supported by good cause.

FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

Plaintiff needs to understand the specific steps that Pipeline is taking to discontinue

services in order to know which additional actions must be enjoined pursuant to a preliminary

injunction. Expedited discovery will allow Plaintiff to do this quickly and efficiently, whereas

the normal discovery timeline will delay any preliminary injunction proceedings, potentially

further harming Plaintiff, and prevent its counsel from expeditiously determining the scope of the

suit and how to proceed. D.C. v. S.A., 178 Ill. 2d 551, 561 (1997) (“The objectives of pretrial

discovery are to enhance the truth-seeking process, to enable attorneys to better prepare for trial,

to eliminate surprise and to promote an expeditious and final determination of controversies.”).

Plaintiff has received a multitude of reports that Pipeline has been creating conditions

inside Westlake aimed at forcing staff out so that Pipeline can claim it does not have enough

staff to safely operate. (See, e.g., Pechulis Decl. ¶¶ 3-11.) But due to fear of reprisals—which are

reasonable given the rash of firings and refusing to allow nurses to work—Plaintiff faces hurdles

in discovering the scope and extent of Pipeline’s misconduct. Plaintiff tried to go straight to the

source by asking Pipeline’s attorneys directly about Pipeline’s conduct, but again, did not get a

clear answer. (Ex. C.) Such obfuscation on Pipeline’s part, coupled with myriad on-the-ground

reports that Pipeline is indeed diminishing the services it provides, makes it exceedingly likely

that information—emails, bypass logs, staffing assignments, deposition testimony from those

involved in the decisions, etc.—exists that will support an extended preliminary injunction.

Obtaining this evidence will support an injunction protecting the Village from further irreparable

harm associated with the discontinuation of services at Westlake before the Review Board acts.

6 Plaintiff’s proposed discovery is attached hereto as Group Exhibit D.

14
 Plaintiff should be afforded the opportunity to obtain that evidence and provide it to the Court

before the services are actually discontinued, so as to preserve the status quo. As such, allowing
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

discovery to proceed on an expedited basis is appropriate.

Under the circumstances, Plaintiff’s request for expedited discovery—which will allow it

to make critical decisions with respect to whether an expended preliminary injunction is

warranted—is necessary, reasonable, and proportional, and also readily supported by good cause.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff Village of Melrose Park respectfully requests that the

Court (i) enter a Temporary Restraining Order and/or a Preliminary Injunction prohibiting

Pipeline from closing Westlake, or creating the conditions that would require them to close

Westlake, until such time as the administrative process under the Planning Act is complete, and

(ii) allow the Village to serve the attached discovery requests and deposition notice.

Respectfully submitted,

VILLAGE OF MELROSE PARK,

Dated: April 8, 2019 By:

One of Plaintiff’s attorneys

Jay Edelson
jedelson@edelson.com
Ari J. Scharg
ascharg@edelson.com
J. Eli Wade-Scott
ewadescott@edelson.com
Michael Ovca
movca@edelson.com
EDELSON PC
350 North LaSalle, 14th Floor
Chicago, Illinois 60654
Tel: (312) 589-6370
Firm ID: 62075

Special Counsel to the Village of Melrose Park

15
 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Ari J. Scharg, an attorney, hereby certify that on April 8, 2019, I served the above and
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

foregoing document by causing a true and accurate copy of the same to be filed and transmitted
to all counsel of record via the Court’s electronic filing system.

16
 Hearing Date: 4/9/2019 9:30 AM - 9:30 AM
Courtroom Number: N/A
Location: District 1 Court FILED
Cook County, IL 4/8/2019 1:12 PM
DOROTHY BROWN
CIRCUIT CLERK
COOK COUNTY, IL

FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

2019CH03041

EXHIBIT A
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

April 2, 2019

Dr. Terry Mason

Chief Operating Officer
Cook County Department of Public Health
15900 S. Cicero Avenue - Administration
Oak Forest, IL 60452

Dear Dr. Terry Mason,

We are writing to request an expert opinion and report summarizing the public health impact of
the proposed closing of Westlake Hospital. On February 21, 2019 Pipeline filed a
Discontinuation Certificate of Exemption Application with the intent to close Westlake Hospital
located at 1225 W Lake St, Melrose Park, IL 60160.

