Case l;15-cv-01059-JDB-egb Document 1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 1 of 11
PagelD 1
IN T H E UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR T H E WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
EASTERN DIVISION
L A W A N D A HUNT,
Plaintiff,
vs.
)
)
NO, 15-1059
JURY T R I A L D E M A N D E D
CITY OF JACKSON, TENNESSEE,
Defendant.
COMPLAINT
L JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1.
This is an action for damages, declaratory and injunctive relief both preliminary
and permanent, to redress the violation o f rights secured by the Fifth and
Amendments
Fourteenth
to the United States Constitution, and tlie Tennessee State Constitution.
Jurisdiction is invoked pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, 1988 and 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Declaratory
injunctive relief is authorized pursuant to 28 U.S.C, § 2201 and 2202.
A l l o f the actions
complained o f herein occurred in the City o f Jackson, Madison County, Tennessee, within the
jurisdiction and venue o f this Court.
II. PARTIES
2.
Plaintiff, Lawanda Hunt, is a thirty-nine (39) year old African-American female
and is and was a resident o f Jackson, Tennessee, at all times relevant to the matters at issue
herein.
1
Case l:15-cv-01059-JDB-egb Document 1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 2 of 11
3.
Defendant,
City
o f Jackson,
Tennessee,
PagelD 2
is a governmental entity
duly
incorporated under the laws o f the State o f Tennessee. Defendant City o f Jackson is responsible
for the policies, practices, and customs o f its police department, as well as the hiring, training,
supervision, control, and discipline o f its officers, deputies, and officials.
Defendant City o f
Jackson is and was the employer o f all members o f the Jackson Police Department, both named
and unnamed herein. The agent for service o f process o f the Defendant City o f Jackson is Jerry
Gist, City Mayor, who may be served at 121 East Main Street, Suite 301, Jackson, Tennessee
38301.
III. DUTY
4.
A t all times pertinent hereto. Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant in this matter
owed her a duty to realize, prevent, and/or protect Plaintiff from the harm that its officials,
employees, and/or agents presented to and inflicted upon her, Plaintiff further alleges that the
Defendant owed her a duty to appropriately/adequately hire, supervise, and train its officials,
employees, and/or agents in order to prevent and protect her from the harm inflicted in this
matter.
IV. STATEMENT OF FACTS
5.
Plaintiff, Lawanda Hunt, (hereinafter "Plaintiff) lives in subsidized housing at
the Ridge Apartments in Jackson, Tennessee, Plaintiff has a 12 year old autistic son that lives
with her in the apartment. Her son has exhibited behavioral problems related to his autism that
have at times caused him to be violent with his mother.
6.
Officer Rochelle Staten is employed by the Defendant City o f Jackson police
department ("JPD") as a police officer and lives and works in the Plaintiffs apartment complex
Case l:15-cv-01059-JDB-egb Document 1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 3 of 11
PagelD 3
as a "courtesy officer" and helps to patrol and watch over the complex and its residents in
conjunction with her duties at JPD.
7.
On or about March 28,2014, Plaintiffs son ran away from home but was located
not far from home within a few hours.
On that same day. Plaintiff and her neighbor, Betty
Henderson, subsequently approached Officer Staten seeking help with the child. Officer Staten
indicated that she knew an officer that "was good with troubled children" and she thought he
could help with the child.
8.
Officer Staten then called JPD Officer Everett Lamont Gray on the telephone
while he was on duty and had him come over and introduced him to Ms. Hunt.
Upon
information and belief Officer Gray had a reputation in the JPD for being sexually aggressive
with females. Officer Staten was aware o f this reputation and had foreknowledge that Officer
Gray would likely make sexual advances toward Ms. Hunt when she introduced him to her,
however never warned Ms. Hunt about Gray's reputation or likely intentions towards her.
9.
A t that time, Officer Gray went to Hunt's apartment and helped her get her son to
take a bath. Before he left that evening. Officer Gray gave Ms. Hunt his cell phone number and
encouraged her to contact him in the future if she wanted help with her son.
10.
