1

DISTRICT COURT, COUNTY OF DENVER,

STATE OF COLORADO
1437 Bannock Street
Denver, CO 80203
_______________________________________________

Plaintiffs: REYNARD HUGEE; FREDERICK MOORE;
and MICHELLE LAMAY

v.

Defendants: PDB SPORTS LTD., d/b/a DENVER
BRONCOS FOOTBALL CLUB; METROPOLITAN
FOOTBALL DISTRICT; STADIUM MANAGEMENT
COMPANY, LLC; DENVER POLICE OFFICER J OHN
DOE 1, in his official and individual capacity; DENVER
POLICE OFFICER J OHN DOE 2, in his official and
individual capacity; and DENVER POLICE OFFICER
J OHN DOE 3, in his official and individual capacity.

_______________________________________________

Attorneys for Plaintiffs:

David A. Lane, #16422
Michael P. Fairhurst, #45987
KILLMER, LANE & NEWMAN, LLP
The Odd Fellows Hall
1543 Champa Street, Suite 400
Denver, Colorado 80202
Telephone: (303) 571-1000; Fax: (303) 571-1001
Email: dlane@kln-law.com
mfairhurst@kln-law.com












COURT USE ONLY



Case No.: 2014CV00048

Div.: 409

Ctrm.:


SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND


Plaintiffs, by and through undersigned counsel, respectfully allege for their Second
Amended Complaint and J ury Demand as follows:


DATE FILED: July 3, 2014 2:42 PM
FILING ID: BAEADEC6D8204
CASE NUMBER: 2014CV48
2

I. INTRODUCTION
1. This is an action for damages against Defendants for violating Plaintiffs rights
under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, and Article II,
Section 10 of the Colorado Constitution, to engage in core political speech in a traditional public
forum without being subjected to censorship and retaliation based on the content and viewpoint
expressed in Plaintiffs speech.
2. Defendants violated Plaintiffs rights to engage in protected speech on a publicly-
owned parking lot adjacent to Sports Authority Field by ordering that the Winnebago with which
they were associated immediately leave the parking lot on J anuary 12, 2014, and then refusing to
let the Winnebago which they were associated even enter the lot on J anuary 19, 2014, because
the Winnebago had the inherently expressive word Cannabis University written on its exterior.
3. Defendants restrictions on Plaintiffs speech were manifestly indefensible
because they were based on its content and viewpoint, took place in a traditional public form,
and were motivated by a desire to silence one sides message in a serious and ongoing national
debate regarding the legalization and regulation of medical and recreational marijuana. Further,
the nongovernmental Defendants were undertaking joint action with government officials to
achieve this illegal end.
II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
4. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to COLO. R. CIV. P. 98(c), in that all of the
events alleged herein occurred within the City and County of Denver.
5. The Court has jurisdiction over the claims asserted herein pursuant to COLO. REV.
STAT. 13-1-124(1)(a)-(b)), and other applicable law.
6.
3

III. PARTIES
7. Plaintiff Reynard (Ray) Hugee is a citizen of the United States and was at all
relevant times a resident of, and domiciled in, the State of Colorado.
8. Plaintiff Frederick (Freddy) Moore is a citizen of the United States and was at
all relevant times a resident of, and domiciled in, the State of Colorado.
9. Plaintiff Michelle LaMay is a citizen of the United States and was at all relevant
times a resident of, and domiciled in, the State of Colorado.
10. Plaintiffs are persons as that term is defined by COLO. REV. STAT. 24-72-
302(9).
11. Defendant PDB Sports Ltd., d/b/a Denver Broncos Football Club (PDB) is a
Colorado limited partnership, and leases Sports Authority Field and its adjacent parking lots,
including parking lot C, from the District. At all times relevant to this action, all PDB agents,
employees, affiliates, principals, partners, and/or representatives involved in events pertinent to
this action were acting within the course and scope of their employment, and under color of state
law.
12. Defendant Metropolitan Football Stadium District (the District) is a body
corporate and politic and a political subdivision of the State of Colorado, which was established
pursuant to the Metropolitan Football Stadium District Act (the Act), C.R.S. 32-15-101, et
seq. At all times relevant to this action, all District agents, employees, affiliates, principals,
partners, and/or representatives involved in events pertinent to this action were acting within the
course and scope of their employment, and under color of state law.
13. Defendant Stadium Management Company, LLC (SMC), a Colorado limited
liability company, is an affiliate of PDB, and, upon information and belief, performs the
4