We the undersigned are concerned that closing Westlake Hospital will put the community of
Melrose Park and the surrounding communities at a profound health risk. Founded in 1927,
Westlake is a 230 bed facility that employees 500 full and part-time employees and houses more
than 200 practicing physicians in more than 30 specialties on its campus. Westlake serves a
predominantly Latinx and African American Community and serves as the safety net provider in
many capacities. Nearly half of the population of Melrose Park falls under 200% of the Federal
Poverty Level.

We are particularly interested in understanding the impact the closing will have on vulnerable
populations such as low-income individuals, pregnant mothers, families with young children,
community members that need mental health resources and the elderly. We know that these
vulnerable populations already face considerable health disparities. The Health Impact
Collaborative of Cook County’s 2016 Community Health Needs Assessment indicated that the
West Suburban Cook County mortality rates for Heart Disease, Cancer, and Stroke are all higher
than the corresponding Illinois rates and that communities in Westlake’s service area (Maywood,
Bellwood, Hillside, Broadview, Melrose Park, Stone Park) have the highest rates of negative
health indicators and poor health outcomes.

In your evaluation please include the impact of the loss of the following services on the overall
health of the community.
 ● Behavioral health inpatient unit (47-bed capacity)
● Comprehensive Emergency Department (13,000 square-foot facility with 12 private
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

rooms)
● Labor, delivery and postpartum recovery department (16 birthing rooms)
● Pediatric Department (5 beds)
● Level II nursery equipped to provide 24-hour support
● Surgical (111 beds)
● Cardiac Care (Primary Stroke Center Certified by the American Stroke Association and
American Heart Association)
● Certified acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (28-bed)

In addition, please provide an analysis on the public health impact of the loss of the following
preventative health services that the Westlake campus currently provides.

● Occupational Health Center

● Senior Center
● Fitness Center with cardiovascular equipment, indoor track, warm water therapy pool and
sauna

We thank you in advance and request an expedited response to this request. Pipeline has
indicated that it will close its doors as soon as feasibly possible leaving the community without
these valuable resources.

Regards,

Mayor Ronald M. Serpico, Village of Melrose Park

Illinois State Representative Kathleen Willis, 77th District of Illinois
Illinois State Representative Emanuel Welch, 7th District of Illinois
Illinois Senator Don Harmon, 39th Senate District of Illinois
Cook County Commissioner Brandon Johnson, 1st District
Cook County Commissioner Jeff Tobolski, 16th District
Reverend Jesus Ramirez Cerda, CS, St Charles Borromeo
Reverend Giovanni Bizzotto, C.S., Parish of Our Lady of Mount Carmel
Dr. Glenn Kushner, President of Westlake Medical Staff
Dr. Nabil Saleh, Pediatrician at Westlake
Liz Figueroa-Serrano, Sarah's Inn
Mony Ruiz-Velasco, PASO-West Suburban Action Project

PASO – West Suburban Action Project

3415 W North Avenue, Suite D | Melrose Park, IL 60160 | Ph: 708-410-2000 | pasoaction.org
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041
 Hearing Date: 4/9/2019 9:30 AM - 9:30 AM
Courtroom Number: N/A
Location: District 1 Court FILED
Cook County, IL 4/8/2019 1:12 PM
DOROTHY BROWN
CIRCUIT CLERK
COOK COUNTY, IL

FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

2019CH03041

EXHIBIT B
 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS
COUNTY DEPARTMENT, CHANCERY DIVISION
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

VILLAGE OF MELROSE PARK,

Plaintiff, No. 19 CH 03041

v. The Honorable Eve M. Reilly

PIPELINE HEALTH SYSTEM LLC, a

Delaware limited liability company, SRC
HOSPITAL INVESTMENTS II LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company,
PIPELINE WESTLAKE HOSPITAL LLC,
a Delaware limited liability company,
TWG PARTNERS LLC, an Illinois limited
liability company, NICHOLAS ORZANO,
an individual, and ERIC WHITAKER, an
individual,

Defendants.

