Free Complaint - District Court of California - California

Case 3:07-cv-04992-TEH

Document 1

Filed 09/26/2007

Page 1 of 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Wayne Johnson, SBN: 112588 Law Offices of Wayne Johnson P.O. Box 19157 Oakland, CA 94619 (510) 451-1166 Attorney for Plaintiffs

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WILLIAM ODOM, A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HIS GUARDIAN AD LITEM, ROXANNE HENDRIX, PLAINTIFF, v. C. WILSON, INDIVIDUALLY, AND IN HIS CAPACITY AS AN EMPLOYEE OF BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT, BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT, AND DOES 1-10, PEACE OFFICERS WHOSE NAMES ARE UNKNOWN, DEFENDANT.
__________________________________________/

CIVIL NO: C07-04992 EMC COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

1.

Plaintiff, WILLIAM ODOM, By And Through his guardian Ad Litem, Roxanne

Hendrix, is and at all times mentioned herein was a resident of Alameda County, California. 2. Officer C. WILSON, and Does 1-10, police officers whose names and capacities

are not known to plaintiff, are sued herein individually and in their official capacities as a sworn peace officers of the State of California, Bay Area Rapid Transit District, for acts and conduct under color of law, as follows.

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

-1­

Case 3:07-cv-04992-TEH

Document 1

Filed 09/26/2007

Page 2 of 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

3.

The BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT is a municipal corporation in the

State of California. 4. This action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. sections 1983, et seq. and 1988, and

the California Constitution, civil rights statutes and common law. Jurisdiction is based on 28 U.S.C. sections 1331 and 1343 and the aforementioned federal statutes. 5. Plaintiff further invokes the pendent jurisdiction of this court to decide claims

arising under the California Constitution and California law covering the use of unreasonable force and unlawful detentions. 6. Plaintiff has filed administrative claims in compliance with Cal. Govt. Code §910

et seq, and such claims have been denied. Ironically, plaintiff lodged an internal affairs complaint and that complaint was sustained, meaning the investigator determined that C. Wilson's use of force against the minor was excessive. Attached is a copy of the findings. 7. Plaintiff has standing to file this complaint against defendants because he was

injured by Defendants' acts, violation of the California and United States Constitutions, and California tort law. 8. Under 42 U.S.C. sections 1983, et seq. and 1988, Plaintiff has standing to bring

suit against defendants to recover compensation for Plaintiff's injuries resulting from Defendants' violation of Plaintiff's Constitutional rights. 9. The BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT is a subdivision of the State of California and

was acting pursuant to the police power authorized by Article XI, Section 7, of the California Constitution, when the Police officers injured Plaintiff. 10. When the officers injured Plaintiff, they were acting as employees of the BAY

AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT Police Department. FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION VIOLATIONS OF TITLE 42 U.S.C. SECTION 1983 11. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 10, of this

complaint as if fully set forth herein. \\\

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

-2­

Case 3:07-cv-04992-TEH

Document 1

Filed 09/26/2007

Page 3 of 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

12. On or about MAY 25, 2007, on his way home from school, Plaintiff had fallen asleep on the train. We he exited the train at the Pittsburg station, he noticed that he had lost his ticket. Plaintiff contacted the ticket agent and informed her that he had lost his ticket. He thought she granted him permission to exit the station. 13. In PITTSBURG, California, C. WILSON detained Plaintiff for an alleged fare evasion. When verbally protested to being detained and being searched, C. WILSON struck Plaintiff several times to the head or body, took him to the ground, placed Plaintiff in handcuffs, and continued to strike Plaintiff while he remained on the ground. After C. Wilson decided to cite and release Plaintiff for fare evasion he and another officer refused to allow Plaintiff to use the toilet in private. 14. C. Wilson seized plaintiff in excess of the Laws of the United States and applied

unreasonable force. 15. The BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT is liable for failure to properly

supervise and failure to train Officer C. Wilson. He employed unreasonable means to investigate plaintiff, a minor, for suspected or alleged fare evasion. 16. Plaintiffs suffered multiple serious injuries, including bruises, abrasions, and

contusions, as well as mental injuries. Attached are photographs depicting some of his injuries. 17. Defendants' above-described conduct, and particularly the unreasonable seizure of

plaintiffs, violated plaintiffs' rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 under the First Amendment and Fourth Amendment, applicable to the states under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. 18. Defendants' above-described conduct, and particularly the acts and omissions of those defendants and maltreatment of the plaintiff, violated plaintiff's rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments, applicable to the states under the Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. 19. Defendants' above-described conduct, and particularly the acts and omissions of

those defendants involved in the unlawful seizure of plaintiffs, constitutes a policy and custom of certain employees of the Bay Area Rapid Transit District Police Department who have a practice

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

-3­

Case 3:07-cv-04992-TEH

Document 1

Filed 09/26/2007

Page 4 of 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

of applying unreasonable force to citizens and failing to supervise officer who use unreasonable force. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment as hereinafter set forth. BATTERY 20. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 19, of this

complaint as if fully set forth herein. 21. plaintiff. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment as hereinafter set forth. FALSE ARREST / FALSE IMPRISONMENT 22. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 21, of this C. Wilson made an unlawful, unprivileged, harmful and offensive contact with

complaint as if fully set forth herein. 23. C. Wilson intentionally detained and arrested Plaintiff without probable cause or

other lawful reason. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment as hereinafter set forth. PUNITIVE DAMAGES ALLEGATION 24. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 23, of this complaint as if fully set forth herein. 25. Defendants' above-described engaged in conduct that was malicious, oppression, and in reckless disregard of plaintiff's Constitutional rights. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment as hereinafter set forth. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiff hereby demands a jury trial for each cause of action for which she is entitled to a jury trial. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays that this Court grant the following relief: A. An award of compensatory and general damages against defendants against the defendants, jointly and severally, for in the amount of $100,000; B. An award of exemplary and punitive damages against all defendants sued in their

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

-4­

Case 3:07-cv-04992-TEH

Document 1

Filed 09/26/2007

Page 5 of 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

individual capacities in the amount of $100,000; C. Trial By Jury; and such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. Dated: ______________________

___________________________________ By: WAYNE JOHNSON Attorney for Plaintiff

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

-5­