Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 8

7

1-
2
3
4
q
6
1
8
9
10
1l
1"2
13
74
15
16
77
1B
19
20
2I
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
}4IDHP[L K. JEANES
Cl erk of ttre 9uperi or Court
Hy Caroen hrdraial' DeFUB
Date 0Ul5/2014 lise lr.,:59:49
Ibsription tuflfirt
ssH cusl4-01104?
------
CIUIL Iffi fl}ftNiliT
SABINUS A. MEGWA, ESQ.
The Megwa Larv Office
681 I South Central Avenue
Phoenix, Arizona 85042
Telephone (602) 243
-61
5 1
State Bar Number: OlL266
Attorney for Plaintiff
TN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MARICOPA
FRANKMoRRTSoN,
)
No.
nv2014_0i 1A47
)
- t
Plaintifl )
)
VS.
)
COMPLAINT
)
(Tort/Non-Motor Vehicle; and 42U.S.C.
)
CIry OF PHOENIX, a public entity; PHOENIX
)
1983)
POLICE OFFICERS JOHN DOES I-3,
)
individually and in their official capacity as a
I
City of Phoenix Police Officers and JANE
{
DOES l-3, husbands and wives;
)
)
Defendants,
)
)
Plaintifl Frank Morrison by and through his attorney undersigned, and for his cause of action
against Defendants, alleges as follorvs:
JT]RISDICTION AND VENU E
l. Plaintiffbring this action against Defendants for his
42 U.S.C.
$
1983, for violations of his rights under the Fourth and
United States Constitution.
T0rf;- il$ffi 3r9.m
ktliFt$ 239ffi54
state lar." claims and pursuant
Fourter:nth Amendments of
2. Jurisdiction and venue are proper in this court as all parties are residents of M
County, Arizona, and the events underlying this larvsuit occurred in Maricopa County.
- 1-
i19.CCI
L
z
3
4
q
A
7
U
Y
- LU
l -1
72
13
L4
15
15
L7
18
! Y
20
2L
22
23
24
25
z o
21
2B
PARTIES
3. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations in the paragraphs above as if set forth full
herein.
4. At all times alleged herein, Plaintiff and the individual det-endants (Phoenix
OfEcers John Does I
-3)
were individuals residing in Maricopa County.
5. At the time of the incident giving rise to this lawsuit, Del'endants Phoenix
Officers John Does l-3 were PoliceOfficers, agents and employees of the Cityof Phoenix who,
the time of the events complained of herein, were acting rvithin the course and scope of thei
employment. Phoenix Police Officers John Does l-3 are sued both in their official capacity for
purposes of Plaintiffls state law claims and in their individual capacity fr.r: purposes of PlaintifP
claims under 42 U.S.C.
$
1983.
6. Phoenix Police Officers John Does l-3 and Jane Does l-3 are married couples and all
residing in Maricopa County, Arizona. All of Phoenix Police Officers John l-)oes l-3's alleged acts
rvere done for the benefit and furtherance of their respective marital community. The true names of
Defendants Phoenix Police Officers John Does 1-3 and their wives Jane Doe s l-3 are unknorvn to
Plaintiffat this time, and Plaintiffhereby brings.this cause of action against said Defendants by such
fictitious name and will ask leave of this court to amend this complaint to shcrw their true names,
capacity and relationships to each other.
7. Defendant Ciry of Phoenix, including all of its departments, subdivisions,
agents, and ernployees is a public municipal corporation formed and designated as such pursuant
Title 9 of the Arizona Revised Statutes. As such, the City is subject to ci.,'il suit and may be
liable both independently and vicariously, as permitted by federal and stare law, for the wro
conduct of its Police Officers, employees, agents, districts, and divisions,sub-divisions, includi
(without limitation) members of the City of Phoenix Police Department.
FACTUAL BASIS OF CLAIMS FOR RELIEF APPLICABLE
'I-O
ALL CLAIMS
8. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations in the paragraphs above as if set forth full
herein.