DECLARATION OF SHELLYE PECHULIS

I, Shellye Pechulis, declare as follows:

1. I am a resident of Chicago and am a non-party to this action. I have been

employed as a Registered Nurse (“RN”) at Westlake Hospital for the past five-and-a-half years,

and have worked as a RN in Illinois for the past 40 years. This declaration is provided in support

of Plaintiff’s Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction. The facts

stated herein were told to me firsthand by nurses and staff at Westlake Hospital. Because nurses

and staff are afraid of speaking publicly for fear of retaliation from Pipeline, I write to voice their

observations and concerns on information and belief, as well as my own observations where

stated.
 2. Since acquiring Westlake Hospital, Pipeline has engaged in a concerted and

systematic campaign to close the hospital before the Illinois Health Facilities Services Review
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

Board rules on Pipeline’s application on April 30, 2019.

3. Pipeline is engaging in a fear-based campaign to cause Westlake staff to leave. Its

agents have routinely communicated to nurses and staff that their jobs will be terminated within

weeks, and that they should start applying for work at other facilities. This has sown fear and

confusion among nurses and staff, caused some to leave, and impaired their ability to care for

patients.

4. On April 1, Chief Nursing Officer Roslyn Lennon (“CNO Lennon”) and Chief

Strategy Officer William Krech told the managers of all the departments during a “huddle”

meeting at Westlake that the hospital will close before April 30, 2019 due to its supposed

inability to maintain adequate staffing levels to ensure patient safety. In reality, Pipeline is itself

creating this situation by transferring and/or terminating staff and by cutting essential hospital

services.

5. CNO Lennon spelled out how Pipeline would close Westlake during a meeting

with senior hospital management and a number of nurses on April 3, 2019. CNO Lennon related

that if there are no staff, there can be no new patients, and then beds in the Intensive Care Unit

and Medical Surgery Unit can be closed.

6. CNO Lennon said that two Medical-Surgical nurses who work on bariatric

surgery will be permanently moved to West Suburban Hospital starting on April 8, and that

surgical bariatric equipment will be moved there on April 10. Later that day, CNO Lennon

informed nurses in the Obstetrics Department that the Department will close in three weeks and
 that they should look for other work. CNO Lennon has disseminated this information to

employees in other hospital departments through the departments’ managers.

FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

7. During this April 3 meeting, CNO Lennon said that Pipeline intends to close

down one of Westlake’s two Medical-Surgical floors by removing patients from it and keeping it

permanently closed. Throughout that day, there were 16 discharges from the floors that were not

previously scheduled.

8. In the same meeting, CNO Lennon stated that Westlake will cease accepting new

patients so it can decrease the number of beds in the Intensive Care Unit from 12 to 4. Later, she

instructed Emergency Room managers to stabilize patients and then transfer them to outside

facilities.

9. To further decrease patient admissions, CNO Lennon put the hospital on “bypass”

status for emergency services on April 3. Bypass is reserved for rare situations when a hospital

cannot safely accept new emergency room patients due to a lack of available beds or cardiac

monitors. Westlake was placed on bypass even though there were ample resources to care for ER

patients. CNO Lennon stated to nurses that she intended for Westlake to stay on bypass status

until April 8 for the specific purpose of preventing new patient admissions, so that staff could be

further transferred.

10. Despite supposedly being short-staffed, Pipeline has implemented a hiring freeze

for all positions at Westlake. Furthermore, the two “per diem” nurse positions the hospital has

relied on for years to supplement staff were cut on April 5, 2019. During the week of April 1,

Pipeline cancelled a contract with a nurse set to begin a 13-week contract in the Intensive Care

Unit.
 11. CNO Lennon is also preventing nurses from returning to work on light duty. I

have personal knowledge of this, as I am cleared for light duty, wish to return and was scheduled
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

to return to work, but CNO Lennon said that I and two other light duty nurses are not allowed to

work. This is the case even though those two nurses were working on light duty at the time

Pipeline acquired Westlake.

12. On April 5, Westlake CEO Joseph Ottolino told managers of all the hospital’s

departments and various nurses that Westlake will be closing before April 30, regardless of what

the Board does.

13. Under penalties as provided by law pursuant to Section 1-109 of the Code of Civil

Procedure, the undersigned certifies that the statements set forth in this instrument are true and

correct, except as to matters therein stated to be on information and belief and as to such matters

the undersigned certifies as aforesaid that he verily believes the same to be true.