Believing that Officer Gray's intentions were to help her, over the next couple o f
days Plaintiff contacted Officer Gray a few times about her son. On one other occasion he came
over again and helped her bathe him. Upon information and belief. Officer Gray was on duty for
the JPD at these times and acting pursuant to his duties as a police officer for the Defendant.
11.
On April 3, 2014, Plaintiff contacted Officer Gray on his cell phone and asked i f
he could come help her with a door alarm she was installing to warn her i f her son left the
3
Case l;15-cv-01059-JDB-egb Document 1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 4 of 11
PagelD 4
apartment. A t the time, Officer Gray was working as a JPD officer at a function at Lane College
with Officer Staten, Investigator Isaiah Thompson and Officer Warren Olden.
12.
Upon information and belief, after being contacted by Plaintiff, Officer Gray
started talking to Investigator Thompson and Officer Olden about going to see Ms. Hunt that
night and about his sexual intentions as to Ms. Hunt when he got there. Upon mformation and
belief. Officer Staten knew what they were discussing as well. However, no one took any action
to stop Officer Gray or to protect or warn Ms. Hunt to be wary o f Officer Gray.
13.
After the Lane College tlinction ended that night. Officer Gray went to Ms.
Hunt's apartment and raped her. Officer Gray has not denied that he had sexual contact with her
that night; however, he claims it was consensual. Officer Gray has been charged with rape, and
his case is currently pending in the Madison County Circuit Court.
14.
Upon information and belief, Officer Gray was under investigation by the JPD at
the time o f these events for other misconduct while he was employed and on duty as a JPD
officer.
Upon information and belief, Officer Gray has been involved in other inappropriate
incidents at his previous employer, and upper management officials at Defendant either knew o f
or should have been aware o f this misconduct, which should have precluded his employment at
the JPD.
Plaintiff further avers that she was raped by Officer Gray because the Defendant's
policymakers acted with deliberate indifference in hiring Officer Gray and in failing to
appropriately oversee, train, discipline and/or supervise Officer Gray.
15.
Plaintiff avers that the rape occurred because Officer Staten introduced Officer
Gray to Ms. Hunt and placed her in the position to be raped, even though Officer Staten was
aware that Officer Gray likely posed a threat to Ms. Hunt but never warned her.
4
Case l:15-cv-01059-JDB-egb Document 1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 5 of 11
16.
PagelD 5
Plaintiff avers that the rape also occurred because Investigator Thompson, along
with Officers Staten and Olden failed to take action to protect Ms. Hunt on the night o f the rape
after learning that Officer Gray had sexual intentions regarding his meeting with Ms. Hunt the
night o f the rape. The Defendant, through its policymakers, acting with deliberate indifference
to the rights o f the citizens it protects, failed to adequately train its police officers how to
appropriately respond when they learn that a fellow officer has expressed inappropriate
intentions toward vulnerable citizens.
17.
Plaintiff further avers that she was raped by Officer Gray because the Defendant's
policymakers acted with deliberate indifference in failing to appropriately oversee, train,
discipline and/or supervise Officers Gray, Staten, Olden, and/or Investigator Thompson.
18.
Plaintiff further avers that the rape was caused by JPD's lack o f institutional
control and training o f officers living and working as courtesy officers in housing units such as
the Ridge Apartments. This increased level o f involvement of officers in the day-to-day lives o f
residents creates a greater risk o f abuse by JPD officers, creating a special duty owed to the
residents and necessitating
specific training and supervision o f these officers, which the
Defendant, acting with deliberate indifference to the residents' rights, failed to provide. The
officers living and working in the housing units, and particularly Officer Staten, were
inadequately trained on how to appropriately respond when they learn that a fellow officer has
expressed inappropriate intentions toward vulnerable citizens.
19.
Plaintiff further avers that the rape occurred because there is pervasive, known,
hostile attitude in much o f the management at JPD and among the male officers in the
department toward females, including victims o f rape and sexual assault, that has created a
culture o f hostility toward females that facilitates and promotes the type o f behavior that Officer
5
Case l:15-cv-01059-JDB-egb Document 1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 6 of 11
Gray engaged in.
PagelD 6
This hostile attitude is evidenced by inappropriate comments, conduct,
pictures, and documentation o f an offensive, sexual nature being made and exhibited by many o f
the male officers, including high ranking officers working at the department.