- 2-
I
2
3
" 4
5
5
1
B
9
10
11
1, 2
13
T4
15
16
I 1
I O
19
20
2L
22
23
24
25
26
21
2B
9. That on August 26,2013, Plaintiffwas residing in a Chirrch pioperty located at 302
East Southern Avenue in Phoenix Arizona and that early moming he felt rveak so he decided to go
outside and to get Some fresh air and rest.
10. As Piaintiffwas outside standing and leaning on a pole, on thc Church property where
he resided and worked, about three Phoenix Police Officers (hereinafter "Phc,enix Police Officer J
Does l-3")drove up on the church property and drew their guns and all of thri:e of them pointed their
gun at Plaintiffand told him to freeze.
11. Plaintiff obeyed the Phoenix Police officers John Does l-3's command, however
Plaintiffwas so scared, shocked and froze and as he tried to put his hands up he was unable to do so
and he specifically told the Police Officers that he was not feeling well and that there was something
wrong with his health.
12. Without provocation and no probable cause, the three Phoenir Police Officers John
Does l-3 then grabbed Plaintiff, pushed him and slammed hirn into a City of Phoenix Police Patrol
Car and told him to stop resisting arrest even though due to his medical cond.:ion Plaintiffrvas
to do anything.
13. That at all time during the incident, Phoenix Police Offrcers John Does l
-3
did not
inform Plaintiffas to why they pointed their guns at him, grabbed and pushec him, nor did they tell
him why they proceeded to handcuffhim and forcefully pushed him into the oack of the Patrol car.
14. That after defendants Police Officers John Does l-3 handcuffe'd and placed Plaintiffi
the back of their Patrol car, a witness told the Police Officers to leave Plaintiif alone and that Plainti
worked at the church premises and thereafter, Phoenix Police Officers John ftoes l-3, removed
Plaintifffrom the back seat of their Patrol car and then removed the handcuff. off of him and at that
time, Plaintiffs condition has gotten worst and he was unable to stand and he fell to the ground and
then passed out and lbss consciousness.
15. That after Plaintifffell to the ground and passed out, Defendarrts Police Officers John
Does 1-3 abandoned Plaintiffrvhile he was on the ground unconscious rvithout rendering any
assistance and they also failed to call paramedics for him.
- 3-
1
2
3
:
5
6
7
B
9
10
11
1-2
13
14
15
16
L7
18
19
20
Z L
22
23
24
25
z o
21
28
16. That Defendants Phoenix Police Offrcers John Does l-3 never told Plaintiffthat he
was under arrest and they abandoned Plaintiffon the ground without providir.ig Plaintiffany
information as to their identities and or incident report number and they also clid not tell him why
they grabbed
!rim,
pushed and slammed him against their Patrol vehicle nor riid they tell him why
they handcufled and detained him.
17. That shortly after the Phoenix Police Officers John Does l-3 r:bandoned Plaintiff
unattended after he passed out, some neighbors picked up Plaintiffand moved him to his room and
several hours later ambulance was called and paramedics transported Plaintif i to Banner Good
Samaritan Medical Center due to the fact that he suffered a stroke.
18. While at banner Good Samaritan Hospital. Plaintiffwas diagn,rsed with Acute
lschemic Stroke which plaintiffalleges herein was either caused or contributed by the acts or
omissions of defendants Phoenix Police Ofiicers John Does l-3.
19. That as of today August 25,2014, almost one year after the incident, the Phoenix
Police Department did not have a Departmental Police Report of the incident, however the only
incident report available at the Phoenix Police Department is Incident Report Number 13001521091
which does not describe the incident with the Phoenix Police Officers, nor di:l it list the true names o
Phoenix Police Officers John Does l-3 who rvere involved in the incident giving rise to this lawsuit.
20.
.