Executed this 8th day of April, 2019.

____________________________________

Shellye Pechulis
 Hearing Date: 4/9/2019 9:30 AM - 9:30 AM
Courtroom Number: N/A
Location: District 1 Court FILED
Cook County, IL 4/8/2019 1:12 PM
DOROTHY BROWN
CIRCUIT CLERK
COOK COUNTY, IL
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

2019CH03041

EXHIBIT C
 4/8/2019 Edelson PC Mail - Westlake Hospital

Ari Scharg <ascharg@edelson.com>

Westlake Hospital 
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

Patricia Holmes <pholmes@rshc­law.com> Thu, Apr 4, 2019 at 2:44 PM
To: Ari Scharg <ascharg@edelson.com>
Cc: Jay Edelson <jedelson@edelson.com>, Eli Wade­Scott
<ewadescott@edelson.com>, Michael Ovca <movca@edelson.com>, Merili Seale
<MSeale@rshc­law.com>, Ronald Safer <rsafer@rshc­law.com>

Ari,

You have our response­­ we will continue to comply with our obligations under the law.

Thank you kindly,

Patricia

From: Ari Scharg <ascharg@edelson.com>  
Sent: Wednesday, April 3, 2019 5:19 PM 
To: Patricia Holmes <pholmes@rshc­law.com> 
Cc: Jay Edelson <jedelson@edelson.com>; Eli Wade­Scott
<ewadescott@edelson.com>; Michael Ovca <movca@edelson.com>; Merili Seale
<MSeale@rshc­law.com>; Ronald Safer <rsafer@rshc­law.com> 
Subject: Re: Westlake Hospital

Patricia­

There seems to be some ambiguity (intentional or not) in your email. We asked for an
unequivocal confirmation that Pipeline will not take any action to discontinue services
or close the Westlake facility before it receives approval from the Review Board. Your
response left us uncertain about Pipeline's intentions, simply stating, in generic terms,
that Pipeline will abide by the law. We believe the law is clear that Pipeline may not
unilaterally discontinue services and/or close the facility. However, given that Pipeline
has been stating its intent to act otherwise (a fact that you do not deny), your email
response could be read as creating one impression ("we will not close") while leaving
you to argue later that your email technically was not meant to mislead ("we had a
different subjective view of the law which was an implied position within our
response").

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1?ik=c62097795f&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1629913955503908696&dsqt=1&simpl=msg-f%3A162991395… 1/5
 4/8/2019 Edelson PC Mail - Westlake Hospital

I think we can both agree that the community is best served by direct and
unambiguous statements, not obfuscation or half­truths. Thus, we ask you again: Can
you provide us assurances that Pipeline will not discontinue services or close the
Westlake facility prior to receiving Review Board approval? (If you cannot, we would
be pleased to understand Pipeline's basis in the law for its position so that we can
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

clear up any confusion before permanent harm is done.)

Ari

Ari J. Scharg | Edelson PC 
350 North LaSalle Street, Suite 1400  
Chicago, Illinois 60654  
312.239.3362 (direct) | 312.589.6370 (firm) | 312.589.6378 (fax)  
ascharg@edelson.com | www.edelson.com  

 
 
CONFIDENTIALITY AND LIABILITY FOR MISUSE.  
The information contained in this communication is the property of Edelson PC. It is confidential, may be attorney
work product, attorney­client privileged or otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable law, and is intended
only for the use of the addressee(s). Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication or any part
thereof is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify Edelson PC immediately
by return e­mail and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all attachments. 

 
Pursuant to requirements related to practice before the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, any tax advice contained in
this communication (including any attachments) is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for purposes of (i)
avoiding penalties imposed under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to
another person any tax­related matter.

On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 4:32 PM Patricia Holmes <pholmes@rshc­law.com> wrote:

Hello, Mr. Scharg:

Thank you so much for your email.  Please be assured we will continue to comply
with our obligations under the law.

Again, thank you kindly.