This conduct
includes, but is not limited to, the following: male officers and supervisors repeatedly making
sexually explicit and demeaning statements and "jokes" about females, male officers exhibiting
sexually suggestive pictures o f women and, on at least one instance, a male officer exhibiting a
photograph o f a female rape victim, in the act o f being raped and asking in a joking manner i f it
looked like she was enjoying herself.
20.
Plaintiff avers that Officer Gray, Officer Staten, Investigator Thompson, Officer
Olden, and other unnamed officers herein were, at all times mentioned in this complaint, officers o f
the Jackson Police Department and employees of the Defendant and were at all times complained o f
herein acting under color o f law, to wit: under color o f statutes, charter, and ordinances, regulations,
policies, customs and us^es of the State o f Tennessee, City of Jackson, Tennessee, and the Jackson
Police Department.
V. CAUSES OF ACTION
CLAIMS PURSUANT TO 42 U.S.C. gl983
21.
Plaintiff incorporates by reference the factual statements contained in Paragraphs 1
through 20 of the Complaint.
22.
Plaintiff avers that the actions described herein o f the employees and policy makers
of Defendant, acting separately and/or conspiring together, under color of law, in either or both their
individual and/or official capacities for the City o f Jackson and the Jackson Police Department
amounted to a deprivation o f her constitutional and/or statutory rights protected under the United
6
Case l:15-cv-01059-JDB-egb Document 1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 7 of 11 PagelD?
States Constitution, Statutes o f the United States, and the Tennessee State Constitution resulting in
the damages listed below.
23.
A t all times pertinent hereto. Plaintiff avers that the Defendant owed her a duty to
realize, prevent, and/or protect Plaintiff from the harm that its officials, employees, and/or agents
presented to and inflicted upon Plaintiff. Plaintiff further avers that Defendant owed her a duty to
adequately and appropriately hire, supervise, discipline and train its officials, employees, and/or
agents in order to prevent and protect Plaintiff from the harm inflicted in this matter.
COUNT I
24.
EQUAL PROTECTION
Plaintiff incorporates by reference the factual statements contained in Paragraphs 1
through 23 of the Complaint.
25.
Plaintiff avers that the policy makers, officers, employees, agents, and officials,
named and unnamed herein, were all employees o f the Defendant City o f Jackson, a
governmental entity duly incorporated under the laws o f the State o f Tennessee, and during all
relevant time periods, and acting under the color o f state law.
26.
Plaintiff avers that as an African-American woman, she is a member of an
identifiable class.
27.
Plaintiff avers that the Defendant's officer, agent, official, and employee. Gray,
specifically targeted Plaintiff for the rape complained o f herein because o f her sex and gender, a
discriminatory action.
28.
Plaintiff avers that the Defendant, by and through its officers, employees, agents,
and officials, both in their official and individual capacities, performed under color o f law, had
actual knowledge o f the harm its failure to adequately/appropriately hire, supervise, discipline, and
train its officials, employees, and/or agents including but not limited to Officers Gray, Staten,
7
Case l:15-cv-01059-JDB-egb Document! Filed 03/24/15 Page 8of 11
Olden and Investigator Thompson presented to Plaintiff,
PagelD 8
As a result o f this actual knowledge,
the Defendant could have taken steps to protect Plaintiff from the harm inflicted herein which it
failed to do.
29.
Plaintiff avers that the Defendant, by and through its officers, employees, agents,
and officials, both in their official and individual capacities, performed under color of law,
because o f its deliberate indifference as set out above, failed to adequately/appropriately hire,
supervise, discipline, and train its officers and employees and failed to take steps to protect
Plaintiff from the harm inflicted herein.
30.
Plaintiff avers that the Defendant, and/or its officers, agents, officials, and
employees, because o f its deliberate indifference as set out above, failed to investigate and
protect Plaintiff and said failure was a result of the Defendant's intent to discriminate against
Plaintiff on the basis o f her sex and gender.
31.
Plaintiff avers that as a result of the deliberate indifference of the Defendant, by
and through its officers, employees, agents, and officials, both in their official and individual
capacities, performed under color of law. Plaintiffs constitutional right to equal protection under
the Fourteenth Amendment o f the United States Constitution was violated.
