Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 1 of 28 PageID #: 1

RECE\VE.D.

p.,UG 2 S 20\4

U
.

s
E:

o°\SsT~R!llC8T&Cr?i'!Rl

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

TRACEY WHITE, individually, and as )

the next best friend of W.D., a minor,

)

)

and

)

)

DWAYNE ANTON MATTHEWS, JR., )

)

and

)

)

DAMON COLEMAN,

)

)

and

)

)

THEOPHILUS GREEN,

)

)

and

)

)

KERRY WHITE,

)

)

Plaintiffs,

)

)

v.

)

)

THOMAS JACKSON, individually, and in )

his official capacity as City of Ferguson, )

Missouri Chief of Police

)

)

and

)

)

JON BELMAR, individually, and in his )

official capacity as St. Louis County,

)

Missouri Chief of Police,

)

)

and

)

)

JUSTIN COSMA, individually, and in

)

his official capacity as a City of

)

Ferguson Police Officer,

)

)

No. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 2 of 28 PageID #: 2

and

)

5

)

JOHN DOE, police officers of the City )

OfFerguso1i and St. Louis County

)

Police Departments whose identities are )

unknown to Plaintiffs at this time,

)

)

and

)

)

ST. LOUIS COUNTY, MISSOURI,

)

)

and

)

)

CITY OF FERGUSON, MISSOURI ,

)

)

Defendants.

)

COMPLAINT (False Arrest; Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress; Negligent Supervision; Assault and Battery; 42 U.S.C. § 1983)

INTRODUCTION

I. This is a civil action seeking damages against Thomas Jackson, who is the City of

Ferguson Police Chief; Jon Belmar, who is the St. Louis County Chief of Police; Justin Cosma,

who is a City of Ferguson Police Officer; the John Doe police officers of the City of Ferguson

Police Department and/or the St. Louis County Police Department whose identities are unknown

to Plaintiffs at this time; St. Louis County, Missouri; and the City of Ferguson, Missouri

(collectively, "Defendants") for committing acts, under color of law, which deprived Plaintiffs of

rights secured under the Constitution and laws of the United States and the state of Missouri;

and, for refusing or failing to prevent such deprivations and denials to Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs

allege, among other things, that Defendants intentionally, negligently and/or recklessly caused

Plaintiffs to be subjected to unnecessary and unwarranted force, arrests that were not based upon

probable cause, and other violations of their constitutional rights. This action seeks both

2

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 3 of 28 PageID #: 3

compensatory and punitive damages against the defendants for the intentional acts of

wrongdoing and negligence under state law.

JURISDICTION

2. This action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1988 and the Fourth

Amendment to the United States Constitution. This Court has jurisdiction over this action under

42 U.S.C. § 1983, 28 U.S.C. § 1343 and 28 U.S.C. § 133 l. Plaintiffs further invoke the

supplemental jurisdiction of this Court to hear and decide claims arising under state law,

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367.

PARTIES

3. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Tracey White was a resident of the state of

Missouri and a citizen of the United States. She is also the mother ofW.D., a minor.

4. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff DeWayne Anton Matthews, Jr., was a

resident of the state of Missouri and a citizen of the United States.

5. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Damon Coleman was a resident of the state

of Missouri and a citizen of the United States.

6. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Theophilus Green was a resident of the state

of Missouri and a citizen of the United States.

7. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Kerry White was a resident of the State of

Missouri and a citizen of the United States.

8.

At all

times

relevant herein, Defendant Thomas Jackson was

the

C ll

1-h.
1 J'

o,·

f f<r~vSPI\
Pi iGTy

~/ 1;,) ,---

Chief of Police and acted under color of the laws, statutes, ordinances, regulations, policies,

customs, and usages of the City of Ferguson, Missouri; and, the City of Ferguson Police

Department; and, pursuant to his authority as the Chief of Police.

3

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 4 of 28 PageID #: 4
9. At all times relevant herein, Defendant Jon Belmar was the St. Louis County Chief of Police and acted under color of the laws, statutes, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of St. Louis County, Missouri; and, the St. Louis County Police Department; and, pursuant to his authority as the Chief of Police.
10. At all times relevant herein, Defendant Justin Cosma was a City of Ferguson Police Officer and acted under color of the laws, statutes, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of the City of Ferguson, Missouri; and, the City of Ferguson Police Department; and, pursuant to his authority as a police officer.
11. At all times relevant herein, Defendant St. Louis County was located in the state of Missouri and maintained a police department which operates under, and administers, a set of law enforcement policies, practices and customs involving the hiring, training and supervision of its officers. These policies, practices and customs include training in the use of force and on-thestreet encounters with civilians as well as the basis for an arrest. St. Louis County is liable directly and vicariously.
12. At all times relevant herein, Defendant City of Ferguson was a municipal corporation and maintained a police department which operates under, and administers, a set of law enforcement policies, practices and customs involving the hiring, training and supervision of its officers. These policies, practices and customs include training in the use of force and on-thestreet encounters with civilians as well as the basis for an arrest. The City of Ferguson is liable directly and vicariously.
13. At all times relevant herein, Defendant John Doe police officers, whose identities are unknown to Plaintiffs at this time, are believed to have been St. Louis County or City of Ferguson Police Department officers acting within the scope of their employment and under
4

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 5 of 28 PageID #: 5
color of the laws, statutes, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of the City of Ferguson, Missouri and the City of Ferguson Police Department; or, St. Louis County, Missouri and the St. Louis County Police Department; as the case may be, pursuant to their authority as police officers.
I. STATEMENT OF FACTS COMMON TO ALL PLAINTIFFS 14. On August 9, 2014, Darren Wilson of the City of Ferguson Police Department and Michael Brown, Jr., a teenaged African American, encountered one another. A violent confrontation ensued, and Michael Brown, Jr., who was unarmed, was shot to death by Darren Wilson, who is Caucasian. 15. Although the fact that an unarmed African American was shot and killed by a Caucasian police officer is not an unusual event in the United States, the Michael Brown, Jr. shooting was somewhat unique in that it occurred between 12:00 p.m. and 1:00 p.m. in the afternoon, and there were several independent eyewitnesses. As a result of the number of eyewitnesses, technology and the internet, the circumstances surrounding the death of Michael Brown, Jr. went viral and millions of people became aware of it. 16. The community in Ferguson was particularly outraged by what appeared to be an excessive use of force in the Michael Brown, Jr. shooting. The unarmed Michael Brown, Jr. was shot multiple times by Officer Wilson. 17. A public outcry about the shooting death of Michael Brown, Jr. by Officer Wilson turned into protests, which subsequently led to civil unrest in the streets of Ferguson, Missouri when Defendants took up arms and, in militaristic displays of force and weaponry, engaged U.S. Citizens as if they were war combatants.
5

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 6 of 28 PageID #: 6
18. In doing so during the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendants used wanton and excessive force, under color oflaw, which deprived Plaintiffs ofrights secured under the Constitution and laws of the United States and state law.
19. Plaintiffs were all victims of the atrocities committed by Defendants during the period of August 11-13, 2014.
II. FACTS AND CLAIMS SPECIFIC TO PLAINTIFF TRACEY WHITE 20. Plaintiffs Tracey White and her son adopt and incorporate by reference paragraphs 1-19 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 21. On August 13, 2014, Plaintiffs Tracey White and her minor son attended a Peace and Love rally that was sponsored by her AME Church group in Ferguson. After the rally was over, she and her son walked to the McDonald's Restaurant located on W. Florissant, where they purchased some drinks and food. 22. While in the restaurant waiting for her husband to come and get her and her son, Plaintiff White conversed with some of the patrons and otherwise acted normally. Shortly thereafter, Plaintiff White's son went to the restroom and she went back up to the counter to purchase a sundae. Just as she did that, several Defendant John Doe police officers and Defendant Cosma, in what appeared to be army uniforms, carrying rifles and sticks and wearing helmets, approached the door and ordered Plaintiff White to "get out." Plaintiff White was terrified and tried to tell Defendant John Doe police officers and Defendant Cosma that her son was in the restroom, and that she was there waiting for her husband to pick them up. 23. After her son exited the restroom, Plaintiff White observed him being accosted by Defendant John Doe police officers and Defendant Cosma. When she expressed her concern,
6

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 7 of 28 PageID #: 7
she was told to "shut up." When Plaintiff White continued to express her concerns about the way her son was being mistreated, she was advised that she was being arrested because she would not "shut up." Plaintiff White was then thrown to the ground and handcuffed. During the process of being arrested, Plaintiff White realized that she had her son's iPad in her hand and summoned him over to retrieve the item. When he did, Defendant John Doe police officers and Defendant Cosma, placed the minor under arrest as well, for no reason at all.
24. Plaintiff White and her minor son were then transported to the St. Louis County Police Department offices in Clayton, Missouri, where they were fingerprinted, photographed, held for more than five (5) hours and told that they had been arrested on the unfounded charge of "failure to disperse."
A.
FALSE ARREST 25. Defendant Cosma wrongfully and unlawfully arrested and detained and/or assisted in the arrest and detention of the Plaintiffs on the unfounded charge of "failure to disperse", even though he knew that no probable cause or any other basis for the charge existed. 26. As a direct proximate result of the false arrest of Plaintiffs by Defendant Cosma and the other Defendants, Plaintiff White and her minor son suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and have suffered, and will continue to suffer, mental anguish, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being falsely arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Tracey White and her son demand judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against
7

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 8 of 28 PageID #: 8
Defendant Cosma, and other Defendants, in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney's fees to the extent allowed by law.
B.
INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 27. Plaintiff White further alleges that Defendant Cosma and Defendant John Doe police officers, with deliberate indifference and reckless disregard for the rights of Plaintiff White and her son and with pure malice, did subject Plaintiff White to the humiliation of being thrown to the ground and being arrested in front of her minor son and the added humiliation of seeing her son taken into custody, and treated as if he were a criminal. Defendants City of Ferguson and County of St. Louis Police Departments, with full knowledge of the inappropriateness of these actions have taken no action against any officer involved in the blatantly unfounded arrest of Plaintiff Tracey White and her minor son and have, therefore, acquiesced in and/or condoned the unlawful acts of Defendant Cosma and other Defendants against Plaintiff. 28. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of Defendants, Plaintiffs suffered discomfort, distress and loss of libe11y; and has suffered, and will continue to suffer, psychological harm and mental anguish including fright, shame, mortification, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being unlawfully anestcd, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against Defendant Cosma in the amount of one
8

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 9 of 28 PageID #: 9
Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney's fees to the extent allowed by law.
c.
NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION 29. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendant Cosma and Defendant John Doe police officers were acting under the direction and control, and pnrsuant to the rules, regulations, policies and procedures, of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County. 30. Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County acted negligently, carelessly and recklessly by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct and monitor Defendant Cosma and Defendant John Doe police officers. 31. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County, Plaintiff White and her minor son were wrongfully and unlawfully, arrested, detained and humiliated. As a result, Plaintiff White and her son have suffered physical assault, embarrassment, and mental anguish. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demands judgment against Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, plus interest, costs and attorney's fees to the extent allowed by law.
D.
ASSAULT AND BATTERY 32. Defendant Cosma and Defendant John Doe police officers, without proper grounds, willfully assaulted and handcuffed Plaintiff White and her minor son without just cause or basis.
9

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 10 of 28 PageID #: 10
33. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' willful, malicious and intentional conduct, Plaintiff White and her minor son suffered bodily injuries when they were taken to the ground to be handcuffed.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against Defendant Cosma in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney's fees to the extent allowed by law.
E.
DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 34. Plaintiff White further alleges that Defendant Cosma and Defendant John Doe police officers, with deliberate indifference to and reckless disregard for the safety and wellbeing of her and her minor son and in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, did on August 13, 2014 deprived Plaintiff White and her son of their Constitutional rights by assaulting them and then placing them under unlawful arrest, or failed to prevent the arrest and detention, when they had the opportunity to do so. 35. The arrest and detention were and are in violation of Plaintiffs' right to be free from unreasonable seizure secured by the Fourth Amendments to the United States Constitution and protected under 42U.S.C.§1983. 36. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' arrest and detention of Plaintiffs as set forth herein, Plaintiffs have suffered severe emotional anguish. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendant Cosma and Defendant John Doe police officers, jointly and severally, in the full and fair amount of One Million Dollars
10

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 11 of 28 PageID #: 11
($1,000,000.00) in compensatory and punitive damages, plus interest, costs and attorney's fees to the extent allowed by law.
F.
FAILURE TO TRAIN, SUPERVISE, AND DISCIPLINE 42 U.S.C. § 1983 37. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendants that were responsible for the arrest of Plaintiff White and her minor son were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the practices and customs of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County and implemented by Defendants Belmar and Thomas. 38. Defendants acted negligently, carelessly, recklessly and with deliberate indifference to Plaintiffs by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct, monitor and discipline Defendant officers from their respective departments who were patrolling the streets of Ferguson, Missouri during the period of August 11-13, 2014. 39. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson, St. Louis County, Belmar and Thomas, Plaintiff White and her minor son were unlawfully arrested, seized and otherwise deprived of their rights under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffa demand judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,00.00), plus punitive damages to the extent allowed by law, attorney's fees, interest, and costs.
III. FACTS AND CLAIMS SPECIFIC TO PLAINTIFF DEWAYNE A. MATTHEWS, JR.
40. Plaintiff Dewayne A. Matthews, Jr. adopts and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-19 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
11

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 12 of 28 PageID #: 12
41. On August 13, 2014, which was a Wednesday night, Plaintiff Matthews was on his way to his mother's house who lives near W. Florissant and Kappel in Ferguson, Missouri.
42. Because of the civil disturbances that had taken place, he was simply going to her house to visit her and make sure she was alright.
43. Plaintiff Matthews took public transportation to his mother's house. When he got off the 61 Chambers bus, he noticed that the street was blocked off so we proceeded to the corner ofW. Florissant and Highmont.
44. At the above location, Plaintiff Matthews was confronted by approximately eight (8) Defendant John Doe police officers in military type unifonns who had their weapons trained upon him. Plaintiff immediately put his hands in the air whereupon he was shot multiple times with rubber bullets.
45. At that point, Plaintiff Matthews fell into a creek or sewer. Defendant John Doe officers pounced on him, slammed his face into the concrete, and pushed his head underwater to the point that he felt he was going to be drowned. Afterward, Defendant John Doe police officers continued to assault him and spray him with O.C. spray.
46. Plaintiff Matthews was arrested for allegedly "failing to disperse" even though he had not been involved in any protests of any kind and was only in the neighborhood to check on his mother.
47. Plaintiff Matthews was transpmted to Christian Hospital Northwest for treatment for the injuries he sustained at the hands of Defendant John Doe police officers. Despite the fact that Plaintiff Matthews was allegedly placed nnder arrest for committing a crime, Plaintiff Matthews was never taken to a police station and was released from the hospital the next day.
12

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 13 of 28 PageID #: 13
A.
FALSE ARREST 48. Plaintiff Matthews was wrongfully and unlawfully arrested and detained by Defendant John Doe police officers on the unfounded charge of "failure to disperse" even though no probable cause or any other basis for the charge existed and even though Plaintiff Matthews was not in any way involved in any protests. 49. As a direct proximate result of his false arrest, Plaintiff Matthews suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and has suffered, and will continue to suffer, mental anguish, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being falsely arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Matthews demands judgment against Defendant John Doe police officers, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against Defendant John Doe police officers in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney's fees to the extent allowed by law.
B. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 50. Plaintiff Matthews further alleges that Defendant John Doe police officers with deliberate indifference and reckless disregard for his rights and with pure malice, subjected him to vicious acts of violence for no lawful reason. Defendants City of Ferguson and County of St. Louis, with full knowledge of the brutal, vicious and gratuitous acts of violence in which its officers were engaging took no action against any officer involved in the blatantly unlawful assault, battery and arrest Plaintiff Matthews and have, therefore, acquiesced in and/or condoned the unlawful acts of the Defendant John Doe officers.
13

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 14 of 28 PageID #: 14

51. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of Defendants, Plaintiff Matthews

suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and has suffered, and will continue to suffer,

psychological harm and mental anguish including fright, shame, mortification, humiliation and

embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being unlawfully arrested, savagely beaten for

no reason, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Matthews demands judgment against Defendant John Doe

police officers, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred

Thousand Dollars($ l,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages in the amount

of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney's fees to the extent

allowed by law.

c.
NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION

52. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendant John Doe police officers

were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the rules, regulations, policies and

procedures of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County.

53. Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County acted negligently, carelessly

and recklessly by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct and monitor Defendant John

Doe police officers.

54. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of

Ferguson and St. Louis County, Plaintiff Matthews was wrongfully and unlawfully, arrested,

detained and shot with tubber bullets and savagely beaten. As a result, he suffered severe bodily

injuries, pain and suffering, mental anguish, embarrassment, and emotional distress.

14

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 15 of 28 PageID #: 15
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Matthews demands judgment against Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, plus interest, costs and attorney's fees to the extent allowed by law.
D.
ASSAULT AND BATTERY 55. On August 13, 2014, Defendant John Doe police officers, without proper grounds, willfully subjected the Plaintiff Matthews to cruel and unwarranted physical violence in the form of a beating, near drowning and being shot numerous times with rubber bullets without just cause or basis. 56. As a direct and proximate result of the conduct of the Defendant John Doe police officers, Plaintiff Matthews suffered severe bodily injuries, emotional distress, mental anguish and pain and suffering. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff Matthews demands judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, and punitive damages against Defendant John Doe police officers in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney's fees to the extent allowed by law.
E.
DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 57. Plaintiff Matthews further alleges that Defendant John Doe police officers, with deliberate indifference to and reckless disregard for his safety and well-being in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, did on August 13, 2014 deprive Plaintiff Matthews of his
15

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 16 of 28 PageID #: 16
Constitutional rights by assaulting him and then placing him under unlawful arrest, or failed to prevent the arrest and detention, when they had the opportunity to do so.
58. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant John Doe police officers' assault, battery, arrest and detention of Plaintiff Matthews as set forth herein, Plaintiff Matthews has suffered severe injuries and emotional anguish.
59. On August 13, 2014, Defendant John Doe police officers used wanton and excessive force, under color of state law, which deprived Plaintiff Matthews of rights secured under the Constitution and laws of the United States.
60. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of Defendant John Doe police officers, Plaintiff Matthews was subjected to an illegal seizure by Defendant John Doe police officers from the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County, acting outside the parameters oflaw and decency.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Matthews demands judgment against Defendants John Doe police officers, jointly and severally, in the full and fair amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) in compensatory and punitive damages, plus interest, costs and attorney's fees to the extent allowed by law.
F. FAILURE TO TRAIN, SUPERVISE, AND DISCIPLINE 42 U.S.C. § 1983 61. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendant John Doe police officers responsible for the arrest and beating of Plaintiff Matthews were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the practices and customs of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County and implemented by Defendants Belmar and Thomas.
16

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 17 of 28 PageID #: 17
62. Defendants City of Ferguson, St. Louis County, Belmar and Thomas acted negligently, carelessly, recklessly and with deliberate indifference to the safety of Plaintiff Matthews by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct, monitor and discipline the officers from their respective departments who were patrolling the streets of Ferguson, Missouri during the period of August 11-13, 2014.
63. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson, St. Louis County, Belmar and Plaintiff Matthews was unlawfully arrested, seized, beaten, shot with rubber bullets and otherwise deprived of his civil rights
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,00.00), plus punitive damages to the extent allowed by law, attorney's fees, interest, and costs.
IV. FACTS AND CLAIMS SPECIFIC TO PLAINTIFF KERRY WHITE 64. Plaintiff Kerry White adopts and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-19 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 65. On Tuesday, August 12, 2014, Plaintiff White was in the City of Ferguson, shooting photographic footage of the protests in Ferguson. He initially parked at Chambers and West Florissant, with two of his friends in the vehicle. 66. As Plaintiff White was shooting footage, he observed Defendant John Doe police officers begin proceeding down Chambers, shooting tear gas and ordering people to leave the area. Plaintiff White left the lot, went south on Chambers and then made a right on Lorrna. Plaintiff White continued to shoot footage from his vehicle. Defendant John Doc police otlicers
17

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 18 of 28 PageID #: 18
subsequently came onto Lorma and when Plaintiff White tried to get out of their path, he was blocked in by a military-like tactical vehicle.
67. At this point, the Plaintiff White was seriously afraid for his life. He held his camera out of his car window in an attempt to let Defendant John Doe police officers know that he was simply photographing the protests.
68. Defendant John Doe police officer snatched Plaintiff White's camera from his hand, took out his memory card and threw it to the ground. Plaintiff White and his passengers were then taken from his vehicle by several Defendant John Doe police officers from the St. Louis County Police Department, handcuffed, placed in a police wagon and transported to the Clayton Justice Center. Once there, they were booked on the unfounded charge of "failure to disburse" even though no basis at all existed for that charge.
A.
FALSE ARREST 69. Plaintiff Kerry White was wrongfully and unlawfully arrested and detained by Defendant John Doe police officers on the unfounded charge of "failure to disperse" even though it was clear that no probable cause or any other basis for the charge existed. 70. As a direct proximate result of his false arrest by Defendant John Doe police officers, Plaintiff White suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and has suffered, and will continue to suffer, mental anguish, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being falsely arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Kerry White demands judgment against Defendant John Doe police officers, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against
18

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 19 of 28 PageID #: 19

Defendant John Doe officers in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest,

costs and attorney's fees to the extent allowed by law.

B. NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION

71. During the period of August l l-13, 2014, Defendant John Doe police officers

were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the rules, regulations, policies and

procedures, of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County.

72. Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County acted negligently, carelessly

and recklessly by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct and monitor Defendant John

Doe police officers during the period of August 11-13, 2014.

73. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of

Ferguson and St. Louis County, Plaintiff White was wrongfully and unlawfully, arrested,

detained and humiliated. As a result, he was caused to suffer mental anguish, embarrassment,

and emotional distress.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff White demands judgment against Defendants City of Ferguson

and St. Louis County in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars

($ l ,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, plus interest, costs and attorney's fees to the extent

allowed by law.

c.
ASSAULT AND BATTERY

74. Defendant John Doe police officers, without proper grounds, willfully assaulted,

battered and handcuffed Plaintiff Kerry White without just cause or basis.

75. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant John Doe police officers' willful,

malicious and intentional actions, Plaintiff White suffered bodily injuries while being unlawfully

19

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 20 of 28 PageID #: 20
arrested, taken to the ground and handcuffed. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff White demands judgment against Defendants, jointly and
severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against Defendant John Doe police officers in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney's fees to the extent allowed by law.
D. DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 76. Plaintiff Kerry White further alleges that Defendant John Doe police officers, with deliberate indifference to and reckless disregard for his safety and well-being and in violation of the Fourth Amendment, did on August 12, 2014, commit or allowed to be committed acts which deprived him of his constitutional right to be free from an unreasonable seizure. 77. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of Defendant John Doe police officers, Kerry White was subjected to an illegal seizure by t Defendant John Doe police officers, who were acting outside the parameters of law and decency. 78. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendant John Doe police officers used wanton and excessive force, under color of state law, which deprived Plaintiff of rights secured under the Constitution and laws of the United States. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff White demands judgment against the Defendant John Doe police officers, jointly and severally, in the full and fair amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000.000.00) in compensatory and punitive damages, plus interest, costs and attorney's fees to the extent allowed by law.
20

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 21 of 28 PageID #: 21
E. FAILURE TO TRAIN, SUPERVISE, AND DISCIPLINE 42 U.S.C. § 1983 79. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendant John Doe police officers responsible for the arrest of Plaintiff Kerry White were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the practices and customs of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County and implemented by Defendants Belmar and Thomas. 80. Defendant John Doe police officers acted negligently, carelessly, recklessly and with deliberate indifference to the safety of Plaintiff White by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct, monitor and discipline the officers from their respective departments who were patrolling the streets of Ferguson, Missouri During the period of August 11-13, 2014. 81. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson, St. Louis County, Belmar and Plaintiff Thomas Kerry White was unlawfully arrested, seized and otherwise deprived of his civil rights. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff White demands judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,00.00), plus punitive damages to the extent allowed by law, attorney's fees, interest, and costs.
v.
FACTS AND CLAIMS SPECIFIC TO PLAINTIFFS DAMON COLEMAN AND THEOPHILUS GREEN 82. Plaintiffs Damon Coleman and Theophilus Green adopt and incorporate by reference paragraphs 1-19 as if fully set forth herein. 83. On August 11, 2014, at approximately 8:00 p.m., Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were engaging in a peaceful protest, with several others, regarding the shooting death of Michael Brown, Jr. on West Florissant near the Quick Trip convenience store.
21

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 22 of 28 PageID #: 22
84. At or around the same date and time, a number of St. Louis County police officers began to arrive on the scene. Shortly thereatler, a military type truck pulled up with more St. Louis County police ot1icers in full riot gear.
85. At that point, other St. Louis County police officers began to put on riot gear and arm themselves with militaristic type automatic weapons. Upon seeing these officers appear to be preparing to engage in combat, the protesters turned to them and began to chant "hands up don't shoot" with their arms raised in the air.
86. In response, Defendant John Doe police officers, who appeared to be seeking a confrontation, began to spread out and take what appeared to be tactical positions behind the non-violent protesters. At about the same time, two military tank-like vehicles began to approach the group from the front with police officers on and next to the vehicles. Defendant John Doe police officers then began shooting tear gas into the group of protestors causing the group to scatter.
87. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were recording these events. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were then spotted and Defendant John Doe police officers began shooting at them. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green raised their hands but the police continued to fire tear gas and what appeared to be stun grenades in their direction.
88. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were repeatedly shot with rubber bullets as the police continued to fire as Plaintiffs Coleman and Green got on their knees and presented no threat.
89. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were subsequently placed under arrest on the unfounded charge of "failure to disperse." While arresting Plaintiffs Coleman and Green,
22

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 23 of 28 PageID #: 23
Defendant John Doe police officers from the St. Louis County Police Department hurled racial epithets at them, while punching and kicking them the entire time.
90. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were eventually taken to the Clayton Justice Center where they were ridiculed and placed in small cells. Plaintiffs Green and Coleman were held for more than 12 hours.
A. FALSE ARREST 91. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green wrongfully and unlawfully arrested and detained on the unfounded charge of "failure to disperse" even though it was clear that no probable cause or any other basis for the charge existed. 92. As a direct proximate result of the false arrest of Plaintiffs Coleman and Green by Defendant John Doe police officers from the St. Louis County Police Department, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green suffered discomfort. distress and loss of liberty; and have suffered, and will continue to suffer, mental anguish, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being falsely arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green demand judgment against Defendant John Doc police officers, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, and punitive damages in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney's fees to the extent allowed by law.
B.
INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 93. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green further allege that Defendant John Doe police officers from the St. Louis County Police Department, with deliberate indifference and reckless
23

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 24 of 28 PageID #: 24
disregard for Plaintiffs' rights, and with pure malice, did falsely arrest, beat, ridicule and shoot them with rubber bullets simply for the sport of it.
94. Defendants City of Ferguson and County of St. Louis with full knowledge of the falsification of police reports by their officers as well as their acts of misconduct and use of excessive force took no action against any officer involved in the unlawful arrest of Plaintiffs Coleman and Green and have, therefore, acquiesced in and/or condoned the unlawful acts of Defendant John Doe police officers.
95. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of Defendants, Plaintiffs suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and have suffered, and will continue to suffer, psychological harm and mental anguish including fright, shame, mortification, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being unlawfully arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly deprived of their civil rights and mistreated
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green demand judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against Defendant John Doe police officers from the St. Louis County Police Department in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney's fees to the extent allowed by law.
c.
NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION 96. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, the Defendant John Doe police officers were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the rules, regulations, policies and procedures, of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County.
24

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 25 of 28 PageID #: 25
97. Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County acted negligently, carelessly and recklessly by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct and monitor Defendant John Doe police officers deployed onto the streets of Ferguson, Missouri During the period of August 11-13, 2014.
98. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were wrongfully and unlawfully, arrested, detained, beaten, shot with rubber bullets and humiliated. As a result, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green have suffered physical injury, pain and suffering, mental anguish, embarrassment, and mental distress.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green demand judgment against the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, plus interest, costs and attorney's fees to the extent allowed by law.
D. ASSAULT AND BATTERY 99. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green, without proper grounds, were shot with rubber bullets and beaten about their bodies by Defendant John Doe police officers even though Plaintiffs Coleman and Green posed no threat to Defendant John Doe police officers or anyone else. 100. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant John Doe police officers willful, malicious and intentional actions, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green suffered serious injury to significant areas of their bodies, as well a pain and suffering, mental anguish, emotional distress and humiliation.
25

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 26 of 28 PageID #: 26
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green demand judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the foll and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney's fees to the extent allowed by law.
E.
DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 10 I. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green further allege that Defendant John Doe police officers, with deliberate indifference to and reckless disregard for their safety and well-being son and in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and protected under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, did on August 11, 2014, commit or allowed to be committed acts which deprived both of them their Constitutional right to be free from an unreasonable seizure and excessive force. 102. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of Defendant John Doc police officers, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were subjected to an illegal seizure and the excessive use of force by the completely out of control police officers, acting outside the parameters of law and decency. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green demand judgment against Defendant John Doe police officers, jointly and severally, in the full and fair amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) in compensatory and punitive damages, plus interest, costs and attorney's fees to the extent allowed by law.
F.
FAILURE TO TRAIN, SUPERVISE, AND DISCIPLINE 42 U.S.C. § 1983 103. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendant John Doe police officers responsible for the unlawful arrest, beating and mistreatment of Plaintiffs Coleman and Green
26

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 27 of 28 PageID #: 27
were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the practices and customs of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County and implemented by Defendants Belmar and Thomas.
104. Defendants acted negligently, carelessly, recklessly and with deliberate indifference to the safety of Plaintiffs Coleman and Green by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct, monitor and discipline Defendant John Doe police officers from their respective departments who were patrolling the streets of Ferguson, Missouri During the period of August 11-13, 2014.
105. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson, St. Louis County, Belmar and Thomas, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were unlawfully arrested, seized and otherwise mistreated.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green demand judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,08.oo), plus {);.--
" punitive damages to the extent allowed by law, attorney's fees, interest, and costs.
This 28'" Day of August 2014,
[Signatures of counsel on next page]
27

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 28 of 28 PageID #: 28
Respectfully submitted,
Gregory L. Lattimer, Esq. {pro hac pending) 1200 G Street, N.W. Suite 800 Washington, D.C. 20005 Tel. (202) 434-4513 Fax: (202) 248-4478 lattlaw@aol.com and
By/{(
Malik Z. Shabazz, Esq. {pro ha 1200 G Street, N.W. Suite 800 Washington, D.C. 20005 Tel: (202) 434-4528 Fax: (202) 248-4478 attorneyshabazz@yahoo.com and
Reginald A. Greene, Esq. {pro hac pending) One Georgia Center, Suite 605 600 West Peachtree Street, N.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30308 Tel. (404) 574-4308 Fax: (404) 574-4308 rgreene@greenelegalgorup.com Counsel for the Plaintiffs
29

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1-1 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 1 of 1 PageID #: 29

I. (a) PLAll\TIFFS Tracey White, DeWayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Theophilus Green, Kerry White
(b) County of Rc~idcncc of Fir~t L1~tcd Plaintiff
r (EXCF'.f' IA' /.,:.S. f'LAl.\'TIFF CASESi

DEFENDA'.\'TS Thomas Jackson, Jon Belmar, Justin Cosma, John Doe police officers whose identities are unknown to Plaintiffs at this time, St. Louis County, Missouri and City of Ferguson, Missouri
CoLmty of Residence of First Listed DdCndam St Louis County, Missouri (l.V U.S. !'LA INTIFF ('ASES Oiv'L r1
!\OTL IN LAND CONDl:.M:"JATJON CASES, USE THI: LOCATION OF I Ill: TRACf OF LAND INVOLVED.

( c) Attorneys (Fil 111 ,V(11t1<'. Addrn1·, :imf frlel'/wn,• ,\'u111ba1
Gregory L. Lattimer, lattlaw@aol.com, Malik Shabazz, attorneyshabazz@yahoo.com, 1200 G St NW Suite 800, Wash, DC 20005 202-434-4513 Reginald Greene rgreene@greenelegalgroup.com

Attorneys (!/ KnOLvn!

I l. BASIS OF JUlllSOIC·r10'.'J fPlacca11 "X' 111 oiw tiux 011111

,,

S Covcrnm.:nl

>:I 3 h:dnal Qucstl\m

l'lillntlll

(l '_S Cftlll'J'l!llli'n/ .\'of a l'mn-}

Ill. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIP1\L PARTIES 1P/(1((' <Iii ""X" i11 One !Jox tor Pla111/i!f

(Ft11 !l1t'<T.1i11· C"ses Onh-)

and One 801 /or Dl'/~·11d11nl)

Cai1cn ofrhi~ St.:itc'

PTF DEF
' 1 1

lncnrpnrat<:J or f'1incipal Place .,( l-\w;incs:; In 1"111> S1,11c

PTF :-1 --1

DEF
n --1

U.S. c;o,·crnmcnl Dcfcmiar11

0 4 DnNSl\y (fndiu11t· Ci11:c11.1h1p ofl'<ir//cs m //em /ff)

Cititc'n o!' Anotl1cr Stntc

_"] 2 Jncorporilh'd 11m/ l'r111c1pal 1'1,icc uf r~usincso ln 1\no1il~r State

Citizen or Suhjcct of a Forci 'll Countrv

0

Fordgn Nation

IV. NATURE OF SUJ1' (Plucean ·x" in Onc Hor Onii')

I

CONTRACT

TORTS

FORFEITL'RE/PENALTY

BANKRUPTCY

'l 11() lih\Hil!KC
, :~o rvl.irlllc'
-, I ;1J ri.1Llkr 1\d

l'ERSO~AL l~.JL1R\
I \ 10 ,\orplanl' ..., 'I~ .\11-planc l'1ud11n

PI<:HSO:"AL l~JtRY :1 .i/\5 l'L'r,onal !n_iury
l'1oduct J,1ab1l11y

II 625 Dn1~ Relaicd Sci/ur,, nfl'r11pc1ty 21 USC ,\Sl
I ti90 (W1c1

use ' --122 Appc~I 2~

1ss

1 421 W1thdr~wal
~s use 157

I I-HI ~c~ut1ablc l11,11u1nc.:1

1 1.1h.l1t;

_-, .>6! IkJITh Can:

I 150 lk<.:c1\c'ryufU;(':rJJll1,·111 :"J "\]LJ ,.\";HLil. ! 1bc•l &

l'harnHKCL1l1cal

PROi.oERTY RIGHTS

& J.nlu1ccn1cnt of luJ~mc'iil

s1.rn,k1

:J 151 McJ1carc Act

:i 3.\() FcJeral F111plt>}Cf>

,-, 15~ Reccn'e1y of[)efaullcd

L1abLlllV

l'c'r~onal Injury l'roJuct Lwbility

::J S20 Copyrights :J 830 p,ttent
il ~40 Trademark

StudcT\\ Loan,

I ')..)() ~JariTIL'

ln1ury Pi-nJuct

(1-:.~eludcs Veteran' I
n 15.l Rec·uve1yofl1\crp<1)n1c:nt
ofVetcrnn·, Hcnd1ts

l '---15 J\lari11c f'ruJuct l.1ah1l11y
1• -'~O!\lutor Vc'l11ck

l.1abilny

LABOR

PERSO.'\'.AL l'HOPF:RTY n 710 F«1r Labor StanJanJs

1 370 Othc·r Framl

Act

CIAL ."ECURITY
i i S61 H1Atl~95tt)
!..., U12 Black Lung (921)

I 160 Stockhol<lcis' Suits

1• 355 :..totor \\'hick

_") J7 I Truth in L~·nding

L"J 720 L1bor/J\.lanagcment

1 X(J3 D!\VC/DJWW {405tg))

:1 190 Other Contr3ct

Product 1.iability

:1 195 Contract Product Lwbil1ty 11 360 Oth~r l'crson<il

1 380 Other Person;il Property Damage

Rchnions ll 740 Railway Lab,1r Acl

I 864 SS!D Tttlc XVI
n ~b5 R'll (405\g})

0 196 Franchise

Injury

C1 31>5 Property Damage

::J 7~ I hunily and Medical

i:J 362 Pcr,onal Injury-

Product Liability

L~'J\'C AL·t

~--=~~====~--+--"'c':;'O'''c'"''c"~'11~':;ra0ct0ic~c'--~====~====,-i~ 790 Othtr Labur Li1igatiun

l

REAL PROPERTY

CIVIL RIGHTS

PRISONER PETITIONS :J 7'/I Employee Retirement

FEDERAL TAX SUITS

_, 210 Land Condcmna11un

" -lAO 01hcr Civil Right~

llahca~ Corpus:

[ncQrnc Security Act

0 870 Taxes (L'.S l'la1nnff

0 221l Forcck>surc

:J 4--11 \ oung

.:J 461 .'\!kn Dct;111wc

or DctCndan!)

0 ~JO Rent Lease & l::'jcctmcnt 0 ..\42 Employmcn1

.1 5 ! 0 !v1ot1,in~ to Vacatc

CJ l\71 IRS--Third Party

0 240 Turb to Lllld
n 245 To1t Product Liability

0-M311,,u.>mg Ac:co1nm0Jal1c>1l>

Sentence 1 5.10 Cieneral

26 USC 7609

i i 290 All Oth~1 R~al Proptil}

, -!-!< .-\nta W·Dt,abil1ILCS - I 515 Lkalh Pcnc1li>

IMMIGRATION

l·1111>lt1yna;nl

Othl•r:

..., 41>2 .\bturah7.lT10n 1\ppl11.·;111011

l-!--1(,,.\1nc•r \ldlb.1b1lilLC'- I ).1(1 .\lJ11dainu' & ( )lh<:'r :-i 4()5 Otiln l1rnrng1;1t1011

()!hc'l

l ..'i.'iO l'i11I Right'

A~tiun:;

l -!4~ Fduc".!ltDll

J 55~ i'ri'>nn Cundnion

:1 5(,(l Civil lktaincc -

C-011J1tion' uf

l'u1itincrncnt

0 6 06

OTHER STATUTF.S

I

.1·75 False C\a1111-; Act
,' 400 Stak Rcappo111c1nmcnt , 410 i\n111mst
, 4.<0 Bank,; Jnd B~nkmg ,:J 450 Lun1111crn:
460 Deportation 0 --17fl Racket1111r In1luenccd and
., Corrupt Orgnn1zat1uns .ixo C-on.-t111Jc'r Credit
,', --190 Cublc'Sat TV )(50 Scnu itic~/( un1motl1l1c>/
Exchange
n 890 Orhcr Sraturory Act1nns
',, 891 Agricultural Act~ R93 Env1ror11ncnrnl Ma1tc1s
895 hce<lom of Information
Act
,,n :N6 Arb1traliu11 )(91/ 1\dmi11i~trative Procedure

Act/Renew or Appeal or Agency Dcds10n 0 950 Constittmonality of State StJtutes

\". ()Rf(;JN 1!'1u," (Ill

'"I !11< h'u\ (JnfrJ

)<( I Onl!.inal l'roC.,;cdi11g

rz~,rno1,.,;d 11,1111
Stale ( ·oun

Renwndctl frorn .-\ppcllatc l\.)urt

::J ~ Rcrnslakd c11 Reopened

rransl'errcd from Another District
f.1/JCCl/_1')

CJ 6 Mult1district Lit1gmicrn

Cill: the U .S Ci\·il _Statute under which you are filing (D111w1cit<'111n\'1/i{'tio11ul .11r11111t'.1· 11nfr.1.1· dfr1.•n1~1'1.
VI. CAUSE OF A C T B4r2ieIUf d.eO Ss.cCri.ptSiN oencotifoc> naus1e9.-83- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Violation of Plaintiffs Civil Rights by County, City and Police

VIL REQUESTED IN COMPLAINT:

:J CJIECK !F Tl/IS JS A CLASS ACTJO'.'l"
UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P.