Patricia

 
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1?ik=c62097795f&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1629913955503908696&dsqt=1&simpl=msg-f%3A162991395… 2/5
 4/8/2019 Edelson PC Mail - Westlake Hospital

Patricia Brown Holmes

Riley Safer Holmes & Cancila LLP

Three First National Plaza 
70 W. Madison Street, Suite 2900 
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

Chicago, Illinois 60602 
(312) 471­8745

pholmes@rshc­law.com

www.rshc­law.com

Assistant: Patricia Clark Seals

pclarkseals@rshc­law.com

312­471­8746

From: Ari Scharg <ascharg@edelson.com>  
Sent: Tuesday, April 2, 2019 5:34 PM 
To: Ronald Safer <rsafer@rshc­law.com> 
Cc: Jay Edelson <jedelson@edelson.com>; Eli Wade­Scott
<ewadescott@edelson.com>; Michael Ovca <movca@edelson.com>; Patricia
Holmes <pholmes@rshc­law.com>; Merili Seale <MSeale@rshc­law.com> 
Subject: Westlake Hospital

Ron, 
 
We represent the Village of Melrose Park in the Westlake litigation. Over the last 24
hours, we have been contacted by a number of Westlake doctors and staff members
that are alarmed by recent statements made by Pipeline representatives to hospital
staff. According to more than a dozen witnesses, certain Pipeline representatives,
including Roslyn Lennon, told supervisors, doctors, nurses, and staff members that
Pipeline will close Westlake Hospital within the next few weeks and that they will
lose their jobs.  
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1?ik=c62097795f&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1629913955503908696&dsqt=1&simpl=msg-f%3A162991395… 3/5
 4/8/2019 Edelson PC Mail - Westlake Hospital

 
As you know, a hospital cannot discontinue services or close a facility without
receiving prior approval from the Illinois Health Facilities and Services Review
Board. Needless to say, Pipeline's statements about closing the facility prematurely
have caused panic among hospital staff. We think it's important to quickly dispel any
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

misconceptions about Pipeline's intent to close down before the Review Board
approves its application and that it's in everybody's best interest to do so.  
 
To that end, we're asking you to confirm that Pipeline will not take any action to
discontinue services or close the Westlake facility before it receives approval from
the Review Board. Unless you have an objection, we'd like to relay Pipeline's
confirmation to the concerned doctors and staff members that reached out to us. 

Please provide the requested confirmation to us by close of business tomorrow
(April 3) so that we can quickly correct any misconceptions among doctors and staff
about the Westlake closing prematurely. Give me a call if you would like to discuss
this matter further.

Best regards,

Ari 
 

Ari J. Scharg | Edelson PC 
350 North LaSalle Street, Suite 1400  
Chicago, Illinois 60654  
312.239.3362 (direct) | 312.589.6370 (firm) | 312.589.6378 (fax)  
ascharg@edelson.com | www.edelson.com  

 
 
CONFIDENTIALITY AND LIABILITY FOR MISUSE.  
The information contained in this communication is the property of Edelson PC. It is confidential, may be
attorney work product, attorney­client privileged or otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable law, and
is intended only for the use of the addressee(s). Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this communication
or any part thereof is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify Edelson
PC immediately by return e­mail and destroy this communication and all copies thereof, including all
attachments. 

 
Pursuant to requirements related to practice before the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, any tax advice contained
in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended to be used, and cannot be used, for purposes
of (i) avoiding penalties imposed under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or
recommending to another person any tax­related matter.

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This e­mail is intended only for the use of the individual
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged,
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1?ik=c62097795f&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1629913955503908696&dsqt=1&simpl=msg-f%3A162991395… 4/5
 4/8/2019 Edelson PC Mail - Westlake Hospital

confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this e­
mail message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for
delivery of the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is prohibited. If you
have received this e­mail in error, please notify us immediately by telephone at (312)
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

471­8700 and also indicate the sender's name. Thank you.

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This e­mail is intended only for the use of the individual or
entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this e­
mail message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for
delivery of the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is prohibited. If you have
received this e­mail in error, please notify us immediately by telephone at (312) 471­
8700 and also indicate the sender's name. Thank you.