COUNT U
32.
SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS
Plaintiff incorporates by reference the factual statements contained in Paragraphs 1
tlirough 31 of the Complaint.
33.
Plaintiff avers that as a resident o f the Ridge Apartments wherein the Defendant
had stationed one of its police officers as a courtesy officer in order to patrol and watch over the
area as a part of his/her regular job duties, the Defendant imposed a special relationship upon the
8
Case l:15-cv-01059-JDB-egb Document l Filed 03/24/15 Page 9 of 11
PagelD 9
Plaintiff whereby the Defendant owed Plaintiff a special duty to protect Plaintiffs fundamental
substantive due process right to personal security and to bodily integrity.
34.
Plaintiff avers that the Defendant's actions and omissions and/or the actions and
omissions o f Defendant's officers, employees, officials, and agents, because of its deliberate
indifference as set out above, impacted upon this substantive due process right.
35.
Plaintiff avers that the Defendant, by and through its officers, employees, agents,
and officials, both in their official and individual capacities, performed under color o f law, had
actual knowledge o f the harm that Officer Gray presented to Plaintiff. As a result o f this actual
knowledge, because o f its deliberate indifference as set out above, the Defendant could have but
failed to take steps to protect Plaintiff from the harm inflicted herein.
36.
Plaintiff avers that the Defendant, by and through its officers, employees, agents,
and officials, both in their official and individual capacities, performed under color o f law as a
result o f its deliberate indifference as set out above, failed to adequately/appropriately hire,
supervise, discipline, and train its officers and employees and failed to take steps to protect
Plaintiff from the harm inflicted herein.
37.
Plaintiff avers that the Defendant, by and through its officers, employees, agents,
and officials, both in their official and individual capacities, performed under color o f law, acted
in conscious disregard and with deliberate indifference as set out above regarding the risk of the
harm that Officer Gray presented to Plaintiff
38.
Plaintiff avers that the Defendant, by and through its policy makers, officers,
employees, agents, and officials, both in their official and individual capacities, performed under
color o f law, had a custom and/or policy o f tolerating and/or deliberate indifference to physical,
emotional, and sexual abuse and assault o f women citizens and residents o f the City o f Jackson,
9
Case l:15-cv-01059-JDB-egb Document 1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 10 of 11
39.
PagelD 10
Plaintiff avers that as a result o f the actions o f the Defendant, by and through its
policy makers, officers, employees, agents, and officials, both in their official and individual
capacities, performed under color o f law, acting with deliberate indifference, violated Plaintiff's
constitutional right to substantive due process under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the
United States Constitution.
VI. DAMAGES
40.
As a direct and proximate cause o f the foregoing deprivations of constitutional
freedoms and statutory rights committed by Defendant and its policy makers, officers, employees,
and officials. Plaintiff was raped by Officer Gray and has suffered, physical and mental injuries,
sexual assault/rape, severe emotional distress, humiliation, inconvenience and embarrassment, other
pecuniary and non-pecuniar^' losses and she has had to retain legal counsel to defend and prosecute
her rights.
VIL PRAYER FOR R E L I E F
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court:
a.
Declare the Defendant's practices, as complained o f herein, to be in violation of and
in contravention of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution;
b.
Grant Plaintiff any compensatory damages to which she is entitled to under 42
U.S.C. § 1983 as a result o f the actions complained o f herein, including but not limited to damages
for her severe emotional distress;
c.
Enter an Order enjoining the Defendant from engaging in the constitutionally
violative policies as set out above;
d.
Grant Plaintiff a trial by jury;
10
Case l:15-cv-01059-JDB-egb Document 1 Filed 03/24/15 Page 11 of 11
c.
PagelD 11
Grant Plaintiff her costs incurred herein, including a reasonable attorney's fee
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988;
f.
Grant Plaintiff such other further relief both general and specific as the Court deems
necessary and proper in this case.
Respectfully submitted,
W E I N M A N & ASSOCIATES
/s/ Michael L. Weinman
Michael L . Weinman (#015074)
Attorney for Plaintiff
112 S. Liberty Street, Suite 321
Jackson, T N 38302
(731)423-5565
[email protected]
11