OE:\-lANI> $ 40,000,000.00

CHECK Yl:S ouly if tlcmanJcJ in complaint JURY DE!\IA!\"O: )!::l Yes CJ No

VIII. RELATED CASE(S)

IF ANY

tSet' 111,1/ru,·fion.1)

JUDGE

DOCKET NUMBl'.R

DA Tl-.
08/28/2014
FOR OFFICE tlSE Ol\L\

SIGNATURI-: OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD

Rl·CFll'T i;

.\ \10\.'t"·>i

ILDCiE

RECCEasIeV: 4E:1D4-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 1-2 Filed: 08/28/14 Page: 1 of 1 PageID #: 30

P..UG 2 S; 2014

. U.S. E.

0"51RIC~ ~iURl ~'f\ RIJI~

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI

y-~r((t\\~~ w~/ \e,}\h)v>eph~1)A\.v\5..+,GOvV-\e)u;.1/aq-l.J.u.ciLw,_;:r0)

\<..eµ '6 W°V\. ~k

.

l

Plaintiff,

)

)

[\...a(YlC\J

Y.
Sa..ck5on/Jofl

~rvv,

•
JuS-h"

) )

GJS•'l"~J s-\-. ~\J ~~fv\d.1t-cr11 CA~

) )

o f %'.r-jVISOV\> ,M, 1$.Y.AJ.o\ Defendant,

)

)

Case No.

ORIGINAL FILING FORM

THIS FORM MUST BE COMPLETED AND VERIFIED BY THE FILING PARTY WHEN INITIATING A NEW CASE.

[ -i THIS SAME CAUSE, OR A SUBSTANTIALLY EQUIVALENT COMPLAINT, WAS
PREVIOUSLY FILED IN THIS COURT AS CASE N U M B E R - - - - - - AND ASSIGNED TO THE HONORABLE J U D G E - - - - - - - - - -

r[_-_ 1j THIS CAUSE IS RELATED, BUT IS NOT SUBSTANTIALLY EQUIVALENT TO ANY

PREVIOUSLY FILED COMPLAINT. THE RELATED CASE NUMBER IS _ _ _ _ _ _ _ AND

THAT CASE WAS ASSIGNED TO THE HONORABLE _ _ _ _ _ _ __ THIS CASE MAY,

THEREFORE, BE OPENED AS AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

E

NEITHER THIS SAME CAUSE, NOR A SUBSTANTIALL y EQUIVALENT

COMPLAINT, HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY FILED IN THIS COURT, AND THEREFORE

MAY BE OPENED AS AN ORIGINAL l'ROCUolllNl;.

The undersigned affirms that the information provided above is true and correct.

~o_,___[2 Date:

?--+--}1--+--i_

~-~ Signature ofFiling Party

 
 Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 1 of 42 PageID #: 56

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

TRACEY WHITE,

)

)

and

)

)

WILLIAM DAVIS,

)

)

and

)

)

DWAYNE ANTON MATTHEWS, JR,

)

Case No. 14-cv-01490

)

and

)

)

DAMON COLEMAN,

)

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

)

and

)

)

THEOPHILUS GREEN,

)

)

and

)

)

KERRY WHITE,

)

)

and

)

)

ANTAWN HARRIS

)

)

and

)

)

NATHAN BURNS

)

)

and

)

)

KIA BOWERS

)

)

and

)

)

SANDY BOWERS

)

)

Plaintiffs,

)

)

THOMAS JACKSON, individually, and in

)

his official capacity as City of Ferguson,

)

1

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 2 of 42 PageID #: 57

Missouri Chief of Police,

)

)

and

)

)

JON BELMAR, individually, and in his

)

official capacity as St. Louis County,

)

Missouri Chief of Police,

)

)

and

)

)

JUSTIN COSMA, individually, and in

)

his official capacity as a City of

)

Ferguson Police Officer,

)

)

and

)

)

JOHN DOES, police officers of the City

)

Of Ferguson and St. Louis County

)

Police Departments whose identities are

)

unknown to Plaintiffs at this time,

)

)

and

)

)

ST. LOUIS COUNTY, MISSOURI,

)

)

and

)

)

CITY OF FERGUSON, MISSOURI,

)

)

Defendants.

)

AMENDED COMPLAINT (False Arrest; Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress; Negligent
Supervision; Assault and Battery; 42 U.S.C. § 1983)

INTRODUCTION

1. This is a civil action seeking damages against Thomas Jackson, who is the

City of Ferguson Police Chief; Jon Belmar, who is the St. Louis County Chief of Police;

Justin Cosma, who is a City of Ferguson Police Officer; the John Doe police officers of the

City of Ferguson Police Department and/or the St. Louis County Police Department whose

identities are unknown to Plaintiffs at this time; St. Louis County, Missouri; and the City of 2

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 3 of 42 PageID #: 58

Ferguson, Missouri (collectively, “Defendants”) for committing acts, under color of law,

which deprived Plaintiffs of rights secured under the Constitution and laws of the United

States and the state of Missouri; and, for refusing or failing to prevent such deprivations and

denials to Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs allege, among other things, that Defendants intentionally,

negligently and/or recklessly caused Plaintiffs to be subjected to unnecessary and

unwarranted force, arrests that were not based upon probable cause, and other violations of

their constitutional rights. This action seeks both compensatory and punitive damages

against the defendants for the intentional acts of wrongdoing and negligence under state law.

JURISDICTION 2. This action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1988 and the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. This Court has jurisdiction over this action Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, 28 U.S.C. § 1343 and 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Plaintiffs further invoke the supplemental jurisdiction of this Court to hear and decide claims arising under state law, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367.

PARTIES

3.

At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Tracey White was a resident of the state

of Missouri and a citizen of the United States.

4.

At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff William Davis was a resident of the state

of Missouri and a citizen of the United States.

5. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff DeWayne Anton Matthews, Jr.,

was a resident of the state of Missouri and a citizen of the United States.

6. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Damon Coleman was a resident of the

state of Missouri and a citizen of the United States. 3

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 4 of 42 PageID #: 59
7. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Theophilus Green was a resident of the state of Missouri and a citizen of the United States.
8. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Kerry White was a resident of the State of Missouri and a citizen of the United States.
9. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Antawn Harris was a resident of the State of Missouri and a citizen of the United States.
10. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Nathan Burns was a resident of the State of Missouri and a citizen of the United States.
11. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Kia Bowers was a resident of the State of Missouri and a citizen of the United States.
12. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Sandy Bowers was a resident of the State of Missouri and a citizen of the United States.
13. At all times relevant herein, Defendant Thomas Jackson was the City of Ferguson Chief of Police and acted under color of the laws, statutes, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of the City of Ferguson, Missouri; and, the City of Ferguson Police Department; and, pursuant to his authority as the Chief of Police.
14. At all times relevant herein, Defendant Jon Belmar was the St. Louis County Chief of Police and acted under color of the laws, statutes, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of St. Louis County, Missouri; and, the St. Louis County Police Department; and, pursuant to his authority as the Chief of Police.
15. At all times relevant herein, Defendant Justin Cosma was a City of Ferguson Police Officer and acted under color of the laws, statutes, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of the City of Ferguson, Missouri; and, the
4

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 5 of 42 PageID #: 60
City of Ferguson Police Department; and, pursuant to his authority as a police officer. 16. At all times relevant herein, Defendant St. Louis County was located in the
state of Missouri and maintained a police department which operates under, and administers, a set of law enforcement policies, practices and customs involving the hiring, training and supervision of its officers. These policies, practices and customs include training in the use of force and on-the- street encounters with civilians as well as the basis for an arrest. St. Louis County is liable directly and vicariously.
17. At all times relevant herein, Defendant City of Ferguson was a municipal corporation and maintained a police department which operates under, and administers, a set of law enforcement policies, practices and customs involving the hiring, training and supervision of its officers. These policies, practices and customs include training in the use of force and on-the- street encounters with civilians as well as the basis for an arrest. The City of Ferguson is liable directly and vicariously.
18. At all times relevant herein, Defendant John Doe police officers, whose identities are unknown to Plaintiffs at this time, are believed to have been St. Louis County or City of Ferguson Police Department officers acting within the scope of their employment and under color of the laws, statutes, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of the City of Ferguson, Missouri and the City of Ferguson Police Department; or, St. Louis County, Missouri and the St. Louis County Police Department; as the case may be, pursuant to their authority as police officers.
I. STATEMENT OF FACTS COMMON TO ALL PLAINTIFFS 19. On August 9, 2014, Darren Wilson of the City of Ferguson Police Department and Michael Brown, Jr., a teenaged African American, encountered one
5

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 6 of 42 PageID #: 61
another. A violent confrontation ensued, and Michael Brown, Jr., who was unarmed, was shot to death by Darren Wilson, who is Caucasian.
20. Although the fact that an unarmed African American was shot and killed by a Caucasian police officer is not an unusual event in the United States, the Michael Brown, Jr. shooting was somewhat unique in that it occurred between 12:00 p.m. and 1:00 p.m. in the afternoon, and there were several independent eyewitnesses. As a result of the number of eyewitnesses, technology and the internet, the circumstances surrounding the death of Michael Brown, Jr. went viral and millions of people became aware of it.
21. The community in Ferguson was particularly outraged by what appeared to be an excessive use of force in the Michael Brown, Jr. shooting. The unarmed Michael Brown, Jr. was shot multiple times by Officer Wilson.
22. A public outcry about the shooting death of Michael Brown, Jr. by Officer Wilson turned into protests, which subsequently led to civil unrest in the streets of Ferguson, Missouri when Defendants took up arms and, in militaristic displays of force and weaponry, engaged U.S. Citizens as if they were war combatants.
23. In doing so during the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendants used wanton and excessive force, under color of law, which deprived Plaintiffs of rights secured under the Constitution and laws of the United States and state law. In addition, the Defendants made arrests without probable cause in defiance of the Constitution and laws of the United States and state law.
24. Plaintiffs were all victims of the atrocities committed by Defendants during the period of August 11-13, 2014.
6

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 7 of 42 PageID #: 62
II. FACTS AND CLAIMS SPECIFIC TO PLAINTIFF
TRACEY WHITE AND WILLIAM DAVIS 25. Plaintiffs Tracey White and her son, Plaintiff William Davis, adopt and incorporate by reference paragraphs 1-24 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 26. On August 13, 2014, Plaintiffs Tracey White and her son, William Davis, attended a Peace and Love rally that was sponsored by her AME Church group in Ferguson. After the rally was over, she and her son walked to the McDonald’s Restaurant located on W. Florissant, where they purchased some drinks and food. 27. While in the restaurant waiting for her husband to come and get her and her son, Plaintiff White conversed with some of the patrons and otherwise acted normally. Shortly thereafter, Plaintiff Davis went to the restroom and Plaintiff went back up to the counter to purchase a sundae. Just as she did that, several Defendant John Doe police officers and Defendant Cosma, in what appeared to be army uniforms, carrying rifles and sticks and wearing helmets, approached the door and ordered Plaintiff White to “get out.” Plaintiff White was terrified and tried to tell Defendant John Doe police officers and Defendant Cosma that her son, Plaintiff Davis, was in the restroom, and that she was there waiting for her husband to pick them up. 28. After her son exited the restroom, Plaintiff White observed him being accosted by Defendant John Doe police officers and Defendant Cosma. When she expressed her concern, she was told to “shut up.” When Plaintiff White continued to express her concerns about the way her son was being mistreated, she was advised that she was being arrested because she would not “shut up.” Plaintiff White was then thrown to the ground and
7

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 8 of 42 PageID #: 63
handcuffed. During the process of being arrested, Plaintiff White realized that she had her son’s iPad in her hand and summoned him over to retrieve the item. When he did, Defendant John Doe police officers and Defendant Cosma, placed Plaintiff William Davis, who was a minor at the time, under arrest as well, for no reason at all.
29. Plaintiff White and Plaintiff Davis, who was a minor at the time, were then transported to the St. Louis County Police Department offices in Clayton, Missouri, where they were fingerprinted, photographed, held for more than five (5) hours and told that they had been arrested on the unfounded charge of “failure to disperse.”
A. FALSE ARREST 30. Defendant Cosma wrongfully and unlawfully arrested and detained and/or assisted in the arrest and detention of the Plaintiffs on the unfounded charge of “failure to disperse,” even though he knew that no probable cause or any other basis for the charge existed. 31. As a direct proximate result of the false arrest of Plaintiffs by Defendant Cosma and the other Defendants, Plaintiffs White and Davis suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and have suffered, and will continue to suffer, mental anguish, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being falsely arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Tracey White and William Davis, demand judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against Defendant Cosma, and other Defendants, in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by
8

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 9 of 42 PageID #: 64
law. B.
INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 32. Plaintiffs White and Davis further allege that Defendant Cosma and Defendant John Doe police officers, with deliberate indifference and reckless disregard for the rights of Plaintiffs White and Davis and with pure malice, did subject Plaintiff White to the humiliation of being thrown to the ground and being arrested in front of her minor son and the added humiliation of seeing her son taken into custody, and treated as if he were a criminal. Defendants City of Ferguson and County of St. Louis Police Departments, with full knowledge of the inappropriateness of these actions have taken no action against any officer involved in the blatantly unfounded arrest of Plaintiffs Tracey White and William Davis and have, therefore, acquiesced in and/or condoned the unlawful acts of Defendant Cosma and other Defendants against Plaintiff. 33. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of Defendants, Plaintiffs White and Davis suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and have suffered, and will continue to suffer, psychological harm and mental anguish including fright, shame, mortification, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being unlawfully arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against Defendant Cosma in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
9

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 10 of 42 PageID #: 65
C. NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION 34. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendant Cosma and Defendant John Doe police officers were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the rules, regulations, policies and procedures, of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County. 35. Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County acted negligently, carelessly and recklessly by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct and monitor Defendant Cosma and Defendant John Doe police officers. 36. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County, Plaintiffs White and Davis were wrongfully and unlawfully, arrested, detained and humiliated. As a result, Plaintiffs White and Davis have suffered physical assault, embarrassment, and mental anguish. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
D. ASSAULT AND BATTERY 37. Defendant Cosma and Defendant John Doe police officers, without proper grounds, willfully assaulted and handcuffed Plaintiffs White and Davis without just cause or basis. 38. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ willful, malicious and
10

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 11 of 42 PageID #: 66
intentional conduct, Plaintiffs White suffered bodily injuries when she was taken to the ground to be handcuffed.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against Defendant Cosma in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
E. DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 39. Plaintiffs White and Davis further allege that Defendant Cosma and Defendant John Doe police officers, with deliberate indifference to and reckless disregard for the safety and well-being of plaintiffs, and in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, did on August 13, 2014 deprived Plaintiffs of their Constitutional rights by assaulting them and then placing them under unlawful arrest, or failed to prevent the arrest and detention, when they had the opportunity to do so. 40. The arrest and detention were and are in violation of Plaintiffs’ right to be free from unreasonable seizure secured by the Fourth Amendments to the United States Constitution and protected under 42 U.S.C. §1983. 41. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ arrest and detention of Plaintiffs as set forth herein, Plaintiffs have suffered severe emotional anguish. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendant Cosma and Defendant John Doe police officers, jointly and severally, in the full and fair amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) in compensatory and punitive damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
11

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 12 of 42 PageID #: 67
F. FAILURE TO TRAIN, SUPERVISE, AND DISCIPLINE 42 U.S.C. § 1983 42. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendants that were responsible for the arrest of Plaintiffs White and Davis were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the practices and customs of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County and implemented by Defendants Belmar and Thomas. 43. Defendants acted negligently, carelessly, recklessly and with deliberate indifference to Plaintiffs by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct, monitor and discipline Defendant officers from their respective departments who were patrolling the streets of Ferguson, Missouri during the period of August 11-13, 2014. 44. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson, St. Louis County, Belmar and Thomas, Plaintiffs White and Davis were unlawfully arrested, seized and otherwise deprived of their rights under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,00.00), plus punitive damages to the extent allowed by law, attorney’s fees, interest, and costs.
III. FACTS AND CLAIMS SPECIFIC TO PLAINTIFF DEWAYNE A. MATTHEWS, JR.
45. Plaintiff Dewayne A. Matthews, Jr. adopts and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-24 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
46. On August 13, 2014, which was a Wednesday night, Plaintiff Matthews was on his way to his mother’s house who lives near W. Florissant and
12

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 13 of 42 PageID #: 68

Kappel in Ferguson, Missouri.

47. Because of the civil disturbances that had taken place, he was simply going to

her house to visit her and make sure she was alright.

48. Plaintiff Matthews took public transportation to his mother’s house. When he

got off the 61 Chambers bus, he noticed that the street was blocked off so he proceeded to the

corner of W. Florissant and Highmont.

49. At the above location, Plaintiff Matthews was confronted by approximately

eight (8) Defendant John Doe police officers in military type uniforms who had their

weapons trained upon him. Plaintiff immediately put his hands in the air whereupon he was

shot multiple times with rubber bullets.

50. At that point, Plaintiff Matthews fell into a creek or sewer. Defendant John

Doe officers pounced on him, slammed his face into the concrete, and pushed his head

underwater to the point that he felt he was going to be drowned. Afterward, Defendant John

Doe police officers continued to assault him and spray him with O.C. spray.

51.

Plaintiff Matthews w as arrested for allegedly “failing to di sperse” even

though h e h ad not b een i nvolved i n any protests o f any kind and w as on ly in t he

neighborhood to check on his mother.

52. Plaintiff Matthews was transported to Christian Hospital Northwest for

treatment for the injuries he sustained at the hands of Defendant John Doe police officers.

Despite the fact that Plaintiff Matthews was allegedly placed under arrest for committing a

crime, Plaintiff Matthews was never taken to a police station and was released from the

hospital the next day.

A. FALSE ARREST
13

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 14 of 42 PageID #: 69
53. Plaintiff Matthews was wrongfully and unlawfully arrested and detained by Defendant John Doe police officers on the unfounded charge of “failure to disperse” even though no probable cause or any other basis for the charge existed and even though Plaintiff Matthews was not in any way involved in any protests.
54. As a direct proximate result of his false arrest, Plaintiff Matthews suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and has suffered, and will continue to suffer, mental anguish, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being falsely arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Matthews demands judgment against Defendant John Doe police officers, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against Defendant John Doe police officers in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
B. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 55. Plaintiff Matthews further alleges that Defendant John Doe police officers with deliberate indifference and reckless disregard for his rights and with pure malice, subjected him to vicious acts of violence for no lawful reason. Defendants City of Ferguson and County of St. Louis, with full knowledge of the brutal, vicious and gratuitous acts of violence in which its officers were engaging took no action against any officer involved in the blatantly unlawful assault, battery and arrest Plaintiff Matthews and have, therefore, acquiesced in and/or condoned the unlawful acts of the Defendant John Doe officers. 56. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of Defendants, Plaintiff
14

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 15 of 42 PageID #: 70
Matthews suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and has suffered, and will continue to suffer, psychological harm and mental anguish including fright, shame, mortification, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being unlawfully arrested, savagely beaten for no reason, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Matthews demands judgment against Defendant John Doe police officers, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
C. NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION 57. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendant John Doe police officers were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the rules, regulations, policies and procedures of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County. 58. Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County acted negligently, carelessly and recklessly by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct and monitor Defendant John Doe police officers. 59. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County, Plaintiff Matthews was wrongfully and unlawfully, arrested, detained and shot with rubber bullets and savagely beaten. As a result, he suffered severe bodily injuries, pain and suffering, mental anguish, embarrassment, and emotional distress. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Matthews demands judgment against Defendants City of
15

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 16 of 42 PageID #: 71
Ferguson and St. Louis County in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
D. ASSAULT AND BATTERY 60. On Au gust 13, 2014, Defendant John D oe police officers, without p roper grounds, w illfully subjected t he Plaintiff Matthews t o cruel and unw arranted p hysical violence in the form of a beating, near drowning and being shot numerous times with rubber bullets without just cause or basis. 61. As a direct and proximate result of the conduct of the Defendant John Doe police officers, Plaintiff Matthews suffered severe bodily injuries, emotional distress, mental anguish and pain and suffering. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff Matthews demands judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, and punitive damages against Defendant John Doe police officers in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
E. DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 62. Plaintiff Matthews further alleges that Defendant John Doe police officers, with deliberate indifference to and reckless disregard for his safety and well-being in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, did on August 13, 2014 deprive Plaintiff Matthews of his Constitutional rights by assaulting him and then placing him under unlawful arrest, or
16

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 17 of 42 PageID #: 72
failed to prevent the arrest and detention, when they had the opportunity to do so. 63. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant John Doe police officers’
assault, battery, arrest and detention of Plaintiff Matthews as set forth herein, Plaintiff Matthews has suffered severe injuries and emotional anguish.
64. On August 13, 2014, Defendant John Doe police officers used wanton and excessive force, under color of state law, which deprived Plaintiff Matthews of rights secured under the Constitution and laws of the United States.
65. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of Defendant John Doe police officers, Plaintiff Matthews was subjected to an illegal seizure by Defendant John Doe police officers from the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County, acting outside the parameters of law and decency.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Matthews demands judgment against Defendants John Doe police officers, jointly and severally, in the full and fair amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) in compensatory and punitive damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
F. FAILURE TO TRAIN, SUPERVISE, AND DISCIPLINE 42 U.S.C. § 1983 66. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendant John Doe police officers responsible for the arrest and beating of Plaintiff Matthews were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the practices and customs of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County and implemented by Defendants Belmar and Thomas. 67. Defendants City of Ferguson, St. Louis County, Belmar and Thomas acted negligently, carelessly, recklessly and with deliberate indifference to the safety of Plaintiff
17

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 18 of 42 PageID #: 73
Matthews by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct, monitor and discipline the officers from their respective departments who were patrolling the streets of Ferguson, Missouri during the period of August 11-13, 2014.
68. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson, St. Louis County, Belmar and Plaintiff Matthews was unlawfully arrested, seized, beaten, shot with rubber bullets and otherwise deprived of his civil rights
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,00.00), plus punitive damages to the extent allowed by law, attorney’s fees, interest, and costs.
IV. FACTS AND CLAIMS SPECIFIC TO PLAINTIFF KERRY WHITE 69. Plaintiff Kerry White adopts and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-24 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 70. On Tuesday, August 12, 2014, Plaintiff White was in the City of Ferguson, shooting photographic footage of the protests in Ferguson. He initially parked at Chambers and West Florissant, with two of his friends in the vehicle. 71. As Plaintiff White was shooting footage, he observed Defendant John Doe police officers begin proceeding down Chambers, shooting tear gas and ordering people to leave the area. Plaintiff White left the lot, went south on Chambers and then made a right on Lorrna. Plaintiff White continued to shoot footage from his vehicle. Defendant John Doe police officers subsequently came onto Lorrna and when Plaintiff White tried to get out of their path, he was blocked in by a military-like tactical vehicle. 72. At this point, the Plaintiff White was seriously afraid for his life. He held his camera out of his car window in an attempt to let Defendant John Doe police officers
18

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 19 of 42 PageID #: 74
know that he was simply photographing the protests. 73. Defendant John Doe police officer snatched Plaintiff White’s camera from
his hand, took out his memory card and threw it to the ground. Plaintiff White and his passengers were then taken from his vehicle by several Defendant John Doe police officers from the St. Louis County Police Department, handcuffed, placed in a police wagon and transported to the Clayton Justice Center. Once there, they were booked on the unfounded charge of “failure to disburse” even though no basis at all existed for that charge.
A. FALSE ARREST 74. Plaintiff Kerry White was wrongfully and unlawfully arrested and detained by Defendant John Doe police officers on the unfounded charge of “failure to disperse” even though it was clear that no probable cause or any other basis for the charge existed. 75. As a direct proximate result of his false arrest by Defendant John Doe police officers, Plaintiff White suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and has suffered, and will continue to suffer, mental anguish, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being falsely arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Kerry White demands judgment against Defendant John Doe police officers, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against Defendant John Doe officers in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
19

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 20 of 42 PageID #: 75
B. NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION 76. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendant John Doe police officers were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the rules, regulations, policies and procedures, of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County. 77. Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County acted negligently, carelessly and recklessly by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct and monitor Defendant John Doe police officers during the period of August 11-13, 2014. 78. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County, Plaintiff White was wrongfully and unlawfully, arrested, detained and humiliated. As a result, he was caused to suffer mental anguish, embarrassment, and emotional distress. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff White demands judgment against Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
C. ASSAULT AND BATTERY 79. Defendant John Doe police officers, without proper grounds, willfully assaulted, battered and handcuffed Plaintiff Kerry White without just cause or basis. 80. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant John Doe police officers’ willful, malicious and intentional actions, Plaintiff White suffered bodily injuries while being unlawfully
20

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 21 of 42 PageID #: 76
arrested, taken to the ground and handcuffed. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff White demands judgment against Defendants, jointly
and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against Defendant John Doe police officers in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
D. DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 81. Plaintiff Kerry White further alleges that Defendant John Doe police officers, with deliberate indifference to and reckless disregard for his safety and well-being and in violation of the Fourth Amendment, did on August 12, 2014, commit or allowed to be committed acts which deprived him of his constitutional right to be free from an unreasonable seizure. 82. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of Defendant John Doe police officers, Kerry White was subjected to an illegal seizure by Defendant John Doe police officers, who were acting outside the parameters of law and decency. 83. Du ring the period of August 11 -13, 2014, D efendant John D oe police officers us ed w anton and excessive force, und er color of state law, wh ich deprived Plaintiff of rights secured under the Constitution and laws of the United States. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff White demands judgment against the Defendant John Doe police officers, jointly and severally, in the full and fair amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) in compensatory and punitive damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
21

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 22 of 42 PageID #: 77
E. FAILURE TO TRAIN, SUPERVISE, AND DISCIPLINE 42 U.S.C. § 1983 84. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendant John Doe police officers responsible for the arrest of Plaintiff Kerry White were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the practices and customs of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County and implemented by Defendants Belmar and Thomas. 85. Defendant John Doe police officers acted negligently, carelessly, recklessly and with deliberate indifference to the safety of Plaintiff White by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct, monitor and discipline the officers from their respective departments who were patrolling the streets of Ferguson, Missouri During the period of August 11-13, 2014. 86. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson, St. Louis County, Belmar and Plaintiff Thomas Kerry White was unlawfully arrested, seized and otherwise deprived of his civil rights. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff White demands judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,00.00), plus punitive damages to the extent allowed by law, attorney’s fees, interest, and costs.
V. FACTS AND CLAIMS SPECIFIC TO PLAINTIFFS DAMON COLEMAN AND THEOPHILUS GREEN 87. Plaintiffs Damon Coleman and Theophilus Green adopt and incorporate by reference paragraphs 1-24 as if fully set forth herein. 88. On August 11, 2014, at approximately 8:00 p.m., Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were engaging in a peaceful protest, with several others, regarding the shooting death of Michael Brown, Jr. on West Florissant near the Quick Trip convenience store.
22

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 23 of 42 PageID #: 78
89. At or around the same date and time, a number of St. Louis County police officers began to arrive on the scene. Shortly thereafter, a military type truck pulled up with more St. Louis County police officers in full riot gear.
90. At that point, other St. Louis County police officers began to put on riot gear and arm themselves with militaristic type automatic weapons. Upon seeing these officers appear to be preparing to engage in combat, the protesters turned to them and began to chant “hands up don’t shoot” with their arms raised in the air.
91. In response, Defendant John Doe police officers, who appeared to be seeking a confrontation, began to spread out and take what appeared to be tactical positions behind the non-violent protesters. At about the same time, two military tanklike vehicles began to approach the group from the front with police officers on and next to the vehicles. Defendant John Doe police officers then began shooting tear gas into the group of protestors causing the group to scatter.
92. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were recording these events. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were then spotted and Defendant John Doe police officers began shooting at them. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green raised their hands but the police continued to fire tear gas and what appeared to be stun grenades in their direction.
93. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were repeatedly shot with rubber bullets as the pol ice continued t o fire as Plaintiffs Coleman and G reen got on t heir knees and presented no threat.
94. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were subsequently placed under arrest on the unfounded charge of “failure to disperse.” While arresting Plaintiffs Coleman and Green,
23

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 24 of 42 PageID #: 79
Defendant John Doe police officers from the St. Louis County Police Department hurled racial epithets at them, while punching and kicking them the entire time.
95. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were eventually taken to the Clayton Justice Center where they were ridiculed and placed in s mall cells. Plaintiffs Green and Coleman were held for more than 12 hours.
A. FALSE ARREST 96. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green wrongfully and unlawfully arrested and detained on the unfounded charge of “failure to disperse” even though it was clear that no probable cause or any other basis for the charge existed. 97. As a direct proximate result of the false arrest of Plaintiffs Coleman and Green by Defendant John Doe police officers from the St. Louis County Police Department, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and have suffered, and will continue to suffer, mental anguish, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being falsely arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green demand judgment against Defendant John Doe police officers, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, and punitive damages in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
B. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 98. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green further allege that Defendant John Doe police
24

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 25 of 42 PageID #: 80
officers from the St. Louis County Police Department, with deliberate indifference and reckless disregard for Plaintiffs’ rights, and with pure malice, did falsely arrest, beat, ridicule and shoot them with rubber bullets simply for the sport of it.
99. Defendants City of Ferguson and County of St. Louis with full knowledge of the falsification of police reports by their officers as well as their acts of misconduct and use of excessive force took no action against any officer involved in the unlawful arrest of Plaintiffs Coleman and Green and have, therefore, acquiesced in and/or condoned the unlawful acts of Defendants John Doe police officers.
100. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of Defendants, Plaintiffs suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and have suffered, and will continue to suffer, psychological harm and mental anguish including fright, shame, mortification, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being unlawfully arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly deprived of their civil rights and mistreated
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green demand judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against Defendant John Doe police officers from the St. Louis County Police Department in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
C. NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION 101. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, the Defendant John Doe police officers were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the rules, regulations,
25

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 26 of 42 PageID #: 81
policies and procedures, of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County. 102. Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County acted negligently,
carelessly and recklessly by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct and monitor Defendant John Doe police officers deployed onto the streets of Ferguson, Missouri During the period of August 11-13, 2014.
103. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were wrongfully and unlawfully, arrested, detained, beaten, shot with rubber bullets and humiliated. As a result, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green have suffered physical injury, pain and suffering, mental anguish, embarrassment, and mental distress.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green demand judgment against the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
D. ASSAULT AND BATTERY 104. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green, without proper grounds, were shot with rubber bullets and beaten about their bodies by Defendant John Doe police officers even though Plaintiffs Coleman and Green posed no threat to Defendant John Doe police officers or anyone else. 105. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant John Doe police officers willful, malicious and intentional actions, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green suffered serious injury to significant areas of their bodies, as well a pain and suffering, mental anguish,
26

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 27 of 42 PageID #: 82
emotional distress and humiliation. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green demand judgment against Defendants,
jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
E. DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 106. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green further allege that Defendant John Doe police officers, with deliberate indifference to and reckless disregard for their safety and well-being and in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution and protected under 42 U.S.C. §1983, did on August 11, 2014, commit or allowed to be committed acts which deprived both of them their Constitutional right to be free from an unreasonable seizure and excessive force. 107. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of Defendant John Doe police officers, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were subjected to an illegal seizure and the excessive use of force by the completely out of control police officers, acting outside the parameters of law and decency. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green demand judgment against Defendant John Doe police officers, jointly and severally, in the full and fair amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) in compensatory and punitive damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
27

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 28 of 42 PageID #: 83
F. FAILURE TO TRAIN, SUPERVISE, AND DISCIPLINE 42 U.S.C. § 1983
108. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendant John Doe police officers responsible for the unlawful arrest, beating and mistreatment of Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the practices and customs of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County and implemented by Defendants Belmar and Thomas.
109. Defendants acted negligently, carelessly, recklessly and with deliberate indifference to the safety of Plaintiffs Coleman and Green by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct, monitor and discipline Defendants John Doe police officers from their respective departments who were patrolling the streets of Ferguson, Missouri During the period of August 11-13, 2014.
110. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson, St. Louis County, Belmar and Thomas, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were unlawfully arrested, seized and otherwise mistreated.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Coleman and G reen d emand j udgment against Defendants, j ointly and s everally, i n t he full and j ust amount of One Million D ollars ($1,000,000.00), pl us puni tive damages t o t he extent allowed by law, attorney’s fees, interest, and costs.
VI. FACTS AND CLAIMS SPECIFIC TO PLAINTIFF ANTAWN HARRIS 111. Plaintiff Antawn Harris adopts and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-24 as if fully set forth herein. 112. On August 11, 2014, at approximately 7:40 p.m., Plaintiff Harris, who resides in
28

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 29 of 42 PageID #: 84
the Canfield Green Apartments, was standing near the intersection of W Florissant Avenue and Canfield Drive observing what was going on at the time.
113. While standing there, the Plaintiff observed several St. Louis County police officers push a man, who had not been doing anything, to the ground and start beating him. The Plaintiff started recording this unlawful conduct. As he was recording the officers, one of them fired his weapon in the direction of the Plaintiff striking him between the eyes with a rubber bullet. As a result of being shot between the eyes, the Plaintiff almost lost consciousness, was knocked back and bleeding badly.
114. As a result of this assault and battery and use of excessive force, the Plaintiff was caused to seek medical treatment at BJC HealthCare Christian Hospital for the serious trauma to his face, blurred vision, headaches and severe swelling that occurred immediately thereafter.
A. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 115. Plaintiff Harris further alleges that the as of yet unidentified St. Louis County police officers, with deliberate indifference and reckless disregard for the rights of the Plaintiff, and with pure malice, did intentionally shoot him in the face with a rubber bullet simply for the sport of it. Defendants City of Ferguson and County of St. Louis with full knowledge of the falsification of police reports by their officers as well as their acts of misconduct and use of excessive force have taken no action against any officer involved in the rubber bullet shooting of Plaintiff Harris and has therefore acquiesced in and/or condoned the unlawful acts of their officers who were deployed on August 11 2014. 116. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of the Defendants, Plaintiff Harris suffered discomfort, distress, psychological harm and mental anguish. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants, jointly and
29

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 30 of 42 PageID #: 85
severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against the officer Defendants in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
B. NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION 117. At all times relevant herein, the officers deployed in Ferguson, Mo., were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the rules, regulations, policies and procedures, of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County. 118. Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County acted negligently, carelessly and recklessly by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct and monitor the officers deployed onto the streets of Ferguson, Mo., on August 11, 2014. 119. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County, Plaintiff Harris was wrongfully and unlawfully shot with a rubber bullet between the eyes. As a result, Plaintiff has suffered physical injury, pain and suffering, mental anguish, and mental distress. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment against the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
C. ASSAULT & BATTERY 120. Plaintiff Harris, without proper grounds, was shot with a rubber bullet between his eyes even though he posed no threat to any officer or anyone else.
30

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 31 of 42 PageID #: 86
121. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ willful, malicious and intentional actions, Plaintiff Harris suffered serious and permanent injury to his face, as well a pain and suffering, mental anguish, emotional distress and humiliation.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment against the defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
D. DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 122. Plaintiff Harris further alleges that the as of yet unidentified officer defendants, with deliberate indifference to and reckless disregard for their safety and well-being and in violation of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution, did on August 11, 2014, commit or allowed to be committed acts which deprived him of his Constitutional right to be free from an unreasonable seizure and excessive force. 123. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of the as of yet unidentified officer Defendants, the Plaintiff was subjected to an illegal seizure and the excessive use of force by the completely out of control police officers, acting outside the parameters of law and decency. Wherefore, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendant officers, jointly and severally, in the full and fair amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) in compensatory and punitive damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
E. FAILURE TO TRAIN, SUPERVISE, AND DISCIPLINE 42 U.S.C. § 1983 124. At all times relevant herein, the lawless officers responsible for the mistreatment of Plaintiff Harris were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the practices
31

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 32 of 42 PageID #: 87
and customs of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County and implemented by Defendants Belmar and Thomas.
125. Defendants acted negligently, carelessly, recklessly and with deliberate indifference to the safety of United States citizens in Ferguson, Mo., by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct, monitor and discipline the officers from their respective departments who were patrolling the streets of Ferguson, Mo., on August 11, 2014.
126. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson, St. Louis County, Belmar and Thomas, Plaintiff Harris was unlawfully shot between the eyes with a rubber bullet, seized and otherwise mistreated.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,00.00), plus punitive damages to the extent allowed by law, attorney’s fees, interest, and costs.
VII. FACTS AND CLAIMS SPECIFIC TO PLAINTIFF NATHAN BURNS 127. Plaintiff Nathan Burns adopts and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-24 as if fully set forth herein. 128. On August 11, 2014, at approximately 10:30 p.m., the Plaintiff was amongst a peaceful group of protesters when suddenly canisters of tear gas were thrown into the crowd of people. Almost simultaneously, 10-15 police officers ambushed members of the crowd. The Plaintiff was sprayed with mace all over his face and mouth. In response, the Plaintiff put his hands up in the air to show that he did not pose a threat to anyone and in an attempt to block the mace that was being sprayed at his face. 129. The Plaintiff then tried to walk away from the chaotic situation only to be grabbed by his hair by one of the policemen who then slammed him to the ground. In an
32

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 33 of 42 PageID #: 88
attempt to diffuse the situation, the Plaintiff immediately placed his hands behind his back so that the officers could handcuff him without any accusation of resistance. After being handcuffed, the Plaintiff’s hair was grabbed by an officer who then slammed his head into the ground while other officers saturated him with mace. One officer even stuck his finger in Plaintiff’s ear.
130. The Plaintiff was eventually lifted off the ground by the officers. While being lifted off the ground, one of the officers whispered in his ear “hey . . . hey. . . now we’re bout to kill you . . . This caused the Plaintiff to panic and seek assistance from the other officers by yelling to them that the officer nearest to him had threatened his life and to not allow him to arrest the Plaintiff. None of the other officers intervened. Plaintiff Burns was then placed in one of the armored vehicles and taken to jail. Before being placed in the vehicle, however, the officers searched the Plaintiff’s genital area several times and made sure to place their mace soaked hands on his genitals.
131. As a result of his bogus arrest for “failure to disburse,” the Plaintiff was held in jail for approximately 24 hours in clothes so drenched in mace that others could not bear to sit near him.
A. FALSE ARREST 132. Plaintiff Burns was wrongfully and unlawfully arrested and detained on the bogus charge of “failure to disperse” even though it was clear that no probable cause or any other basis for the charge existed. 133. As a direct proximate result of the false arrest of Plaintiff Burns by as of yet unidentified St. Louis County officer Defendants, the Plaintiff suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and has suffered, and will continue to suffer, mental anguish, humiliation and
33

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 34 of 42 PageID #: 89
embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being falsely arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Burns demands judgment against the Defendant officers, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, and punitive damages in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
B. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 134. Plaintiff Burns further alleges that the as of yet unidentified St. Louis County police officers, with deliberate indifference and reckless disregard for the rights of the Plaintiff, and with pure malice, did falsely arrest, beat, ridicule and spray him with a mace like substance simply for the sport of it. Defendants City of Ferguson and County of St. Louis with full knowledge of the falsification of police reports by their officers as well as their acts of misconduct and use of excessive force have taken no action against any officer involved in the blatantly bogus arrest of Plaintiff Burns and has therefore acquiesced in and/or condoned the unlawful acts of their officers who were deployed on August 11 2014. 135. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of the defendants, Plaintiff suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and has suffered, and will continue to suffer, psychological harm and mental anguish including fright, shame, mortification, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being unlawfully arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars
34