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/1?ik=c62097795f&view=pt&search=all&permmsgid=msg-f%3A1629913955503908696&dsqt=1&simpl=msg-f%3A162991395… 5/5
 Hearing Date: 4/9/2019 9:30 AM - 9:30 AM
Courtroom Number: N/A
Location: District 1 Court FILED
Cook County, IL 4/8/2019 1:12 PM
DOROTHY BROWN
CIRCUIT CLERK
COOK COUNTY, IL

FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

2019CH03041

EXHIBIT D


IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS

COUNTY DEPARTMENT, CHANCERY DIVISION
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

VILLAGE OF MELROSE PARK,

Plaintiff, No. 19 CH 03041

v. The Honorable Eve M. Reilly

PIPELINE HEALTH SYSTEM LLC, a

Delaware limited liability company, SRC
HOSPITAL INVESTMENTS II LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company,
PIPELINE WESTLAKE HOSPITAL LLC,
a Delaware limited liability company,
TWG PARTNERS LLC, an Illinois limited
liability company, NICHOLAS ORZANO,
an individual, and ERIC WHITAKER, an
individual,

Defendants.

PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO

DEFENDANTS PIPELINE-WESTLAKE HOSPITAL LLC AND SRC HOSPITAL
INVESTMENTS II, LLC

Plaintiff Village of Melrose Park, pursuant to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 214, hereby

request that Defendants Pipeline-Westlake Hospital LLC and SRC Hospital Investments II LLC

produce the following documents for inspection and copying at the offices of Edelson PC, 350

North LaSalle, 14th Floor, Chicago, Illinois 60654, within ______ days of service hereof.

I. Definitions

1. “Communication” means the transmittal of information expressed by any means.

2. “Document” or “Documents” includes all Documents, Communications,

information, or tangible things within the scope of Illinois Supreme Court Rule 201(b)(4),

Including ESI, and all versions and drafts of Documents.

3. “Electronically Stored Information” or “ESI” means information that is stored in

electronic media, regardless of the media or whether it is in the original format in which it was
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

created, and that is retrievable in perceivable form and includes metadata, system data, deleted

data, and fragmented data.

4. “Identify,” when used with respect to a natural Person, means to state the Person’s

full name, present or last known business affiliation and position, past and present home address

and past position and business affiliation, if any, with any of the parties herein.

5. “Identify,” when used in reference to an event, transaction, or occurrence, means

to Describe the act in complete and reasonable detail; state the time, date, location; Identify all

Persons participating or present; and Identify all Documents Relating thereto.

6. “Including” means “including, but not limited to.”

7. “Person” or “Persons” means any natural person, corporation, partnership,

association, organization, joint venture, or other entity of any type or nature.

8. “Regarding,” Relating To,” or “Relate” means discussing, mentioning, addressing,

referring to, analyzing, comprising, underlying, memorializing, describing, or showing the

subject indicated.

9. “Relevant Time Period” means the time period between January 29, 2019, and the

present.

10. “You” or “Your” means Defendants Pipeline-Westlake Hospital LLC and SRC

Hospital Investments II LLC (collectively referred to as “Pipeline”), and their divisions,

subsidiaries, related companies, predecessors and successors, all present and former officers,

directors, agents, attorneys, employees, and all Persons acting or purporting to act on behalf of

any of them.

II. Instructions

1. To the extent that any ESI, Including spreadsheets, executable files, videos,
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

animations, audio files, and presentations that Include video, animation, or audio shall be

produced; these items shall be produced where practical in native format. To the extent that

Documents produced in native format cannot be rendered or viewed without the use of propriety

software, the parties shall meet and confer to minimize any expense or burden associated with

the review of such Documents, Including issues that may arise with respect to obtaining access to

any such software or operating manuals. All Documents produced as native files shall be

produced along with a spacer image sheet that indicates that the file was produced as a native file

and is marked with a production number. That production number will be the production number

of the corresponding native file. The native file shall be named according to this production

number.

2. Each page of the produced Document or Media upon which ESI in native format

is produced, shall have a legible, unique page identifier “Bates Number.” As to any Document or

ESI withheld on privilege or work product grounds, You also must identify the author or

originator, the addressees and/or recipients, the date, the nature of the Document or ESI, the

present custodian and location, and include a statement of the factual and legal reason(s) why the

Document or ESI is being withheld from production.