operation and management of the parking facilities on District property adjacent to Sports
Authority, including parking lot C. Upon information and belief, SMC agents, including, but
not limited to, J on Applegate, Austin Zilis, and, Robbie Roppolo, were directly involved in the
incidents giving rise to this action. At all times relevant to this action, all SMC agents,
employees, affiliates, principals, partners, and/or representatives involved in events pertinent to
this action were acting within the course and scope of their employment, and under color of state
law.
14. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this litigation, upon information and
belief, Defendant Denver Police Officer J ohn Doe 1 was a citizen of the United States and a resident
of Colorado and was acting under color of state law in his capacity as a Denver Police Officer.
15. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this litigation, upon information and
belief, Defendant Denver Police Officer J ohn Doe 2 was a citizen of the United States and a resident
of Colorado and was acting under color of state law in his capacity as a Denver Police Officer
16. At all times relevant to the subject matter of this litigation, upon information and
belief, Defendant Denver Police Officer J ohn Doe 3 was a citizen of the United States and a resident
of Colorado and was acting under color of state law in his capacity as a Denver Police Officer
IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

January 12 Incident

17. On J anuary 12, 2014, Reynard (Ray) Hugee, Naomi Gabrerra, J im Brown, and
Frederick (Freddy) Moore spent the morning peacefully tailgating from Mr. Moores
Winnebago
1

1
Technically, the Winnebago belonged (and belongs) to Filthy Rich TV, LLC and 1Bluntradio, a division
of Filthy Rich TV. Mr. Moore is 100% owner of Filthy Rich TV and 1Bluntradio.
in parking lot C of Sports Authority Field in Denver, Colorado, in anticipation of
5

the Denver Broncos (Broncos) playing the San Diego Chargers in the American Football
Conference (AFC) divisional playoffs during the afternoon.
18. Mr. Moores Winnebago was legally parked in parking lot C.
19. The Winnebago had the phrase CANNABIS UNIVERSITY emblazoned on its
passenger and driver sides.
20. The phrase CANNABIS UNIVERSITY as written on Mr. Moores Winnebago
is inherently expressive and therefore constitutes speech, as discussed more fully below.
21. Plaintiff Michelle LaMay is closely associated with the phrase CANNABIS
UNIVERSITY as written on Mr. Moores Winnebago and the speech with which it is
inextricably connected because she is the Dean and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of
Cannabis University and affirmatively consented to the use of the phrase on Mr. Moores
Winnebago in order to express and disseminate Cannabis Universitys particular viewpoint.
22. Mr. Moore, for his part, likewise made the affirmative choice to paint the phrase
CANNABIS UNIVERSITY on his Winnebago in order to express and disseminate Cannabis
Universitys particular viewpoint.
23. Shortly before the football game started, at around noon, agents of SMC and DPD
ordered the Winnebagos occupants to either immediately cover the word cannabis on the
Winnebago or remove the Winnebago from Sports Authority Field property, even though no one
associated with the Winnebago was engaging in any inappropriate behavior that merited ejecting
the Winnebago from the parking lot.
24. Because the Winnebagos occupants had no way to cover the word cannabis,
they were forced to remove the Winnebago and its expressive content from parking lot C.
6

25. Upon information and belief, at least three agents of SMC including, but not
limited to, J on Applegate, Austin Zilis, and Robbie Roppolo, and at least two on-duty Denver
Police Department (DPD) officers (Defendants J ohn Doe 1 and J ohn Doe 2) conspired and
acted in concert to effectuate the ejection of the Cannabis University Winnebago from stadium
land on J anuary 12 based on the content and viewpoint of its speech.
January 19 Incident
26. On the morning of J anuary 19, 2014, Ray Hugee, Freddy Moore, Naomi
Gabrerra, Brandon Conner, David Frederick, and J im Brown sought to park the Cannabis
University-emblazoned Winnebago in parking lot C, but this time had covered the phrase
Cannabis University on both its sides in order to comply with SMCs and DPDs specious
demand that they not display the phrase while on Sports Authority Field property.
27. Yet, agents of SMC including, but not limited to, J on Applegate and Austin Zilis,
and at least one on-duty DPD officer (Defendant J ohn Doe 3), refused to let the Cannabis
University Winnebago even enter parking lot C, and demanded that the Winnebago
immediately leave Sports Authority Field property at the threat of being towed, solely because
the Winnebago and its occupants were associated with cannabis.
28. The Defendants ordered the Winnebago to leave Sports Authority Field property
on J anuary 19 despite knowing that its occupants wished to pay the applicable parking fee.
29. Plaintiffs also made it clear to everyone involved in ejecting the Winnebago from
stadium land on J anuary 12, 2014 and again on J anuary 19, 2014 that they had not engaged and
did not seek to engage in any unlawful, boisterous, or otherwise inappropriate behavior that
merited kicking the Winnebago off parking lot C.
7