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 35 of 42 PageID #: 90
($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against the officer Defendants in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
C. NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION 136. At all times relevant herein, the officers deployed in Ferguson, Mo., were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the rules, regulations, policies and procedures, of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County. 137. Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County acted negligently, carelessly and recklessly by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct and monitor the officers deployed onto the streets of Ferguson, Mo., on August 11, 2014. 138. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County, Plaintiff Burns was wrongfully and unlawfully, arrested, detained, beaten, sprayed with a mace like substance and humiliated. As a result, Plaintiff has suffered physical injury, pain and suffering, mental anguish, embarrassment, and mental distress. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment against the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
D. ASSAULT & BATTERY 139. Plaintiff Burns, without proper grounds, was sprayed with a mace like substance and beaten about his body even though he posed no threat to any officer or anyone else.
35

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 36 of 42 PageID #: 91
140. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ willful, malicious and intentional actions, the Plaintiff suffered serious injury to significant areas of their bodies, as well a pain and suffering, mental anguish, emotional distress and humiliation.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
E. DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 141. Plaintiff Burns further alleges that the as of yet unidentified officer Defendants, with deliberate indifference to and reckless disregard for his safety and well-being and in violation of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution, did on August 11, 2014, commit or allowed to be committed acts which deprived both of them their Constitutional right to be free from an unreasonable seizure and excessive force. 142. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of the as of yet unidentified officer defendants, the Plaintiff was subjected to an illegal seizure and excessive use of force by the completely out of control police officers, acting outside the parameters of law and decency. Wherefore, Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendant officers, jointly and severally, in the full and fair amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) in compensatory and punitive damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
F. FAILURE TO TRAIN, SUPERVISE, AND DISCIPLINE 42 U.S.C. § 1983 143. At all times relevant herein, the lawless officers responsible for the arrest, beating and mistreatment of Plaintiff Burns was acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to
36

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 37 of 42 PageID #: 92
the practices and customs of defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County and implemented by Defendants Belmar and Thomas.
144. Defendants acted negligently, carelessly, recklessly and with deliberate indifference to the safety of United States citizens in Ferguson, Mo., by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct, monitor and discipline the officers from their respective departments who were patrolling the streets of Ferguson, Mo., on August 11, 2014.
145. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson, St. Louis County, Belmar and Thomas, Plaintff Burns was unlawfully arrested, seized and otherwise mistreated.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,00.00), plus punitive damages to the extent allowed by law, attorney’s fees, interest, and costs.
VIII. FACTS AND CLAIMS SPECIFIC TO PLAINTIFFS SANDY & KIA BOWERS
146. These Plaintiffs adopt and incorporate by reference paragraphs 1-24 as if fully set forth herein.
147. On Tuesday, August 12, 2014, the plaintiffs were in the City of Ferguson, shooting photographic footage of the goings on in Ferguson. They initially parked at Chambers and West Florissant, Plaintiff Kerry White was in the vehicle with them.
148. As Plaintiff White was shooting footage, the Plaintiffs observed the police begin proceeding down Chambers, shooting tear gas and ordering people to leave the area. The Plaintiffs left the lot, went south on Chambers and then made a right on Lorrna. Plaintiff White continued to shoot footage from the vehicle. The police subsequently came onto Lorna and when the Plaintiffs tried to get out of their path, they were blocked in by a military like
37

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 38 of 42 PageID #: 93
tactical vehicle. 149. At this point, the Plaintiffs were seriously afraid for their lives. Plaintiff White
held his camera out of his car window in an attempt to let the police officers know that he was simply photographing the goings on.
150. A police officer snatched the camera from Plaintiff White’s hand, took out his memory card and threw it to the ground. The Plaintiffs were then taken from the vehicle by several St. Louis County police officers, thrown to the ground, handcuffed, placed in a police wagon and transported to the Clayton Justice Center. Once there, they were booked on the bogus charge of failure to disburse even though no basis at all existed for that charge.
A. FALSE ARREST 151. Plaintiffs Kai and Sandy Bowers were wrongfully and unlawfully arrested and detained on the bogus charge of “failure to disperse” even though it was clear that no probable cause or any other basis for the charge existed. 152. As a direct proximate result of their false arrest, the Plaintiffs suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and has suffered, and will continue to suffer, mental anguish, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being falsely arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Kai and Sandy Bowers demand judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against the officer Defendants in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
38

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 39 of 42 PageID #: 94
B. NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION 153. At all times relevant herein, the Defendant officers, were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the rules, regulations, policies and procedures, of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County. 154. Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County acted negligently, carelessly and recklessly by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct and monitor their officers who were deployed on August 12, 2014. 155. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County, Plaintiffs Kai and Sandy Bowers were wrongfully and unlawfully, arrested, detained and humiliated. As a result, they were caused to suffer mental anguish, embarrassment, and emotional distress. WHEREFORE, these Plaintiffs demand judgment against the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
C. ASSAULT & BATTERY 156. Several yet to be identified officers, without proper grounds, willfully manhandled and handcuffed Plaintiffs Kai and Sandy Bowers without just cause or basis. 157. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ willful, malicious and intentional actions, the Plaintiffs suffered bodily injury after being taken to the ground to be handcuffed. WHEREFORE, these Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars
39

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 40 of 42 PageID #: 95
($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against the Defendant officers in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
D. DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 158. Plaintiffs Kai and Sandy Bowers further allege that several yet to be identified officer Defendants, with deliberate indifference to and reckless disregard for his safety and well-being and in violation of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution, did on August 12, 2014, commit or allowed to be committed acts which deprived them of their constitutional right to be free from an unreasonable seizure. 159. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of these officers, Kai and Sandy Bowers were subjected to an illegal seizure by the completely out of control police officers, acting outside the parameters of law and decency. Wherefore, these Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendant officers, jointly and severally, in the full and fair amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) in compensatory and punitive damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
E. FAILURE TO TRAIN, SUPERVISE, AND DISCIPLINE 42 U.S.C. § 1983 160. At all times relevant herein, the lawless officers responsible for the arrest of Plaintiffs Kai and Sandy Bowers were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the practices and customs of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County and implemented by Defendants Belmar and Thomas. 161. Defendants acted negligently, carelessly, recklessly and with deliberate
40

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 41 of 42 PageID #: 96 indifference to the safety of United States citizens lawfully in Ferguson, Mo., by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct, monitor and discipline the officers from their respective departments who were patrolling the streets of Ferguson, Mo., on August 12, 2014.
162. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson, St. Louis County, Belmar and Thomas, Kai and Sandy Bowers were unlawfully arrested, seized and otherwise mistreated.
WHEREFORE, these Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00), plus punitive damages to the extent allowed by law, attorney’s fees, interest, and costs.
This 2nd day of October 2014, [Signature of counsel on next page]
41

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 9 Filed: 10/02/14 Page: 42 of 42 PageID #: 97
Respectfully submitted,
LAW OFFICES OF GREGORY L. LATTIMER
By /s/ Gregory L. Lattimer Gregory L. Lattimer, Esq. 1200 G Street, N.W. Suite 800 Washington, D.C. 20005 Tel. (202) 434-4513 Fax: (866) 764-6442 Lattlaw@aol.com
and
BLACK LAWYERS FOR JUSTICE
By /s/ Malik Z. Shabazz Malik Z. Shabazz, Esq. 1200 G Street, N.W. Suite 800 Washington, D.C. 20005 Tel: (202) 434-4528 Fax: (202) 248-4478 attorneyshabazz@yahoo.com
and
GREENE LEGAL GROUP LLC
By Reginald A. Greene Reginald A. Greene, Esq. One Georgia Center, Suite 605 600 West Peachtree Street, N.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30308 Tel. (404) 574-4308 Fax: (404) 574-4308 rgreene@greenelegalgorup.com
Counsel for the Plaintiffs
42

 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION

TRACEY WHITE, et al., Plaintiffs,
v. THOMAS JACKSON, et al.,
Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

No. 4:14CV1490 HEA

)

)

)

)

)

OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the St. Louis County Defendants’ six separate Motions

to Dismiss, which were joined by the Ferguson Defendants [Doc. Nos. 42–47]; the Ferguson

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 50]; and the St. Louis County Defendants’ Motion to

Sever, which was joined by the Ferguson Defendants [Doc. No. 35]. Plaintiffs oppose these

Motions. For the reasons set forth below, the St. Louis County Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss

will be granted in part and denied in part, the Ferguson Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss will be

denied, and the Motion to Sever will be denied. Facts and Background1

Michael Brown, Jr. was shot and killed by a police officer on August 9, 2014, in the City

of Ferguson, Missouri. In the hours and days that followed, large crowds gathered in Ferguson to

protest Brown’s death. The pleadings assert the protests “subsequently led to civil unrest in the

streets of Ferguson, Missouri when [officers from the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County

Police Departments] took up arms and, in militaristic displays of force and weaponry, engaged

U.S. Citizens as if they were war combatants.” [Doc. No. 41 at ¶ 23].

1 The recitation of facts is taken from Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint and are taken as true for the purposes of this motion. Such recitation in no way relieves any party from the necessary proof thereof in later proceedings.

Plaintiffs are individuals who claim to have suffered violations of various rights between August 11 and August 13, 2014 in Ferguson. Named as Defendants are the City of Ferguson; Thomas Jackson (the City of Ferguson Chief of Police); Justin Cosma (a City of Ferguson police officer) (collectively the “Ferguson Defendants”); St. Louis County; Jon Belmar (the St. Louis County Chief of Police) (collectively the “St. Louis County Defendants”); and John Does (police officers from the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County police departments).
Plaintiffs initiated this action on August 28, 2014, and filed their Second Amended Complaint on December 2, 2014. Plaintiffs bring federal claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for deprivation of their civil rights and for failure to train, supervise, and discipline. Plaintiffs bring state law claims for false arrest, assault and battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligent supervision.
Standard A complaint must set out a “short and plain statement of [a plaintiff’s] claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). To test the legal sufficiency of a complaint, a defendant may file a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). “To survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). In other words, a plaintiff must plead facts from which the court can draw a “reasonable inference” of liability. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. The complaint need not contain “detailed factual allegations” but must contain more than mere “labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements” or “naked assertion[s]” devoid of “further factual enhancement.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555, 557. An “unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfullyharmed-me accusation” will not suffice. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678. “While legal conclusions can
- 2 -

provide the framework of a complaint, they must be supported by factual allegations,” id. at 679, which “raise a right to relief above the speculative level,” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555.
Under Twombly and Iqbal, “[a] plaintiff . . . must plead facts sufficient to show that her claim has substantive plausibility.” Johnson v. City of Shelby, 135 S. Ct. 346, 347 (2014). If the plaintiff “inform[s] the [defendant] of the factual basis for [her] complaint, [she] [is] required to do no more to stave off threshold dismissal for want of an adequate statement of [her] claim.” Id.
In evaluating a motion to dismiss, the court can “choose to begin by identifying pleadings that, because they are no more than conclusions, are not entitled to the assumption of truth.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 679. Turning to any “well-pleaded factual allegations,” the court should “assume their veracity and then determine whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement to relief.” Id. The court may only consider the initial pleadings. Brooks v. Midwest Heart Grp., 655 F.3d 796, 799 (8th Cir. 2011).
Discussion Defendants contend that Plaintiffs failed to state claims for § 1983 violations against Defendants Belmar, Jackson, St. Louis County and the City of Ferguson. As to Plaintiffs’ state law claims, Defendants argue that all Plaintiffs failed to adequately allege an exception to sovereign immunity, and failed to state claims for negligent supervision and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Further, Defendants assert that certain Plaintiffs failed to state claims for assault and battery and false arrest. As discussed below, the Court finds that Plaintiffs stated substantively plausible § 1983 claims; that Plaintiffs adequately alleged an exception to sovereign immunity; that Plaintiffs failed to state claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress; that Plaintiffs failed to state claims for negligent supervision; and that Plaintiff Davis failed to state a clam for assault and battery. Further, the Court will deny the Motion to Sever. A. Section 1983 Claims
- 3 -

Defendants argue that Plaintiffs have failed to state § 1983 claims against Defendants
Belmar, Jackson, St. Louis County, and Ferguson. The Court disagrees.
1. Belmar and Jackson
Plaintiffs set forth claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendants Belmar and Jackson
in their individual and official capacities for their failure to properly train, supervise, control, direct, monitor and discipline officers in their respective departments.2
“To state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right
secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged
deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.” Cook v. City of Bella
Villa, 582 F.3d 840, 848–49 (8th Cir. 2009) (citation omitted). It is well established that for
municipalities, or supervisory defendants sued in their individual capacities, respondeat superior
or vicarious liability will not attach under § 1983. City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378, 385
(1989); Livers v. Shenck, 700 F.3d 340, 355 (8th Cir. 2012). Rather, a supervisory defendant—
sued in his individual capacity—may be liable under § 1983 “if he directly participates in the
constitutional violation or if he fails to train or supervise the subordinate who caused the
2 The St. Louis County Defendants argue that Plaintiffs failed to sue Defendant Belmar in his individual capacity because, although they identified him as being sued in his individual capacity in the caption of the Second Amended Complaint, they did not do so in the actual text of the Second Amended Complaint. “[I]n order to sue a public official in his or her individual capacity, a plaintiff must expressly and unambiguously state so in the pleadings, otherwise, it will be assumed that the defendant is sued only in his or her official capacity.” Alexander v. Hedback, 718 F.3d 762, 766 n.4 (8th Cir. 2013) (citing Johnson v. Outboard Marine Corp., 172 F.3d 531, 535 (8th Cir. 1999)). Given that “section 1983 liability exposes public servants to civil liability and damages, . . . only an express statement that they are being sued in their individual capacity will suffice to give proper notice to defendants.” Johnson, 172 F.3d at 535 (citing Nix v. Norman, 879 F.2d 429, 431 (8th Cir. 1989), and Egerdahl v. Hibbing Comm. Coll., 72 F.3d 615, 619–20 (8th Cir. 1995)). Plaintiffs’ indication in the caption of the Second Amended Complaint that Defendants Belmar, Jackson, and Cosma were being sued in their individual and official capacities was clearly sufficient under Eighth Circuit law to give them proper notice. See Jackson v. Crews, 873 F.2d 1105, 1107 (8th Cir. 1989) (“We caution future § 1983 litigants . . . that it would be much better for them to clearly indicate both the parties being sued and their capacity in the caption.”) (emphasis added). Accordingly, the Court rejects the St. Louis County Defendants’ argument.
- 4 -

violation.” Brockinton v. City of Sherwood, 503 F.3d 667, 673 (8th Cir. 2007) (citing Tilson v. Forrest City Police Dep’t, 28 F.3d 802, 806 (8th Cir. 1994)).3
The Eighth Circuit recognizes the following elements for supervisory liability under § 1983 for failure to train or supervise: (1) notice of a pattern of unconstitutional acts committed by subordinates; (2) deliberate indifference to or tacit authorization of those acts; (3) failure to take sufficient remedial action; and (4) proximate cause of the plaintiff’s injury. Livers, 700 F.3d at 355. “In order to show deliberate indifference or tacit authorization, [the plaintiff] must allege and ultimately prove [the supervisory defendant] ‘had notice that the training procedures and supervision were inadequate and likely to result in a constitutional violation.’” Id. at 355–56 (quoting Andrews v. Fowler, 98 F.3d 1069, 1078 (8th Cir. 1996)).
Plaintiffs’ factual allegations against Defendants Jackson and Belmar are sufficient to state a substantively plausible claim through which the Court can draw a reasonable inference of liability. Plaintiffs allege that the John Doe police officers were “acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the practices and customs of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County implemented by Defendants Belmar and [Jackson],” when they “took up arms and, in militaristic displays of force and weaponry, engaged U.S. Citizens as if they were war combatants.” [Doc. No. 41 at ¶¶ 23, 43] [emphasis added]. In this regard, Plaintiffs allege various instances of being subjected to “wanton and excessive force,” as well as being arrested without probable cause in violation of their Fourth Amendment rights. Plaintiffs’ specific factual allegations during this period range from being shot with rubber bullets, to being physically assaulted, to being sprayed with mace. Given the temporal relation of these individual allegations (August 11–13, 2013), as well as the alleged shared objective of the officers—namely,
3 Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants Belmar and Jackson in their official capacities constitute claims against St. Louis County and the City of Ferguson, respectively. See Will v. Michigan Dep’t of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 71 (1989); see also Alexander, 718 F.3d at 766 (citing Johnson, 172 F.3d at 535).
- 5 -

responding to protests and civil unrest following Michael Brown’s death—Plaintiffs have plausibly alleged that Defendants Belmar and Jackson knew or should have known of the pattern of unconstitutional acts committed by the John Doe officers and were deliberately indifferent to, or tacitly authorized those acts, which resulted in Plaintiffs suffering various injuries. Livers, 700 F.3d at 355.
Accordingly, Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss the § 1983 claims against Defendants Belmar and Jackson are denied.
2. St. Louis County and the City of Ferguson Plaintiffs allege that Defendants St. Louis County and the City of Ferguson had customs, policies, and practices in place regarding the training, supervision, control, monitoring and disciplining of their officers that exhibited deliberate indifference to the care and safety of citizens, which led to Plaintiffs’ injuries. “A local government may not be sued under § 1983 for an injury inflicted solely by its employees or agents. Instead, it is when execution of a government’s policy . . . inflicts the injury that the government as an entity is responsible under § 1983.” Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658, 694 (1978). A local government may be liable for failure to train its employees when that failure can be shown to be deliberate indifference to the rights of others. Yellow Horse v. Pennington County, 225 F.3d 923, 928 (8th Cir. 2000). Deliberate indifference in the context of claims for failure to train and supervise is a stringent standard of fault, requiring proof that a governmental entity disregarded a known or obvious consequence of its actions. Board of Comm’rs of Bryan Cnty. v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397, 410 (1997). When governmental policymakers are on actual or constructive notice that a particular omission in their training program causes city employees to violate citizens’ constitutional rights, the governmental entity may be deemed deliberately indifferent if the
- 6 -

policymakers choose to retain that program. Brown, 520 U.S. at 407. The governmental entity’s “policy of inaction” in light of notice that its program will cause constitutional violations “is the functional equivalent of a decision by the [governmental entity] itself to violate the Constitution.” Canton, 489 U.S. at 395. “A pattern of similar constitutional violations by untrained employees is ‘ordinarily necessary’ to demonstrate deliberate indifference for purposes of failure to train.” Connick v. Thompson, 131 S.Ct. 1350, 1360 (2011).
“Liability may be established through proof that the alleged misconduct was so pervasive among the non-policy making employees of the [entity] as to constitute a ‘custom or usage’ with the force of law.” McGautha v. Jackson Cnty., Mo., Collections Dep’t, 36 F.3d 53, 56 (8th Cir. 1994) (quoting Monell, 436 U.S. at 690–91). An allegation of an isolated incident of police misconduct generally “cannot, as a matter of law, establish a municipal policy or custom creating liability under § 1983.” Ulrich v. Pope County, 715 F.3d 1054, 1061 (8th Cir. 2013) (citing Wedemeier v. City of Ballwin, 931 F.2d 24, 26 (8th Cir. 1991)). Rather, “[t]o establish a claim for ‘custom’ liability, [Plaintiffs] must demonstrate: (1) the existence of a continuing, widespread, persistent pattern of unconstitutional misconduct by the governmental entity’s employees; (2) deliberate indifference to or tacit authorization of such conduct by the governmental entity’s policymaking officials after notice to the officials of that misconduct; and (3) that plaintiff was injured by acts pursuant to the governmental entity’s custom, i.e., that the custom was a moving force behind the constitutional violation.” Snider v. City of Cape Girardeau, 752 F.3d 1149, 1160 (8th Cir. 2014) (citing Johnson v. Douglas Cnty. Med. Dep’t, 725 F.3d 825, 828 (8th Cir. 2013)).
Based on the reasoning and factual allegations discussed above with regard to Plaintiffs’ § 1983 claims against Defendants Belmar and Jackson, the Court finds that Plaintiffs—through their allegations of a pervasive pattern of civil rights violations during the days in question—
- 7 -

have stated a substantively plausible claim through which the Court can draw a reasonable
inference of liability as to St. Louis County and the City of Ferguson. Accordingly, Defendants’
Motions to Dismiss the § 1983 claims against these Defendants are denied.4
B. State Law Claims
1. Sovereign Immunity
Defendants argue that Plaintiffs failed to allege an exception to the sovereign
immunity afforded to Defendants St. Louis County and the City of Ferguson under
Missouri law. The Court disagrees.
Under section 537.600 of the Missouri Revised Statutes, public entities enjoy
sovereign immunity from actions sounding in tort. Gregg v. City of Kansas City, 272
S.W.3d 353, 358 (Mo. Ct. App. 2008).5 “Municipalities and other public entities,
however, can waive their sovereign immunity for governmental functions to the extent
that they are covered by liability insurance.” Southers v. City of Farmington, 263 S.W.3d
603, 609 (Mo. banc 2008). Liability insurance can be purchased pursuant to section
4 The Court will also deny the Ferguson Defendants’ request that the Court strike or dismiss the last two words of the sentence “The City of Ferguson is liable directly and vicariously,” from paragraph seventeen of the general “Parties” section of the Second Amended Complaint. The Ferguson Defendants correctly note that a local government may not be held vicariously liable under § 1983. See Canton, 489 U.S. at 385. Plaintiffs do not object to this point of law, and assert in their Reply that “any alleged vicarious liability on the part of the City of Ferguson . . . was only pled with respect to Plaintiffs’ common law claims[.]” [Doc. No. 52 at 8]. The counts in which Plaintiffs allege § 1983 violations assert neither vicarious liability, nor respondeat superior. Accordingly, the Ferguson Defendants’ request is moot.
5 However, public entities do not enjoy sovereign immunity against tort claims “where a plaintiff’s injury arises from a public employee’s negligent operation of a motor vehicle in the course of his employment (section 537.600.1(1))” or “where the injury is caused by the dangerous condition of the [public entity’s] property (section 537.600.1(2)).” Bennartz v. City of Columbia, 300 S.W.3d 251, 259 (Mo. Ct. App. 2009) (citing State ex rel. Bd. of Trustees of the City of North Kansas City Mem’l Hosp., 843 S.W.2d 353, 358 (Mo. banc 1993)). Further, “Missouri municipalities are not provided immunity for propriety functions—those performed for the benefit or profit of the municipality as a corporate entity—but are immune for governmental functions—those performed for the common good.” Southers, 263 S.W.3d at 609 (citing Jungerman v. City of Raytown, 925 S.W.2d 202, 204 (Mo. banc 1996)). The proprietary/governmental distinction does not apply to the sovereign immunity of the State or its political subdivisions, which enjoy sovereign immunity even if acting in a proprietary function. Wyman v. Mo. Dep’t of Mental Health, 376 S.W.3d 16, 20 n.4 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012) (citing Southers, 263 S.W.3d at 609); Gregg, 272 S.W.3d at 362.
- 8 -

537.610,6 which pertains to political subdivisions of the state, or section 71.185,7 which pertains to municipalities. Id. “The waiver of sovereign immunity is only to the extent of the insurance coverage.” Southers, 263 S.W.3d at 609 n.6 (citing sections 71.185.2 and 537.610.1). However, “‘[a] public entity does not waive its sovereign immunity by maintaining an insurance policy where that policy includes a provision stating that the policy is not meant to constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity.’” Brooks v. City of Sugar Creek, 340 S.W.3d 201, 208 (Mo. App. Ct. 2011) (quoting Langley v. Curators of Univ. of Mo., 73 S.W.3d 808, 811 (Mo. App. W.D. 2002) (citing State ex rel. Bd. of Trustees v. Russell, 843 S.W.2d 353, 360 (Mo. banc 1992))
In Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint, it is alleged that “Defendants have waived sovereign immunity by establishing some type of insurance coverage for the claim[s] at issue pursuant to Mo. Rev. Stat. § 71.185,” and that “the City of Ferguson, as a Charter Member of the St. Louis Area Insurance Trust, has purchased insurance policies that would address, at least to some extent, the claims alleged herein.” [Doc. No. 41 at ¶ 19]. The St. Louis County Defendants contend these allegations are insufficient to allege that St. Louis County has waived sovereign immunity because only a municipality can waive its sovereign immunity pursuant to section 71.185.
6 Section 537.610 states, in pertinent part, that any political subdivision of Missouri “may purchase liability insurance for tort claims, made against the state or the political subdivision . . . . Sovereign immunity for the state of Missouri and its political subdivisions is waived only to the maximum amount of and only for the purposes covered by such policy of insurance purchased pursuant to the provisions of this section and in such amount and for such purposes provided in any self-insurance plan duly adopted by the governing body of any political subdivision of the state.”
7 Section 71.185 states, in pertinent part: “Any municipality engaged in the exercise of governmental functions may carry liability insurance and pay the premiums therefor to insure such municipality and their employees against claims or causes of action for property damage or personal injuries, including death, caused while in the exercise of the governmental functions, and shall be liable as in other cases of torts for property damage and personal injuries including death suffered by third persons while the municipality is engaged in the exercise of the governmental functions to the extent of the insurance so carried.”
- 9 -

While there is authority that appears to suggest that a municipality can waive sovereign immunity by purchasing liability insurance under either section 71.185 or 537.610,8 it is clear from the plain language of section 71.185, and Missouri case law, that only a municipality—and not a political subdivision of the state, such as St. Louis County—can waive sovereign immunity by purchasing liability insurance under section 71.185. Gregg, 272 S.W.3d at 359 (citing Brennan By and Through Brennan v. Curators of the Univ. of Mo., 942 S.W.2d 432, 436 (Mo. Ct. App. 1997)); Spotts v. Kansas City, 728 S.W.2d 242, 246–47 (Mo. Ct. App. 1987); see also St. Louis County v. Watson, 311 S.W.3d 886, 888 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010). However, for present purposes, it is a distinction without a difference. As one Missouri court noted, in explaining why it could rely on cases analyzing an alleged section 71.185 waiver for its analysis of an alleged section 537.610 waiver:
Despite differences in language and the fact that § 71.185 applies to municipalities and § 537.610 applies to political subdivisions of the State, the purchase of liability insurance may function as a waiver of sovereign immunity under either statute. Therefore, we find §§ 71.185 and 537.610 to be sufficiently analogous that we may rely on the above-cited cases referring to § 71.185 in making our determination here. Brennan, 942 S.W.2d at 436 (citing Russell, 843 S.W.2d at 360); see also Gregg, 272 S.W.3d at 359 (citing Brennan, 942 S.W.2d at 436). Plaintiffs allege that Defendant St. Louis County waived its sovereign immunity to their tort claims by purchasing liability insurance to cover those claims. Accepting this allegation as true—as the Court must, Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 679—the Court finds that it is inconsequential at this stage of proceedings whether Plaintiffs alleged that St. Louis
8 See, e.g., Kunzie v. City of Olivette, 184 S.W.3d 570, 573–74 (Mo. banc 2006); Topps v. City of Country Club Hills, 272 S.W.3d 409, 414–15, 17–18 (Mo. App. 2008).
- 10 -

County purchased the insurance pursuant to section 537.610 or 71.185.9 Plaintiffs’
allegation that St. Louis County waived its sovereign immunity to Plaintiffs’ claims by
virtue of the purchase of liability insurance is sufficient to allege waiver.
Both the St. Louis County and Ferguson Defendants further argue that Plaintiffs
failed to properly allege an exception to St. Louis County and the City of Ferguson’s
respective sovereign immunity because Plaintiffs did not allege that the liability
insurance each entity purchased did not include an endorsement exempting coverage for
liability barred by sovereign immunity. The Court finds that the pleading rules do not
require such an allegation to sufficiently claim an exception to sovereign immunity.
As noted above, “[a] public entity does not waive its sovereign immunity by
maintaining an insurance policy where that policy includes a provision stating that the
policy is not meant to constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity.” Brooks, 340 S.W.3d at
208 (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). Although Plaintiffs will “bear[] the
burden of demonstrating the existence of the insurance and that it covered [their]
particular claim[s],” and Plaintiffs “must plead with specificity facts demonstrating
[their] claims fall[] within an exception to sovereign immunity” because “finding a
[governmental entity] liable for torts is the exception to the general rule of sovereign
9 In a footnote in Kunzie, the Missouri Supreme Court noted a then-existing distinction between the sovereign immunity waiver associated with liability insurance purchased under section 537.610 and the corresponding waiver associated with section 71.185. Kunzie, 184 S.W.3d at 574 n.4. Namely, the discretionary immunity doctrine (also known as the official immunity doctrine) and the public duty doctrine were not waived as to municipalities that purchased liability insurance under section 71.185, whereas these doctrines of immunity were waived as to political subdivisions that purchased liability insurance under 537.610. Id. (contrasting the “absolute and complete waiver of all immunities” found in section 537.610 with section 71.185’s statement that a municipality engaged in governmental functions that purchases liability insurance “shall be liable as in other cases of torts.”). However, in subsequent cases, the Missouri Supreme Court held that the official/discretionary immunity doctrine and the public duty doctrine are “personal immunities” that shield government employees, but not government employers from liability. Davis v. Lambert-St. Louis Int’l Airport, 193 S.W.3d 760, 764–66 (Mo. Banc 2006) (official/discretionary immunity doctrine); Southers, 263 S.W.3d at 611–14 (public duty doctrine). Thus, separate and apart from the issue of whether St. Louis County could purchase liability insurance under section 71.185, Kunzie’s observation in footnote four regarding the differences between the waives in sections 71.185 and 536.610 was obviated by the Missouri Supreme Court’s decisions in Davis and Southers, and at this stage of the proceedings it is irrelevant under which of the two statutes Plaintiffs allege that either St. Louis County or the City of Ferguson purchased liability insurance and thereby waived sovereign immunity.
- 11 -

immunity,” Gregg, 272 S.W.3d at 359–60, the law does not require Plaintiffs to plead the absence of a provision in the insurance policy stating that the policy does not waive sovereign immunity.
Indeed, Defendants rely only upon inapposite cases to argue that such a pleading requirements exists. See Hankins v. City of Hazelwood, 2014 WL 996789, at *1 (E.D. Mo. Mar. 13, 2014) (dismissing Missouri tort claims against the defendant municipality where the “plaintiff plead[ed] no facts showing that an exception to sovereign immunity applie[d].”) (emphasis added); Cunningham v. Hinrichs, 2013 WL 6068881, at *10 (E.D. Mo. Nov. 18, 2013) (granting summary judgment in favor of the defendant municipality where the municipality submitted its insurance policy as an exhibit to its motion, which contained a disclaimer specifying that the procurement of insurance did not constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity); Hummel v. St. Charles City R-3 Sch. Dist., 114 S.W.3d 282, 284–85 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003) (affirming the dismissal of an action where the plaintiff “attempted to meet her burden of proving an exception to sovereign immunity by relying on an alleged waiver thereof in the workers’ compensation statutes, and not on [an] insurance waiver,” and argued on appeal that she should be permitted to amend her pleadings to allege waiver via insurance).
There is, however, case law suggesting that a plaintiff’s allegation that a defendant waived its sovereign immunity by the purchase of insurance is sufficient to state a claim for waiver, notwithstanding the absence of an allegation that the insurance policy did not include an endorsement exempting coverage for liability barred by sovereign immunity. For example, in Gregg, the plaintiffs alleged that the municipal defendant carried liability insurance that insured against the tort claims the plaintiffs brought. 272 S.W.3d at 356–57. The defendant municipality “filed a motion to dismiss
- 12 -

alleging that it was protected by sovereign immunity and that no insurance coverage existed that waived sovereign immunity,” attached copies of two insurance policies that it purported to be the only policies it maintained that were potentially pertinent to the case, and asserted that the policies “clearly did not provide coverage relevant to Plaintiffs’ claims.” Id. at 357. The trial court granted the motion to dismiss. The Missouri Court of Appeals reversed and remanded, noting that it “fail[ed] to understand why the City proceeded on a motion to dismiss, rather than a summary judgment,” and that, under the motion to dismiss standard, “the allegations of [the plaintiffs’] petition [namely, that the defendant municipality waived its sovereign immunity through the purchase of liability insurance,] must be taken as true for present purposes.” Id. at 360.
Similarly in Kunzie v. City of Olivette, the Missouri Supreme Court reversed the dismissal of a tort action against a municipality, and remanded, explaining:
Kunzie alleges that the city maintains liability insurance “to handle the consequences of employment related actions brought against them.” By doing so, Kunzie has sufficiently alleged facts that, if proved, would bring his tort claims within the purview of the statute. Because the trial court dismissed Kunzie’s petition prior to the commencement of discovery, Kunzie was not able to prove the existence and content of the insurance policy. 184 S.W.3d 570, 574 (Mo. banc 2006). The Court will follow Gregg and Kunzie and hold that an allegation that a public entity waived its sovereign immunity through the purchase of liability insurance is sufficient to state a claim for waiver, despite the absence of an allegation that the insurance policy did not include an endorsement exempting coverage for liability barred by sovereign immunity. 2. Personal Immunities Defendants argue that several personal immunities enjoyed by Defendants Belmar and Jackson—namely, the public duty doctrine, the official immunity doctrine, and a
- 13 -

prohibition on respondeat superior for police chiefs—should shield them from liability for any state law claims brought against them. Plaintiffs rebut that they have not alleged any state law claims against Defendant Belmar or Jackson. Accordingly, because Plaintiffs have not alleged any state law claims against Defendants Belmar and Jackson, Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss are denied as moot as to this point.10
3. Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Plaintiffs bring claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress (“IIED”) against St. Louis County, the City of Ferguson, Defendant Cosma, and the John Doe police officers. “To recover for intentional infliction of emotional distress, [a plaintiff] must show (1) the defendant’s conduct was extreme and outrageous; (2) the defendant acted intentionally or recklessly; and (3) the defendant’s conduct caused extreme emotional distress resulting in bodily harm.” Cent. Mo. Elec. Co-op. v. Balke, 119 S.W.3d 627, 636 (Mo. Ct. App. 2003) (citing Thomas v. Special Olympics Missouri, Inc., 31 S.W.3d 442, 446 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000)); see also St. Anthony’s Medical Center v. H.S.H., 974 S.W.2d 606, 611 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998). “The conduct must have been so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious, and utterly intolerable in a civilized community.” Gibson v. Brewer, 952 S.W.2d 239, 249 (Mo. banc 1997) (internal quotations omitted). The alleged emotional distress must be “medically diagnosable and medically significant.” Hendrix v. Wainwright Indus., 755 S.W.2d 411, 412 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998) (internal quotation omitted); see also Collins v. Burg, 169 F.3d 563, 565 (8th Cir. 1999).
10 The City of Ferguson Defendants additionally request that the Court dismiss or strike—pursuant to the public duty doctrine—any state law claims brought by unnamed “U.S. Citizens,” and dismiss any federal claims brought by “U.S. Citizens” as well. Given that Plaintiffs have not alleged any claims brought by any unnamed “U.S. Citizens,” but rather appear to use the term as a general description of the individuals in Ferguson during the events in question, the Court will also deny this request.
- 14 -

Further, “where one’s conduct amounts to the commission of a traditional tort and was not intended only to cause extreme emotional distress to the victim, the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress will not lie and recovery must be had under the appropriate traditional tort action.” Diehl v. Fred Weber, Inc., 309 S.W.3d 309, 322 (Mo. Ct. App. 2010) (emphasis added) (citing K.G. v. R.T.R., 918 S.W.2d 795, 799 (Mo. 1996) (en banc)). “The rationale behind this rule is that the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress . . . . was intended to supplement existing forms of recovery, not swallow them.” K.G., 918 S.W.2d at 799 (citation omitted). Accordingly, [w]hile recovery for emotional distress caused by battery may be allowable as an element of damages in a battery action, there is no independent action for intentional infliction of emotional distress where the existence of the claim is dependent upon a battery.” Id.
Here, all of Plaintiffs’ claims for IIED are predicated on their claims for assault and battery, and/or false arrest. Thus, their claims for IIED must be dismissed, lest they “swallow” Plaintiffs’ predicate tort claims. See id. at 799–800. Further, Plaintiffs have not adequately claimed that any of their alleged emotional distress was “medically diagnosable and medically significant.” Hendrix, 755 S.W.2d at 412.
Accordingly, the St. Louis County Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss are granted as to Plaintiffs’ claims for IIED.
4. Negligent Supervision Plaintiffs bring claims for negligent supervision against Ferguson and St. Louis County. Missouri law incorporates the Restatement’s definition for negligent supervision: A master is under the duty to exercise reasonable care so to control his servant while acting outside the scope of his employment as to prevent him from intentionally harming others or from so conducting himself as to create an unreasonable risk of bodily harm to them if (a) the servant
- 15 -

(i) is upon the premises in possession of the master or upon which the servant is privileged to enter only as his servant, or (ii) is using a chattel of the master, and (b) the master (i) knows or has reason to know that he has the ability to control his servant, and (ii) knows or should know of the necessity and opportunity for exercising such control. Dibrill v. Normandy Assocs., 383 S.W.3d 77, 87 (Mo. Ct. App. 2012) (emphasis added) (quoting Gibson, 952 S.W.2d at 247 (quoting RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS § 317)). Missouri courts have emphasized that a cause of action for negligent supervision “‘require[s] evidence that would cause the employer to foresee that the employee would create an unreasonable risk of harm outside the scope of his employment.’” Id. (emphasis added) (quoting Reed v. Kelly, 37 S.W.3d 274, 278 (Mo. Ct. App. 2000)); see also Truck Ins. Exch. v. Prairie Framing, LLC, 162 S.W.3d 64, 82 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005). There is no indication here that the Defendant police officers were acting outside the scope of their employment. By contrast, in St. John Bank & Trust Co. v. St. John, the only Missouri case Plaintiffs cite—and that the Court could locate through research—in which negligent supervision was applied against a local government for the actions of its police force, an officer set a movie theatre on fire. 679 S.W.2d 399 (Mo. Ct. App. 1981). Accordingly, St. John Bank is distinguishable in that the police officer’s conduct was clearly outside the scope of his employment. The Court finds that Plaintiffs have failed to state claims for negligent supervision and will grant the St. Louis County Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss as to this claim. 5. Plaintiffs Kerry White, Kai Bowers, Sandy Bowers, William Davis, and
Tracey White’s Assault and Battery Claims
- 16 -

The St. Louis County Defendants argue that Plaintiffs Kerry White, Kai Bowers, Sandy Bowers, William Davis, and Tracey White failed to state claims for assault and battery because they have only alleged that they were handcuffed without just cause. Under Missouri law, a police officer effectuating an arrest may be found liable for assault and battery only when he uses more force than is “reasonably necessary.” Neal v. Helbling, 726 S.W.2d 483, 487 (Mo. Ct. App. 1987).
Here, Plaintiffs Kai Bowers, Sandy Bowers, and Tracey White allege that they were “thrown to the ground,” before being handcuffed, and Plaintiff Kerry White alleges that he was “taken to the ground” before being handcuffed. [Doc. No. 41 at ¶¶ 29, 81, 151]. All four of these Plaintiffs allege that they suffered bodily injuries during the arrest. [Id. at ¶¶ 39, 81, 158]. At this stage of the proceedings, these allegations are enough to sufficiently claim that the Defendant police officers used more force than was reasonably necessary in arresting Plaintiffs Kerry White, Kai Bowers, Sandy Bowers, and Tracey White. Accordingly, the St. Louis County Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is denied as to this point.
However, Plaintiffs have not alleged any unreasonable force with regard to Plaintiff Davis, but rather have only alleged that he was “accosted” by Defendant police officers Accordingly, the Court will grant the St. Louis County Defendants’ Motion as to Plaintiff Davis’s assault and battery claim.
6. Plaintiffs Tracey White and William Davis’s False Arrest Claims The St. Louis County Defendants argue that Plaintiffs Tracey White and William Davis failed to state claims for false arrest because, based on the allegations in their complaint, they violated section 574.060 of the Missouri Revised Statutes by refusing to disperse from the scene of a riot. The court disagrees.
- 17 -