3. If any Document requested has been lost or destroyed since its creation, identify

the nature of the Document (e.g., letter, email, etc.), the date of the Document, the persons who

sent and received the original and any copy of the Document, a summary of the content of the

Document and describe when, where, how, and by whom said Document was lost or destroyed,

and state the name of the person(s) who last had custody thereof.

4. If no Documents or ESI responsive to a request exist, please state that no

responsive Documents exist.

FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

5. Unless otherwise specified, each Request pertains and is limited to the Relevant

Time Period.

6. For any term used herein which is not otherwise specifically defined, the common

and usual meaning of such term is intended. Any ambiguity in these Requests shall be resolved

so as to construe these Requests as broadly as possible. Defined terms need not be capitalized

terms to retain their defined meaning.

III. Requests for Production

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1

All Communications since January 29, 2019 Related To closing Westlake Hospital before

April 30, 2019, discontinuing any service offered by Westlake Hospital before April 30, 2019, or

any changes to the scope of medical services offered at Westlake Hospital that will occur before

April 30, 2019.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2

All Communications since January 29, 2019 Related To placing Westlake Hospital on

“bypass” status for emergency services.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3

All Communications since January 29, 2019 Related To the termination, firing, or

declining to assign any employee to work at Westlake Hospital.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 4

All Communications since January 29, 2019 Related To the termination of any temporary

staffing or “per diem” contracts for staffing at Westlake Hospital.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 5

Documents sufficient to Identify all employees and/or independent contractors that you
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

have temporarily or permanently transferred to West Suburban Medical Center or any other

hospital or healthcare facility since January 29, 2019.

Dated: April 8, 2019 Respectfully submitted,

VILLAGE OF MELROSE PARK,

By:
One of Plaintiff’s attorneys

Jay Edelson
jedelson@edelson.com
Ari J. Scharg
ascharg@edelson.com
J. Eli Wade-Scott
ewadescott@edelson.com
Michael Ovca
movca@edelson.com
EDELSON PC
350 North LaSalle, 14th Floor
Chicago, Illinois 60654
Tel: (312) 589-6370
Fax: (312) 589-6378
Firm ID: 62075

Special Counsel to the Village of Melrose Park

5


 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS
COUNTY DEPARTMENT, CHANCERY DIVISION
FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

VILLAGE OF MELROSE PARK,

Plaintiff, No. 19 CH 03041

v. The Honorable Eve M. Reilly

PIPELINE HEALTH SYSTEM LLC, a

Delaware limited liability company, SRC
HOSPITAL INVESTMENTS II LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company,
PIPELINE WESTLAKE HOSPITAL LLC,
a Delaware limited liability company,
TWG PARTNERS LLC, an Illinois limited
liability company, NICHOLAS ORZANO,
an individual, and ERIC WHITAKER, an
individual,

Defendants.

NOTICE OF DEPOSITION

To: Pipeline-Westlake Hospital LLC

c/o Patricia Brown Holmes
Riley Safer Holmes & Cancila LLP
70 West Madison Street, Suite 900
Chicago, Illinois 60602

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 206, Plaintiff

Village of Melrose Park, through their attorneys, will take the deposition of Defendant Pipeline-

Westlake Hospital LLC’s Chief Nursing Officer, Roslyn Lennon, on _______ at 10:00 a.m. at

the offices of Edelson PC, 350 North LaSalle Street, 14th Floor, Chicago, Illinois, 60654. The

deposition will be recorded by stenographic and audio means. Ms. Lennon is instructed to bring

to the deposition all documents used or relied upon in preparing for the deposition.

1
 Dated: April 8, 2019 Respectfully submitted,

VILLAGE OF MELROSE PARK,

FILED DATE: 4/8/2019 1:12 PM 2019CH03041

By:
One of Plaintiff’s attorneys

Jay Edelson
jedelson@edelson.com
Ari J. Scharg
ascharg@edelson.com
J. Eli Wade-Scott
ewadescott@edelson.com
Michael Ovca
movca@edelson.com
EDELSON PC
350 North LaSalle, 14th Floor
Chicago, Illinois 60654
Tel: (312) 589-6370
Fax: (312) 589-6378
Firm ID: 62075

Special Counsel to the Village of Melrose Park