30. Further, at no relevant time did Plaintiff engage, seek to engage, or give any
indication that they sought to engage in speech or expressive conduct that was obscene, directed
to inciting or producing imminent lawless action; tended to incite an immediate breach of the
peace; or that intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly inflicted emotional distress.
31. The DPD and SMC Defendants nonetheless conspired and acted in concert to
eject the Winnebago from Sports Authority Field property on J anuary 12 and 19, 2014 for the
bogus reason that all commercial activity is prohibited on stadium land.
32. In reality, the DPD and SMC Defendants selectively enforced this alleged
commercial activity ban on stadium land by ordering the Winnebago first to leave, and then to
stay off Sports Authority Field parking lot property because of the content and viewpoint of the
cannabis-related speech with which the Winnebago and its occupants were associated, while
simultaneously permitting a wide variety of other, non-cannabis-related political and commercial
speech and expressive images on stadium land, including in parking lot C.
33. The non-cannabis-related speech that DPD and SMC Defendants permitted on
stadium land on J anuary 12 and 19 included many written and visual advertisements.
34. There was no rational basis to eject Cannabis Universitys Winnebago from
Sports Authority Field property on either J anuary 12 and 19 based on its wholly appropriate
visual appearance and the proper behavior of all individuals associated with the Winnebago.
35. Additionally, the Winnebago would have fit in designated parking spots in
parking lot C and would not have unduly impeded pedestrian or vehicle traffic, or been
otherwise potentially disruptive.
8

36. With a capacity of 76,125 people, Sports Authority Field is the single largest
event venue in the State of Colorado, and is the stadium where the Broncos play their home
games.
37. Parking lot C is immediately adjacent to the southwest corner of Sports
Authority Field and its southeast corner goes under an elevated portion of West Colfax Avenue,
which is a publicly-owned, heavily-traveled road.
38. Parking lot C is also immediately adjacent to the main pedestrian walkway that
leads to a major entrance to Sports Authority Field. See
http://www.sportsauthorityfieldatmilehigh.com/stadium-information/parking-transportation.
39. Pedestrians on foot are free to enter, leave, and tailgate in parking lot C without
paying any fee or having a ticket to enter Sports Authority Field.
40. Except for fences at the vehicular access points to parking lot C, there are no
gates or fences separating parking lot C from the public street and sidewalks adjacent to the
parking lot.
41. There also are no signs in or next to parking lot C stating that parking lot C is
not generally open to the public.
42. Cannabis Universitys core mission is to change hearts and minds by joining the
robust business community of physicians, attorneys, retail merchants, media, and caregivers in
contributing to the acceptance of marijuana after a century of negative images associated with it
and its users. See http://www.cannabisuniversitycolorado.com/.
43. Accordingly, Cannabis University regularly posts political commentary and news
on its blog, http://www.cannabisuniversitycolorado.com/apps/blog/, which addresses issues such
as the legalization, regulation, and taxation of medical and recreational marijuana-related
9

products, and also educates its readers about the cultivation, production, health benefits of, and
safe consumption of marijuana-related products.
44. Additionally, Cannabis University lawfully sells cannabis-related services, texts,
and apparel.
45. One of the reasons why Plaintiffs sought to park the Cannabis University-
emblazoned Winnebago outside the Sports Authority Field in parking lot C on J anuary 12,
2014 was to express, promote, and disseminate the political, cultural, and social message
inextricably intertwined with the phrase Cannabis University.
46. Plaintiffs likewise wanted to express, promote, and disseminate the political,
cultural, and social message inextricably intertwined with the phrase Cannabis University on
J anuary 19, 2014, but were stymied by Defendants prior restraint on their speech specifically,
Defendants insistence that Plaintiffs cover the word cannabis in order to enter parking lot C.
47. Thus, at no relevant time did Plaintiffs engage, seek to engage, or give any
indication that they sought to engage in speech that was merely commercial in nature.
48. The Broncos playoff games on both J anuary 12 and 19, 2014 were sold out
meaning that tickets had been purchased for all 76,125 seats at Sports Authority Field.
49. Many of the tens of thousands of people attending the J anuary 12 and 19 football
games, along with the thousands more who tailgated and followed the games from parking lots
near Sports Authority Field, stopped in, passed through, or walked extremely nearby parking lot
C.
50. Therefore, on both J anuary 12 and 19, Plaintiffs sought to park their inherently
expressive Winnebago in one of the most prominent, highly-visible public locations that they
could have chosen anywhere within State of Colorado at any time during the year.
10