“The essence of the cause of action of false arrest, or false imprisonment, ‘is the confinement, without legal justification, by the wrongdoer of the person wronged.’” Rustici v. Weidemeyer, 673 S.W.2d 762, 767 (Mo. banc 1984) (citing Warrem v. Parrish, 436 S.W.2d 670, 672 (Mo. 1969), and Patrich v. Menorah Med. Ctr., 636 S.W.2d 134, 138 (Mo. App. Ct. 1982)). Under section 574.060, “[a] person commits the crime of refusal to disperse if, being present at the scene of an unlawful assembly, or at the scene of a riot, he knowingly fails or refuses to obey the lawful command of a law enforcement officer to depart from the scene of such unlawful assembly or riot.”
Plaintiff White claims that she and her minor son, Plaintiff Davis, purchased food in McDonalds on W. Florissant in Ferguson on August 13, 2014, following a church-sponsored Peace and Love rally. The two waited for Plaintiff White’s husband to pick them up, and Plaintiff White conversed with other patrons. While Plaintiff Davis was in the restroom and Plaintiff White was approaching the counter to purchase a Sunday, several John Doe Defendant police officers and Defendant Cosma entered “in what appeared to be army uniforms, carrying rifles and sticks and wearing helmets, approached the door and ordered Plaintiff White to ‘get out.’” Plaintiff White tried to tell them that she was waiting for her son in the restroom. When Plaintiff Davis came out, they “accosted” him. When Plaintiff White expressed her concerns, she was told to shut up, and then arrested for not shutting up. Plaintiff White was thrown to the ground in handcuffs and, when Plaintiff Davis came over on her command to retrieve his iPad from her hand, he was arrested as well.
The St. Louis County Defendants contend that, because Plaintiffs alleged that there was civil unrest in the streets of Ferguson, they effectively alleged that Plaintiffs White and Davis refused to disperse from the scene of a riot, and thus violated section 574.060. However, Plaintiffs have not done so. Plaintiffs White and Davis’s allegations, viewed in the light most
- 18 -

favorable to them, are sufficient to state a claim for false arrest. Accordingly, the Court will deny the St. Louis County Defendants’’ Motions to Dismiss as to this point. C. Motion to Sever
Rule 20 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governs permissive joinder of parties. Rule 20(a)(1) “allows multiple plaintiffs to join in a single action if (i) they assert claims ‘with respect to or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences;’ and (ii) ‘any question of law or fact common to all plaintiffs will arise in the action.’” In re Prempro Products Liab. Litig., 591 F.3d 613, 622 (8th Cir. 2010). The Eighth Circuit recognizes “a very broad definition for the term ‘transaction.’” Id.
“Transaction” is a word of flexible meaning. It may comprehend a series of many occurrences, depending not so much upon the immediateness of their connection as upon their logical relationship. Accordingly, all “logically related” events entitling a person to institute a legal action against another generally are regarded as comprising a transaction or occurrence. The analogous interpretation of the terms as used in Rule 20 would permit all reasonably related claims for relief by or against different parties to be tried in a single proceeding. Absolute identity of all events is unnecessary. Mosley v. General Motors Corp., 497 F.2d 1330, 1333 (8th Cir. 1974) (citations omitted). This assessment is made on a “case by case” basis. Id. Here, the Court finds that the allegations—all of which are related both temporally and in regard to the same general events—are close enough in logical relation to comprise the same transaction. Rule 20 is in place “to promote trial convenience and expedite the final determination of disputes, thereby preventing multiple lawsuits.” Id. at 1332. Further, “[s]ingle trials generally tend to lessen the delay, expense and inconvenience to all concerned.” Id.
- 19 -

Any inclination the Court may have had to grant Defendants’ Motion to Sever at this time was extinguished by the St. Louis County Defendants’ filing of six different Motions to Dismiss. The Motions in question are nearly identical, save for minor variances. Most of the Motions repeat the same arguments, word for word, with the minor variances randomly interspersed throughout. This method of filing required the Court to study the Motions in search for slight changes and differing arguments. Further, the six separate Motions necessitated six separate Responses, and six separate replies, all of which were, again, substantially identical to one another. The result was a total of approximately 240 pages of briefing for arguments that, when distilled so as to not be repetitive, would total approximately 45 pages of briefing.
While Defendants are free to file future motions in whatever form and manner they deem appropriate (so long as they comply with the local and federal rules), the Court will not encourage duplicative, inefficient, and resource-consuming filings of this magnitude by granting Defendants’ Motion to Sever. The Court will deny the Motion to Sever, without prejudice, at this time, but will contemplate considering the matter anew later in the proceedings. Id. (“Rule 20(b) and Rule 42(b) vest in the district court the discretion to order separate trials or make such other orders as will prevent delay or prejudice.”).
Conclusion Based on the foregoing, the St. Louis County Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss are granted in part and denied in part. The Court will dismiss Plaintiffs’ claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent supervision, and will dismiss Plaintiff William Davis’s claim for assault and battery. The Ferguson Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is denied. Further, the St. Louis County Defendants’ Motion to Sever is denied.
- 20 -

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the St. Louis County Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint [Doc. Nos. 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47] are GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Ferguson Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint [Doc. No. 50] is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the St. Louis County Defendants’ Motion to Sever [Doc. No. 35] is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress are DISMISSED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ claims for negligent supervision are DISMISSED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff William Davis’s claim for assault and battery is DISMISSED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the St. Louis County Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss the Complaint [Doc. Nos. 23, 25, 27, 29, 31, 33] are DENIED AS MOOT. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Ferguson Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss the Complaint [Doc. No. 13] is DENIED AS MOOT. Dated this 16th day of March, 2015.
HENRY EDWARD AUTREY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
- 21 -

 
 Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 1 of 49 PageID #: 713

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

TRACEY WHITE, and WILLIAM DAVIS and DWAYNE ANTON MATTHEWS, JR., and DAMON COLEMAN, and THEOPHILUS GREEN, and KERRY WHITE, and ANTWAN HARRIS, and NATHAN BURNS, and KAI BOWERS, and SANDY BOWERS.
Plaintiffs, v. THOMAS JACKSON, individually, and

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 14-cv-01490 (HEA) ) ) JURYTRIAL DEMANDED ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 2 of 49 PageID #: 714

In his official capacity as City of

)

Ferguson Missouri Chief of Police

)

)

and

)

)

JON BELMAR, individually, and in his

)

official capacity as St. Louis County,

)

Missouri Chief of Police,

)

)

and

)

)

JUSTIN COSMA, individually, and in

)

his official capacity as a City of

)

Ferguson Police Officer,

)

)

and

)

)

SGT. DAVID RYAN, DSN 2725,

)

individually and his official capacity

)

as a County Of St. Louis Police Officer

)

)

and

)

)

OFC. TERRENCE McCOY, DSN 3937,

)

individually and his official capacity

)

as a County Of St. Louis Police Officer

)

)

and

)

)

OFC. MICHAEL McCANN, DSN 2648,

)

individually and his official capacity

)

as a County Of St. Louis Police Officer

)

)

and

)

)

DET. DERIK JACKSON, DSN 3850,

)

individually and his official capacity

)

as a County Of St. Louis Police Officer

)

)

and

)

)

DET. JOE PATTERSON, DSN 3857,

)

individually and his official capacity

)

as a County Of St. Louis Police Officer

)

2

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 3 of 49 PageID #: 715

)

and

)

)

DET. AARON VINSON, DSN 3861,

)

individually and his official capacity

)

as a County Of St. Louis Police Officer

)

)

and

)

)

DET. WILLIAM BATES, DSN 3877,

)

individually and his official capacity

)

as a County Of St. Louis Police Officer

)

)

and

)

)

DET. NICOLAS PAYNE, DSN 2725,

)

individually and his official capacity

)

as a County Of St. Louis Police Officer

)

)

and

)

)

OFC. DANIEL HILL, DSN 3879,

)

individually and his official capacity

)

as a County Of St. Louis Police Officer

)

)

and

)

)

OFC. ANTONIO VALENTINE, DSN 3699

)

individually and his official capacity

)

as a County Of St. Louis Police Officer

)

)

and

)

)

LT. MATT DELIA,

)

individually and his official capacity

)

as a City Of Maryland Heights, Mo.

)

Police Officer

)

)

and

)

)

OFC. DEVOUTON, DSN 207

)

individually and his official capacity

)

as a City Of Maryland Heights, Mo.

)

Police Officer

)

3

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 4 of 49 PageID #: 716

)

and

)

)

OFC. McKINNON, DSN 179

)

individually and his official capacity

)

as a City Of Maryland Heights, Mo.

)

Police Officer

)

)

and

)

)

ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI

)

)

and

)

)

CITY OF FERGUSON, MISSOURI,

)

)

Defendants.

)

THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT (False Arrest; Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress; Negligent Supervision; Assault and Battery; 42 U.S.C. § 1983)

INTRODUCTION

1. This is a civil action seeking damages against Thomas Jackson, who is the

City of Ferguson Police Chief; Jon Belmar, who is the St. Louis County Chief of Police;

Justin Cosma, who is a City of Ferguson Police Officer; several officers from the St.

Louis County Police Department ; three (3) officers from the Maryland Heights Police

Department; and the City of Ferguson, Missouri (collectively, “Defendants”)for

committing acts, under color of law, which deprived Plaintiffs of rights secured under the

Constitution and laws of the United States and the state of Missouri; and, for refusing or

failing to prevent such deprivations and denials to Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs allege, among

other things, that Defendants intentionally, negligently and/or recklessly caused Plaintiffs

to be subjected to unnecessary and unwarranted force, arrests that were not based upon

4

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 5 of 49 PageID #: 717
probable cause, and other violations of their constitutional rights. This action seeks both compensatory and punitive damages against the defendants for the intentional acts of wrongdoing and negligence under state law.
JURISDICTION 2. This action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1988 and the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. This Court has jurisdiction over this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, 28 U.S.C. § 1343 and 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Plaintiffs further invoke the supplemental jurisdiction of this Court to hear and decide claims arising under state law, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367.
PARTIES 3. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Tracey White was a resident of the state of Missouri and a citizen of the United States. 4. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff William Davis was a resident of the state of Missouri and a citizen of the United States. 5. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff DeWayne Anton Matthews, Jr., was a resident of the state of Missouri and a citizen of the United States. 6. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Damon Coleman was a resident of the state of Missouri and a citizen of the United States. 7. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Theophilus Green was a resident of the state of Missouri and a citizen of the United States. 8. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Kerry White was a resident of the State of Missouri and a citizen of the United States.
5

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 6 of 49 PageID #: 718
9. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Antwan Harris was a resident of the State of Missouri and a citizen of the United States.
10. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Nathan Burns was a resident of the State of Missouri and a citizen of the United States.
11. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Kai Bowers was a resident of the State of Missouri and a citizen of the United States.
12. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff Sandy Bowers was a resident of the State of Missouri and a citizen of the United States.
13. At all times relevant herein, Defendant Thomas Jackson was the City of Ferguson Chief of Police and acted under color of the laws, statutes, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of the City of Ferguson, Missouri; and, the City of Ferguson Police Department; and, pursuant to his authority as the Chief of Police.
14. At all times relevant herein, Defendant Jon Belmar was the St. Louis County Chief of Police and acted under color of the laws, statutes, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of St. Louis County, Missouri; and, the St. Louis County Police Department; and, pursuant to his authority as the Chief of Police.
15. At all times relevant herein, Defendant Justin Cosma was a City of Ferguson Police Officer and acted under color of the laws, statutes, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of the City of Ferguson, Missouri; and, the City of Ferguson Police Department; and, pursuant to his authority as a police officer.
16. At all times relevant herein, defendant Sgt. David Ryan was a St. Louis, County Police Officer and acted under color of the laws, statute, ordinances, regulations,
6

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 7 of 49 PageID #: 719
policies, customs, and usages of the County of St. Louis and the County of St. Louis Police Department; and pursuant to his authority as a police officer.
17. At all times relevant herein, defendant Terrence McCoy was a St. Louis, County Police Officer and acted under color of the laws, statute, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of the County of St. Louis and the County of St. Louis Police Department; and pursuant to his authority as a police officer.
18. At all times relevant herein, defendant Michael McCann was a St. Louis, County Police Officer and acted under color of the laws, statute, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of the County of St. Louis and the County of St. Louis Police Department; and pursuant to his authority as a police officer.
19. At all times relevant herein, defendant Det. Derik Jackson was a St. Louis, County Police Officer and acted under color of the laws, statute, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of the County of St. Louis and the County of St. Louis Police Department; and pursuant to his authority as a police officer.
20. At all times relevant herein, defendant Det. Joe Patterson was a St. Louis, County Police Officer and acted under color of the laws, statute, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of the County of St. Louis and the County of St. Louis Police Department; and pursuant to his authority as a police officer.
21. At all times relevant herein, defendant Det. Aaron Vinson was a St. Louis, County Police Officer and acted under color of the laws, statute, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of the County of St. Louis and the County of St. Louis Police Department; and pursuant to his authority as a police officer.
7

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 8 of 49 PageID #: 720
22. At all times relevant herein, defendant Det. William Bates was a St. Louis, County Police Officer and acted under color of the laws, statute, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of the County of St. Louis and the County of St. Louis Police Department; and pursuant to his authority as a police officer.
23. At all times relevant herein, defendant Det. Matthew Burns was a St. Louis, County Police Officer and acted under color of the laws, statute, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of the County of St. Louis and the County of St. Louis Police Department; and pursuant to his authority as a police officer.
24. At all times relevant herein, defendant Det. Nicholas Payne was a St. Louis, County Police Officer and acted under color of the laws, statute, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of the County of St. Louis and the County of St. Louis Police Department; and pursuant to his authority as a police officer.
25. At all times relevant herein, defendant Ofc. Daniel Hill was a St. Louis, County Police Officer and acted under color of the laws, statute, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of the County of St. Louis and the County of St. Louis Police Department; and pursuant to his authority as a police officer.
26. At all times relevant herein, defendant Ofc. Antonio Valentine was a St. Louis, County Police Officer and acted under color of the laws, statute, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of the County of St. Louis and the County of St. Louis Police Department; and pursuant to his authority as a police officer.
27. At all times relevant herein, defendant Lt. Matt Delia was a City of Maryland Heights, Mo., Police Officer and acted under color of the laws, statute,
8

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 9 of 49 PageID #: 721
ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of the County of St. Louis and the County of St. Louis Police Department; and pursuant to his authority as a police officer.
28. At all times relevant herein, defendant Officer Devouton was a City of Maryland Heights, Mo., Police Officer and acted under color of the laws, statute, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of the County of St. Louis and the County of St. Louis Police Department; and pursuant to his authority as a police officer.
29. At all times relevant herein, defendant Officer McKinnon was a City of Maryland Heights, Mo., Police Officer and acted under color of the laws, statute, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of the County of St. Louis and the County of St. Louis Police Department; and pursuant to his authority as a police officer.
30. At all times relevant herein, Defendant St. Louis County was located in the state of Missouri and maintained a police department which operates under, and administers, a set of law enforcement policies, practices and customs involving the hiring, training and supervision of its officers. These policies, practices and customs include training in the use of force and on-the-street encounters with civilians as well as the basis for an arrest. St. Louis County is liable directly and vicariously.
31. At all times relevant herein, Defendant City of Ferguson was a municipal corporation and maintained a police department which operates under, and administers, a set of law enforcement policies, practices and customs involving the hiring, training and supervision of its officers. These policies, practices and customs include training in the use of force and on-the-street encounters with civilians as well as the basis for an arrest. The City of Ferguson is liable directly and vicariously.
9

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 10 of 49 PageID #: 722
32. At all times relevant herein, the defendant police officers were acting within the scope of their employment and under color of the laws, statutes, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs, and usages of the City of Ferguson, Missouri and the City of Ferguson Police Department; or, St. Louis County, Missouri and the St. Louis County Police Department.
33. Upon information and belief, Defendants have waived sovereign immunity by establishing some type of insurance coverage for the claim at issue pursuant to Mo. Rev. Stat. § 71.185.
I. STATEMENT OF FACTS COMMON TO ALL PLAINTIFFS 34. On August 8, 2014, Darren Wilson of the City of Ferguson Police Department and Michael Brown, Jr., a teenaged African American, encountered one another. A violent confrontation ensued, and Michael Brown, Jr., who was unarmed, was shot to death by Darren Wilson, who is Caucasian. 35. Although the fact that an unarmed African American was shot and killed by a Caucasian police officer is not an unusual event in the United States, the Michael Brown, Jr. shooting was somewhat unique in that it occurred between 12:00 p.m. and 1:00 p.m. in the afternoon, and there were several independent eyewitnesses. As a result of the number of eyewitnesses, technology and the internet, the circumstances surrounding the death of Michael Brown, Jr. went viral and millions of people became aware of it.
10

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 11 of 49 PageID #: 723
36. The community in Ferguson was particularly outraged by what appeared to be an excessive use of force in the Michael Brown, Jr. shooting. The unarmed Michael Brown, Jr. was shot multiple times by Officer Wilson.
37. A public outcry about the shooting death of Michael Brown, Jr. by Officer Wilson turned into protests, which subsequently led to civil unrest in the streets of Ferguson, Missouri when Defendants took up arms and, in militaristic displays of force and weaponry, engaged U.S. Citizens as if they were war combatants.
38. In doing so, during the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendants used wanton and excessive force, under color of law, which deprived Plaintiffs of rights secured under the Constitution and laws of the United States and state law. In addition, Defendants made arrests without probable cause in defiance of the Constitution and laws of the United States and state law.
39. Plaintiffs were all victims of the atrocities committed by Defendants during the period of August 11-13, 2014.
II. FACTS AND CLAIMS SPECIFIC TO PLAINTIFFS
TRACEY WHITE AND WILLIAM DAVIS 40. Plaintiffs Tracey White and her son, Plaintiff William Davis, adopt and incorporate by reference paragraphs 1-39 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 41. On August 13, 2014, Plaintiffs Tracey White and her then minor son, William Davis, attended a Peace and Love rally that was sponsored by her AME Church group in Ferguson. After the rally was over, she and her son walked to the McDonald’s Restaurant located on W. Florissant, where they purchased some drinks and food.
11

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 12 of 49 PageID #: 724
42. While in the restaurant waiting for her husband to come and get her and her son, Plaintiff White conversed with some of the patrons and otherwise acted normally. Shortly thereafter, Plaintiff White’s son went to the restroom and she went back up to the counter to purchase a sundae. Just as she did that, Defendants Ryan, McCoy,McCann and Defendant Cosma, in what appeared to be army uniforms, carrying rifles and sticks and wearing helmets, approached the door and ordered Plaintiff White to “get out.” Plaintiff White was terrified and tried to tell these people that her son was in the restroom, and that she was there waiting for her husband to pick them up.
43. After her son exited the restroom, Plaintiff White observed him being accosted by the defendant police officers. When she expressed her concern, she was told to “shut up.” When Plaintiff White continued to express her concerns about the way her son was being mistreated, she was advised that she was being arrested because she would not “shut up.” Plaintiff White was then thrown to the ground and handcuffed. During the process of being arrested, Plaintiff White realized that she had her son’s iPad in her hand and summoned him over to retrieve the item. When he did, Defendant McCoy placed the minor under arrest as well, for no reason at all.
44. Plaintiff Tracey White and her minor son were then transported to the St. Louis County Police Department offices in Clayton, Missouri, where they were fingerprinted, photographed, held for more than five (5) hours and told that they had been arrested on the unfounded charge of “failure to disperse.”
12

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 13 of 49 PageID #: 725
A. FALSE ARREST 45. Defendants Ryan, McCann, McCoy and Cosma wrongfully and unlawfully arrested and detained and/or assisted in the arrest and detention of the Plaintiffs on the unfounded charge of “failure to disperse,” even though he knew that no probable cause or any other basis for the charge existed. 46. As a direct proximate result of the false arrest of Plaintiffs by the defendant officers and the other Defendants, Plaintiff and her minor son suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and have suffered, and will continue to suffer, mental anguish, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being falsely arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Tracey White and her son demand judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against Defendants Ryan, McCann, McCoy and Cosma in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
B. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 47. Plaintiff White further alleges that Defendants Ryan, McCann, McCoy and Cosma with deliberate indifference and reckless disregard for the rights of Plaintiff White and her son and with pure malice, did subject Plaintiff White to the humiliation of being thrown to the ground and being arrested in front of her minor son and the added
13

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 14 of 49 PageID #: 726
humiliation of seeing her son taken into custody, and treated as if he were a criminal. Defendants City of Ferguson and County of St. Louis Police Departments, with full knowledge of the inappropriateness of these actions have taken no action against any officer involved in the blatantly unfounded arrest of Plaintiff Tracey White and her minor son and have therefore acquiesced in and/or condoned the unlawful acts of Defendants Ryan, McCann, McCoy and Cosma.
48. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of Defendants, Plaintiffs suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and has suffered, and will continue to suffer, psychological harm and mental anguish including fright, shame, mortification, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being unlawfully arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against Defendants Ryan, McCann, McCoy and Cosma in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
C. NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION 49. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendants Ryan, McCann, McCoy and Cosma were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the rules, regulations, policies and procedures, of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County.
14

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 15 of 49 PageID #: 727
50. Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County acted negligently, carelessly and recklessly by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct and monitor Defendant Cosma and Defendant John Doe police officers.
51. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County, Plaintiff White and her minor son were wrongfully and unlawfully, arrested, detained and humiliated. As a result, Plaintiff White and her son have suffered physical assault, embarrassment, and mental anguish.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demands judgment against the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
D. ASSAULT AND BATTERY 52. Defendants Ryan, McCann, McCoy and Cosma, without proper grounds, willfully assaulted and handcuffed Plaintiff White and her minor son without just cause or basis. 53. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ willful, malicious and intentional conduct, Plaintiff White and her minor son suffered bodily injuries when they were taken to the ground to be handcuffed. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against Defendants Ryan,
15

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 16 of 49 PageID #: 728
McCann, McCoy and Cosma in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
E. DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 54. Plaintiff White further alleges that Defendants Ryan, McCann, McCoy and Cosma with deliberate indifference to and reckless disregard for the safety and wellbeing of her and her minor son and in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, did on August 13, 2014 deprive Plaintiffs of their Constitutional rights by assaulting them and then placing them under unlawful arrest, or failed to prevent the arrest and detention, when they had the opportunity to do so. 55. The arrest and detention were and are in violation of Plaintiffs’ right to be free from unreasonable seizure secured by the Fourth Amendments to the United States Constitution and protected under 42 U.S.C. §1983. 56. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ arrest and detention of Plaintiffs as set forth herein, Plaintiffs have suffered severe emotional anguish. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against Defendants Ryan, McCann, McCoy and Cosma, jointly and severally, in the full and fair amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) in compensatory and punitive damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
F. FAILURE TO TRAIN, SUPERVISE, AND DISCIPLINE 42 U.S.C. § 1983
57. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendants that were responsible for the arrest of Plaintiff White and her minor son were acting under the
16

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 17 of 49 PageID #: 729
direction and control, and pursuant to the practices and customs of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County and implemented by Defendants Belmar and Thomas.
58. Defendants acted negligently, carelessly, recklessly and with deliberate indifference to Plaintiffs by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct, monitor and discipline Defendant officers from their respective departments who were patrolling the streets of Ferguson, Missouri during the period of August 11-13, 2014.
59. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson, St. Louis County, Belmar and Thomas, Plaintiff White and her minor son were unlawfully arrested, seized and otherwise deprived of their rights under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs demand judgment against the named Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,00.00), plus punitive damages to the extent allowed by law, attorney’s fees, interest, and costs.
III. FACTS AND CLAIMS SPECIFIC TO PLAINTIFF DEWAYNE A. MATTHEWS,
JR. 60. Plaintiff Dewayne A. Matthews, Jr. adopts and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-39 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 61. On August 13, 2014, which was a Wednesday night, Plaintiff Matthews was on his way to his mother’s house who lives near W. Florissant and Kappel in Ferguson, Missouri. 62. Because of the civil disturbances that had taken place, he was simply going to her house to visit her and make sure she was alright.
17

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 18 of 49 PageID #: 730
63. Plaintiff Matthews took public transportation to his mother’s house. When he got off the 61 Chambers bus, he noticed that the street was blocked off so we proceeded to the corner of W. Florissant and Highmont.
64. At the above location, Plaintiff Matthews was confronted by approximately eight (8) police officers in military type uniforms who had their weapons trained upon him among those officers were Defendants Jackson, Patterson, Vinson, Bates, Burns and Payne. Plaintiff immediately put his hands in the air whereupon he was shot with a “less lethal shotgun” multiple times.
65. At that point, Plaintiff Matthews fell into a creek or sewer. The Defendant officers pounced on him, slammed his face into the concrete, and pushed his head underwater to the point that he felt he was going to be drowned. Afterward, the Defendant police officers continued to assault him and spray him with O.C. spray.
66. Plaintiff Matthews was arrested for allegedly “failing to disperse” even though he had not been involved in any protests of any kind and was only in the neighborhood to check on his mother.
67. Plaintiff Matthews was transported to Christian Hospital Northwest for treatment for the injuries he sustained at the hands of Defendants Jackson, Patterson, Bates, Vinson, Burns and Payne police officers. Despite the fact that Plaintiff Matthews was allegedly placed under arrest for committing a crime, Plaintiff Matthews was never taken to a police station and was released from the hospital the next day.
A. FALSE ARREST 68. Plaintiff Matthews was wrongfully and unlawfully arrested and detained
18

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 19 of 49 PageID #: 731
by Defendants Jackson, Patterson, Bates, Burns, Payne, and Vinson on the unfounded charge of “failure to disperse” even though no probable cause or any other basis for the charge existed and even though Plaintiff Matthews was not in any way involved in any protests.
69. As a direct proximate result of his false arrest, Plaintiff Matthews suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and has suffered, and will continue to suffer, mental anguish, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being falsely arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Matthews demands judgment against the Defendant officers, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
B. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 70. Plaintiff Matthews further alleges that Defendants Jackson, Patterson, Bates, Vinson, Burns and Payne, with deliberate indifference and reckless disregard for his rights and with pure malice, subjected him to vicious acts of violence for no lawful reason. Defendants City of Ferguson and County of St. Louis, with full knowledge of the brutal, vicious and gratuitous acts of violence in which its officers were engaging took no action against any officer involved in the blatantly unlawful assault, battery and arrest Plaintiff Matthews and have, therefore, acquiesced in and/or condoned the unlawful acts of the Defendant officers.
19

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 20 of 49 PageID #: 732
71. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of Defendants, Plaintiff Matthews suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and has suffered, and will continue to suffer, psychological harm and mental anguish including fright, shame, mortification, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being unlawfully arrested, savagely beaten for no reason, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Matthews demands judgment against the Defendant officers, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
C. NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION 72. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendants Jackson, Patterson, Bates, Vinson, Burns and Payne were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the rules, regulations, policies and procedures of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County. 73. Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County acted negligently, carelessly and recklessly by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct and monitor the Defendant police officers. 74. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County, Plaintiff Matthews was wrongfully and unlawfully, arrested, detained and shot with rubber bullets and savagely beaten. As a
20

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 21 of 49 PageID #: 733
result, he suffered severe bodily injuries, pain and suffering, mental anguish, embarrassment, and emotional distress.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Matthews demands judgment against the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
D. ASSAULT AND BATTERY 75. On August 13, 2014, Defendants Jackson, Patterson, Bates, Vinson, Burns and Payne, without proper grounds, willfully subjected the Plaintiff Matthews to cruel and unwarranted physical violence in the form of a beating, near drowning and being shot numerous times with rubber bullets without just cause or basis. 76. As a direct and proximate result of the conduct of Defendants Jackson, Patterson, Bates, Vinson, Burns and Payne, Plaintiff Matthews suffered severe bodily injuries, emotional distress, mental anguish and pain and suffering. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff Matthews demands judgment against the Defendant officers, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, and punitive damages against Defendant John Doe police officers in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
21

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 22 of 49 PageID #: 734
E. DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 77. Plaintiff Matthews further alleges that Defendants Jackson, Patterson, Bates, Vinson, Burns and Payne, with deliberate indifference to and reckless disregard for his safety and well-being in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, did on August 13, 2014 deprive Plaintiff Matthews of his Constitutional rights by assaulting him and then placing him under unlawful arrest, or failed to prevent the arrest and detention, when they had the opportunity to do so. 78. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant officers’ assault, battery, arrest and detention of Plaintiff Matthews as set forth herein, Plaintiff Matthews has suffered severe injuries and emotional anguish. 79. On August 13, 2014, Defendants Jackson, Patterson, Bates, Vinson, Burns and Payne used wanton and excessive force, under color of state law, which deprived Plaintiff Matthews of rights secured under the Constitution and laws of the United States. 80. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of Defendants Jackson, Patterson, Vinson, Bates, Burns and Payne, Plaintiff Matthews was subjected to an illegal seizure by police officers from the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County, acting outside the parameters of law and decency. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Matthews demands judgment against the Defendant police officers, jointly and severally, in the full and fair amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) in compensatory and punitive damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
22

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 23 of 49 PageID #: 735
F. FAILURE TO TRAIN, SUPERVISE, AND DISCIPLINE 42 U.S.C. § 1983
81. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, the Defendant police officers responsible for the arrest and beating of Plaintiff Matthews were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the practices and customs of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County and implemented by Defendants Belmar and Thomas.
82. Defendants City of Ferguson, St. Louis County, Belmar and Thomas acted negligently, carelessly, recklessly and with deliberate indifference to the safety of Plaintiff Matthews by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct, monitor and discipline the officers from their respective departments who were patrolling the streets of Ferguson, Missouri during the period of August 11-13, 2014.
83. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson, St. Louis County, Belmar and Plaintiff Matthews was unlawfully arrested, seized, beaten, shot with rubber bullets and otherwise deprived of his civil rights
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendants Belmar and Thomas, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,00.00), plus punitive damages to the extent allowed by law, attorney’s fees, interest, and costs.
IV. FACTS AND CLAIMS SPECIFIC TO PLAINTIFF KERRY WHITE 84. Plaintiff Kerry White adopts and incorporates by reference paragraphs 120 of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
23

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 24 of 49 PageID #: 736
85. On Tuesday, August 12, 2014, Plaintiff White was in the City of Ferguson, shooting photographic footage of the protests in Ferguson. He initially parked at Chambers and West Florissant, with two of his friends in the vehicle.
86. As Plaintiff White was shooting footage, he observed police officers begin proceeding down Chambers, shooting tear gas and ordering people to leave the area. Plaintiff White left the lot, went south on Chambers and then made a right on Lorrna. Plaintiff White continued to shoot footage from his vehicle. Defendants McCann, McCoy, Valentine and Hill subsequently came onto Lorrna and when Plaintiff White tried to get out of their path, he was blocked in by a military-like tactical vehicle.
87. At this point, the Plaintiff White was seriously afraid for his life. He held his camera out of his car window in an attempt to let the Defendant police officers know that he was simply photographing the protests.
88. Plaintiff White’s camera was snatched from his hand, his memory card was taken from the camera and thrown to the ground. Plaintiff White and his passengers were then taken from his vehicle by Defendants McCann, McCoy, Valentine and Hill, handcuffed, placed in a police wagon and transported to the Clayton Justice Center. Once there, they were booked on the unfounded charge of “failure to disburse” even though no basis at all existed for that charge.
A. FALSE ARREST 89. Plaintiff Kerry White was wrongfully and unlawfully arrested and detained by Defendants McCann, McCoy, Valentine and Hill on the unfounded charge of
24

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 25 of 49 PageID #: 737
“failure to disperse” even though it was clear that no probable cause or any other basis for the charge existed.
90. As a direct and proximate result of his false arrest by the Defendant officers, Plaintiff White suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and has suffered, and will continue to suffer, mental anguish, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being falsely arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Kerry White demands judgment against Defendants McCann, McCoy, Valentine and Hill, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against Defendant John Doe officers in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
B. NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION 91. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendants McCann, McCoy, Valentine and Hill were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the rules, regulations, policies and procedures, of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County. 92. Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County acted negligently, carelessly and recklessly by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct and monitor Defendant John Doe police officers during the period of August 11-13, 2014.
25

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 26 of 49 PageID #: 738
93. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County, Plaintiff White was wrongfully and unlawfully, arrested, detained and humiliated. As a result, he was caused to suffer mental anguish, embarrassment, and emotional distress.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff White demands judgment against Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
C. ASSAULT AND BATTERY 94. Defendants McCann, McCoy, Valentine and Hill, without proper grounds, willfully assaulted, battered and handcuffed Plaintiff Kerry White without just cause or basis. 95. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant officers’ willful, malicious and intentional actions, Plaintiff White suffered bodily injuries while being unlawfully arrested, taken to the ground and handcuffed. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff White demands judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against the Defendant police officers in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
D. DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS, 42 U.S.C. § 1983
26

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 27 of 49 PageID #: 739
96. Plaintiff Kerry White further alleges that Defendants McCann, McCoy, Valentine and Hill, with deliberate indifference to and reckless disregard for his safety and well-being and in violation of the Fourth Amendment, did on August 12, 2014, commit or allowed to be committed acts which deprived him of his constitutional right to be free from an unreasonable seizure.
97. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of the Defendant officers, Kerry White was subjected to an illegal seizure by t Defendant John Doe police officers, who were acting outside the parameters of law and decency.
98. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, Defendants McCann, McCoy, Valentine and Hill used wanton and excessive force, under color of state law, which deprived Plaintiff of rights secured under the Constitution and laws of the United States.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff White demands judgment against the Defendant officers, jointly and severally, in the full and fair amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) in compensatory and punitive damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
E. FAILURE TO TRAIN, SUPERVISE, AND DISCIPLINE 42 U.S.C. § 1983
99. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, the Defendant police officers responsible for the arrest of Plaintiff Kerry White were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the practices and customs of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County and implemented by Defendants Belmar and Thomas.
100. Defendants Belmar and Thomas acted negligently, carelessly, recklessly and with deliberate indifference to the safety of Plaintiff White by failing to properly
27

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 28 of 49 PageID #: 740
train, supervise, control, direct, monitor and discipline the officers from their respective departments who were patrolling the streets of Ferguson, Missouri During the period of August 11-13, 2014.
101. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson, St. Louis County, Belmar and Plaintiff Thomas Kerry White was unlawfully arrested, seized and otherwise deprived of his civil rights.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff White demands judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,00.00), plus punitive damages to the extent allowed by law, attorney’s fees, interest, and costs.
V. FACTS AND CLAIMS SPECIFIC TO PLAINTIFFS DAMON COLEMAN AND THEOPHILUS GREEN 102. Plaintiffs Damon Coleman and Theophilus Green adopt and incorporate by reference paragraphs 1-39 as if fully set forth herein. 103. On August 11, 2014, at approximately 8:00 p.m., Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were engaging in a peaceful protest, with several others, regarding the shooting death of Michael Brown, Jr. on West Florissant near the Quick Trip convenience store. 104. At or around the same date and time, a number of St. Louis County police officers began to arrive on the scene. Shortly thereafter, a military type truck pulled up with more St. Louis County police officers in full riot gear. 105. At that point, other St. Louis County police officers began to put on riot gear and arm themselves with militaristic type automatic weapons. Upon seeing these
28

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 29 of 49 PageID #: 741
officers appear to be preparing to engage in combat, the protesters turned to them and began to chant “hands up don’t shoot” with their arms raised in the air.
106. In response, officers from the City of Maryland Heights Police Department, under the supervision and control of the St. Louis County Police Department, who appeared to be seeking a confrontation, began to spread out and take what appeared to be tactical positions behind the non-violent protesters. At about the same time, two military tank-like vehicles began to approach the group from the front with police officers on and next to the vehicles. Numerous police officers then began shooting tear gas into the group of protestors causing the group to scatter.
107. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were recording these events. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were then spotted by Defendants Delia, Devouton and McKinnon who began shooting at them. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green raised their hands but the police continued to fire tear gas and what appeared to be stun grenades in their direction.
108. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were repeatedly shot with rubber bullets as the police continued to fire as Plaintiffs Coleman and Green got on their knees and presented no threat.
109. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were subsequently placed under arrest on the unfounded charge of “failure to disperse.” While arresting Plaintiffs Coleman and Green, Defendants Delia, Devouton and McKinnon hurled racial epithets at them, while punching and kicking them the entire time.
29

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 30 of 49 PageID #: 742
110. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were eventually taken to the Clayton Justice Center where they were ridiculed and placed in small cells. Plaintiffs Green and Coleman were held for more than 12 hours.
A. FALSE ARREST 111. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green wrongfully and unlawfully arrested and detained on the unfounded charge of “failure to disperse” even though it was clear that no probable cause or any other basis for the charge existed. 112. As a direct proximate result of the false arrest of Plaintiffs Coleman and Green by City of Maryland Heights Police Department under the supervision and control of the St. Louis County Police Department, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and have suffered, and will continue to suffer, mental anguish, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being falsely arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green demand judgment against the Defendant police officers, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, and punitive damages in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
B. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 113. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green further allege that the City of Maryland Heights Police Department officers under the supervision and control of the St. Louis
30

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 31 of 49 PageID #: 743
County Police Department, with deliberate indifference and reckless disregard for Plaintiffs’ rights, and with pure malice, did falsely arrest, beat, ridicule and shoot them with rubber bullets simply for the sport of it.
114. Defendant County of St. Louis with full knowledge of the falsification of police reports by their officers as well as their acts of misconduct and use of excessive force took no action against any officer involved in the unlawful arrest of Plaintiffs Coleman and Green and have, therefore, acquiesced in and/or condoned the unlawful acts of Defendants Delia, Devouton and McKinnon.
115. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of the Defendants, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and have suffered, and will continue to suffer, psychological harm and mental anguish including fright, shame, mortification, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being unlawfully arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly deprived of their civil rights and mistreated
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green demand judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against the Defendants in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
C. NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION 116. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, the Defendant police officers were from the City of Maryland Heights and were acting under the direction and control,
31

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 32 of 49 PageID #: 744
and pursuant to the rules, regulations, policies and procedures, of Defendant St. Louis County.
117. Defendant St. Louis County acted negligently, carelessly and recklessly by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct and monitor Defendants Delia, Devouton and McKinnon who it deployed onto the streets of Ferguson, Missouri During the period of August 11-13, 2014.
118. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendant and St. Louis County, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were wrongfully and unlawfully, arrested, detained, beaten, shot with rubber bullets and humiliated. As a result, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green have suffered physical injury, pain and suffering, mental anguish, embarrassment, and mental distress.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green demand judgment against St. Louis County in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
D. ASSAULT AND BATTERY 119. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green, without proper grounds, were shot with rubber bullets and beaten about their bodies by Defendants Delia, Devouton and McKinnon even though Plaintiffs Coleman and Green posed no threat to the Defendant police officers or anyone else. 120. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant police officers willful, malicious and intentional actions of the Defendant officers, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green
32

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 33 of 49 PageID #: 745
suffered serious injury to significant areas of their bodies, as well a pain and suffering, mental anguish, emotional distress and humiliation.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green demand judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
E. DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 121. Plaintiffs Coleman and Green further allege that Defendants Delia, Devouton and McKinnon, with deliberate indifference to and reckless disregard for their safety and well-being and in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, did on August 11, 2014, commit or allowed to be committed acts which deprived both of them their Constitutional right to be free from an unreasonable seizure and excessive force. 122. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of the Defendant police officers, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were subjected to an illegal seizure and the excessive use of force by the completely out of control police officers, acting outside the parameters of law and decency. WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green demand judgment against Defendants Delia, Devouton and McKinnon, jointly and severally, in the full and fair amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) in compensatory and punitive damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
33

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 34 of 49 PageID #: 746
F. FAILURE TO TRAIN, SUPERVISE, AND DISCIPLINE 42 U.S.C. § 1983
123. During the period of August 11-13, 2014, the Defendant police officers responsible for the unlawful arrest, beating and mistreatment of Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the practices and customs of Defendant St. Louis County and implemented by Defendant Belmar.
124. Defendants acted negligently, carelessly, recklessly and with deliberate indifference to the safety of Plaintiffs Coleman and Green by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct, monitor and discipline Defendant police officers from their respective departments who were patrolling the streets of Ferguson, Missouri during the period of August 11-13, 2014.
125. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants St. Louis County, and Belmar, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were unlawfully arrested, seized and otherwise mistreated.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Coleman and Green demand judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,00.00), plus punitive damages to the extent allowed by law, attorney’s fees, interest, and costs.
VI. FACTS AND CLAIMS SPECIFIC TO PLAINTIFF ANTAWN HARRIS 126. Plaintiff Antawn Harris adopts and incorporates by reference paragraphs 139 as if fully set forth herein.
34