That at all times relevant to the incident giving rise to this lawsuit, Plaintiff Fr
Morrison complied with Phoenix Police Officers John Does 1-3's commands despite his physi
limitations based on medical condition.
21. As a direct result of the acts and or omissions Phoenix Police Officers John Does I
-3
PlaintiffFrank Morrison sustained severe permanent bodily injuries.
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(False
Arrest False Imprisonment Negligence. Gross Neqligencg.
Assluli
and Batterv and
Vicarious Liablitv)
22. Plaintiffincorporates the'allegations in the paragraphs above as il'set forth fully herein.
- 4-
1
2
5
4
5
6
'7
B
9
10
1L
I 2
L3
T4
15
76
L]
1B
19
20
2I
22
23
24
25
26
21
2B
23. That Plaintiffwas larvfully outside his residence standing and learing on a pole, on the
Church property where he resided and rvorked and was not committing any crime and was not
resisting an arrest immediately during and after Phoenix Police Officers John D.oes I
-3
pointed their
guns on him. grabbed him, pushed him, handcuffed him and slammed him into their patrol car as they
falsely arrested, detained, and.imprisoned Plaintiff and violated his civil rights causing Plaintiff to
sustain damages in an amount to be proven at trial herein.
24.T\at Defendants Phoenix Police Officers John Does l-3 used exccssive and unreasonable
force when they negligently, recklessly and or with gross negligence grabbed Plaintiff, pushed him,
handcuffed him and slammed him into their patrol car and further caused Plaintiffto fall to the
ground as they forcefully removed him from the patrbl car and rernoved the hirndcuff.s, causing
Plaintiffto sustain severe bodily injuries and damages all in an ambunt to be proven at trial herein.
25. . That Defendants Phoenix Police Officers John Does l-3 willfu.ly, unlawfully and
harmfully and without lawful necessity assaulted Plaintiffcausing him to sust;rin severe bodily
injuries and damages.
26. That Defendants Phoenix Police Officers John Does l-3 willfuity, unlarvfully and
harmfulty and abandoned Plaintiffwithout getting him medical assistance causing Plaintiff to sustain
severe bodily injuries and damages.
27- Defendants Phoenix Police Officers John Does 1-3 acted doii'or failed to act, despite
knowing or having reason to know that Plaintiff Frank Morrison was or rvould be inappropriatell
subjected to an unreasonable risk of serious bodily injury as a result of their actions and/or inactions.
28. Defendants Phoenix Police Offrcers John Does l-3 subjected i'laintiffFrank Morrison
to reckless and excessive force, and/or failed to intervene to prevent the use ofsuch force, as alleged
above.
29. That a reasonable person under the same circumstances rvould have known thal
Plaintiffwas inappropriately subjected to the use of unreasonable and unjustii:ed force.
30. At all times material hereto, Defendants Phoenix Police Officers John Does l-3 were
acting within the course and scope of their employment with defendant City of Phoenix and as such,
Defendant City of Phoenix is vicariously liable for their acts or omissions that caused injury and
- 5-
1
2
3
I
5
6
1
I
9
10
11
L2
13
L4
15
16
77
18
" t 9
20
2L
22
23
24
25
26
27
2B
damages to Plaintiff.
31. That Defendants Phoenix Police Officers John Does l-3 werc reckless and"/or
negligent in the handling, treatment and care of PlaintiffFrank Morrison.
32. Defendants Phoenix Police Officers John Does 1-3's brea::hes of their duties,
outlined above, constitute gross negligence, which was the proximate cause,rf serious bodily injuri
sustained by Plaintiff-
33. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants Phoenix Police Officers
3's wrongful conduct, Plaintiff sustained severe bodily injuries and damages in an
proven at trial.
John Does I
amount to
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
Ontentional and Neelieent Infliction of Severe Emotioqat Distre$)
33. Plaintiffrefers to and repleads each and every allegation contained in above
Paragraphs of this Complaint, and by this reference, incorporates same hereir," and makes each a part
hereof.