51. The Metropolitan Football Stadium District (the District) is a body corporate
and politic and a political subdivision of the State of Colorado, which was established pursuant
to the Metropolitan Football Stadium District Act (the Act), C.R.S. 32-15-101, et seq.
52. The Act created the District for the purpose of planning, acquiring land, and
constructing a professional football stadium.
53. The District owns Sports Authority Field and its adjacent parking lots, including
parking lot C, and leases the property to PDB Sports Ltd., d/b/a Denver Broncos Football Club
(PDB), a Colorado limited partnership, and the holder of the Broncos.
54. Pursuant to a Lease and Management Agreement dated September 3, 1998 (the
Agreement), the District and PDB agree that Stadium Management Company, LLC (SMC) a
Colorado limited liability company, and an affiliate of PDB, may perform the operation and
management of the premises as set forth in the Agreement. See Agreement, p. 1.
55. The Agreement describes, inter alia, the terms and conditions surrounding the
construction, maintenance, and use of Sports Authority Field and its adjacent property, including
parking lot C.
56. Under the Agreement, PDB leases from the District all real property reflected in
the map attached hereto as Exhibit 1, including parking lot C, (Stadium Land), together with
all improvements constructed on that land.
57. The Agreement provides that the District shall contribute seventy-five percent
(75%) of the Total Project Budget [for the Stadium Project] up to $270 million, subject to the
availability of adequate revenues (excluding payments to the District pursuant to this Agreement)
as determined by the District. Agreement, p. 2.
11

58. The Agreement also states: Any costs which exceed the Total Project Budget
will be paid 75% by the District and 25% by PDB to the extent that the District has funds
available (excluding payments to the District pursuant to this Agreement). Id. at 3.
59. In addition, the Agreement grants the Districts employees, agents, and
representatives certain special privileges in the use of Stadium Land.
60. The Agreement states: The District shall use the office space for normal business
operations during normal business hours and during District hosted events. Attendant to this
office space, the District will also have, at no expense, the use of parking spaces during such
times that the District is permitted to use the office space (as agreed to between the District and
PDB or, if no such agreement can be reached, as reasonably designated by the District) for its
office staff. Id. at 13.
61. The Agreement similarly asserts: Any Stadium security system and parking plan
developed by PDB shall not cause unreasonable interference with the ingress and egress of any
of the District's employees, agents, or representatives to and from the Leased Premises,
necessary for the District to perform all of its operations, except on the days of scheduled
events. Id.
62. Further, the Agreement requires the District to contribute annual payments
aggregating more than $2,000,000.00 (as of the year 2013) from PDBs rent payments to a
Capital Replacement Fund that is used for Capital Replacement expenses, which means any
work (including all labor, supplies, materials and equipment) reasonably necessary to repair,
restore, or replace any equipment, facility, structure or any other component of a Repair Area,
and includes repaving or resurfacing of driveway and parking areas no more often than once
every five (5) years. Id. at 14, 24.
12