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 35 of 49 PageID #: 747
127. On August 11, 2014, at approximately 7:40 p.m., Plaintiff Harris, who resides in the Canfield Green Apartments, was standing near the intersection of W Florissant Avenue and Canfield Drive observing what was going on at the time.
128. While standing there, the Plaintiff observed several St. Louis County police officers push a man, who had not been doing anything, to the ground and start beating him. The Plaintiff started recording this unlawful conduct. As he was recording the officers, one of them fired his weapon in the direction of the Plaintiff striking him between the eyes with a rubber bullet. As a result of being shot between the eyes, the Plaintiff almost lost consciousness, was knocked back and was bleeding.
129. As a result of this assault and battery and use of excessive force, the Plaintiff was caused to seek medical treatment at BJC HealthCare Christian Hospital for the serious trauma to his face, blurred vision, headaches and severe swelling that occurred immediately thereafter.
A. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 130. Plaintiff Harris further alleges that the as of yet unidentified St. Louis County police officers, with deliberate indifference and reckless disregard for the rights of the Plaintiff, and with pure malice, did intentionally shoot him in the face with a rubber bullet simply for the sport of it. Defendants City of Ferguson and County of St. Louis with full knowledge of the falsification of police reports by their officers as well as their acts of misconduct and use of excessive force have taken no action against any officer involved in the rubber bullet shooting of Plaintiff Harris and has therefore
35

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 36 of 49 PageID #: 748
acquiesced in and/or condoned the unlawful acts of their officers who were deployed on August 11 2014.
131. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of the Defendants, Plaintiff Harris suffered discomfort, distress, psychological harm and mental anguish.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against the officer Defendants in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
B. NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION 132. At all times relevant herein, the officers deployed in Ferguson, Mo., were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the rules, regulations, policies and procedures, of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County. 133. Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County acted negligently, carelessly and recklessly by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct and monitor the officers deployed onto the streets of Ferguson, Mo., on August 11, 2014. 134. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County, Plaintiff Harris was wrongfully and unlawfully shot with a rubber bullet between the eyes. As a result, Plaintiff has suffered physical injury, pain and suffering, mental anguish, and mental distress. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment against the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand
36

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 37 of 49 PageID #: 749
Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
C. ASSAULT & BATTERY 135. Plaintiff Harris, without proper grounds, was shot with a rubber bullet between his eyes even though he posed no threat to any officer or anyone else. 136. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ willful, malicious and intentional actions, Plaintiff Harris suffered serious and permanent injury to his face, as well a pain and suffering, mental anguish, emotional distress and humiliation. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment against the defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
D. DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 137. Plaintiff Harris further alleges that the as of yet unidentified officer defendants, with deliberate indifference to and reckless disregard for their safety and well-being and in violation of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution, did on August 11, 2014, commit or allowed to be committed acts which deprived him of his Constitutional right to be free from an unreasonable seizure and excessive force. 138. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of the as of yet unidentified officer Defendants, the Plaintiff was subjected to an illegal seizure and the excessive use
37

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 38 of 49 PageID #: 750
of force by the completely out of control police officers, acting outside the parameters of law and decency.
Wherefore, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendant officers, jointly and severally, in the full and fair amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) in compensatory and punitive damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
E. FAILURE TO TRAIN, SUPERVISE, AND DISCIPLINE 42 U.S.C. § 1983
139. At all times relevant herein, the lawless officers responsible for the mistreatment of Plaintiff Harris were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the practices and customs of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County and implemented by Defendants Belmar and Thomas.
140. Defendants acted negligently, carelessly, recklessly and with deliberate indifference to the safety of United States citizens in Ferguson, Mo., by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct, monitor and discipline the officers from their respective departments who were patrolling the streets of Ferguson, Mo., on August 11, 2014.
141. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson, St. Louis County, Belmar and Thomas, Plaintiff Harris was unlawfully shot between the eyes with a rubber bullet, seized and otherwise mistreated.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,00.00), plus punitive damages to the extent allowed by law, attorney’s fees, interest, and costs.
38

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 39 of 49 PageID #: 751
VII. FACTS AND CLAIMS SPECIFIC TO PLAINTIFF NATHAN BURNS 142. Plaintiff Nathan Burns adopts and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1-39 as if fully set forth herein. 143. On August 11, 2014, at approximately 10:30 p.m., the Plaintiff was amongst a peaceful group of protesters when suddenly canisters of tear gas were thrown into the crowd of people. Almost simultaneously, 10-15 police officers ambushed members of the crowd. The Plaintiff was sprayed with mace all over his face and mouth. In response, the Plaintiff put his hands up in the air to show that he did not pose a threat to anyone and in an attempt to block the mace that was being sprayed at his face. 144. The Plaintiff then tried to walk away from the chaotic situation only to be grabbed by his hair by one of the policemen who then slammed him to the ground. In an attempt to diffuse the situation, the Plaintiff immediately placed his hands behind his back so that Defendants McCann, McCoy and Hill could handcuff him without any accusation of resistance. After being handcuffed, the Plaintiff’s hair was grabbed by one of the Defendant officers who then slammed his head into the ground while other officers saturated him with mace. One of the Defendant officers even stuck his finger in Plaintiff’s ear. 145. The Plaintiff was eventually lifted off the ground by the officers. While being lifted off the ground, one of the officers whispered in his ear “hey . . . hey. . . now we’re bout to kill you . . . This caused the Plaintiff to panic and seek assistance from the other officers by yelling to them that the officer nearest to him had threatened his life and to not allow him to arrest the Plaintiff. None of the other officers intervened. Plaintiff
39

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 40 of 49 PageID #: 752
Burns was then placed in one of the armored vehicles and taken to jail. Before being placed in the vehicle, however, the officers searched the Plaintiff’s genital area several times and made sure to place their mace soaked hands on his genitals.
146. As a result of his bogus arrest for “failure to disburse,” the Plaintiff was held in jail for approximately 24 hours in clothes so drenched in mace that others could not bear to sit near him.
A. FALSE ARREST 147. Plaintiff Burns was wrongfully and unlawfully arrested and detained on the bogus charge of “failure to disperse” even though it was clear that no probable cause or any other basis for the charge existed. 148. As a direct proximate result of the false arrest of Plaintiff Burns by Defendants McCann, McCoy and Hill, the Plaintiff suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and has suffered, and will continue to suffer, mental anguish, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being falsely arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Burns demands judgment against the Defendant officers, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, and punitive damages in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
40

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 41 of 49 PageID #: 753
B. INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS 149. Plaintiff Burns further alleges that Defendants McCann, McCoy and Hill, with deliberate indifference and reckless disregard for the rights of the Plaintiff, and with pure malice, did falsely arrest, beat, ridicule and spray him with a mace like substance simply for the sport of it. Defendants City of Ferguson and County of St. Louis with full knowledge of the falsification of police reports by their officers as well as their acts of misconduct and use of excessive force have taken no action against any officer involved in the blatantly bogus arrest of Plaintiff Burns and has therefore acquiesced in and/or condoned the unlawful acts of their officers who were deployed on August 11 2014. 150. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of the defendants, Plaintiff suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and has suffered, and will continue to suffer, psychological harm and mental anguish including fright, shame, mortification, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being unlawfully arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against the officer Defendants in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
41

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 42 of 49 PageID #: 754
C. NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION 151. At all times relevant herein, the officers deployed in Ferguson, Mo., were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the rules, regulations, policies and procedures, of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County. 152. Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County acted negligently, carelessly and recklessly by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct and monitor the officers deployed onto the streets of Ferguson, Mo., on August 11, 2014. 153. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County, Plaintiff Burns was wrongfully and unlawfully, arrested, detained, beaten, sprayed with a mace like substance and humiliated. As a result, Plaintiff has suffered physical injury, pain and suffering, mental anguish, embarrassment, and mental distress. WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment against the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
D. ASSAULT & BATTERY 154. Plaintiff Burns, without proper grounds, was sprayed with a mace like substance and beaten about his body even though he posed no threat to any officer or anyone else.
42

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 43 of 49 PageID #: 755
155. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant Officers’ willful, malicious and intentional actions, the Plaintiff suffered serious injury to significant areas of his body, as well a pain and suffering, mental anguish, emotional distress and humiliation.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
E. DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 156. Plaintiff Burns further alleges that Defendants McCann, McCoy and Hill, with deliberate indifference to and reckless disregard for his safety and well-being and in violation of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution, did on August 11, 2014, commit or allowed to be committed acts which deprived both of them their Constitutional right to be free from an unreasonable seizure and excessive force. 157. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of the as of yet unidentified officer defendants, the Plaintiff was subjected to an illegal seizure and excessive use of force by the completely out of control police officers, acting outside the parameters of law and decency. Wherefore, Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendant officers, jointly and severally, in the full and fair amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) in
43

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 44 of 49 PageID #: 756
compensatory and punitive damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
F. FAILURE TO TRAIN, SUPERVISE, AND DISCIPLINE 42 U.S.C. § 1983
158. At all times relevant herein, the lawless officers responsible for the arrest, beating and mistreatment of Plaintiff Burns was acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the practices and customs of defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County and implemented by Defendants Belmar and Thomas.
159. Defendants acted negligently, carelessly, recklessly and with deliberate indifference to the safety of United States citizens in Ferguson, Mo., by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct, monitor and discipline the officers from their respective departments who were patrolling the streets of Ferguson, Mo., on August 11, 2014.
160. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson, St. Louis County, Belmar and Thomas, Plaintff Burns was unlawfully arrested, seized and otherwise mistreated.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,00.00), plus punitive damages to the extent allowed by law, attorney’s fees, interest, and costs.
VIII. FACTS AND CLAIMS SPECIFIC TO PLAINTIFFS SANDY & KIA BOWERS
161. These Plaintiffs adopt and incorporate by reference paragraphs 1-39 as if fully set forth herein.
44

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 45 of 49 PageID #: 757
162. On Tuesday, August 12, 2014, the plaintiffs were in the City of Ferguson, shooting photographic footage of the goings on in Ferguson. They initially parked at Chambers and West Florissant, Plaintiff Kerry White was in the vehicle with them.
163. As Plaintiff White was shooting footage, the Plaintiffs observed the police begin proceeding down Chambers, shooting tear gas and ordering people to leave the area. The Plaintiffs left the lot, went south on Chambers and then made a right on Lorrna. Plaintiff White continued to shoot footage from the vehicle. The police subsequently came onto Lorna and when the Plaintiffs tried to get out of their path, they were blocked in by a military like tactical vehicle.
164. At this point, the Plaintiffs were seriously afraid for their lives. Plaintiff White held his camera out of his car window in an attempt to let the police officers know that he was simply photographing the goings on.
165. A police officer snatched the camera from Plaintiff White’s hand, took out his memory card and threw it to the ground. The Plaintiffs were then taken from the vehicle by Defendants McCann, Hill, Valentine, McCoy and Payne, thrown to the ground, handcuffed, placed in a police wagon and transported to the Clayton Justice Center. Once there, they were booked on the bogus charge of failure to disburse even though no basis at all existed for that charge.
A. FALSE ARREST 166. Plaintiffs Kai and Sandy Bowers were wrongfully and unlawfully arrested and detained on the bogus charge of “failure to disperse” even though it was clear that no probable cause or any other basis for the charge existed.
45

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 46 of 49 PageID #: 758
167. As a direct proximate result of their false arrest, the Plaintiffs suffered discomfort, distress and loss of liberty; and has suffered, and will continue to suffer, mental anguish, humiliation and embarrassment from the indignity and disgrace of being falsely arrested, taken into custody, and otherwise grossly mistreated.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Kai and Sandy Bowers demand judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against the officer Defendants in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
B. NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION 168. At all times relevant herein, the Defendant officers, were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the rules, regulations, policies and procedures, of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County. 169. Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County acted negligently, carelessly and recklessly by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct and monitor their officers who were deployed on August 12, 2014. 170. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County, Plaintiffs Kai and Sandy Bowers were wrongfully and unlawfully, arrested, detained and humiliated. As a result, they were caused to suffer mental anguish, embarrassment, and emotional distress. WHEREFORE, these Plaintiffs demand judgment against the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand
46

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 47 of 49 PageID #: 759
Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
C. ASSAULT & BATTERY 171. Defendants McCann, Hill, Valentine, McCoy and Payne, without proper grounds, willfully manhandled and handcuffed Plaintiffs Kai and Sandy Bowers without just cause or basis. 172. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ willful, malicious and intentional actions, the Plaintiffs suffered bodily injury after being taken to the ground to be handcuffed. WHEREFORE, these Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendants, jointly and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00), in compensatory damages, punitive damages against the Defendant officers in the amount of one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
D. DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 173. Plaintiffs Kai and Sandy Bowers further allege that Defendants McCann, Hill, Valentine, McCoy and Payne, with deliberate indifference to and reckless disregard for his safety and well-being and in violation of the 4th Amendment to the Constitution, did on August 12, 2014, commit or allowed to be committed acts which deprived them of their constitutional right to be free from an unreasonable seizure.
47

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 48 of 49 PageID #: 760
174. As a direct and proximate result of the actions of these officers, Kai and Sandy Bowers were subjected to an illegal seizure by the completely out of control police officers, acting outside the parameters of law and decency.
Wherefore, these Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendant officers, jointly and severally, in the full and fair amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00) in compensatory and punitive damages, plus interest, costs and attorney’s fees to the extent allowed by law.
E. FAILURE TO TRAIN, SUPERVISE, AND DISCIPLINE 42 U.S.C. § 1983
175. At all times relevant herein, the lawless officers responsible for the arrest of Plaintiffs Kai and Sandy Bowers were acting under the direction and control, and pursuant to the practices and customs of Defendants City of Ferguson and St. Louis County and implemented by Defendants Belmar and Thomas.
176. Defendants acted negligently, carelessly, recklessly and with deliberate indifference to the safety of United States citizens lawfully in Ferguson, Mo., by failing to properly train, supervise, control, direct, monitor and discipline the officers from their respective departments who were patrolling the streets of Ferguson, Mo., on August 12, 2014.
177. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of Defendants City of Ferguson, St. Louis County, Belmar and Thomas, Kai and Sandy Bowers were unlawfully arrested, seized and otherwise mistreated.
48

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 81 Filed: 05/27/15 Page: 49 of 49 PageID #: 761
WHEREFORE, these Plaintiffs demand judgment against the Defendants, jointly
and severally, in the full and just amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00), plus
punitive damages to the extent allowed by law, attorney’s fees, interest, and costs.
Respectfully submitted,
LAW OFFICES OF GREGORY L. LATTIMER
By /s/ Gregory L. Lattimer Gregory L. Lattimer, Esq. [371926DC] 1200 G Street, N.W. Suite 800 Washington, D.C. 20005 Tel. (202) 434-4513 Fax: (866) 764-6442 Lattlaw@aol.com
and
BLACK LAWYERS FOR JUSTICE
Malik Z. Shabazz, Esq. [458434DC] 1200 G Street, N.W. Suite 800 Washington, D.C. 20005 Tel: (202) 434-4528 Fax: (202) 248-4478 attorneyshabazz@yahoo.com
and
GREENE LEGAL GROUP LLC Reginald A. Greene, Esq. [308674GA] One Georgia Center, Suite 605 600 West Peachtree Street, N.W. Atlanta, Georgia 30308 Tel. (404) 574-4308 Fax: (404) 574-4308 rgreene@greenelegalgorup.com
Counsel for the Plaintiffs 49

 
 Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 103 Filed: 06/25/15 Page: 1 of 1 PageID #: 891

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION

TRACEY WHITE, et al., Plaintiffs,
v. THOMAS JACKSON, et al.,
Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

No. 4:14CV1490 HEA

)

)

)

)

)

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the Ferguson Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, [Doc.

No. 87], which requests that the Court dismiss from Plaintiffs’ Third Amended Complaint

Plaintiffs’ claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent supervision, based

on the Court’s rationale and analysis in dismissing these claims from Plaintiffs’ Second

Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs filed a Response conceding that these claims should be

dismissed.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Ferguson Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [Doc.

No. 87] is GRANTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ claims for intentional infliction of

emotional distress and negligent supervision are DISMISSED from Plaintiff’s Third Amended

Complaint. Dated this 25th day of June, 2015.

HENRY EDWARD AUTREY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 
 Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 1 of 74 PageID #: 4159

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION

TRACEY WHITE, et al., Plaintiffs,
v. THOMAS JACKSON, et al.,
Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

No. 4:14CV1490 HEA

)

)

)

)

)

OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the City of Ferguson, Thomas Jackson,

Justin Cosma, Matt Delia, Brandon McKinnon, and Ryan Devouton’s Motion for

Summary Judgment, [Doc. No. 143] and John Belmar, David Ryan, Terrence

McCoy, Michael McCann, Derik Jackson, Joe Patterson, Aaron Vinson, William

Bates, Nicholas Payne, Daniel Hill, Antonio Valentine and St. Louis County,

Missouri’s Motion for Summary Judgment, [Doc. No. 158]. Plaintiffs oppose the

motions. For the reasons set forth below, the Motions are granted.

Initially, Plaintiffs agree that Defendant Cosma should be dismissed; he was

not involved in any arrests of any Plaintiffs. Accordingly, Defendant Cosma’s

Motion for Summary Judgment is granted.