34. That as a direct and proximate result of Defendants Phoenix P.rlice Officers John
l-3's acts and or omissions, Plaintiffsustained severe emotional suffering, hr miliation, mental
distress, stress, anguish, and anxiety resulting from the outrageous and unprir ileged conduct of the
Defendants and each of them done with the intent to cause such injury and or reckless disregard of
the probability of causing such injury to Plaintifl all in an amount to be proven at trial herein.
THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(Phoenlx Police Officers John Does l-3 Violated Plaintiff Frank Morrison's Rights Under
the Fourth Amendment and 42 U.S.C.
S
1983 to be Free From the Unreasonabl e Use of
Force)
35. Plaintiff incorporates the allegations in the
iaragraphs
abcve as if set forth full
herein.
36. At no time rvere Phoenix Police Offrcers John Does l-3 threatened, in any way,
- 6-
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Y
10
i _1
L2
13
14
15
16
1_'l
18
I 9
20
2L
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PlaintiffFrank Morrison. I
37. PlaintiffFrank Morrison was outside his residence standing and leaning on a pole, on
I
the Church property where he resided and worked, when three Phoenix Policc Officers John Does l-31
drove up on the church property and drerv their guns and all of three of them
pointed
their gun at
I
Plaintiffand told him to freeze and thereafter, they grabbed him, pushed him. slammed him and
I
handcuffed him for no lawful reason.
38. That at no point in time did Defendants Phoenix Potice Offict:rs John Does l-3 infond
Plaintiff Frank Morrison that he was under arrest and why.
39- Phoenix Police Officer John Does l-3' s acts or omission in assaulting Plaintiff bl
pointing their grrns at him, grabbing him, handcuffrng.him and forccfully pushing and slarnrning hil
on their Patrol vehicle and restraining his movement and freedom, falsell detaining and arrestin$
I
him, and failing to provide him medical assistance were all done without pr,rbable cause in violatior{
I
of PlaintifPs Constitutional Rights, including my 4th and l4d Amendment :{ights in violation of +y'
I
u. s. c.
$1e83.
I
40. For the reasons set forth above, Defendants Phoenix Police Officers John Does I
-31
I
used excessive force against Plaintiff in violation of Frank Morrison's consti:utional rights.
I
- l
41. The.nature of these actions are so extreme and outrageous tlat an award of punitiv{
I
damages is warranted against Defendants Phoenix Police Officers John Does l-3.
I
I
42. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants Phoenix Police Officers John Does lJ
3's rvrongful conduct, PlaintiffFrank Morrison has suffered damages in an amount to be prorr"n u{
trial.
I
I
ruRY TRIAL I
I
I
Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by
j,t.y.
I
I
I
I
' l
I
I
I
I
_1_
|
I
I
I
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
B
9
10
11
12
13
I 4
15
16
1.' l
1B
19
20
2L
22
23
24
25
26
27.
2B
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffprays for damages forjudgment against Defendants as follows:
a) General damages in an amount to be proven at trial, as to the causes of action,
and theories of relief alleged herein;
Punitive damages in an amount deemed
Phoenix police officers John Does 1-3 as
of relief alleged herein;
just
and reasonablc against the Defendant
to the causes of actron, claims, and
b)
c)
d)
e)
0
Costs and attomeys' fees against the Defendants as to the cau:es of action, claims,
theories of relief alleged herein under the Constitution and lirws of the United Sta
pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
S
1988;
The costs of litigation;
All remedies provided by 42 U.S.C.
g
1983; and
'Such
other and further relief which may seem
just
an<i reasonable under
circumstances.
Dated this 25th day of August 2014.
THE MECWA L,{W OFFICE
SABINUS ' \. MEGWA
681I South Central Ave.
Phoenix, Arzona 85042
Attornev for Plaintiff
- 8-