63. The Agreement also provides the District with authority to determine which
Capital Replacements to undertake (subject to very limited exceptions), stating: Prior to the
beginning of each year during the Term, the District and PDB shall meet and agree upon any
Capital Replacements which are to be made to the Stadium during such year. No Capital
Replacements shall be made without the concurrence of the District and PDB, except that PDB
shall be permitted to make Capital Replacements without the District's approval in emergency
situations and if required by the NFL, in conjunction with a NFL resolution applicable to all NFL
stadiums which are similar in age and utility to the Stadium. Id. at 16.
64. Therefore, the District is intertwined with PDB and SMC in multiple aspects of
the use and maintenance of Stadium Land, including its parking lots.
65. Parking lot C is a traditional public forum.
66. The government has the highest burden in defending a restriction of free speech
in a public forum. Victory through Jesus Sports Ministries Found. v. City of Overland Park,
2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 61761, 14 (D. Kan. May 5, 2014).
67. In order for government to enforce a content-based restriction in traditional public
fora, it must show that its regulation is necessary to serve a compelling state interest and that it
is narrowly drawn to achieve that end. Perry Educ. Ass'n v. Perry Local Educators' Ass'n, 460
U.S. 37, 45 (1983).
68. Based on the facts alleged in this Second Amended Complaint, Defendants
viewpoint- and content-based restrictions on Plaintiffs First Amendment rights in parking lot
C are indefensible. See, e.g., Lewis v. Colorado Rockies Baseball Club, Ltd., 941 P.2d 266
(Colo. 1997) (holding that sidewalks and walkways adjacent to Coors Field in Denver were
traditional public forum property under a First Amendment free speech analysis because they
13

were owned by Stadium District, which is a public entity, and invalidating baseball club's
content-neutral restriction preventing sale and distribution of material around stadium by anyone
other than the club's exclusive licensee); Bock v. Westminster Mall Co., 819 P.2d 55 (Colo.
1991) (holding that common areas of privately-owned mall effectively function as a latter-day
public form, and reversing the judgment of the court of appeals affirming the district court's
denial of petitioners' request to speak freely and solicit signatures in the mall).
CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Violations of First and Fourteenth Amendments to United States Constitution (42 U.S.C.
1983) and Article II, Section 10 of the Colorado Constitution)
All Defendants

69. Plaintiffs incorporate all other paragraphs of this Second Amended Complaint for
purposes of this claim.
70. Plaintiffs were engaging in constitutionally-protected activity at all relevant times,
including but not limited to the inherently politically expressive use of the word cannabis on
Plaintiff Moores Winnebago.
71. Plaintiffs speech was related to a matter of important public concern.
72. Defendants ejections of Plaintiffs Winnebago from Stadium Land were
substantially motivated as a response to Plaintiffs exercise of constitutionally-protected conduct.
73. Defendants adverse actions in retaliation for Plaintiffs exercise of their free
speech rights caused Plaintiffs to suffer economic and emotional injuries.
74. To the extent legally relevant, Defendants conduct violated clearly established
rights belonging to Plaintiffs of which reasonable public officials knew or should have known.
75. Plaintiffs right to speak out on issues of public concern outweighed any of
Defendants interests.
14

76. Defendants engaged in the conduct described by this Second Amended Complaint
willfully and wantonly and in reckless disregard of Plaintiffs State and federal constitutional
rights.
77. Defendants conduct proximately caused significant injuries, damages, and losses
to Plaintiffs.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court enter judgment in their
favor and against the Defendants, and grant:
(a) Appropriate declaratory and other injunctive and/or equitable relief;
(b) Compensatory and consequential damages, including damages for emotional
distress, loss of reputation, humiliation, loss of enjoyment of life, and other pain and suffering on
all claims allowed by law in an amount to be determined at trial;
(c) All economic losses on all claims allowed by law;
(d) Punitive damages on all claims allowed by law and in an amount to be determined
at trial;
(e) Attorneys fees and the costs associated with this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
1988;
(f) Pre and post-judgment interest at the lawful rate; and
(g) Any further relief that this court deems just and proper, and any other relief as
allowed by law.
PLAINTIFFS REQUEST A J URY TRIAL ON ALL ISSUES SO TRIABLE.
DATED this 3
rd
day of J uly, 2014.
KILLMER, LANE & NEWMAN, LLP

s/ David A. Lane__________________
David A. Lane, #16422
Michael P. Fairhurst, #45987
15

1543 Champa Street, Suite 400
Denver, CO 80202
(303) 571-1000
dlane@kln-law.com
mfairhurst@kln-law.com

Attorneys for Plaintiffs



CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on this 3
rd
day of J uly, 2014, a true and correct copy of the foregoing
SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND was sent via ICCES E-Filing
system addressed to the following:

Daniel Reilly
Caleb Durling
REILLY POZNER, LLP
1900 Sixteenth Street, Suite 1700
Denver, CO 80202
303-893-6100
dreilly@rplaw.com
cdurling@rplaw.com


KILLMER, LANE & NEWMAN, LLP

/s/ Jamie Akard
J amie Akard