Facts and Background

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 2 of 74 PageID #: 4160
Michael Brown, Jr. was shot and killed by a police officer on August 9, 2014, in the City of Ferguson, Missouri. In the hours and days that followed, large crowds gathered in Ferguson to protest Brown’s death.
Plaintiffs are individuals who claim to have suffered violations of various rights between August 11 and August 13, 2014, in Ferguson.
Plaintiffs initiated this action several days days after the death of Michael Brown, Jr., and have filed their Third Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs bring federal claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for deprivation of their civil rights and for failure to train, supervise, and discipline. Plaintiffs bring state law claims for false arrest, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent supervision and assault and battery.
The undisputed facts of the occurrences of August 11, 2014 are as follows: Lt. Delia, P.O. DeVouton, and P.O. McKinnon were performing duties as licensed peace officers at the request of St. Louis County, Missouri. At least one officer of the St. Louis County Police Department determined the protest near West Florissant area had turned more violent and more civilly disobedient. At least one officer of the St. Louis County Police Department determined the area near West Florissant constituted an unlawful assembly and informed Lt. Delia of the same. Lt. Delia, P.O. DeVouton, and P.O. McKinnon heard police deliver several audible commands to the protesters, by-standers and other people to leave /
- 2 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 3 of 74 PageID #: 4161
disperse the area near West Florissant. Lt. Delia, P.O. DeVouton, and P.O. McKinnon were all present and did not observe Plaintiffs Coleman and Green leave the subject area near West Florissant after being ordered to do so and before Plaintiffs Coleman and Green were placed under arrest. Lt. Delia perceived Plaintiffs Coleman and Green making throwing motions and throwing items toward himself and toward other police officers. P.O. McKinnon did not place Plaintiffs Coleman or Green in handcuffs.
Neither Lt. Delia, nor P.O. DeVouton, nor P. O. McKinnon possessed nor were equipped with any weapons or firearms capable of discharging less-lethal projectiles such as rubber bullets, mace/pepper balls, or bean bags. Neither Lt. Delia, nor P.O. DeVouton, nor P. O. McKinnon discharged any less-lethal munitions in conjunction with the arrest of Mr. Damon Coleman and Mr. Theophilus Green. Neither Lt. Delia, nor P.O. DeVouton, nor P. O. McKinnon observed each other ever discharge any less-lethal munitions in conjunction with the arrests of Plaintiffs Damon Coleman and Theophilus Green.
Plaintiffs did not identify any of the three Defendant Maryland Heights Officers (Lt. Delia, P.O. DeVouton, nor P. O. McKinnon) as an officer who allegedly used force against them. Plaintiffs state that the defendant officers were wearing gas masks that hid their identity.
No force was used either against Ms. Tracey White or her son, William Davis, inside the McDonald's off of West Florissant in Ferguson. Tracey White
- 3 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 4 of 74 PageID #: 4162
was arrested by a St. Louis County Police Officer and two St. Charles Police Officers. William Davis was arrested by St. Louis County Officer Terrence McCoy. Any officer associated with the arrests of either Ms. White or Mr. Davis was with either the St. Louis County Police Department or St. Charles Police Department.
Thomas Jackson was the Chief of the City of Ferguson in the subject time frame.
White's son at the time of the incident was 17 years old, and he was turning 18 the following month.
White denied under oath that she had ever been a party to an action filed in any court in Missouri. When told what is on Missouri Case Net, White agreed that she is a defendant in an action for nonpayment of a credit card. White then also agreed that in 2014 there was an order of protection served against her. Pursuant to that order of protection, White agreed to stay 100 feet away from the home of the petitioner in that action. In her deposition, White refused to answer the question asking what it was that she had done that led to a permanent order of protection being issued against her. White also agreed that in 2008 she was arrested in Florissant, charged with interfering and resisting arrest, went to court, and the charge was dismissed. She also agreed that she was also charged with assault third and disorderly conduct in the municipality of Country Club Hills in 1999.
- 4 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 5 of 74 PageID #: 4163
Before the Complaint in this lawsuit was filed, White discussed with her attorney what happened to her in this case.
Tracey White attended a rally on August 13th, 2014. This rally was sponsored by a pastor. Tracey White does not know who the pastor is. The rally was not sponsored by Tracey White's church, and she does not belong to an AME church.
After the rally White and her son William Davis walked to the McDonald's. S h e arrived at the McDonald's around 6:00 or 6:05 pm, and stayed there for about an hour. White walked out the door of the McDonalds and the reason for doing so was that her phone was not charged. Before White walked out of the McDonalds she had not seen any police officers. After she was outside she noticed one police officer who she described as an African American but was otherwise unable to say to which police department he belonged. Outside the McDonalds, White talked to the officer about her husband, while she waited for her son to come out. During their conversation, the officer told White that she and her son could wait on the corner when her son came out.
White was not thrown to the ground inside the McDonalds restaurant. Her son was not arrested inside the restaurant.
Outside the restaurant, there was a crowd of people who were instructed by police to move back, and they did as instructed.
- 5 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 6 of 74 PageID #: 4164
The encounter of White with the police occurred on a side street. She is not certain of the amount of time that elapsed between her leaving McDonalds and her arriving at the location where she was arrested; it could have been 30-45 minutes. She remembers that on the other street, to which she and members of the crowd went, there was a truck that was stuck and trying to get out, and that this halted the movement of the crowd, and the movement of the police. She recalls that the police were then directing the crowd to a different specific street. She claims that when she asked a police officer how much farther do we have to get pushed back in this crowd, the police officer grabbed her, threw her to the ground, put his knee on her back and arrested her. White does not know what color uniform this police officer was wearing. White agreed that she was told to disperse and to keep moving backward.
When White viewed the video of her arrest during her deposition, she admitted that the video showed the truck that was stuck, it showed her, and it showed an officer placing hand ties on her. She agreed that video showed an officer placing hand ties on her, and that she was not on the ground, and that there was no knee in her back.
The footage from the video shows White’s son walking by holding an iPad in his hand, and so she agrees that the officer may have handed the iPad to her son. White viewed footage showing where her son is walking, and that he was holding a soda and ice cream that were still in his hands. She agrees that when her son was
- 6 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 7 of 74 PageID #: 4165
walking by with the soda, ice cream sundae, and iPad in his hands, he was not handcuffed and he was not yet arrested.
The video footage then shows Tracey White walking with her hands behind her back; she agrees that at this point she is under arrest, and that she should be compliant and should walk with the officers. The footage then shows that White’s hands have fallen out of the handcuffs. She disagreed on the record that she had been pulling her hands away to become uncuffed. When shown the footage, White admitted that she wasn’t thrown to the ground.
White had never seen the police officers before this incident, and as far as she knows, the police officers did not know her. She is not certain about Officers McCoy, McCann and Ryan, and she does not know what these officers look like. She does not know what color uniform the officer who allegedly threw her to the ground was wearing. No racial epithets or slurs were used against Tracey White.
Tracey White observed her son being arrested. She cannot recall any force being used against her son, but she believes an ice cream that he was holding was knocked out of his hand.
No medical claim is being made by Plaintiff Tracey White. Plaintiff William Davis is aware that there was civil unrest in the streets of Ferguson, that there was chaos, that buildings were burned, that there was looting, that there were gunshots in the streets of Ferguson, and that rocks and bottles were
- 7 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 8 of 74 PageID #: 4166
thrown at police. He had seen the Quik Trip burned down and the hair salon broken into.
After the shooting of Michael Brown, and before August 13, 2014, Davis had gone to Ferguson five times, three times with his mother and two times with his father. On August 13, 2014, Davis’ dad dropped off Davis and his mother, Tracey White near the burnt out Quik Trip. Davis and White walked down the street where there was a peace rally, but he cannot remember if he heard any of the speakers at the rally. He heard the police saying to get out of the street. He and his mother left the rally after 10 minutes. They walked 15 minutes to the McDonalds on West Florissant, and stayed there for about an hour.
At some point, White walked out of the McDonalds to look for her husband. While White was outside, Davis remained inside the McDonalds for perhaps an hour. He sat, ate food, and watched CNN. No police office touched Davis inside the McDonalds.
After SWAT officers came inside the McDonalds and told people to leave, Davis walked out the door, where his mom was talking to a tall black SWAT officer, dressed in black, who was wearing a helmet. The officer did not have any weapons or sticks in his hands. Davis could not hear what the officer was saying to his mom because the officer was talking low and there was a lot of commotion in the background.
- 8 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 9 of 74 PageID #: 4167
He saw the police or SWAT members forming a line. After that, there was a large group of people, including Davis and his mother, who were moved up some street that he was not familiar with, but he and his mother were then following the directions of the police.
When his mother was arrested, all that Davis heard the officers say was “you’re being arrested, you’re being arrested.” He did not hear what the police said before this because of the commotion.
Davis remembers an officer saying to him that he was under arrest, whereupon he placed his hands behind his back and allowed himself to be handcuffed, and no force was used. At this time, the rest of the crowd had moved on and had moved down.
Sgt. Ryan was dressed in a brown uniform with the external vest in front and the back. Ryan testified that the officers under his command were wearing helmets due to the fact that on previous days, there had been shots to the head and rocks thrown at them. He further testified that the officers wore vests because of what had been going on the nights before.
Ryan testified that the objective was to clear persons from the area to make sure they are safe securing businesses so that they are not looted or burned down. Ryan further testified that the police wished to clear Ferguson Market by securing a line up toward Sharondale Ave. due to the fact that the evenings before, the police were attacked from people on the hill. He further testified that the street to
- 9 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 10 of 74 PageID #: 4168
the right is Ferguson Ave. and the first street off of Ferguson is Sharondale. He further testified that there is a way out of the apartment complex; that there are two entrances along the street.
Ryan testified that in addition to the St. Louis County police being in the area, there were officers from St. Charles, Ferguson, and the Missouri Highway Patrol.
A truck had become stuck and Ryan had instructed officers to go talk to people to get them to move a little further up to where the police could get the truck out. Everything would have to be cleared, and this was after he had instructed White to go up to the top of the hill on Sharondale. White would be able to go into the apartment complex, or to keep walking on Ferguson Avenue, where she could have been picked up. Police had been moving people in the area of Ferguson and Sharondale, but Ryan had to keep them moving from where the truck was located because he was trying to make sure nobody got hurt. Ryan testified that White would be able to go into the apartment complex, or to keep walking to Ferguson Ave., where she could be picked up.
Those officers, who effectuated the arrest of Tracey White, did so under the supervision of Sgt. David Ryan, and St. Louis County police were in charge of the scene when Tracey White was arrested.
Officer Terence McCoy testified that the Neighborhood Enforcement Team is almost the same idea as hot spot policing. The Neighborhood Enforcement
- 10 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 11 of 74 PageID #: 4169
Team tries to address crime trends and to prevent home burglaries, car larcenies, shootings, or drug activity in an area. McCoy further testified that The Neighborhood Enforcement Team's duties include doing search warrants, responding to armed and barricaded subjects, instructing at the academy, teaching at schools, and training. McCoy testified that there had been civil unrest in Ferguson; large crowds, property being destroyed, police officers assaulted by having things thrown at them, multiple shots fired, people injured, large crowds throwing rocks at officers.
With regard to Tracey White and William Davis, McCoy testified that what was occurring was that there was a certain area that was trying to be secured and there was a truck that was stuck and they were in the area where the police were attempting to get the truck out of the spot it was stuck in. McCoy testified that the truck was hooked up to a trailer.
In the video Officer McCoy is shown grabbing Tracey White's left arm. McCoy testified that Tracey White and William Davis were arrested because the police had asked them to leave the area and the police were trying to get the truck out of the area safely. McCoy testified that White and Davis had been instructed to go into the apartment complex or up the street to the next intersection. McCoy did not order the arrest of Tracey White. McCoy is the one who arrested William Davis; McCoy testified that Davis was told that he had to leave the area, and McCoy told Davis that the police are
- 11 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 12 of 74 PageID #: 4170
not hurting his mom, and that he still had to leave the area; that "we're giving you an opportunity to either go into the apartment complex or go up the street;" that Davis stared, he didn't say anything, and then McCoy said: "I'm going to have to arrest you if you don't choose either to go into the apartment complex or go up the street. McCoy further testified that Davis just stayed there and stared. Then McCoy placed Davis under arrest. There was no resistance, and Davis was completely compliant.
Regarding Tracey White and William Davis, McCann testified that he was in the area but did not make the arrest. McCann testified that he was dealing with the truck that had gotten itself pinned between a street sign, had gone off the road, and was stuck. McCann testified further that he was motioning the truck driver forward and back, and there was a group of people. McCann testified: "we were afraid they were going to get run over by this vehicle if it became unlodged quickly. From what I remember the trailer was kind of like jackknifed." McCann testified further that "while maneuvered him forward, back, motioned this way, that way, and while they were dealing with crowds of people, the skirmish line was dealing with people. Because this ....now became an event itself." McCann testified further that he did not personally engage Ms. White or Mr. Davis.
On August 13, 2014, Dwayne Matthews said that he caught the 61 Chambers bus at the North Hanley Station and took it to West Florissant and Chambers. Dwayne Matthews testified that he walked toward West Florissant
- 12 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 13 of 74 PageID #: 4171
and Highmont. He kept walking. The tear gas got thicker. He kept walking on West Florissant. It is "pretty dark." There aren't many street lights. It is dark plus tear gas and smoke. After Matthews got off the bus, and when he was at the Elite Liquor store some unknown officers pointed him in the direction of West Florissant and Highmont, then he walked in that direction, and tear gas was getting thicker, he had his transfer in his right hand, and when he ran into the officers he put his hands up. According to the testimony of Dwayne Matthews, when he saw the tear gas and smoke, if he had wanted to walk to a parallel street, he could have walked down to West Florissant and made a right on Highmont, which connects to South Dellwood. From there he could have made a right on South Dellwood, walked across the road closing, and then his mother's house is right there. Dwayne Matthews testified he had his hands in the air and he said in one hand he held a bus transfer ticket. Dwayne Matthews testified that he walked toward a line of police officers, who he describes as wearing military uniform(s) and gas masks. Matthews walked through a cloud of smoke and walked through tear gas. Matthews was affected by the tear gas when he was walking through the tear gas. Matthews was shot with a first bean bag round, but continued to move forward. Matthews said that he was hit in his stomach, his arms, hand and pinkie (which he says caused his transfer to drop from his hand), and in the left shin. He fell into a creek where he was followed by the police. Matthews also described the shooting in the following ways:
- 13 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 14 of 74 PageID #: 4172
"They shot me with the bean bag, I fell into the creek water, hit my head on the pavement, they drowned me for about five, six seconds;" " when they shot me with the bean bag, it took my leg off, like my leg just- by force it went off the pavement, so I'm standing on one leg and I'm leaning to the left, I fell by gravity;" "like you shot me, by force it took my leg off my feet, like I'm standing on one leg." Matthews also testified that after he fell into the creek, they "drowned me for about three to five seconds, I was unconscious from the contact of my head hitting the concrete." He was lifted out of the water after which his face was slammed into the pavement, his face was scraped on the ground, and then "they took turns punching, kicking me." The police used racial slurs. Meanwhile Mr. Matthews yelled out "I'm not part of the protest; I'm trying to get home. Then he was cuffed after which he was "Maced" "everywhere" including his wounds, his face, his nose, and his mouth. He called it gruesome. Further describing the events, Matthews claimed that someone grabbed him by the throat, two others grabbed his arm, and one grabbed his legs. They flipped him over like a cross, his head was grabbed, and was slammed like a wrestling maneuver. Further describing the incident, Matthews testified that one man was on his back with a knee and all of his weight on Matthews. While this was occurring five or six officers were beating him; he was punched five or six times; his dreads were grabbed; and his face was scraped on the pavement. The beating lasted two to three minutes. During this time the officers were taking
- 14 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 15 of 74 PageID #: 4173
turns just doing anything they wanted. Matthews was placed in a police van for "45 minutes to an hour, burning, leg's fractured, and excruciating pain." Matthews said he did not meet with an ambulance until 45 minutes to an hour later. The location of the paramedics that he finally saw was at the Ferguson police department. Matthews stated: "I was seen by paramedics once I got to Ferguson." Matthews is unable to identify any of the officers who did this; he cannot say if the officers were white or black, but says that they were all wearing military uniforms, and were not wearing blue jeans or tennis shoes. Matthews is not aware of any witnesses to what he says happened to him; there were only the officers and him. The paramedics took Matthews to a hospital, where he was seen and then released. He went straight home thereafter. When the paramedics asked Matthews questions, he tried to be very honest. At the hospital Matthews tried to be very honest to the person who did the initial paperwork, he tried to be very honest with the nurses who saw him, and he tried to be very honest with the physicians who saw him.
Matthews has seen his medical records. When asked if he disagrees with what is in his medical records he answered no. When read, the history that was recorded by the paramedic said: "Patient states that he was walking through the area and was told to evacuate by police. Patient admits that he did not immediately evacuate, was shot with rubber bullets and tear gas." Matthews denied that this is what he had said but instead stated: "I told them the same story
- 15 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 16 of 74 PageID #: 4174
I told you." Matthews was asked to admit as true that the doctor had asked him if he had lost consciousness and that Matthews had told the doctor no, Matthews stated: "I told the doctor the same story that I've told you." Matthews disagreed with the doctor's assessment that Matthews appeared to be in moderate pain, but Matthews agreed that the doctor put his hands on him and palpated him and that the doctor examined his forehead, face, right upper abdomen, right upper leg, lower leg, pupils, ear, nose throat, neck, heart pulses, abdomen, and skin. Matthews agreed that after X-rays and CT scans were taken at the hospital, he was told that the results were normal. Matthews agreed that he was not admitted to the hospital overnight as a patient; that he was discharged at 1:15 a.m.; and that a friend drove him home. After the initial treatment at the emergency room, Matthews did not have any follow up care with any doctor, or with any psychiatrists or psychologists or licensed clinical social workers.
It was very dark in the area. Not only was it night time, but there was smoke and tear gas. While the movement of the police who were dispersing the crowd was northbound on West Florissant, Matthews emerged from the smoke heading southbound toward the police line. Payne could hear Det. Joe Patterson yelling at Matthews to stop and tum around. Although Payne was wearing a gas mask, he also was yelling at Mathews to stop. Matthews continued coming towards the police line. Payne saw that Matthews had his hands up, but because he kept coming toward the police after being told to stop, Payne still considered
- 16 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 17 of 74 PageID #: 4175
Matthews to be a threat. The member of their team who had been issued the less lethal shotgun that night was Det. Derik Jackson. After several commands were made by Patterson, and by Payne, and by other detectives telling Matthews to stop, Payne then heard Derik Jackson yell out the words "Less lethal, less lethal, less lethal." After those words were yelled out by Jackson, Jackson then fired the less lethal shotgun. Payne considered what Jackson did to be appropriate, and he fully supports the firing of the less lethal rounds in the situation that occurred. What Det. Payne believes that he saw next was Matthews stumble and fall into a culvert that had water in it. Payne observed first Vinson, followed by Bates going to the culvert to get Matthews out. Bates actually helped both Det. Vinson and Dwayne Matthews out of the culvert onto a grassy area. Payne observed that Matthews was fighting and moving after being placed on the grassy area next to the sidewalk. Plaintiff Matthews said that he was compliant. During the struggle, i.e. when Matthews kept moving and fighting, Payne and others yelled at Matthews to stop resisting, and that he was under arrest. Matthews kept moving and fighting, and then Payne overheard Det. Patterson warn Matthews that he would be pepper sprayed. Then Payne observed one spray of OC spray, after which the resisting stopped. Matthews was handcuffed, searched and placed in a sitting position. After Matthews was sat up, he was leaning against the leg of Payne. Payne then assisted Matthews to his feet and walked Matthews to St. Charles County SWAT officers, one of whom told Payne he was a paramedic.
- 17 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 18 of 74 PageID #: 4176
After turning Matthews over to the St. Charles County paramedic and the St. Charles County SWAT officer, Payne and the other members of the team resumed their crowd control assignment on the police skirmish line. Payne did not strike Matthews, and did not observe anyone else strike Matthews.
On the night of August 13, 2014, the members of the drug enforcement bureau, consisting of Detectives Derik Jackson, Joe Patterson, William Bates, Aaron Vinson, Nick Payne, and Matt Burns, under the supervision of Sgt. Brandt Wathen reported to the Buzz Westfall Command Post for instructions and assignment as needed. At approximately 9 p.m. they were assigned to a police skirmish line on West Florissant near Highmont to act as an arrest team. Sgt. Wathen was nearby as were higher ranked officers. Their instructions included that all persons arrested should be turned over to conveyance officers, and then the arrest team would return to the skirmish line. The detectives in this group were each wearing jeans, T-shirts, and a vest with the word "Police" on the front and back, and they had their badges exposed. They were not dressed in military type uniforms. After arrival, Burns noted rocks and bottles being thrown at the police, and a Molotov cocktail was thrown at a building near the police. A different team, the Tactical O perations Division, made numerous orders for the crowd to disperse over loud speakers. The decision to issue the orders to disperse were not made by the arrest team, but by others higher in the chain of command.
- 18 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 19 of 74 PageID #: 4177
Smoke was deployed and tear gas was deployed (not by the arrest team, but by the Tactical O perations Division). The decision to deploy smoke and tear gas was not made by the arrest team but by others higher in the chain of command. The smoke and the tear gas that was deployed, was deployed after numerous announcements had been made to disperse. After smoke and tear gas was deployed, the crowd was dispersing. While the crowd was dispersing, the arrest team remained on the skirmish line. While the crowd was dispersing, Det. Burns was standing on the skirmish line next to Jackson. Det. Derik Jackson was on the other side of Det. Burns, and so Det. Burns believes that he was standing between Detectives Patterson and Jackson. Burns suddenly observed Matthews come through the smoke and tear gas heading toward the police. Burns observed that Matthews had clenched fists, and it appeared to Burns that Matthews was moving quickly. Because the crowd was disbursing away from the police while Matthews was running toward the police, Burns "had no idea what he was doing, or why he was running toward police." Matthews’ actions put Burns on "higher alert." Burns yelled at Matthews to stop and turn around; other officers near Burns yelled at Matthews to stop and turn around. Det. Joe Patterson "somewhat removed his gas mask" exposing his mouth, and yelled loud commands, telling Matthews to stop and turn around. Matthews continued coming at police. With Matthews still coming at the police, Det. Burns could hear Det. Derik Jackson yell out the words: "Less lethal, less lethal, less lethal." According to Matt Burns,
- 19 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 20 of 74 PageID #: 4178
Matthews was hit twice with bean bag rounds that were not effective in stopping him. Det. Jackson fired a third bean bag round that was effective. Plaintiffs say that the 2nd rou nd was effective, and the 3rd round caused Matthews to fall into the creek.
As Matthews went into the culvert, from the perspective of Matt Burns, it appeared that Matthews had jumped into the culvert, rather than falling into the culvert. Burns observed Detectives Vinson and Bates go to the edge of the culvert to try to retrieve Matthews, while it appeared to Burns that Matthews was trying to get away. Matthews was pulled out of the culvert by Detectives Vinson and Bates, placed on flat ground, and then Det. Burns and others approached them. Burns observed Matthews flailing and struggling, when officers were telling him to stop; while this was occurring, Det. Burns was attempting to hold Matthews. Burns observed Det. Patterson deploy one short burst of OC spray in Matthews’ facial area. After the burst of OC spray, Matthews was handcuffed. The involvement of Det. Burns was to attempt to hold Matthews when he was flailing before the burst of OC Spray, and then after Matthews was handcuffed, to make sure that the handcuffs fit properly. Burns had no other involvement. Matthews was turned over to St. Charles County SWAT team officers, one of whom was a tactical paramedic. Burns had not been aware that the St. Charles County paramedic had been recording what was happening, but the footage
- 20 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 21 of 74 PageID #: 4179
confirms that Matthews was turned over to the St. Charles County officers. Det. Burns did not strike Matthews, and did not see anyone strike Matthews.
On August 13, 2014, as a member of the seven detective unit called the Street Enforcement Team, Det. Derik Jackson was dispatched with the rest of the team to the area of Canfield and West Florissant to assist with reinforcing the skirmish line. He and other Street Enforcement Team members were wearing blue jeans, a shirt, a black clad vest that had the words "Police" on the front and the back, and a neck badge. When his team of officers reinforced the skirmish line, they encountered a large crowd that was unruly, and had been throwing rocks, bottles, and even a Molotov cocktail. There were gunshots, which Derik Jackson believed were directed at officers. The street team members then also put on their protective masks.
A different team, called the Tactical Operations Team used loud speakers to tell the crowd to leave, turn around, and go north on West Florissant. According to Derik Jackson, a lot of peaceful protesters did leave. Those who did not leave continued to throw projectiles.
Tactical Operations then began to deploy smoke canisters. As the line of police advanced forward, there were still people who were still actively showing aggression. Derik Jackson noticed one individual with shoulder length hair come forward on the east side of West Florissant south towards the police position. Jackson testified that efforts were made to communicate with the individual, later
- 21 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 22 of 74 PageID #: 4180
identified as Matthews. Clear verbal commands were given to him to turn around. These efforts included Detective Patterson removing his gas mask and give directions to Matthews to turn around. M atthews kept coming toward the officers. Jackson testified that with Matthews still coming toward the officers, Jackson feared that assault could be imminent, and he yelled out the words "less lethal, lethal, less lethal." He then fired what he believed to be three less lethal rounds.
Mathews came toward officers. He ran toward the skirmish line, and Det. Derik Jackson feared that an assault was imminent. Det. Derik Jackson did not see what was in Matthews' hands, but Jackson believed that Matthews' hands were clenched. Jackson believes that Mathews was struck with less lethal rounds three times, after which Matthews went into a culvert.
Det. Joseph Patterson testified that on August 13, 2014, he along with other members of the Drug Enforcement Street Team were assigned to act as an arrest team for the Bureau of Patrol Support and Tactical Operations Unit. Patterson testified that "at approximately 9 p.m. we were on the skirmish line near West Florissant and Canfield when the crowd became hostile ...there was reports of gunfire, there was at least one Molotov cocktail that was thrown and several rocks and bottles." Patterson testified that commanders on the scene had declared an unlawful assembly, that there were dozens of warnings to disperse northbound on West Florissant away from Canfield. Patterson testified that 90% of the
- 22 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 23 of 74 PageID #: 4181
crowd did disperse, but some in the crowd refused to leave, and then the skirmish line of police officers moved the remaining crowd toward Chambers Road. This was occurring with a human chain of police officers. On the interior of the chain of police officers, there were two armored vehicles equipped with loud speakers as well as police lights. Also there were continual announcements made to the crowd to disperse. Patterson testified that there was also tear gas and smoke. Patterson testified that the SWAT officers were the ones who deployed tear gas. Patterson testified that "through the police radio we were getting reports that even at West Florissant and Chambers at the lot of the Mobil, they were also experiencing a hostile environment." Patterson testified that as this report was occurring, the police line reached West Florissant and Highmont. There they encountered the man later identified as Dwayne Matthews. Patterson testified that Matthews "was running at us and he refused our orders to stop." Patterson testified that he (Det. Patterson) was wearing a gas mask, but that he (Det. Patterson) removed his gas mask, and told this man to stop. The man stopped for a brief moment, but then continued moving forward. Patterson testified that "I had no idea why a person would act so unreasonably after hearing so many warnings from those loud speakers..." Patterson testified that he (Det. Patterson) was standing in a cloud of tear gas when this was happening. There was tear gas and smoke lingering in the area, and what Patterson said to Matthews was "this is the police, stop." Patterson testified that after Matthews stopped for a brief
- 23 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 24 of 74 PageID #: 4182
moment Matthews responded "I'm coming through," and that it was at that point that Det. Derik Jackson shot at the man with his less lethal round.
When asked why Matthews was shot with less lethal, Det. Patterson answered that Matthews was shot "because he continued his forward advancement towards police officers after refusing dozens upon dozens of warnings ...we have no idea what his intentions are, especially after he proclaims to us that I'm coming through ....fearing an assault was imminent, that is when Detective Jackson first deployed the less lethal rounds." Patterson testified that when the less lethal rounds were deployed, there was a lot of yelling going on. Patterson testified that when the less lethal round took, the man fell or hobbled or stumbled; there was a sort of a culvert that had probably two or three feet of water, and the man fell into that. Patterson testified that he (Patterson) did not go into the culvert but went right up to the edge. Patterson testified he observed Det. Vinson jump into the water to get Matthews out, and because the culvert was steep, Detective Bates was pulling out both Det. Vinson and Matthews. Patterson testified he observed that after Matthews was pulled out of the water, Matthews was put on the ground, but Matthews was thrashing and kicking about. Matthews was wet, the officers were wet, the officers were having a very difficult time securing Matthews' arms and legs, and the officers were saying "stop resisting, stop resisting." Patterson testified that he observed Detectives Vinson and Bates struggle while attempting to place handcuffs on Matthews. Patterson knew that
- 24 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 25 of 74 PageID #: 4183
Det. Jackson had the less lethal, and knew that his sergeant had a (lethal) rifle. Det. Patterson realized that he was the only person to get this under control, and so after observing more thrashing, Patterson removed his department-issued OC standard personal use spray from his belt, gave a warning to Matthews, and then gave a one second burst of spray above the man's eyebrows. The spray took effect in a second or two and the man sort of gave up, and placed his hands behind his back. Patterson testified that from that point, Matthews was immediately brought over to two St. Charles County SWAT officers, one of whom was a paramedic. W h en Matthews was handed off to the St. Charles County medic, Mathews was calm and cooperative. Patterson testified that once they handed off Matthews to the St. Charles paramedic, that "we continued on;"...... "with the crowd being the way that it was a n d the external circumstances of the situation, no one was allowed to be around there."
William Bates, Jr. is a detective with the St. Louis County police department. On the night of August 13, 2014, Det. Bates was wearing blue jeans, a T-Shirt, and a clad black raid vest with a "Police" insignia on it. The attire was typical attire for his unit. There were six people from Bates’; but also on the skirmish line there were officers from other jurisdictions. Bates testified that on the night of August 13, 2014 he was assigned to the street team. "We met up at the command post, we got ...requested to come out there and join the skirmish line.....when it started to get darker ...it turned more violent. I remember
- 25 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 26 of 74 PageID #: 4184
...threats and people throwing bottles and rocks and.....just yelling at us. I remember there was a Molotov cocktail that was thrown ...landed on a roof."
Upon further questioning, Bates remembered "our tactical operations gave multiple commands for people to stop throwing bottles, stop throwing rocks ....pretty much stop throwing things at us. The commands to disperse were generally made to the whole crowd. As stated by Det. Bates: "the whole crowd as a whole was responsible for the throwing the bottles, the rocks, ...so at that time they made commands to disperse for everybody." Bates testified that he first observed Matthews in the general area of Canfield and West Florissant after multiple commands had been given for the crowds to disperse. There was tear gas, and some of the crowd was moving back but no one was coming toward the police. Then "it shocked me when I saw him, Mr. Matthews, coming toward us."
Upon further questioning Det. Bates stated: "I just remember him coming straight at us." Bates testified that he (Det. Bates) focused on Matthews' hands more than anything else to make sure he did not draw a weapon, "but he's still running at us, I remember hearing commands being given to him to stop, turn around, leave the area."
Bates testified that the skirmish line was in the street, but it extended to the grass part. When asked if Matthews was on the grassy knoll or the street when Det. Bates first saw him, Bates answered "I believe he was coming down the sidewalk .....from my recollection." Bates remembers that his group was
- 26 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 27 of 74 PageID #: 4185
furthest right than the rest of the skirmish line'', and also remembers that there were points when he was in the grass. Bates further testified that he remembers the man "refuses to stop," "somebody saying he was under arrest," and "he kept coming,...I remember hearing 'Less Lethal' and "I thought I heard three of the bean bag rounds." Bates remembers that Mathews "kind of reacted to the first shot I don't know exactly where it hit him." When Bates was asked if he saw Mathews fall into the ravine, his answer was: "He jumped into the ravine .....He took both of his feet and he jumped towards the ravine and into the ravine."
When questioned further, William Bates agreed that the "ravine...sort of fell off a cliff after that grassy knoll." When asked whether he actually saw whether or not the bean bag shots took effect, Bates answered: "Out there ....it was so smoky and tear gassy, so I couldn't see where they specifically hit him but.. .....I could definitely tell by his body reaction that .....he was hit by one of them at least." Bates further explained "The reaction was ....it's just like his body just moved a little bit, ....he still come forward." When questioned regarding what was done once Matthews was in the ravine, Bates answered: "Detective Vinson was trying to get a hold of Matthews ...he told Matthews to grab his hand .....and then basically I remember he was having trouble getting Matthews ...so I grabbed onto him (Vinson) and I grabbed onto Matthews, and kind of was both of them at the same time .....we all came, came out...to the top part ....and then there was multiple people getting in there, he was kicking and flailing and
- 27 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 28 of 74 PageID #: 4186
everything like that, and basically we were telling him, you know, he's under arrest, put his hands behind his back, refused to do that, so there were multiple officers trying to, you know, assist in that once he got to the top, but then he was taken into custody." Bates testified that after Matthews was handcuffed, he was turned over to a couple of other officers. Bates does not know who the other officers were. Bates had no other involvement with Matthews after that.
Aaron Vinson is assigned to the Bureau of Drug Enforcement as a detective. On August 13, 2014, Det. Vinson was with other members of the Street Enforcement Team assigned to the command post. He was then dispatched to areas that needed reinforcements. Vinson was dressed in blue jeans, a department issued vest that was marked "Police" on the front and back, and a badge hanging around his neck. Vinson's unit consisted of six detectives, and a sergeant. Vinson was part of a skirmish line, on the eastern side of the line, which would be in the southbound lanes of traffic. Vinson testified that when he saw the man later identified as Dwayne Matthews, Matthews' fists were clenched. Vinson observed Detective Patterson lift his gas mask, after which Vinson heard Det. Patterson tell Matthews that he could not come through there, and that he needed to go in another direction. Several other detectives said the same thing, but Patterson is the only detective who lifted off his mask. The first contact that Det. Vinson had with Matthews was after Matthews had been hit with the less lethal round(s) and was in the ravine.
- 28 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 29 of 74 PageID #: 4187
Det. Vinson was the first detective to arrive at the ravine, followed by Detectives Bates, Patterson, and Burns. Sgt. Wathen was present, but did not engage in any physical contact. Vinson pulled Matthews out of the water, by wrapping his hand up in Matthews' shirt. Vinson was assisted by Det. Bates. The assistance that Vinson remembers is that Det. Bates grabbed the arm of Detective Vinson. Vinson said that Det. Bates did not grab the man, but rather assisted Vinson. The detectives were attempting to get Matthews to a flat surface so that neither Matthews nor the detectives would fall back into the ravine. Vinson testified that Matthews was thrashing his body and arms. The detectives told Matthews to stop resisting. Det. Patterson administered the department issued OC spray, the thrashing stopped, and Matthews was handcuffed. Det. Vinson testified that once Matthews was placed on the flatter surface, Matthews continued to thrash about the ground, "his elbows were flying," and Matthews was told to stop resisting.
There is a video that shows this man being brought to the flat surface. The video picks up after the man is brought out of the ravine. Vinson stated that he had grabbed the jersey worn by Matthews to pull Matthews out of the ravine. He also grabbed Matthews' wrists and hands to handcuff Matthews, but did not touch any other parts of Matthews' body.
Kerry White has never been employed by any news agency. White has never been paid for any media photographs that he has done. Kerry White did
- 29 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 30 of 74 PageID #: 4188
not have an employer that sent him to Ferguson. Kerry White was arrested before midnight, perhaps around 10 p.m.
Perhaps he was arrested at 10:45 p.m. With his camera, Kerry White took photos of the burned Quik Trip store, other places that were looted, people cleaning up, the liquor store that was looted, of stores around New Halls Ferry, broken glass, and racks and stuff knocked over. On the night that he was arrested, Kerry White was in the drivers' seat, Sandy Bowers was in the passenger seat, and Kai Bowers was in the back. On the night that he was arrested, Kerry White could hear distant gunfire coming from way down West Florissant. That night Kerry White observed maybe 75 people near the police line. He described this as a "hostile moment" where "people had their tempers and everybody was yelling." Kerry White could hear announcements from the police over a loud speaker, saying to disperse the area. Kerry White had noticed smoke. White did not initially see tear gas on Lorna Lane, but once the police started firing tear gas on Lorna Lane he was there. Kerry White saw the police at the end of Lorna. White was stopped on Lorna with his windows rolled up, but nonetheless could hear what was going on outside because "it was loud." He saw people running and he saw people dispersing. He estimates the number of people to be about 50. He cannot say the number of people who were in front of the police line because people were running and dispersing. He could not really count how many people there were. He heard a lot of what he described as negative comments directed
- 30 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 31 of 74 PageID #: 4189
toward police, including shouting and all types of obscenities. He saw the police enter onto Lorna, like a police line. He turned the car around and then the police line began marching from the front, and they were being fired upon from the back. Kerry White made a U Turn and the police line was there. W hen he saw the police line, he pulled up a little, stopped, and held his camera out the window. The time between when the police turned onto Lorna Lane and when he was actually arrested was a matter of seconds. The police marched fast and surrounded the car quickly. A police officer snatched the camera out of Kerry White's hand and threw it to the ground. The officer who snatched the camera had a gas mask on. Kerry White described the size of his camera as "pretty big." White described the force that was used as "not out of the ordinary." He also said that "they slammed us to the ground and handcuffed us." Kerry White was not injured.
The occupants of the car were escorted by police to Chambers and Lorna. White did not hear any profanity. Kerry White had been initially placed in metal handcuffs. When he got to the back of the police van, the handcuffs were replaced with zip ties. White sat in the back of the wagon with Sandy and Kai Bowers for about 40 minutes. He was then taken to Clayton.
Kerry White found his camera inside his vehicle the day after he was arrested. The camera had not been taken to Clayton. The day after the arrest, Kerry White and Sandy Bowers returned to where they had been arrested. They saw empty canisters in the street, which Kerry photographed. Kerry described the
- 31 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 32 of 74 PageID #: 4190
empty canisters as "expired flash bangs that was used by police." There were two of these. Kerry White had an outstanding arrest warrant from the City of Maryland Heights at the time of his arrest in Ferguson.
Sandy Bowers has never done professional work as a photographer. The event of this lawsuit occurred the night of August 12 to the 13, 2014 Sandy Bowers does not recall what time he arrived in Ferguson the night of August l2 but it was early in the night, maybe 9 ish or 10. He had been aware that there was violence going on in Ferguson after Michael Brown's death, but the violence was in the nighttime. Prior to August 12, he had gone to Ferguson for a daytime peaceful protesting, but August 12 was the first time that Sandy Bowers had gone during the nighttime. The time that Sandy Bowers went to Ferguson during the day was after the riots, which is the day after the Quik Trip store burned. The night that Sandy Bowers was arrested was the first and only night that he was at Ferguson at night (after the Michael Brown shooting).
Kerry White was driving a white Impala. Sandy Bowers was in the back seat behind the driver, and Kai Bowers was in the front seat of the car that Kerry White was driving. Sandy Bowers saw that the police had the street blocked off at Chambers and West Florissant, and he saw smoke and gas. The car was moving towards Chambers on a street that could have been Lorna.
Sandy Bowers cannot recall that the street had any street lights. There was no other traffic on the street that Sandy Bowers can recall, but no more than 10
- 32 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 33 of 74 PageID #: 4191
people rumb1ing past. Regarding the ten people who were running, Sandy Bowers thought that they were dispersing. Sandy Bowers does not recall if the headlights of the car they were in were on or not.
When the police officers came toward them, the police came in a formation like a triangle: one officer got there first and went to Kerry's door; the other officers came around to the side of the car in a quick second; all that Sandy Bowers knows is that it happened so quick. The brother of Sandy Bowers was on the other side of the car; Kerry White was in front of the car; Sandy Bowers could not see what was going on with them. Sandy Bowers can only describe one of the officers as an African American. The African American officer did not handcuff him but he was cussing. When asked if he remembers anything the police were saying to him when they arrested him initially Sandy Bowers answered "get on the F-ing ground;" and then apparently the officers thought that he was not complying and so they said "they was going to break my arm or something like that;" but there were no racial slurs that were used.
Once he got arrested, Sandy Bowers noticed that there was a helicopter overhead that had "the lights on us." The African American officer did not have gloves, (and that was how Sandy Bowers knew that he was an African American), and then there was a Caucasian officer who was decent, but he cannot describe any other officer because the officers had gas masks on and gloves, and suited up.
After the police put them in handcuffs, the police walked them to Chambers
- 33 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 34 of 74 PageID #: 4192
Road, in front of the convenience store, sat the three of them on the curb and made them wait for the van. After four or five minutes there, a van took them to Clayton. At Clayton, "they did a book and release," which took about 4 or 5 hours. This time in Clayton was spent in a holding area; he was not placed in a cell.
The next day, around 9 a.m. or 10 a.m., Sandy Bowers and Kerry White drove back to Lorna Lane where they found items such as casings from things like flash bombs and smoke bombs. S andy Bowers did not see any doctors or receive any medical care for whatever pain that he might have had after this incident.
The day after the Quik Trip burned, Kai Bowers and Sandy Bowers accompanied Kerry White to Ferguson as Kerry White took photos of the area. There also were a lot of different newspaper, TV, and different cameramen also out there taking photos.
The night that Kai Bowers was arrested involved the night of August 12th carrying into August 13th , 2014. On August 12th, Kai and Sandy Bowers and Kerry White arrived in Ferguson around 5 or 6 p.m. After arrival they parked at Red's Barbecue lot. Kai Bowers was involved in some protesting on August 12th. The three of them arrived in late afternoon on the 12th and did not leave the area until they were arrested. At about 10 p.m. the three of them went to Rally's on Chambers Rd. and Halls Ferry. Before they went to Rally's, there was tear
- 34 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 35 of 74 PageID #: 4193
gas. After this tear gas they were able to get into their car at Red's Barbecue and leave. They had been on West Florissant before they went to Rally's and when they were previously on West Florissant they heard police telling people to disperse. They had previously left West Florissant when the police started tear gassing. Kai Bowers was sitting in the front seat, his brother Sandy Bowers was in the back seat sitting behind the driver; the driver was Kerry White. When the three of them left Rally's, they started driving towards West Florissant. Before they got to West Florissant, they turned onto the street that they later got arrested on.
Kai Bowers saw 20-30 people coming down the street, those people were scattering different ways. When the three of them went down the side street, there was a military vehicle blocking the end, and there were people who were walking and then those people took off running. The military type vehicle was at Lorna and Kappel. Kerry White pulled the car into a driveway to turn around, and then they saw another military type vehicle, and then the car pulled over (to the curb), and Kerry White held his hands out the window showing a camera. The police who came to the car were a combination of African American and Caucasian. The police came to the car with weapons drawn, told them to get out of the car, told Kai Bowers to put his hands up, "they grabbed me out the car, put me down, put his knee in..." When again describing this, Kai Bowers said that the officer "dragged me out of the car, put me on the ground, put his knee in the
- 35 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 36 of 74 PageID #: 4194
back of my head, and held me with force." Kai Bowers did not go to the hospital, but because the officer had a knee on his neck and shoulder, "I felt like I was hurt." There was just one officer holding him down. What hurt Kai Bowers was not being taken to the ground, but the pressure on the neck and back.
Kai Bowers overheard Kerry White say to the police, don't break my camera, just put my stuff in the car. Regarding the camera, Kai Bowers said that he saw an officer drop the camera. Explaining further he said: "I don't know exactly how he dropped it, it's just like the camera fell somehow, and then that's when Kerry was like, 'Oh, man, you trying to break my camera,' and then they picked it up.' After the officer picked it up, Kai saw the officer put the camera back in the vehicle.
Regarding being cuffed, Kai Bowers said "they zip-tied us all and they walked us down ....next door to the liquor store." They were transported in a police wagon to Clayton where they were booked and released.
Near midnight on August 12, 2014, the members of the Neighborhood Enforcement Team, which included Officer Michael McCann, were assigned to assist with what was going on near West Florissant and Chambers Road. This group was assisting with a police line which, after midnight, reached Chambers Road and Lorna Lane. Some of the crowd moved south on Lorna Lane, and the police line also moved onto Lorna Lane. McCann was on the left side of Lorna Lane, and so were Officers Valentine and Hill. Warnings were given by tactical
- 36 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 37 of 74 PageID #: 4195
operations to disperse on Lorna Lane; in addition tactical operations dispersed tear gas on Lorna Lane. McCann heard sounds of gunfire. McCann had also earlier heard threats from the crowd to kill police. McCann heard a radio transmission from a helicopter that there was a white vehicle heading toward the police line on Lorna. A fter McCann heard the radio transmission from the helicopter, he actually observed the car driving toward the police line, and observed that this car did not have its headlights activated. McCann removed his gas mask and yelled "Stop." He repeated this over and over.
The car did not stop until it was very near the police line. Before the car stopped, Officer McCann removed his weapon. McCann yelled out, show us your hands. Other officers also yelled this out. The occupants did show their hands.
When the driver showed his hands, there was a black object in one hand. Officer McCann yelled drop it; he did drop it. M cCann approached the vehicle. Other officers approached the vehicle. There were at least two sergeants nearby. The driver was removed from the car, taken to the ground, and a pat down search was performed, all with very little force being used. Kerry White admitted to Officer McCann that he had heard the commands to stop.
Officer McCann believed in good faith that there was probable cause for arrest. McCann believes that he was polite and professional with Kerry White.
Observations were made of equipment inside the car. A discussion was had whether it was safe to leave the car on the street. A decision was made by a
- 37 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 38 of 74 PageID #: 4196
sergeant. On August 12 -13, 2014, Officer McCoy was a member of the
Neighborhood Enforcement Team. On August 12th continuing past midnight, McCoy’s team was deployed to West Florissant to assist, and was assigned to be part of a skirmish line. McCoy heard gunshots that seemed to be coming from West Florissant and Chambers Road, and heard gunshots that seemed to be coming from farther east on Chambers Road. That night on West Florissant, McCoy saw objects thrown at police and heard threats directed at police. McCoy heard several loud warnings on loud speakers instructing the crowd to disperse. He observed smoke. He observed the crowd begin to disperse, and then the police line moved east.
When the police line reached Chambers Road and Lorna Lane, some of the crowd moved to Lorna Lane, so many officers, including Officer Terence McCoy, also moved south on Lorna Lane. Once the line moved onto Lorna Lane, members of the crowd were dispersing by running through yards and running away from the police line. McCoy then heard a report from a helicopter saying that a car was driving on Lorna Lane toward the police. After hearing the report from the helicopter, Officer McCoy then personally observed an automobile driving toward the police line with no headlights. M cCoy heard officers around him yelling for the car to stop, but the car did not stop. McCoy pulled out his
- 38 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 39 of 74 PageID #: 4197
weapon. McCoy thought that this was a danger, not only because the car was driving at the police line but also because he had earlier heard gunshots, and so this was a concern. The car braked and stopped close to the police, McCoy and other officers yelled to the occupants to show their hands. McCoy approached a passenger, grabbed his arms, but otherwise did not use any force and did not place the passenger on the ground.
Officer McCoy overheard Officer Valentine ask a passenger if he had orders to stop, and overheard the passenger say yes. McCoy observed what appeared to be expensive equipment inside the car and took part in a discussion whether or not the car with the equipment should be left on the street. McCoy expressed his opinion that it would be dangerous, his opinion being based on actually having this area as his permanent beat prior to what his present assignment was.
Officer Dan Hill was asked generally about circumstances where police would disperse crowds on August 11-13, 2014, in Ferguson, and he answered that under circumstances that it became violent unlawful assembly the commanders gave the police the directive when it wasn't safe to be out there, but other than that, they did not disperse anyone. Upon more general questioning, not specific to the plaintiffs, Hill described the police actions saying: "I think we were incredibly restrained ....We did what our commander told us to do.....We did what we were told.
- 39 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 40 of 74 PageID #: 4198
Hill testified that on August 13, 2014, after his unit had first been staged at the command post, his unit was deployed as a supporting role with the Tactical Operations Team to the area of Chambers and West Florissant. Hill testified that when they arrived, they saw the police units who had requested additional support; there was a large gathering; there were rocks and bottles being thrown; his unit was directed to form a scrimmage line. Hill testified there were numerous repeated commands from loud speakers for crowds to disperse, it was no longer a peaceful assembly, and they were subject to arrest. Hill testified that his unit was to be the arresting unit that would do the handcuffing; and he explained it further by saying "Our assignment was to support the tact unit, and if a commander decided that somebody needed to go to jail, they would direct us to that person and we would handcuff them."
Hill testified there was a steady movement up Chambers, the commanders were there on the ground and were concerned that some parts of the line were moving too far ahead and some were moving too slowly, and the commanders tried to keep everyone shoulder to shoulder; the movement was very coordinated from the commanders on the ground. Hill testified that when the line reached Lorna and Chambers Rd., that the large group basically broke up, and one group continued east on Chambers and another turned onto Lorna; Hill was then in the group of officers that turned onto Lorna. Hill testified that orders were given, tear gas was deployed, and the crowd on Lorna began running in between houses
- 40 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 41 of 74 PageID #: 4199
and into people's back yards. Hill testified that not everyone was dispersing. Hill testified that there was a heavy presence of gas in the air.
Hill testified that a "warning had been put out over the radio by the air unit" something to the effect that there was a car "approaching the scrimmage line." Hill testified that as the officers were in a line moving down the street, a vehicle was driving northbound on Lorna; numerous commands were given for the vehicle to stop. Hill perceived the vehicle as a threat. Hill described the movement of the vehicle as "driving at us;" at which point he drew his gun. Hill testified that the vehicle drove "within 25 feet of us," and further testified that "I don't recall headlights being on," but conceded he does not remember if the headlights were on or off. When the vehicle stopped, it pulled over; Hill approached the passenger door, and described the encounter as follows: "We ordered them out. They complied. We helped them to the ground. They were flex cuffed with their hands behind their back.[sic]" When further questioned, Officer Hill testified that when the vehicle stopped, that his approach to the vehicle "was a slow cautioned approach," and that he was yelling "Show us your hands, show us your hands," and that a lot of people were yelling. Hill testified that when he got to the passenger door, the door was open. Hill described his encounter with a passenger as "I may have had my hand on his hand, on his arm and assisted him going to the ground, I don't recall. ...it wasn't a big incident. It wasn't a big production. It was he got out of the car, got on the ground, laid down." Upon further
- 41 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 42 of 74 PageID #: 4200
questioning, Officer Hill stated that he "was focused purely on the passenger," and so he has "no idea" how the driver got out of the car, and further stated that he did not see anyone thrown to the ground, and when asked if he was saying that all of the occupants got out of the vehicle and on the ground voluntarily, he answered "We directed them to, and they did voluntarily, yes." When asked to state the reason that the officers apprehended the occupants of the vehicle Officer Hill stated: "We had given numerous commands for everyone to flee the area, and they were approaching us, making no attempts to flee the area. Like you pointed out earlier, they could have turned around and drove away, but they did not." Upon further questioning, Officer Hill stated, "Of all the things that he could have done, he chose to come toward us and approach us and put us in fear ......the totality of the situation from the last three or four days, we were doing everything as safely for everyone as we could.” Hill testified that the arrested persons were then walked to an intersection a n d placed in a conveyance van.
Antonio Valentine was an officer on August 13, 2014, with the Neighborhood Enforcement Team. When asked, Valentine testified that two of the six officers, including Valentine, who were part of the Neighborhood Enforcement Team are African American officers; the briefings after Officer Valentine's first day at the unrest included instruction on not to respond to banter directed at African American officers who were called out by others so as not to escalate or incite the crowd.
- 42 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 43 of 74 PageID #: 4201
On August 1 2 t h when Valentine arrived on duty, there were briefings which included relaying information to supervisors who can relay back up to higher ups. Briefings on when to disperse a crowd came from Valentine's chain of command.
On August 12th , when it was dark, Valentine's group was involved in a dispersal of a crowd when individuals were throwing rocks, liquor bottles, glass bottles, batteries, and water bottles at police. Valentine additionally testified that members of the crowd also confronted officers and told them what they were going to do to the officers and that they would shoot the officers. Valentine testified that on August 13th , 2014, ten or more commands were given to the crowd that they were not peacefully protesting anymore and that they needed to disperse; at that time "it wasn't just batteries and bottles of water, it was glass, bricks were thrown, we were being confronted, threatened, they were coming at us." Additionally, Officer Valentine told his immediate supervisor that individuals were actually flanking the police by running in between the businesses like Exquisite Cuts and Zisser Tire.
In this area near the barber shop, Mr. Malik Shabazz was wearing a yellow shirt, khaki pants, and holding a bullhorn, and being an active participant. Valentine further testified that the officers were told to stop moving forward because the throwing of rocks, batteries and glass intensified. Valentine further
- 43 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 44 of 74 PageID #: 4202
testified that after it intensified, that more commands were given and then smoke and tear gas were deployed. From the area where the officers were being flanked, there was debris or various items being thrown at the police. Valentine further testified that after tear gas was deployed, the crowd started going back east on Chambers Rd; and also the crowd went in multiple directions between businesses; the police did not pursue those that dispersed. Valentine testified that the police line continued to move further east on Chambers, moving about 20-30 feet and then the crowd would stop and "engage" the police; then they reached the intersection of Chambers and Denis; then the intersection of Chambers and Vickie. Valentine further testified that there was still a crowd of 40 to 50 people going back and forth, and also vehicles were involved darting in and out of adjacent streets. While this was going on, Officer Valentine learned of a call that one of the businesses further down was actually being looted. When again asked whether people were pursued, Officer Valentine again stated that he and his unit did not pursue anyone.
When the police line reached Lorna, there was a command by higher ups to stop. When the police line stopped at Lorna, the officers checked on each other to make sure there were no injuries; and further noted there had been persons and vehicles that had turned down Lorna, and persons going down Lorna cutting in between houses. Valentine testified further that it was being said that a large crowd was gathering on Lorna toward the middle of the street; he did not see that
- 44 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 45 of 74 PageID #: 4203
because he was then facing Chambers, but there was a command to go down Lorna, and then he actually saw a crowd of 10 to 15 people on Lorna. Valentine testified that "we turned on Lorna and actually started to go down Lorna." Valentine testified that "From there, we actually (were) informed by the air unit that there was a white vehicle, no lights, that was actually headed back toward us." When questioned further on the role of the helicopter, Officer Valentine testified that the helicopter "brought it (the white vehicle) to our attention;" and upon even more questioning testified that the helicopter did shine its light on the white vehicle a few times.
Officer Valentine testified that the white vehicle "had no lights, it was roughly driving at approximately 20-25 miles an hour, was not swerving or anything, but it was coming at us, coming north on Lorna." Commands were given by police officers to "stop, pull over," the vehicle continue to travel, more commands were given. After five or six commands were given, officers drew their guns; he testified that no command was given to draw their weapons, but the officers did draw their weapons after the warnings were given. Valentine testified that the reason that they drew their weapons was that the vehicle with the headlights off was "actually coming at us," and further said "it was really not complying with our commands and it's still coming at us," and further stated "I felt threatened." Valentine testified that commands were given by the officers to the occupants, to "show me your hands," and then Valentine approached the rear
- 45 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 46 of 74 PageID #: 4204
passenger door, opened the door, told the passenger to step out, took control of his left wrist, placed that behind the man's back, took control of the right arm, and assisted the man to the ground, did not throw the man to the ground. Valentine patted down that man to make sure that he did not have any weapons, and placed him in flex cuffs. Valentine testified that after handcuffing the man, Valentine asked if he had heard the commands to stop; with the response being "Yeah, we heard it, but he kept driving," while motioning to the driver.
Officer Valentine believed, based upon his training and experience, that there was probable cause to have this man arrested for something.
While other officers then maintained control of the people who had just been removed from the vehicle Officer Valentine inventoried the vehicle and found various electronic equipment. Valentine agreed that when a tow truck was initially requested, i t was denied which means that either the tow truck driver or someone on behalf of the tow truck driver decided that it wasn't safe for the tow truck to come into that area to tow the car from Lorna Ave.
Valentine testified that he feels that he was adequately trained; that St. Louis County had conducted riot training or crowd control training the year prior, which was part of the in service training of the department which training was done annually if not biannually since 2011. When questioned regarding his reactions when he was called names by the crowd, and when others threatened to
- 46 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 47 of 74 PageID #: 4205
kill the police, Officer Valentine answered: "I have a lot of self-restraint and tact," and that he understands that people say a lot of things in the heat of moments."
Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County police officer, assigned to the drug unit and has been for five years. He has had formal training on crowd control; the last training prior to August 9, 2014, was about a month or two before. The regular police gear for the men in his unit is blue jeans and T-shirts.
On August 13, 2014, (after midnight) the crowd was getting unruly; a hundred or more persons were in the crowd at Chambers Rd and West Florissant where there was yelling and throwing of objects and gunshots going on. The order was given several times to disperse; the crowd was not disbursing; the crowd continued to throw rocks and bottles at the police; then a decision was made for the Tactical Operations Unit to begin using smoke and tear gas to disperse the crowd. As the police were moving on Chambers from West Florissant, the crowd would be dispersed and then reformed, and rocks and bottles would be thrown at police again, after which the Tactical Operation Unit would deploy what they felt necessary to disperse the crowd. When questioned regarding what Det. Payne's feelings were as they were going up Chambers with objects being thrown at him and cursing directed at them, Det. Payne answered: "The only thing I was probably worried about was being shot, at that point."
- 47 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 48 of 74 PageID #: 4206
Then they went down Lorna; the numbers on Lorna were 20-25 people and they were throwing rocks and bottles and yelling. As the police were moving on Lorna, Payne heard over the radio that there was a white vehicle approaching the police line. Payne drew his weapon because "the vehicle was moving and I was afraid I was going to be hit by a car." Upon further questioning, Payne stated "As long as the vehicle is moving, I would consider it a threat."
When Payne first saw the vehicle, it was "Maybe 100 yards, maybe 100, 200 yards;" and Payne stated: "We were yelling for the vehicle to stop;" Payne considered the vehicle to be a threat.
Payne testified that Kerry White got out of the vehicle voluntarily, and that Kerry White laid on the ground, and that Det. Payne "assisted him in getting him into the flex cuffs and get him into custody." Payne did put his hands on Mr. White to place him in custody once he was on the ground.
On August 11, 2014, at around 7:40 p.m. Antawn Harris was on West Florissant Ave. near the burned down Quik Trip. He had seen tear gas and knew that the crowd was to disperse. He was using his cell phone to film the police and the crowd. While he was filming people throwing tear gas and people leaving, one police officer shot Harris in the face. Harris has no evidence that the person who shot him in the face was a St. Louis County officer. The officer was wearing riot gear, but Harris cannot say if this was a St. Louis County police officer or
- 48 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 49 of 74 PageID #: 4207
not. Harris agrees that in Harris’ cell phone video that was still operating after he was hit, that Harris indicated on the video that Harris said that he did not know what hit him. When asked isn't it true that on the video someone else is heard saying that maybe it was a BB, Harris answered "I don't know," and that someone else is heard saying it was a rock, Harris answered "I don't know." From the knowledge of Harris, at the time when it happened, he did not know if he had been struck with a rubber bullet or a real bullet. Neither Harris nor the people whose voices were heard on the video looked around to see if there was anything laying on the ground. Harris does not know one way or the other if this was really a rubber bullet. After he was hit, he walked home, and within 10 minutes of the incident a photo was taken of the bridge of his nose. Before the photo was taken, he had not wiped off his face with a towel; he had not cleaned off his face. There is no powder or powder spray on his face.
Five minutes after the photo was taken, the father of Mr. Harris took him to Christian Hospital Northwest emergency room. Mr. Harris saw the nurse at 8 or 8: 16 p.m. At the E.R., Mr. Harris tried to give honest answers to questions that the nurse asked him. Harris told the nurse that he did not lose consciousness, he denied visual changes, but his eyelids felt heavy and it was difficult for him to open his eyes for 10 minutes. It sounds relatively accurate to Harris that official hospital records show that his admission time was clocked in at 9:26 and his discharge time was 11:05 p.m. After discharge from the hospital, Harris did not
- 49 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 50 of 74 PageID #: 4208
follow up with another doctor for examination and did not ever get a prescription filled. Harris has never been to any other doctor or health care provider or clinic relating to the injury. Harris was treated at a hospital after August 11, 2014, for a problem unrelated to what happened on West Florissant. During the subsequent unrelated treatment Harris gave a history that his vision was normal and he had no other complaints, other than the subsequent unrelated condition. Mr. Harris was not arrested by any police department.
On August 11, 2014, Nathan Burns was arrested around 10:30 p.m. Before being arrested, Nathan Burns had heard police give orders to disperse, which orders were given over loud speakers. Burns had heard "maybe three" orders to disperse that night. At first Burns was with a large group of people; he cannot give a number, and then right before he was "Maced," people were scattered out into subgroups. When asked if he had wanted to leave, could he have gone through a yard, he answered "My car was actually on the street and I didn't want to leave my car out there.” Before OC spray was used, Nathan Burns had observed tear gas or smoke being used, and heard three orders to disperse. Burns does not know Detectives Terence McCoy, Dan Hill, or Mike McCann; and Nathan Burns does not know what they did the evening of August 11, 2014.
That night, Nathan Burns was transported to the Justice Center, which he refers to as the jail. At the Justice Center there was a nurse who performed an
- 50 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 51 of 74 PageID #: 4209
intake examination of Nathan Burns. County Exhibit E, according to the affidavit, are medical records of Nathan Burns kept in the ordinary course of business of Saint Louis County Department of Public Health pertaining to Nathan Burns on August 12, 2014. The intake RN Assessment had a question: "Does patient report having any limitation at the time?" The recorded answer is "No." The intake RN Assessment contained a question: "Does patient require special care for a physical condition at this time." The recorded answer is "No." The Intake RN Assessment included the Word: "Behaviors." The notation afterwards is "Cooperative." The Intake RN Assessment included the words: "Current Chief Complaint: Following that it is written: "Other (Recurrent Lumbar pains past 2 months tx by Chiropractor."
Christopher Shearer considers Nathan Burns to be his best friend. The area that Nathan Burns and his best friend Christopher Shearer went to was within walking distance of Nathan Burns' apartment. Burns and Shearer did not walk; they drove in Nathan's car and parked on a street called Gage, over from West Florissant. Before tear gas was deployed, Mr. Shearer heard announcements from police to "Go to your homes." That announcement was made on the loud speaker; Mr. Shearer cannot remember the number of times that the announcement was made. Mr. Shearer was not subjected to tear gas. Shearer had run from where he had been and did not see Nathan Burns get "Maced." Shearer did not hear any police officer say anything directly to Nathan Burns because
- 51 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 52 of 74 PageID #: 4210
Shearer did not even know where Nathan Burns was; when the police told Shearer to get off the street, Shearer drove off in Nathan's car. Nathan Burns did not ever tell Christopher Shearer that he was injured at all by what happened that night.
On August 11, 2014, Officer Dan Hill was a member of the Neighborhood Enforcement Team, and reported to the Command Center for briefing and assignment. His team was assigned to be an arrest team, but in addition Officer Hill and Officer McCann were detached to be liaisons with the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department (i.e. City of St. Louis Police Department) because the radio systems of the City and County police departments were unable then to communicate with each other. Officers Hill and McCann were riding on a City of St. Louis Armored Vehicle which they called the "Bear" on West Florissant Ave. While riding on the Bear, Hill and McCann stood on a skid, at the very rear, on the outside of the Bear. City police officers were standing near them but in front of Hill and McCann. Hill observed rocks and other objects thrown at police and heard announcements made by the City of St. Louis Tactical Operations over loud speakers commanding the crowd to disperse. As Hill was riding on the outside of the Bear on West Florissant Ave. he could hear the City police officers yell "Duck," and as he ducked he could hear objects strike the Bear. Hill observed rocks thrown at the Bear form a small group; then Hill observed a City of St. Louis tactical operations officer deploy Mace at the group;
- 52 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 53 of 74 PageID #: 4211
then he observed people from that group scatter and run away, except that Nathan Burns, who was in the midst of the group, did not scatter and run away. The instructions that had been given to Hill's team that night was not to chase people who dispersed and ran away, but they could arrest someone, with probable cause, who did not run away. So Hill went to where Burns was standing to arrest Burns. The reason for arresting Burns was he had not dispersed, plus Hill had observed Nathan Burns to be standing within a small group of person throwing rocks at police, and Burns was then Maced by City police. Nathan Burns did not resist arrest. The arrest of Nathan Burns was uneventful, consisting of placing him on the ground, placing flex cuffs on him, picking him up, taking him to conveyance officers. After Burns was given to conveyance officers, Officer Hill returned to the Bear to resume his assignment. Officer Hill did not strike Nathan Burns and used what he called minimal and appropriate force.
Officer McCoy described the civil unrest in Ferguson to include large crowds, property being destroyed, police officers being assaulted by having things thrown at them, multiple shots fired, people injured, large crowds throwing rocks at officers. McCoy was involved in the arrest of Nathan Burns on West Florissant near Highmont. McCoy testified that that night McCoy was wearing brown pants, a black shirt with police officer vest and a helmet and boots. McCoy was part of the arrest team that night. McCoy testified that there was a different unit that had made several announcements from a "loud PA" to disperse;
- 53 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 54 of 74 PageID #: 4212
after which a good portio\n of the crowd did disperse; but some members of the crowd continued to throw rocks. McCoy testified that the police had been instructed not to chase anybody that ran from the group; Nathan Burns did not run; Burns was taken into custody. McCoy testified that he assisted Officers Hill and McCann with the arrest. McCoy testified that "we (the arrest team) pass(ed) him off ' to officers who transported Burns; Burns at that time was pretty disoriented because he had pepper spray in his face. McCoy testified that Nathan Burns "told me his eyes were burning,. .... he was talking, he was very calm." McCoy testified that the deployment of OC spray was done by St. Louis City police as opposed to St. Louis County police.
On August 12, 2014, Officer McCann was involved in the arrest of Nathan Burns. The arrest of Nathan Burns occurred at West Florissant and Highmont. Officer McCann testified that there were officers riding on running boards on the side of the armored vehicle. McCann testified that he had seen Nathan Burns "in a crowd of people at the intersection of Highmont and West Florissant, east end, I saw Mr. Burns throw a rock at the....we call it the Bear, it's an armored personnel vehicle that St. Louis City was using to move the crowds along." McCann testified that besides Mr. Burns, there were several rocks thrown; St. Louis City deployed Mace in the direction of the group that was throwing rocks. McCann testified that City officers who deployed Mace used an aerosol can that was about the size of a small fire extinguisher, to deploy the Mace. McCann,
- 54 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 55 of 74 PageID #: 4213
when questioned further, repeated that it was Members of the St. Louis City police department who used OC spray on Mr. Burns. Also when questioned further, Officer McCann repeated that Nathan Burns did throw a rock toward the vehicle; that officers were on the running boards holding onto the vehicle as it proceeded up West Florissant. McCann testified that he was probably 2-3 feet from the City officer who used the OC spray; that some of the spray inadvertently went into McCann's eyes; that McCann nonetheless still walked in the general direction of where Nathan Burns had been standing and saw Officers Hill and McCoy place Burns under arrest; that McCann believes that it was Hill and McCoy who cuffed Nathan Burns but McCann assisted with picking Burns up from the ground, placing him under arrest, and moving Burns to the sprinter van (where the conveyance officer was).
Jon Belmar is chief of police of St. Louis County now and has been since January 31, 2014, and has responsibility for the overall operation of the St. Louis County Police Department, and overall responsibility for making sure that the department complies with accreditation standards, and the Board of Police Commissioners, per the County charter, approves policies. Belmar has been a St. Louis County Police Officer for 30 years having risen through the ranks to chief.
St. Louis County has been accredited by CALEA, the Commission on Accreditation of Law Enforcement Agencies, since 1988). Belmar is familiar with CALEA, summarized CALEA in paragraphs 8, 10-20. These include:
- 55 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 56 of 74 PageID #: 4214
CALEA is the premier accrediting association within the United States, there is a rigorous accreditation process every three years which includes on site assessment, review of policies, procedures, and practices, the accreditation covers law enforcement, Communications, and training. The last two accreditation cycles, which included the time period before and after the events mentioned in the lawsuit, St. Louis County met all 484 standards. The areas involved in accreditation are Law Enforcement, Communications, and Training, and the review of the activity of the department during the preceding assessment cycle. As a result, the 2015 cycle included a review of the activity, the policies, the practices, and the training occurring during the Ferguson civil unrest time period were reviewed.
The hiring process of St. Louis County police officers includes background checks of driving history, criminal history, financial status, education verification, reference checking, checking of prior law enforcement and military employment when applicable including internal affairs history, testing, psychological test, polygraph test, and interview. Belmar makes the ultimate decision on who to hire and has not hired anyone with a history of assaultive behavior, or a sustained complaint of excessive force or unlawful arrest, or anyone with a pattern of complaints involving unlawful arrests or excessive force, and is not aware that his predecessors.
St. Louis County has a Conduct and Discipline Rules and Procedure
- 56 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 57 of 74 PageID #: 4215
Manual in place, and a discipline procedure in place. All allegations of employee misconduct are investigated by the Bureau of Professional Standards. If there is a sustained complaint of excessive force or unlawful arrest the discipline is significant. Arrests without probable cause are not tolerated and excessive force is not tolerated. CALEA requires 25 standards pertaining to internal affairs and disciplinary policies and procedures, and St. Louis County met all of them in the 2012 and 2015 reaccreditation process.
The training and certification of St. Louis County officers includes: all officers must graduate from a police academy and must pass license exams, they must be POST certified (Peace Officer Standards and Training); there must be POST licensing of basic training centers and basic training instructors, and POST approval of curricula, there must be 48 hours of POST approved continuing education every 36 months. Some specific ongoing training of St. Louis County officers includes the basis for warrantless arrests, probable cause, and use of force.
A few months before August of 2014, St. Louis County police officers were required to undergo Civil Disturbance Riot Training in the spring of 2014, by an instructor trained by the United States Department of Homeland Security. In addition to requiring its own officers to attend, St. Louis County invited police officers from municipalities located within St. Louis County to attend, and perhaps coincidentally, the City of Maryland Heights participated in the training,
- 57 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 58 of 74 PageID #: 4216
and Chief Belmar himself attended. Even before the Spring of 2014, Civil Disturbance Training that was required for all officers. New recruits have been receiving Civil Disturbance and Riot Training for seven years. Supervision of St. Louis County police includes: a chain of command; meeting CALEA standards that apply to supervision, regularly evaluating supervisors, having a probationary period for supervisors.
The unprecedented events of Ferguson, which included gunfire, looting and burning and other criminal activity, were addressed by Chief Belmar; actions of the chief included telling his officers at the very beginning to remain calm and maintain discipline, frequent contact with commanders of the Missouri Highway Patrol and the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department and others, providing the bulk of the manpower, (who as mentioned were POST certified and well trained as accredited by CALEA), working with and knowing the other departments who were present such as the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department and Maryland Heights, and knowing that they are well trained and professional; Chief Belmar personally remained present to supervise during heightened criminal activity, along with St. Louis County supervisors and commanders who were actually on the ground supervising, and more. Belmar has no knowledge, or reason to believe that the officers from the City of St. Louis and/or from the City of Maryland Heights who were in the Ferguson area between August 11 and 13, 2014, were inadequately trained, or had a pattern of
- 58 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 59 of 74 PageID #: 4217
making arrests without probable cause or of using excessive force. Chief Belmar had had regular and frequent contact with both the Highway
Patrol and the St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department ("SLMPD") prior to August 2014. He viewed both of them to be highly competent and well trained law enforcement agencies. Chief Belmar knew that SLMPD was a CALEA certified agency in 2014. Belmar was not aware of a pattern of unaddressed unconstitutional behavior on behalf of any SLMPD officer. Both the Highway Patrol and SLMPD brought their own senior level commanders and supervisors with them to Ferguson.
The City of Maryland Heights responded to the Code 2000 in Ferguson with police officers. Belmar had worked with the Maryland Heights Police Department over the years, and knew the officers in that Department to be professional and well trained.
Maryland Heights responded as a unit with its own supervisors. Belmar was comfortable that the Maryland Heights officers who were on the scene in the Ferguson area were properly supervised. Belmar was aware that Maryland Heights had participated in the County Civil Disturbance Riot Training, and that all of its officers were POST certified. Maryland Heights had participated in County Incident Control Training, where County officers trained with officers from other law enforcement agencies in the area to respond to a disaster. Belmar was not aware of a pattern of unaddressed unconstitutional behavior on behalf of
- 59 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 60 of 74 PageID #: 4218
any Maryland Heights police officer. Chief Belmar personally remained present in the Ferguson area to supervise the police activities for as long as his physical stamina permitted during the heightened protesting and criminal activity in August, 2014. Belmar had no personal involvement with the plaintiffs in this lawsuit (and it is not even alleged that he did), and has no knowledge that officers who were personally involved with them had had a pattern of arrest without probable cause or use of excessive force.
St. Louis County Self-Insurance Policy provides for coverage of "only those claims for which sovereign immunity is not authorized under Section 537.600 et seq. R.S.Mo. (2007 as amended)." Under the first section, titled "NON-W AIYER OF SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY," the Policy states that the "County expressly does not hereby waive, and County does hereby avail itself of and reserve, any and all rights, immunities, protections and defenses available under Section 537.600 et seq., under any present and future state or federal provisions, or under common law as it develops.” Excess Insurance Coverage is not an issue in this case because there is either no injury or very minor injuries. But if the Excess Coverage were an issue, the County's Excess Insurance Contract with Starr Indemnity & Liability Company contains a statement expressly declaring that the policy does not include "coverage for any suit, claim or liability against which St. Louis County is immune pursuant to Sec. 537.600 R.S.Mo. et seq, or any other statute or law granting counties of the State of
- 60 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 61 of 74 PageID #: 4219
Missouri governmental, or sovereign, immunity, to the fullest extent to which such immunity is applicable." Further, the policy clarifies that nothing in the policy "shall be construed to broaden the liability of the Named Insured beyond the provisions of Sections 537.600 to 537.610 of the Missouri Statutes. . . nor to abolish or waive any defense at law which might otherwise be available to the Named Insured, its officers or employees.”
Standard Summary judgment is proper if the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, demonstrates no genuine issue of material fact exists and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c); Cordry v. Vanderbilt Mortg. & Fin., Inc., 445 F.3d 1106, 1109 (8th Cir.2006) (quoting Bockelman v. MCI Worldcom, Inc., 403 F.3d 528, 531 (8th Cir.2005)). The proponent of a motion for summary judgment “bears the initial responsibility of informing the district court of the basis for its motion, and identifying those portions of ‘the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any,’ which it believes demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of material fact.” Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c)). The proponent need not, however, negate the opponent's claims or defenses. Id. at 324–25. In response to the proponent's showing, the opponent's burden is to “come forward with ‘specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial.’ “ Matsushita
- 61 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 62 of 74 PageID #: 4220
Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 587 (1986) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(e)). A “genuine” dispute of material fact is more than “some metaphysical doubt as to the material facts.” Id. at 586.
“[T]here is no issue for trial unless there is sufficient evidence favoring the nonmoving party for a jury to return a verdict for that party.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 249 (1986). “If the evidence is merely colorable ... or is not significantly probative ... summary judgment may be granted.” Id. at 249–50 (citations omitted).
Discussion Official immunity protects public officials from liability for alleged acts of ordinary negligence committed during the course of their official duties for the performance of discretionary acts. acts. Kanagawa v. State By and Through Freeman, 685 S.W.2d 831, 835 (Mo. banc 1985). Whether an act is discretionary or ministerial depends on the “degree of reason and judgment required” to perform the act. Id.at 836. An act is discretionary when it requires “the exercise of reason in the adaption of means to an end, and discretion in determining how or whether an act should be done or a course pursued.” Rustici v. Weidemeyer, 673 S.W.2d 762, 769 (Mo. banc 1984) quoting
Jackson v. Wilson, 581 S.W.2d 39, 43 (Mo.App.1979).
Davis v. Lambert–St. Louis Int'l Airport, 193 S.W.3d 760, 763 (Mo.Banc.2006).
“Under Missouri law, the official immunity doctrine protects public officials from liability for injuries arising out of their discretionary acts or omissions, but not from liability in claims arising from their performance of ministerial acts.” Reasonover v. St. Louis County, Mo, 447 F.3d 569, 585 (8th Cir. 2006). Official
- 62 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 63 of 74 PageID #: 4221
immunity does not apply, however, to discretionary acts done in bad faith or with malice. Id.; State ex rel. Twiehaus v. Adolf, 706 S.W.2d 443, 446 (Mo. 1986) (en banc). “The relevant definition of bad faith or malice in this context ordinarily contains a requirement of actual intent to cause injury.” Twiehaus, 706 S.W.2d at 447. “A defendant acts with malice when he wantonly does that which a man of reasonable intelligence would know to be contrary to his duty and which he intends to be prejudicial or injurious to another. An act is wanton when it is done of wicked purpose, or when done needlessly, manifesting a reckless indifference to the rights of others.” Id. (internal punctuation and quoted case omitted). “Bad faith, although not susceptible of concrete definition, embraces more than bad judgment or negligence. It imports a dishonest purpose, moral obliquity, conscious wrongdoing, breach of a known duty through some ulterior motive or ill will partaking of the nature of fraud.” Id. (brackets and quoted case omitted). An allegation of “malicious motive or purpose or of conscious wrongdoing” is sufficient under Missouri law to preclude application of the official immunity doctrine. See Twiehaus, 706 S.W.2d at 447.
Official immunity “ ‘protects public employees from liability for alleged acts of negligence committed during the course of their official duties for the performance of discretionary [as opposed to ministerial] acts.’” K.B. v. Waddle, 764 F.3d 821, 824 (8th Cir. 2014) (quoting Southers v. City of Farmington, 263 S.W.3d 603, 610 (Mo. 2008)).
- 63 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 64 of 74 PageID #: 4222
“Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability and the burdens of litigation in a § 1983 action unless the official's conduct violates a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable person would have known.” Snider v. City of Cape Girardeau, 752 F.3d 1149, 1155 (8th Cir. 2014) (citing Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818 (1982)). “To overcome a defendant's claim of qualified immunity, the burden falls on [plaintiffs] to show: ‘(1) the facts, viewed in the light most favorable to [plaintiffs], demonstrate the deprivation of a constitutional right; and (2) the right was clearly established at the time of the deprivation.’ ” Id. (quoting Baribeau v. City of Minneapolis, 596 F.3d 465, 474 (8th Cir. 2010)).
Gilmore v. City of Minneapolis, No. 15-2465, 2016 WL 4758552, at *2 (8th Cir.
Sept. 13, 2016).
The court applies the doctrine of qualified immunity in a manner that “gives
ample room for mistaken judgments by protecting all but the plainly incompetent
or those who knowingly violate the law.” Walker v. City of Pine Bluff, 414 F.3d
989, 992 (8th Cir.2005) (quoting Hunter v. Bryant, 502 U.S. 224, 229, 112 S.Ct.
534, 116 L.Ed.2d 589 (1991)).
To determine whether a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity, the
Court first considers whether the alleged facts demonstrate that his conduct
violated a constitutional right and, if so, whether the right claimed was clearly
established at the time of the alleged injury. Howard v. Kan. City Police Dep't, 570
F.3d 984, 988 (8th Cir.2009). “If the answer to either question is no,” then the
defendant is entitled to qualified immunity. Doe v. Flaherty, 623 F.3d 577, 583
(8th Cir.2010).
- 64 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 65 of 74 PageID #: 4223
Qualified immunity shields a government official from liability and the burdens of litigation in a § 1983 action for damages unless the official's conduct violated a clearly established constitutional or statutory right of which a reasonable official would have known. Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800, 818, 102 S.Ct. 2727, 73 L.Ed.2d 396 (1982). When a defendant asserts qualified immunity at the summary judgment stage, the plaintiff must produce evidence sufficient to create a genuine issue of fact regarding whether the defendant violated clearly established law. Johnson v. Fankell, 520 U.S. 911, 915, 117 S.Ct. 1800, 138 L.Ed.2d 108 (1997).
To defeat a claim of qualified immunity, a plaintiff alleging excessive use of force must present sufficient facts to show that the officer's conduct violated a constitutional right, and he also must establish that the constitutional right was clearly established.
Chambers v. Pennycook, 641 F.3d 898, 904 (8th Cir. 2011).
“A warrantless arrest is consistent with the Fourth Amendment if it is supported by probable cause, and an officer is entitled to qualified immunity if there is at least ‘arguable probable cause.’ ” Borgman v. Kedley, 646 F.3d 518, 522–23 (8th Cir. 2011) (quoting Walker v. City of Pine Bluff, 414 F.3d 989, 992 (8th Cir. 2005)). A law enforcement officer has probable cause “when the totality of the circumstances at the time of the arrest ‘are sufficient to lead a reasonable person to believe that the defendant has committed or is committing an offense.’ ” Id. at 523 (quoting Fisher v. Wal– Mart Stores, Inc., 619 F.3d 811, 816 (8th Cir. 2010)). If an officer arrests a suspect under the mistaken belief that there is probable cause, arguable probable cause exists “if the mistake is ‘objectively reasonable.’ ” Id. (quoting Amrine v. Brooks, 522 F.3d 823, 832 (8th Cir. 2008)).
Gilmore v. City of Minneapolis, No. 15-2465, 2016 WL 4758552, at *2 (8th Cir.
Sept. 13, 2016).
The Fourth Amendment precludes the use of excessive force by law-
enforcement officers. E.g., Guite v. Wright, 147 F.3d 747, 750 (8th Cir.1998). The
question to be answered, therefore, is whether the amount of force used exceeds
the constitutionally permitted quantum of force. Not every push or shove by an
- 65 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 66 of 74 PageID #: 4224
officer violates the Fourth Amendment. Crumley v. City of St. Paul, 324 F.3d 1003, 1007 (8th Cir.2003). “[T]he right to make an arrest ... necessarily carries with it the right to use some degree of physical coercion or threat thereof to effect it.” Graham v. Connor, 480 U.S. 386, 396 (1989). Force used in making an arrest is not excessive in violation of the Fourth Amendment if the “officers' actions are ‘objectively reasonable’ in light of the facts and circumstances confronting them.” Id. at 397. The severity of the crime at issue, whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the public or the officers' safety, and whether the suspect is actively resisting or evading arrest are all relevant in determining whether the officers in question acted reasonably. Id. at 396. A court's reasonableness analysis “must embody allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments—in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving—about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation.” Id. at 396–97. Ultimately, “the dispositive question is whether the officer's conduct was objectively reasonable under the circumstances, as judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene at the time the force was applied.” Chambers, 641 at 907, (citing Graham, 490 U.S. at 396); Cook v. City of Bella Villa, 582 F.3d 840, 849 (8th Cir.2009)).
When a supervising official who had no direct participation in an alleged constitutional violation is sued for failure to train or supervise the offending actor, the supervisor is entitled to qualified immunity “unless plaintiff proves that the supervisor (1) received notice of a pattern of unconstitutional acts
- 66 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 67 of 74 PageID #: 4225
committed by a subordinate, and (2) was deliberately indifferent to or authorized those acts. Livers v. Schenck, 700 F.3d 340, 355 (8th Cir.2012).
(1) This rigorous standard requires proof that the supervisor had notice of a pattern of conduct by the subordinate that violated a clearly established constitutional right. Allegations of generalized notice are insufficient. “To impose supervisory liability, other misconduct must be very similar to the conduct giving rise to liability.” Id. at 356. For purposes of this appeal, Krigbaum concedes that Edwards's sexual assaults deprived plaintiffs of a clearly established constitutional right to substantive due process when he committed “an egregious, nonconsensual entry into the body which was an exercise of power without any legitimate governmental objective.” Johnson v. Phillips, 664 F.3d 232, 239 (8th Cir.2011) (quotation omitted). S.M. v. Krigbaum, 808 F.3d 335, 340 (8th Cir. 2015).
A false arrest claim cannot succeed when there was probable cause. Arnott v.
Mataya, 995 F.2d 121, 124 (8th Cir. 1993). “The standard for arrest is probable
cause, defined in terms of facts and circumstances sufficient to warrant a prudent
man in believing that the (suspect) had committed or was committing an offense.”
Gerstein v. Pugh, 420 U.S. 103, 111-12 (1975). However, for qualified immunity
analysis, the standard for probable cause is less demanding, and “the officers are
immune from suit if they had a mistaken but objectively reasonable belief that
[plaintiff] had committed a criminal offense.” Ransom v. Grisafe, 790 F.3d 804, 813 (8th Cir. 2015) (internal quotation marks omitted). Immunity applies, therefore,
when there is merely arguable probable cause for the arrest. Id.
Section 1983 liability for a constitutional violation may attach to a
municipality if the violation resulted from (1) an official municipal policy, (2) an
- 67 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 68 of 74 PageID #: 4226
unofficial custom, or (3) a deliberately indifferent failure to train or supervise. Monell v. Dep't of Soc. Serv., 436 U.S. 658, 690–91 (1978); City of Canton, Ohio v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378, 388–89 (1989).
A plaintiff may establish municipal liability under § 1983 by proving that his or her constitutional rights were violated by an action pursuant to official municipal policy or misconduct so pervasive among non-policymaking employees of the municipality as to constitute a custom or usage with the force of law.” Ware v. Jackson Cnty., Mo., 150 F.3d 873, 880 (8th Cir.1998) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). “[I]n order to state a viable § 1983 claim [ ], plaintiff is required to plead facts sufficient to show at least an inference that [her] constitutional rights were violated as a result of action taken pursuant to an official policy, or as a result of misconduct so pervasive among non-policymakers as to constitute a widespread custom and practice with the force of law.” Davis v. St. Louis County, Mo., 4:14CV1563 CAS, 2015 WL 758218, at *12 (E.D.Mo. Feb. 23, 2015) (citation omitted).
The record before the Court establishes that Defendants Ryan, McCoy, McCann, Derik Jackson, Patterson, Vinson, Bates, Payne, Hill, Valentine, Delia, DeVouton, and McKinnon are entitled to official immunity from Plaintiff’s State law claims and Qualified Immunity from Plaintiff’s Section 1983 claims.
- 68 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 69 of 74 PageID #: 4227
With regard to the state law claims, Plaintiffs have completely failed to present any credible evidence that any of the actions taken by these individuals were taken with malice or were committed in bad faith. The record is clear that at the time of the events detailed herein, the atmosphere surrounding the arrests was extremely intense and had turned violent. Participants in what had turned from a peaceful assembly to unlawful assembly were advised to disperse. Numerous warnings had been announced to the crowds to do so. These defendants were advised by their superiors to arrest anyone who refused to disperse in accordance with the warnings. Even after the announcement of the orders to disperse, the individual defendants gave repeated warnings to Plaintiffs that they must leave the area. When Plaintiffs failed to do so, these individual defendants were compelled to follow the orders given to make arrests because an unlawful assembly/riot was occurring.
Plaintiffs attempt to avoid application of these immunity doctrines by arguing that none of the Plaintiffs could possibly be categorized as participating in an unlawful assembly by reason of the fact that there were never more than six plaintiffs assembled at any time during the events. Plaintiff’s interpretation seeks to magically carve out the individuals in isolation of the events that occurred. Plaintiffs, however, fail to recognize that the immunity analysis encompasses the totality of the circumstances. At the time of the events, the unlawful assembly which gave rise to these defendants’ arguable probable cause was the entire
- 69 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 70 of 74 PageID #: 4228
assembly of the protestors and not whether two or three Plaintiffs were gathered together. These plaintiffs were a part of the greater sea of humanity that had converged upon the City of Ferguson, some of whom were throwing various objects at police with the intent to cause harm. It is undisputed in the record that the individual defendants were reacting to their orders to arrest those that did not disperse, and more importantly were reacting to the threats of harm to themselves and the people, who were otherwise peaceable and following orders to disperse gathered, in the streets. They acted without malice or bad faith; they clearly had arguable probable cause to arrest any individual who refused to comply with the orders to disperse.
Likewise, Plaintiffs’ reliance on Abhoullah v. County of St. Louis, 52 F.Supp.3d 936 (E.D. Mo 2014) to support their argument that they were not a part of an unlawful assembly or a riot is misplaced. As Defendants correctly point out, the events detailed in Abhoullah occurred after the events involved herein, and dealt with an arbitrary unwritten policy which required protesters to “keep moving” even absent any violence. The events giving rise to this action are entirely different. There was violence. There was chaos. There was a situation where the police and innocent protesters were at risk of being injured. Nothing in Abhoullah attempts to prevent the police from taking necessary action in order to maintain the safety of themselves and the people they were there to protect.
- 70 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 71 of 74 PageID #: 4229
Indeed, Judge Perry so indicated in her opinion the difference between an order to
disperse and an order to “keep moving.”
[P]eople were not told to “disperse”—in other words, to leave the area. Instead they were told to keep moving. Second, the order was given even when there were fewer than six people gathered. The evidence included examples where the order was given to one person alone, to three people attempting to pray, to a reporter and one other person, as well as to larger groups. And the order was given to people who were doing nothing to indicate they intended to violate laws of any sort, much less to engage in violence. In fact, nearly all of plaintiff's fact witnesses testified that despite gatherings that were peaceful and law-abiding at the time, officers told people they must keep moving or they would be arrested. Unlike the defendant in Mast, who was told to disperse and was arrested only after his group wreaked significant havoc upon people and property, people in Ferguson were subject to the keep moving-rule for no reason other than that they were standing still on the public sidewalks. Abdullah, 52 F. Supp. 3d at 944.
With respect to the specific claims of Plaintiff Matthews of excessive force,
the record establishes that Plaintiff’s claims cannot survive summary judgment.
Although Matthews claims he was subjected to a “gruesome” beating by 5 or 6
officers, his own statements belie his position. He told the paramedics that he was
told to evacuate, he did not; he was shot with rubber bullets and tear gas after he
did not heed the orders. Matthews told hospital personnel that he did not lose
consciousness, even though he claims he did. The X Rays and CT scans that were
taken were normal. He was released from the emergency room and was not
admitted to the hospital. He had no follow up care. Plaintiff Matthews cannot
identify any one of the individual officers who he claimed attacked him. He
- 71 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 72 of 74 PageID #: 4230
described them as wearing “military uniforms” but the record establishes that all the officers involved were dressed in blue jeans and T-shirts, and wore vests with the word “police” in front and on the back with their badges exposed. These officers used less than lethal ammunition to curtail Matthews’ continued approach toward them after they told him several times to stop and disperse.
With respect to the excessive force claims of Kerry White, Sandy Bowers and Kai Bowers, the record clearly and plainly establishes that the alleged excessive force used was that which was, in the words of Plaintiff Kerry White, “not out of the ordinary.” None of these Plaintiffs have presented evidence of injury.
Plaintiff Burns alleges that he was maced all over his face and mouth, he tried to walk away from the chaotic situation,” a police officer pulled his hair and slammed him to the ground, he was maced again and a police officer stuck his finger in his ear, another said they were going to kill him, and a policeman touched his genitals with mace soaked hand. The uncontroverted facts, however establish that Plaintiff Burns heard the orders to disperse, had observed tear gas and smoke being used. He did not disperse, rather, he remained at the location. He does not know who the officers he has sued are, and does not know what they did August 11, 2014. Indeed, the record establishes that it was St. Louis City police officers who actually deployed the spray on Plaintiff Burns.
- 72 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 73 of 74 PageID #: 4231
After being transported to the St. Louis County Justice Center, Plaintiff Burns did not indicate to the nurse that he needed special care for his alleged injuries. He reported no complaints relating to being maced, slammed to the ground, or having a finger put in his ear.
Plaintiffs Coleman and Green claim that they were struck by less than lethal projectiles and have sued Defendants Delia, DeVouton and McKinnon for excessive force. Plaintiffs have failed to controvert the affidavits of these Defendants wherein they each aver they were not carrying and did not use any firearms during the night in question. Neither Plaintiff can identify any of these officers as the one who used any type of force against them. Their claims of excessive force and assault and battery necessarily therefore fail.
Plaintiffs Tracey White and William Davis both admit in the record that they were not hurt. Their assault and battery claims accordingly fail.
Likewise, Plaintiff Harris cannot identify any officer who allegedly injured him. As such, he fails to satisfy the burden of coming forward with admissible evidence in order to overcome the motion for summary judgment.
Regarding the claims against Defendants Belmar and Thomas Jackson and St. Louis County, because Plaintiffs have failed to overcome summary judgment on their claims against the individual police defendants, Plaintiffs cannot satisfy their burden of establishing supervisory liability or municipal liability. Brockinton v. City of Sherwood, Ark, 503 F.3d 667, 674 (8th Cir. 2007).
- 73 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 255 Filed: 09/30/16 Page: 74 of 74 PageID #: 4232
Conclusion The record before the court establishes that the individual police Defendants are entitled to official and qualified immunity from suit. Plaintiffs have failed to establish that immunity does not apply. As such, the supervisory defendants and St. Louis County are also entitled to summary judgment. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the City of Ferguson, Thomas Jackson, Justin Cosma, Matt Delia, Brandon McKinnon, and Ryan Devouton’s Motion for Summary Judgment, [Doc. No. 143], is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that John Belmar, David Ryan, Terrence McCoy, Michael McCann, Derik Jackson, Joe Patterson, Aaron Vinson, William Bates, Nicholas Payne, Daniel Hill, Antonio Valentine and St. Louis County, Missouri’s Motion for Summary Judgment, [Doc. No. 158], is GRANTED. A separate judgment in accordance with this Opinion, Memorandum and Order is entered this same date. Dated this 30th day of September, 2016.
HENRY EDWARD AUTREY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
- 74 -

 
 Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 1 of 26 PageID #: 4387
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________
No. 16-3897 ___________________________ Tracey White; DeWayne Anton Matthews, Jr.; Damon Coleman; Theophilus Green; Kerry White; Antawn Harris; Sandy Bowers; William Davis; Nathan
Burns; Kai Bowers lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiffs - Appellants
v. Thomas Jackson; John Belmar; Justin Cosmo; St. Louis County, Missouri; City of
Ferguson, Missouri; David Ryan; Terrence McCoy; Michael McCann; Derik Jackson; Joe Patterson; Aaron Vinson; William Bates; Nicholas Payne; Daniel Hill; Antonio Valentine; Matt Delia; David "Ryan" DeVouton; Brandon McKinnon
lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees ____________
Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis
____________ Submitted: June 7, 2017 Filed: August 1, 2017
____________ Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.
____________
MURPHY, Circuit Judge.
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 2 of 26 PageID #: 4388
Michael Brown, Jr. was killed by a police officer in Ferguson, Missouri on August 9, 2014. In the days that followed, large crowds gathered in Ferguson. While the crowds were largely peaceful, at times they became violent. This action concerns six sets of plaintiffs who allege multiple claims related to the police response to the demonstrations. The district court granted defendants summary judgment on all plaintiffs' claims, and plaintiffs appeal. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.
I. Background
On August 9, 2014, Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson shot Michael Brown, Jr. killing him. In the following days, large crowds gathered in Ferguson, and the crowds turned violent on several evenings in the week following Brown's death. Individuals threw objects at the police, discharged firearms, looted businesses, and set a convenience store on fire. The epicenter of this unrest was West Florissant Avenue which runs north and south and is located on the eastern edge of the City of Ferguson. In response to the civil unrest, the Ferguson Police Department requested assistance from the St. Louis County Police Department and from other municipal police departments located in the county. This action concerns six sets of plaintiffs who allege state and federal claims against the individual defendants, St. Louis County, and the City of Ferguson.
A. Nathan Burns
On the evening of August 11, Nathan Burns and a friend were standing near Gage Drive and West Florissant Avenue in Ferguson. A crowd of approximately one hundred people was assembled near Gage and West Florissant. Members of the crowd were throwing objects at the police who attempted to disperse the crowd by instructions and by the use of smoke and tear gas. Burns did not follow the orders to disperse. While standing with a small group of others, who also remained in the area,
-2-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 2 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 3 of 26 PageID #: 4389
he was sprayed with pepper spray by St. Louis Metropolitan police officers who were not named as defendants in this action.
St. Louis County police officers Terence McCoy and Daniel Hill arrested Burns after he had been pepper sprayed. Burns testified that officers had deployed pepper spray on him several times, but he did not identify the individual officers. After McCoy and Hill arrested Burns they transferred him to other officers who transported him to the St. Louis County Jail. Burns testified that while he was in handcuffs an officer with pepper spray on his hands had placed his hand between Burns' pants and his underwear and rubbed his genital area. It is unclear from Burns' testimony the time at which this occurred, and Burns did not identify the officer.
Burns alleges state law claims for false arrest, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and assault and battery against St. Louis County police officers McCoy, Hill, and Michael McCann. He also alleges negligent supervision against the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County. His remaining federal civil rights claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for unreasonable seizure and excessive force are brought against McCann, McCoy, and Hill; claims for failure to train, supervise, and discipline are brought against the City of Ferguson, its police chief Thomas Jackson, St. Louis County, and its police chief Jon Belmar.
B. Damon Coleman and Theophilus Green
On August 11, Maryland Heights police lieutenant Matt Delia, officer Brandon McKinnon, and officer David "Ryan" DeVouton were assigned to play a support role to the St. Louis County tactical operations on West Florissant Avenue. Delia, McKinnon, and DeVouton were not equipped with firearms capable of discharging nonlethal projectiles. That night, the St. Louis County police department determined that the crowds had turned violent and that they therefore needed to be dispersed. County officers then made announcements to the crowd to disperse.
-3-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 3 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 4 of 26 PageID #: 4390
That evening the tactical unit proceeded toward West Florissant and Canfield Drive because they had received reports of gunfire in that area. While the unit was moving down West Florissant, officers noticed two individuals standing in a nearby parking lot. The individuals were later identified as Damon Coleman and Theophilus Green. They were near a group of approximately 15 to 20 people who were repeatedly ordered to disperse by county officers. The group dispersed except for Coleman and Green who made no effort to leave while yelling at the police officers.
As officers approached Coleman and Green, they hit the two with nonlethal projectiles. Lieutenant Delia instructed officer DeVouton to arrest Coleman and Green, and officer DeVouton made the arrests while officer McKinnon stood nearby and observed. Coleman later testified that about four officers had applied force to him during his arrest and that while he was lying on his stomach and being handcuffed, he was kicked, struck with a stick, and dragged on the ground.
Coleman and Green allege state law claims for false arrest and intentional infliction of emotional distress against unidentified police officers from the City of Maryland Heights and an assault and battery claim against Maryland Heights police lieutenant Delia and officers McKinnon and DeVouton. They also allege negligent supervision against St. Louis County. Section 1983 claims for unreasonable seizure and excessive force were also brought against Delia, McKinnon, and DeVouton, as well as failure to train, supervise, and discipline against St. Louis County and chief Belmar.
C. Antawn Harris
At approximately 7:00 p.m. on the evening of August 11, Antawn Harris walked from his apartment to a barbeque restaurant on the corner of West Florissant Avenue and Canfield Drive. Harris saw that the police were attempting to disperse the crowd on West Florissant and had deployed tear gas, but Harris did not disperse.
-4-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 4 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 5 of 26 PageID #: 4391
Instead, he stayed and filmed the events on his phone. Harris testified that while he was standing near the street, a police officer shot him in the face with a nonlethal projectile. Harris was not able to identify the officer who shot him or the department to which he belonged. Harris was taken to the hospital, was discharged that evening, and did not seek any follow up care.
Harris alleges state law claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress and assault and battery against unidentified police officers from the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County. He also alleges negligent supervision against the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County. He finally alleges § 1983 claims for unreasonable seizure and excessive force against unidentified police officers from the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County and for failure to train, supervise, and discipline against the City of Ferguson, chief Jackson, St. Louis County, and chief Belmar.
D. Kerry White, Sandy Bowers, and Kai Bowers
On the following evening of August 12, crowds near West Florissant Avenue and Chambers Road became violent. Police had heard gunshots, and people were throwing objects and directing threats at the officers. Police officers made announcements on loud speakers instructing the crowd to disperse. The police also deployed smoke and tear gas. In an additional effort to disperse the crowds, police officers formed a skirmish line. The skirmish line headed east on Chambers Road where a crowd of about 40 or 50 people were standing. At around midnight the police line reached Chambers Road and Lorna Lane. There were between 10 and 50 people on Lorna Lane at this time.
When the skirmish line reached the intersection of Chambers and Lorna, a police helicopter alerted officers on the ground that a car was driving on Lorna toward the police line. The officers in the skirmish line observed a car driving toward them shortly thereafter. They gave several instructions for the car to stop, but it
-5-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 5 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 6 of 26 PageID #: 4392
continued moving toward them. When it stopped close to the police line, the occupants (Kerry White, Sandy Bowers, and Kai Bowers) were arrested for refusal to disperse.
Kerry White alleges state law claims for false arrest and assault and battery against St. Louis County police officers McCann, McCoy, Hill, and Antonio Valentine. He also alleges a § 1983 claim for unreasonable seizure against the same four officers. Sandy and Kai Bowers allege state law claims for false arrest and assault and battery against St. Louis County police officers McCann, Hill, Valentine, and St. Louis County detective Nicholas Payne. They also allege § 1983 claims for unreasonable seizure against the same officers. All three plaintiffs allege negligent supervision against the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County and a § 1983 claim for failure to train, supervise, and discipline against the City of Ferguson, chief Jackson, St. Louis County, and chief Belmar.
E. Tracey White and William Davis
Tracey White and her son William Davis attended a rally in Ferguson on August 13. At approximately 6:00 p.m. White and Davis walked to a McDonald's near the corner of West Florissant Avenue and Ferguson Avenue. They ordered food and waited for White's husband to pick them up. At approximately 7:00 p.m. police officers told everyone inside the restaurant that they had to leave. St. Louis County police sergeant David Ryan testified that the businesses along West Florissant Avenue were cleared due to the violence that had occurred in the days prior to August 13.
Police officers then directed the crowd of people on the street to move west on Ferguson Avenue. The police instructed the crowd that they could be picked up at the intersection of Sharondale Circle and Ferguson Avenue. When officers reached that intersection, however, they encountered a truck that was stuck in the grass by the
-6-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 6 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 7 of 26 PageID #: 4393
side of the road. Because officers did not know who was driving the truck or why it was there, they decided to clear the area around it and then move it out of the way in order to ensure the safety of the officers and bystanders.
White and Davis were instructed to continue walking west on Ferguson Avenue or to proceed north on Sharondale Circle. When White did not follow these instructions, she was arrested and charged with refusal to disperse. A police officer told Davis that he would have to leave the area even though his mother was being arrested. When Davis failed to leave, he was arrested and charged with refusal to disperse.
White and Davis allege state law claims for false arrest, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and assault and battery against St. Louis County police sergeant Ryan, St. Louis County police officers McCoy, McCann, and City of Ferguson police officer Justin Cosma. They also allege negligent supervision against the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County. They finally allege § 1983 claims for false arrest and excessive force against Ryan, McCann, McCoy, and Cosma and for failure to supervise, train, and discipline against the City of Ferguson, chief Jackson, St. Louis County, and chief Belmar.
F. DeWayne Matthews
On the evening of August 13, a crowd again gathered on West Florissant Avenue and engaged in violent behavior. Members of the crowd threw objects at the police including bottles, rocks, and a Molotov cocktail. The police ordered the crowd to disperse and deployed tear gas and smoke. Police formed a skirmish line and moved north on West Florissant in an attempt to disperse the crowd. The skirmish line included St. Louis County detectives Payne, Aaron Vinson, Derik Jackson, William Bates, and Joe Patterson.
-7-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 7 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 8 of 26 PageID #: 4394
That evening after DeWayne Anton Matthews, Jr. left a bus on West Florissant and Chambers Road, he headed south on West Florissant toward Kappel Drive. He was intending to take a right on Kappel Drive and head toward his mother's house, but officers told him to continue south on West Florissant.
As Matthews was proceeding down West Florissant Avenue he began to walk through tear gas and smoke that increased in thickness as he went. He then encountered the police skirmish line. After the officers on the skirmish line noticed Matthews, detective Patterson gave him a loud verbal command to turn around and walk the other way. When Matthews kept walking toward the police line detective Patterson yelled that he was under arrest. Matthews nevertheless continued advancing toward the police line. At this point Jackson yelled "less lethal, less lethal, less lethal." He then fired nonlethal projectiles at Matthews. Matthews later testified that he was hit by about five bean bag rounds and four rubber bullets.
Matthews testified that after he was struck in the shin with a bean bag he fell into a culvert on the side of the road. The culvert was filled with two to three feet of water. Detectives Vinson and Bates left the skirmish line to pull Matthews out of the culvert. Matthews testified that before the officers pulled him out of the culvert, they held his head underwater for three to five seconds before lifting him out of the water and slamming him face first into the pavement. Matthews testified that an officer put his knee on his back while he was lying on the pavement. Then, some five or six officers proceeded to beat him. He testified that the officers punched and kicked him while using racial slurs like "nigger" and "mop head." He testified that the beating lasted two to three minutes and that he was hit about five times by different officers. After the officers handcuffed him, they used pepper spray on him he testified.
According to the detectives' testimony, detectives Vinson and Bates were attempting to put handcuffs on Matthews while detective Payne was yelling at him to stop resisting. Detective Patterson testified that he was the officer who
-8-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 8 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 9 of 26 PageID #: 4395
administered the pepper spray, and that Jackson merely stood nearby while Matthews was being arrested. None of the officers testified that they kicked or punched Matthews or used any racial slurs. Matthews was taken to the hospital where he was seen and released; the doctor's assessment was that Matthews appeared to be in moderate pain. His x-rays and CT scan appeared normal. Matthews did not seek follow up care.
Matthews alleges state law claims for false arrest, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and assault and battery against detectives Jackson, Patterson, Bates, Payne, and Vinson. He also alleges negligent supervision against the City of Ferguson and St. Louis County. He finally alleges § 1983 claims for false arrest and excessive force against detectives Jackson, Patterson, Bates, Burns, Payne, and Vinson and for failure to train, supervise, and discipline against the City of Ferguson, chief Jackson, St. Louis County, and chief Belmar.
G. Procedural History
The district court granted the individual defendants summary judgment on all plaintiffs' claims. The court granted the individual defendants official immunity on plaintiffs' state law claims after concluding that plaintiffs had presented no evidence that defendants had acted with malice or bad faith. The individual defendants were granted qualified immunity on plaintiffs' § 1983 unlawful arrest claims for the reason that the individual defendants had arguable probable cause to make all of the arrests in question. The court also granted the individual defendants qualified immunity on plaintiffs' § 1983 excessive force claims. Finally, the court also granted defendants summary judgment on plaintiffs' § 1983 failure to train, supervise, and discipline claims because plaintiffs had failed to overcome summary judgment against any of the individual defendants.
-9-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 9 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 10 of 26 PageID #: 4396
II. Analysis
We review a district court's "grant of summary judgment de novo and consider the facts in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party." Nichols v. Tri-Nat'l Logistics, Inc., 809 F.3d 981, 985 (8th Cir. 2016). A district court's grant of "[s]ummary judgment is only appropriate when 'there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.'" Id. (quoting Pinson v. 45 Dev., LLC, 758 F.3d 948, 951–52 (8th Cir. 2014)).
The district court concluded that the individual defendants were entitled to qualified immunity on plaintiffs' § 1983 claims for unlawful arrest and excessive force. To review such a ruling, we examine "(1) whether the facts shown by the plaintiff make out a violation of a constitutional or statutory right, and (2) whether that right was clearly established at the time of the defendant's alleged misconduct." Foster v. Mo. Dep't of Health & Senior Servs., 736 F.3d 759, 762 (8th Cir. 2013) (quoting Winslow v. Smith, 696 F.3d 716, 731 (8th Cir. 2012)). "If the answer to either question is no" then a defendant is entitled to qualified immunity. Doe v. Flaherty, 623 F.3d 577, 583 (8th Cir. 2010). We may take up these questions in either order. Foster, 736 F.3d at 763.
A warrantless arrest does not violate "the Fourth Amendment if it is supported by probable cause, and an officer is entitled to qualified immunity if there is at least 'arguable probable cause.'" Borgman v. Kedley, 646 F.3d 518, 522–23 (8th Cir. 2011) (quoting Walker v. City of Pine Bluff, 414 F.3d 989, 992 (8th Cir. 2005)). "An officer has probable cause to make a warrantless arrest when the totality of the circumstances at the time of the arrest 'are sufficient to lead a reasonable person to believe that the defendant has committed or is committing an offense.'" Id. at 523 (quoting Fisher v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 619 F.3d 811, 816 (8th Cir. 2010)). There is arguable probable cause "even where an officer mistakenly arrests a suspect
-10-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 10 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 11 of 26 PageID #: 4397
believing it is based in probable cause if the mistake is 'objectively reasonable.'" Id. (quoting Amrine v. Brooks, 522 F.3d 823, 832 (8th Cir. 2008)).
Excessive force claims under the Fourth Amendment are governed by a reasonableness standard. Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 395 (1989). Analyzing "whether the force used to effect a particular seizure is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment requires a careful balancing of the nature and quality of the intrusion on the individual's Fourth Amendment interests against the countervailing governmental interests at stake." Id. at 396 (internal quotation marks omitted). Applying this balancing test "requires careful attention to the facts and circumstances of each particular case, including the severity of the crime at issue, whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others, and whether he is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight." Id.
The district court also determined that the individual defendants were entitled to official immunity from plaintiffs’ state law claims. In Missouri "the official immunity doctrine protects public officials from liability for injuries arising out of their discretionary acts or omissions." Reasonover v. St. Louis Cty., 447 F.3d 569, 585 (8th Cir. 2006). Deciding to arrest someone is a discretionary act because "the officer must decide what course should be pursued based on the circumstances at hand." Blue v. Harrah’s N. Kansas City, LLC, 170 S.W.3d 466, 479 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005). Official immunity is a qualified immunity, however, "and does not apply to those discretionary acts done in bad faith or with malice." Reasonover, 447 F.3d at 585 (quoting Davis v. Bd. of Educ. of St. Louis, 963 S.W.2d 679, 688 (Mo. Ct. App. 1998)). Bad faith "ordinarily contains a requirement of actual intent to cause injury." State ex rel. Twiehaus v. Adolf, 706 S.W.2d 443, 447 (Mo. 1986) (en banc). We have affirmed a district court’s grant of summary judgement on official immunity grounds when a plaintiff did not present "specific evidence of bad faith." Reasonover, 447 F.3d at 585–86.
-11-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 11 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 12 of 26 PageID #: 4398
The district court granted police chiefs Belmar and Jackson, St. Louis County, and the City of Ferguson summary judgment on plaintiffs’ § 1983 claims for failure to train, supervise, and discipline after concluding that plaintiffs’ underlying claims against the individual defendants failed. Because plaintiffs have sued chiefs Belmar and Jackson in their official capacities, their claims are "against the governmental entity itself." Brockinton v. City of Sherwood, 503 F.3d 667, 674 (8th Cir. 2007). Since § 1983 does not allow for vicarious liability, "a plaintiff must identify a governmental ‘policy or custom that caused the plaintiff's injury’ to recover" under that statute. Id. (quoting Bd. of the Cty. Comm'rs v. Brown, 520 U.S. 397, 403 (1997)). Municipal liability will not attach unless individual liability is "found on an underlying substantive claim." Id. (quoting McCoy v. City of Monticello, 411 F.3d 920, 922 (8th Cir. 2005)).
A. Nathan Burns
Burns argues in his opening brief that "there is not a single material undisputed [sic] that would entitle the Appellees to summary judgment." Burns does not identify any facts in dispute, however, and does not raise any specific arguments with respect to any of his claims. Indeed, he only identifies one of his claims in his opening brief when he states "[i]nsofar as the arrest of Mr. Burns is concerned, there is a genuine issue as to every material fact." Because Burns has not presented any "meaningful argument" in his opening brief regarding his state law claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent supervision, and assault and battery and his § 1983 claim for excessive force, he has waived review of the district court's decision on those claims. See Chay-Velasquez v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 751, 756 (8th Cir. 2004). Although he arguably also waived review of his § 1983 unreasonable seizure and state law false arrest claims, we review them because they are specifically referenced in his brief.
-12-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 12 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 13 of 26 PageID #: 4399
Burns' § 1983 claim for unreasonable seizure fails because St. Louis County police officers McCann and Hill had at least arguable probable cause to arrest him for refusal to disperse. A person is guilty "of refusal to disperse if, being present at the scene of an unlawful assembly, or at the scene of a riot, he or she knowingly fails or refuses to obey the lawful command of a law enforcement officer to depart from the scene of such unlawful assembly or riot." Mo. Rev. Stat. § 574.060.1. An unlawful assembly occurs if a person "knowingly assembles with six or more other persons and agrees with such persons to violate" the law. Mo. Rev. Stat. § 574.040.1; see also State v. Mast, 713 S.W.2d 601, 604 (Mo. Ct. App. 1986). A person can join "an unlawful assembly by not disassociating himself from the group assembled and by knowingly joining or remaining with the group assembled after it has become unlawful." Mast, 713 S.W.2d at 604.
Before officers McCann and Hill arrested Burns, he was standing near a group of approximately one hundred people who were throwing objects at the police. After the crowd turned violent, the police issued multiple orders to the crowd to disperse. The officers arrested Burns while he was standing with a group of people in an area that officers had been attempting to clear. On these facts, McCann and Hill could have reasonably concluded that Burns was "cognizant of the unlawful acts being committed by the other members of the assembly," chose not to disassociate himself from the assembly, had heard the dispersal orders, and chose not to disperse. See Mast, 713 S.W.2d at 604; see also Mo. Rev. Stat. § 574.060.1. The officers thus had at least arguable probable cause to arrest Burns for refusal to disperse and are entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate his constitutional rights.
The district court properly granted the individual defendants official immunity on Burns' state law false arrest claim because he has not presented "specific evidence of bad faith" or malice. Reasonover, 447 F.3d at 585–86. We also affirm the district court's dismissal of Burns' § 1983 claim for failure to train, supervise, and discipline
-13-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 13 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 14 of 26 PageID #: 4400
because he lacks an underlying substantive claim against the individual defendants. See Brockinton, 503 F.3d at 674.
B. Damon Coleman and Theophilus Green
Coleman and Green first argue that the district court erred by granting the individual defendants qualified immunity on their § 1983 unreasonable seizure claims.1 They claim that the police did not have arguable probable cause to arrest them on the night of August 11. We disagree. That night, a large crowd had gathered in Ferguson and had turned violent. The police issued multiple orders to the crowd to disperse, but Coleman and Green did not follow the orders. On these facts, the individual defendants could have reasonably concluded that Coleman and Green were "cognizant of the unlawful acts being committed by the other members of the assembly," chose not to disassociate themselves from the assembly, had heard the dispersal orders, and chose not to disperse. See Mast, 713 S.W.2d at 604; see also Mo. Rev. Stat. § 574.060.1. The officers thus had at least arguable probable cause to arrest Coleman and Green for refusal to disperse and are entitled to qualified immunity on their § 1983 unreasonable seizure claims because the officers did not violate their constitutional rights.
Coleman and Green also argue that the use of rubber bullets on them prior to their arrests amounted to excessive force. All three Maryland Heights police officers named by Coleman and Green submitted affidavits stating that they had not been carrying nonlethal firearms at the time of the relevant arrests. Coleman and Green attempt to dispute this fact by pointing to officer McKinnon's testimony that some officers in his unit may have been armed with a nonlethal shotgun that day, but none
1Because Coleman and Green have not presented any "meaningful argument" in their opening brief regarding their state law claims they have waived review of the district court's decision on those claims. See Chay-Velasquez, 367 F.3d at 756.
-14-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 14 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 15 of 26 PageID #: 4401
were identified. Coleman and Green's claim is thus unavailing because § 1983 does not allow for vicarious liability. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 676 (2009). Rather, a plaintiff must be able to prove "that each Government-official defendant, through the official's own individual actions, has violated the Constitution." Id.
Coleman claims that he was subjected to excessive force while he was being handcuffed. He testified that while he was lying on his stomach being handcuffed, he was kicked by a police officer, struck once in the back with a stick, and dragged on the ground. Coleman's complaint alleged that, during his arrest, defendants "hurled racial epithets at [him], while punching and kicking [him] the entire time." He alleges that defendants did this "for no reason other than sport." Green testified that he was looking away but did not observe officers use any force during Coleman's arrest. Defendants Delia, McKinnon, and DeVouton testified that Coleman was arrested without incident and without force. They testified that DeVouton was the officer who handcuffed Coleman.
Coleman's video and audio recording of the event wholly contradicts Coleman's testimony describing his arrest. The video shows several police officers approaching Coleman and Green. The officers order the two men to the ground. After arguing back, Coleman places his camera face up and lowers himself to the ground. The audio records Coleman's arrest, which takes less than one minute. The officers received radio instructions to take Coleman and Green into custody. An unidentified officer uses zip ties to handcuff Coleman. Forty five seconds after he first laid on the ground, and roughly twenty seconds after the handcuffing begins, officers help Coleman stand. Referring to the camera on the ground, Coleman says "that's mine." An officer hands the camera to Coleman. Just before it shuts off, Coleman jokingly asks an officer, "selfie?" to which the officer laughs and says, "I got you a good selfie."
-15-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 15 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 16 of 26 PageID #: 4402
"When opposing parties tell two different stories, one of which is blatantly contradicted by the record, so that no reasonable jury could believe it, a court should not adopt that version of the facts for purposes of ruling on a motion for summary judgment." Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372, 380 (2007). Despite the clear audio on Coleman's recording, no sounds indicate anything like the assault Coleman alleges. If he had been kicked, struck with a stick, and dragged, there would be some evidence of a scuffle. Everything said during the arrest is recorded, and no racial epithets nor any beating can be heard. Given this video and audio evidence, we need not accept Coleman's version of the facts. See Ehlers v. City of Rapid City, 846 F.3d 1002, 1010 (8th Cir. 2017). The recording makes clear that officers did not use force greater than necessary to execute an arrest when handcuffing Coleman. See Graham, 490 U.S. at 396. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's dismissal of Coleman's excessive force claim.
Because Green and Coleman have no remaining substantive claims against the individual defendants, we also affirm the dismissal of their § 1983 claims for failure to train, supervise, and discipline. See Brockington, 503 F.3d at 674.
C. Antawn Harris
Harris' only argument on appeal is that chief Belmar and St. Louis County are liable under § 1983 for failure to train, supervise, and discipline. Harris has thus waived review of the district court's decision on his state law claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent supervision, and assault and battery and his § 1983 claims for unreasonable seizure and excessive force. See Chay-Velasquez, 367 F.3d at 756. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's dismissal of his claims against chief Belmar and St. Louis County because municipal liability will not attach unless individual liability is found on an underlying substantive claim. Brockinton, 503 F.3d at 674.
-16-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 16 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 17 of 26 PageID #: 4403
D. Kerry White, Sandy Bowers, and Kai Bowers
White and the Bowers argue that the district court erred by granting the individual defendants qualified immunity on their § 1983 unreasonable seizure claims.2 They claim that defendants did not have arguable probable cause to arrest them for refusal to disperse because they were not in a group of seven or more persons and had not been ordered to disperse.
On the night of August 12, crowds near West Florissant Avenue and Chambers Road became violent. Police officers made announcements on loud speakers instructing the crowd to disperse. The police also deployed smoke and tear gas. The police skirmish line headed east on Chambers Road where a crowd of about 40 or 50 people was standing. At around midnight the police line reached Chambers Road and Lorna Lane where approximately 10 to 50 people were gathered. It was at this point that officers in the skirmish line observed a car driving toward them with White and the Bowers. Officers then arrested the occupants of the vehicle.
On these facts, the individual defendants could have reasonably concluded that White and the Bowers were "cognizant of the unlawful acts being committed by the other members of the assembly," chose not to disassociate themselves from the assembly, had heard the dispersal orders, and chose not to disperse. See Mast, 713 S.W.2d at 604; see also Mo. Rev. Stat. § 574.060.1. The officers thus had at least arguable probable cause to arrest White and the Bowers for refusal to disperse and are entitled to qualified immunity. We also affirm the district court's dismissal of White and the Bowers' § 1983 claim for failure to train, supervise, and discipline because
2Because White and Davis have not presented any "meaningful argument" in their opening brief regarding their state law claims they have waived review of the district court's decision on those claims. See Chay-Velasquez, 367 F.3d at 756.
-17-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 17 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 18 of 26 PageID #: 4404
they lack an underlying substantive claim against the individual defendants. See Brockinton, 503 F.3d at 674.
E. Tracey White and William Davis
White and Davis argue that the district court erroneously granted the individual defendants qualified immunity on their § 1983 false arrest claims.3 The individual defendants however had at least arguable probable cause to arrest White and Davis for interfering with the duties of a police officer. In St. Louis County, "[i]t is unlawful for any person to interfere in any manner with a police officer or other employee of the County in the performance of his official duties or to obstruct him in any manner whatsoever while performing any duty." St. Louis Cty. Rev. Ordinances tit. VII, ch. 701, § 701.110.
At the time of the arrests of White and Davis the police had been attempting to clear the intersection of Ferguson Avenue and Sharondale Circle because there was a truck stuck near the intersection. The police decided to clear the area because protestors had attacked them on previous nights from this vicinity and they had not yet ascertained whether the truck was a threat to them under these conditions. White and Davis were thus instructed to either continue walking west on Ferguson Avenue or proceed north on Sharondale Circle. When White and Davis did not comply with the officers' orders to clear the area, the officers arrested them.
3Although White and Davis do not contest their § 1983 excessive force claims in their opening brief, they attempt to argue in their reply that they were raised in its fact section. Since they did not present any "meaningful argument" regarding excessive force in their opening brief, such claims have been waived. See Chay-Velasquez, 367 F.3d at 756. Their state law claims are similarly waived because there is no argument on them in their brief. See id.
-18-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 18 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 19 of 26 PageID #: 4405
We have previously concluded that a failure to follow an officer's orders which were grounded in officer safety created at least arguable probable cause to arrest an individual for obstructing a police officer. See Ehlers, 846 F.3d at 1009–1010 (applying South Dakota law). Here the individual defendants had at least arguable probable cause to arrest White and Davis for interfering with the duties of a police officer because they had refused to comply with orders for officer safety.
White and Davis argue that since they were charged with refusal to disperse, defendants cannot now argue that they had probable cause to arrest them for the separate crime of interfering with the duties of a police officer. An officer's "subjective reason for making the arrest need not be the criminal offense as to which the known facts provide probable cause," however. Devenpeck v. Alford, 543 U.S. 146, 153 (2004). We thus affirm the district court's dismissal of White and Davis' § 1983 unlawful arrest claims on qualified immunity grounds because defendants did not violate their constitutional rights. We also affirm the district court's dismissal of White and Davis' § 1983 claims for failure to train, supervise, and discipline because they lack an underlying substantive claim against the individual defendants. Brockinton, 503 F.3d at 674.
F. DeWayne Matthews
Matthews challenges the district court's grant of summary judgment on his false arrest and excessive force claims.4 As to his false arrest claim, he argues that the individual defendants did not have arguable probable cause to arrest him for refusal to disperse because he was never assembled with six or more people. On the evening
4Because Matthews has not presented any "meaningful argument" in his opening brief regarding his state law claims for false arrest, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent supervision, and assault and battery, he has waived review of the district court's decision on those claims. See Chay-Velasquez, 367 F.3d at 756.
-19-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 19 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 20 of 26 PageID #: 4406
of August 13 a crowd of people on West Florissant was throwing objects at the police including bottles, rocks, and a Molotov cocktail. The police then issued several orders to the crowd to disperse. Officers in the police skirmish line on West Florissant subsequently encountered Matthews headed directly toward them. Officers testified that they shouted at him to turn around and that Matthews did not comply with this command.
On these facts, the individual defendants could have reasonably concluded that Matthews was "cognizant of the unlawful acts being committed by the other members of the assembly," chose not to disassociate himself from the assembly, had heard the dispersal orders, and chose not to disperse. See Mast, 713 S.W.2d at 604; see also Mo. Rev. Stat. § 574.060.1. The officers thus had at least arguable probable cause to arrest Matthews for refusal to disperse and are entitled to qualified immunity on this claim because they did not violate his constitutional rights.
Matthews next argues that it was an excessive use of force for police officers to fire rubber bullets and bean bags at him while he was approaching the police skirmish line. At the time Matthews was shot with nonlethal projectiles, he was in the vicinity of a violent crowd of people and proceeding directly toward the police skirmish line. The officers told him to stop approaching the line, but he did not obey. Defendant Derik Jackson then fired nonlethal projectiles at him. After Matthews was initially shot, he continued to move toward the police line, causing Jackson to continue firing. Under these circumstances a reasonable officer could have concluded that Matthews had been a part of the violent crowd, that his advances toward the skirmish line posed a threat to officer safety, and that he disobeyed officer orders to stop. See Graham, 490 U.S. at 396–97. Defendant Jackson's use of force was thus reasonable under the circumstances, and he is entitled to qualified immunity on this claim.
-20-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 20 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 21 of 26 PageID #: 4407
Matthews finally argues that the district court erred by granting the individual defendants qualified immunity on his claim that the officers used excessive force while they were effectuating his arrest. Matthews testified that officers held his head underwater for three to five seconds, slammed his face onto the pavement, placed a knee on his back when he was being handcuffed, pepper sprayed him, and took turns punching and kicking him for two to three minutes while calling him racial slurs.
First, we conclude that it was not an unreasonable use of force to push Matthews to the ground and place a knee on his back. The right to make an arrest "necessarily carries with it the right to use some degree of physical coercion or threat thereof to effect it." Graham, 490 U.S. at 396. We have previously had occasion to reject an excessive force claim where an officer kneed the plaintiff in the back while he was placing the him in the patrol car, despite the fact that the plaintiff "did not resist arrest." Cavataio v. City of Bella Villa, 570 F.3d 1015, 1017, 1020 (8th Cir. 2009). The individual defendants thus are entitled to qualified immunity on Matthews' excessive force claims as they relate to them pushing him to the ground and placing a knee on his back.
Second, we conclude that the district court erred in granting defendants Vinson, Bates, Patterson, and Payne qualified immunity with regard to Matthews' claims that officers had held his head underwater for three to five seconds, pepper sprayed him, and took turns punching and kicking him for two to three minutes. We have previously concluded that police officers had used an objectively unreasonable amount of force when they allegedly kicked and punched an individual while he was handcuffed on the ground and no longer resisting. Krout v. Goemmer, 583 F.3d 557, 566 (8th Cir. 2009). We noted in that case, that it "was clearly established that the use of this type of gratuitous force against a suspect who is handcuffed, not resisting, and fully subdued is objectively unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment." Id.
-21-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 21 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 22 of 26 PageID #: 4408
Taking the evidence in the light most favorable to Matthews, the alleged facts here are almost identical to those in Krout. Matthews was lying on the ground, handcuffed, and not resisting arrest while officers kicked, punched, and pepper sprayed him. Matthews also testified that while he was lying face down in the culvert, officers approached him and held his head underwater for three to five seconds. This is the type of gratuitous force that is objectively unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment.
The district court dismissed Matthews' excessive force claim after finding that medical evidence undermined his testimony. As an initial matter, this is a misleading characterization of the record. Matthews' medical records simply indicate that he told the doctor that he had not lost consciousness, had not told paramedics about the beating or drowning, and that his x rays and CT scans were normal. None of this evidence contradicts Matthews' testimony that he had been beaten and drowned. Nevertheless, even if the medical evidence did conflict with Matthews' testimony, that type of factual and credibility conflict is a genuine issue of material fact, and it is "the role of the jury" to resolve such conflicts. See Boesing v. Spiess, 540 F.3d 886, 890 (8th Cir. 2008).
Defendants argue that we should affirm the grant of qualified immunity because Matthews is unable to identify the defendants who performed these acts. Defendants are correct that "§ 1983 liability is personal." Doran v. Eckold, 409 F.3d 958, 965 (8th Cir. 2005) (en banc). To prevail on a § 1983 claim, a plaintiff must show each individual defendant's personal involvement in the alleged violation. See Dahl v. Weber, 580 F.3d 730, 733 (8th Cir. 2009); Wilson v. Northcutt, 441 F.3d 586, 591 (8th Cir. 2006). That does not mean however that a § 1983 excessive force plaintiff must be able to personally identify his assailants to avoid summary judgment.
-22-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 22 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 23 of 26 PageID #: 4409
Testimony of the officers on the scene, including that of Vinson and Bates, confirms that Vinson and Bates physically removed Matthews from the culvert. Patterson confirmed that he deployed pepper spray. Payne testified that he observed the arrest and yelled at Matthews to stop resisting. When Matthews was handcuffed, he sat up and leaned against Payne's leg. Payne helped Matthews up and brought him to the paramedics. This is sufficient evidence to identify Vinson, Bates, Patterson, and Payne as officers who personally participated in Matthews's arrest. While the officers and Matthews vehemently disagree about whether Matthews was resisting and the extent and reasonableness of the force applied, these fact disputes cannot be resolved on summary judgment. Therefore, the district court erred in granting these defendants qualified immunity.
There is no evidence that defendant Derik Jackson was personally involved in the alleged use of excessive force during the arrest. Officers testified that Jackson observed others pull Matthews from the culvert and arrest him, and that Jackson could not personally participate because he was carrying a firearm. Notably, Matthews's Opposition to the Saint Louis County Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and his brief on appeal only discuss Jackson's involvement in deploying a less-lethal shotgun, not the alleged assault on Matthews during his removal from the culvert and arrest. Because Matthews presents no evidence showing Jackson's personal involvement in the alleged use of excessive force during Matthews's arrest, Jackson is entitled to qualified immunity on this claim.
In an excessive force case, a police officer may be liable for breach of a duty to intervene "where the officer is aware of the abuse and the duration of the episode is sufficient to permit an inference of tacit collaboration." Krout, 583 F.3d at 565. Matthews did not assert a claim against Jackson for failure to intervene in the alleged assault at the district court or before our court, however, and therefore we do not consider it. See Chay-Velasquez, 367 F.3d at 756; Burton v. Richmond, 276 F.3d 973, 977 (8th Cir. 2002).
-23-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 23 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 24 of 26 PageID #: 4410
The district court dismissed Matthews' § 1983 failure to train, supervise, and discipline claim on the ground that municipal liability may not attach absent liability on an underlying substantive claim. Because we reverse the grant of summary judgment on Matthews' § 1983 excessive force claim, we also reverse on his failure to train, supervise, and discipline claim as it relates to his remaining excessive force claim. See Ryan v. Armstrong, 850 F.3d 419, 428 (8th Cir. 2017).
III. Conclusion For these reasons we affirm in part and reverse and remand in part, as described above.
______________________________
-24-
Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 24 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 25 of 26 PageID #: 4411

Michael E. Gans Clerk of Court

United States Court of Appeals
For The Eighth Circuit
Thomas F. Eagleton U.S. Courthouse 111 South 10th Street, Room 24.329
St. Louis, Missouri 63102

VOICE (314) 244-2400 FAX (314) 244-2780
www.ca8.uscourts.gov

August 01, 2017

West Publishing Opinions Clerk 610 Opperman Drive Building D D4-40 Eagan, MN 55123-0000

RE: 16-3897 Tracey White, et al v. Thomas Jackson, et al

Dear Sirs:

A published opinion was filed today in the above case.

Counsel who presented argument on behalf of the appellant was Gregory L. Lattimer, of Washington, DC.

Counsel who presented argument on behalf of the appellees John Belmar, David Ryan, Terrence McCoy, Michael McCann, Derik Jackson, Joe Patterson, Aaron Vinson, William Bates, Nicholas Payne, Hill, Antonio Valentine, and St. Louis County was Michael Edward Hughes, of Saint Louis, MO. Also appearing on the brief for these appellees was Priscilla F. Gunn, Saint Louis, MO.

Counsel who presented argument on behalf of the appellees, City of Ferguson, Thomas Jackson, Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Brandon McKinnon, and David “Ryan” DeVouton, was Robert T. Plunkert, of Saint Louis, MO. The following attorney also appeared on the brief for these appellees: Peter J. Dunne, of Saint Louis, MO.

The judge who heard the case in the district court was Honorable Henry E. Autrey. The judgment of the district court was entered on September 30, 2016.

If you have any questions concerning this case, please call this office.

Michael E. Gans Clerk of Court

SRD Enclosure(s) cc: MO Lawyers Weekly

District Court/Agency Case Number(s): 4:14-cv-01490-HEA

Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 278 Filed: 08/01/17 Page: 26 of 26 PageID #: 4412

Michael E. Gans Clerk of Court

United States Court of Appeals
For The Eighth Circuit
Thomas F. Eagleton U.S. Courthouse 111 South 10th Street, Room 24.329
St. Louis, Missouri 63102

VOICE (314) 244-2400 FAX (314) 244-2780
www.ca8.uscourts.gov

August 01, 2017

Mr. Gregory L. Lattimer LAW OFFICES OF GREGORY L. LATTIMER Suite 800 1200 G Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20005
RE: 16-3897 Tracey White, et al v. Thomas Jackson, et al
Dear Counsel:
The court has issued an opinion in this case. Judgment has been entered in accordance with the opinion. The opinion will be released to the public at 10:00 a.m. today. Please hold the opinion in confidence until that time.
Please review Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and the Eighth Circuit Rules on postsubmission procedure to ensure that any contemplated filing is timely and in compliance with the rules. Note particularly that petitions for rehearing and petitions for rehearing en banc must be received in the clerk's office within 14 days of the date of the entry of judgment. Counsel-filed petitions must be filed electronically in CM/ECF. Paper copies are not required. No grace period for mailing is allowed, and the date of the postmark is irrelevant for pro-se-filed petitions. Any petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc which is not received within the 14 day period for filing permitted by FRAP 40 may be denied as untimely.
Michael E. Gans Clerk of Court
SRD Enclosure(s) cc: Mr. Peter J. Dunne
Mr. Reginald A. Greene Ms. Priscilla F. Gunn Mr. Michael Edward Hughes Mr. Gregory J. Linhares Mr. Ronald Alan Norwood Mr. Robert T. Plunkert Mr. Malik Z. Shabazz Mr. Michael A. Shuman
District Court/Agency Case Number(s): 4:14-cv-01490-HEA

Appellate Case: 16-3897 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/01/2017 Entry ID: 4563290

 
 Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 335 Filed: 01/31/19 Page: 1 of 4 PageID #: 5007

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION

DEWAYNE MATTHEWS, Plaintiff,
v. THOMAS JACKSON, et al.,
Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

No. 4:14CV1490 HEA

)

)

)

)

)

OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment, filed

by defendants Jon Belmar and the County of St. Louis, [Doc. No. 292]. Plaintiff

opposes the motion. The Motion is denied.

Facts and Background

The facts and background have been previously detailed. After remand from

the appeal of this Court’s grant of summary judgment to all defendants, Defendants

Belmar and St. Louis County again move for summary judgment on the claims

against them. Defendants argue that there is no dispute as to any material facts

which could subject them to liability.

Plaintiff’s remaining claims against these defendants are under 42 U.S.C. §

1983 for deprivation of his civil rights and for failure to supervise, and discipline.

Standard

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 335 Filed: 01/31/19 Page: 2 of 4 PageID #: 5008
Summary judgment is proper if the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, demonstrates no genuine issue of material fact exists and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c); Cordry v. Vanderbilt Mortg. & Fin., Inc., 445 F.3d 1106, 1109 (8th Cir.2006) (quoting Bockelman v. MCI Worldcom, Inc., 403 F.3d 528, 531 (8th Cir.2005)). The proponent of a motion for summary judgment “bears the initial responsibility of informing the district court of the basis for its motion, and identifying those portions of ‘the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any,’ which it believes demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of material fact.” Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c)). The proponent need not, however, negate the opponent's claims or defenses. Id. at 324–25. In response to the proponent's showing, the opponent's burden is to “come forward with ‘specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial.’ “ Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 587 (1986) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(e)). A “genuine” dispute of material fact is more than “some metaphysical doubt as to the material facts.” Id. at 586.
“[T]here is no issue for trial unless there is sufficient evidence favoring the nonmoving party for a jury to return a verdict for that party.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 249 (1986). “If the evidence is merely colorable ... or is
- 2 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 335 Filed: 01/31/19 Page: 3 of 4 PageID #: 5009
not significantly probative ... summary judgment may be granted.” Id. at 249–50 (citations omitted).
Discussion Section 1983 liability for a constitutional violation may attach to a municipality if the violation resulted from (1) an official municipal policy, (2) an unofficial custom, or (3) a deliberately indifferent failure to train or supervise. Monell v. Dep't of Soc. Serv., 436 U.S. 658, 690–91 (1978); City of Canton, Ohio v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378, 388–89 (1989). A plaintiff may establish municipal liability under § 1983 by proving that his or her constitutional rights were violated by an action pursuant to official municipal policy or misconduct so pervasive among non-policymaking employees of the municipality as to constitute a custom or usage with the force of law.” Ware v. Jackson Cnty., Mo., 150 F.3d 873, 880 (8th Cir.1998) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). “[I]n order to state a viable § 1983 claim [ ], plaintiff is required to plead facts sufficient to show at least an inference that [her] constitutional rights were violated as a result of action taken pursuant to an official policy, or as a result of misconduct so pervasive among non-policymakers as to constitute a widespread custom and practice with the force of law.” Davis v. St. Louis County, Mo., 4:14CV1563 CAS, 2015 WL 758218, at *12 (E.D.Mo. Feb. 23, 2015) (citation omitted).
- 3 -

Case: 4:14-cv-01490-HEA Doc. #: 335 Filed: 01/31/19 Page: 4 of 4 PageID #: 5010
The pleadings, affidavits and evidence in the record, together with the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom, establish that disputes of material fact exist which must be decided by the trier of fact. As such, summary judgment is not appropriate.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion for Summary Judgment, [Doc. No. 292], is DENIED. Dated this 31st day of January, 2019.
HENRY EDWARD AUTREY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
- 4 -

 
 CLOSED,ADR,ADRC,TRCK2
U.S. District Court Eastern District of Missouri (St. Louis) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:14−cv−01490−HEA

White et al v. Jackson et al Assigned to: District Judge Henry Edward Autrey Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 08/28/2014 Date Terminated: 02/08/2019 Jury Demand: Both Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Tracey White Individually, TERMINATED: 01/31/2019

represented by Gregory L. Lattimer GREGORY L. LATTIMER, ESQ 1200 G. St., N.W. Suite 800 Washington, DC 20005 202−434−4513 Fax: 202−248−4478 Email: lattlaw@aol.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Malik Z. Shabazz MALIK Z. SHABAZZ 1200 G. St., N.W. Suite 800 Washington, DC 20005 202−434−4528 Fax: 202−248−4478 Email: attorney.shabazz@yahoo.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Reginald A. Greene GREENE LEGAL GROUP LLC 600 W. Peachtree St. Suite 605 Atlanta, GA 30308 404−574−4308 Fax: 404−574−4312 Email: rgreene@greenelegalgroup.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr.

represented by Gregory L. Lattimer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Malik Z. Shabazz (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Reginald A. Greene (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff

Damon Coleman TERMINATED: 01/31/2019
Plaintiff Theophilus Green TERMINATED: 01/31/2019
Plaintiff Kerry White TERMINATED: 01/31/2019
Plaintiff W. D. a minor, by and through, TERMINATED: 10/02/2014 next friend Tracey White TERMINATED: 10/02/2014

represented by Gregory L. Lattimer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Malik Z. Shabazz (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Reginald A. Greene (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Gregory L. Lattimer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Malik Z. Shabazz (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Reginald A. Greene (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Gregory L. Lattimer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Malik Z. Shabazz (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Reginald A. Greene (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Gregory L. Lattimer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Malik Z. Shabazz (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Reginald A. Greene (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff Antawn Harris TERMINATED: 01/31/2019
Plaintiff Sandy Bowers TERMINATED: 01/31/2019
Plaintiff William Davis TERMINATED: 01/31/2019
Plaintiff Nathan Burns TERMINATED: 01/31/2019
Plaintiff Kia Bowers TERMINATED: 01/31/2019
V. Defendant Thomas Jackson individually, and in his official capacity

represented by Gregory L. Lattimer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Reginald A. Greene (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Gregory L. Lattimer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Reginald A. Greene (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Gregory L. Lattimer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Reginald A. Greene (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Gregory L. Lattimer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Reginald A. Greene (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Gregory L. Lattimer (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Reginald A. Greene (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Peter J. Dunne PITZER SNODGRASS, P.C.

as City of Ferguson, Missouri Chief of Police TERMINATED: 01/31/2019
Defendant Jon Belmar individually, and in his official capacity as St. Louis County, Missouri Chief of Police,
Defendant Justin Cosmo individually, and in his official capacity as a City of Ferguson Police Officer, TERMINATED: 01/31/2019
Defendant John Does police officers of the City Of Ferguson and St. Louis County Police Departments whose identities are unknown to Plaintiffs at this time, TERMINATED: 01/31/2019 Defendant St. Louis County, Missouri

100 S. Fourth Street Suite 400 St. Louis, MO 63102−1821 314−421−5545 Fax: 314−421−3144 Email: dunne@pspclaw.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Robert T. Plunkert PITZER SNODGRASS, P.C. 100 S. Fourth Street Suite 400 St. Louis, MO 63102−1821 314−335−1306 Fax: 314−421−5545 Email: plunkert@pspclaw.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael E. Hughes ST. LOUIS COUNTY COUNSELOR'S OFFICE 41 S. Central Avenue Clayton, MO 63105 314−615−7009 Fax: 314−615−3732 Email: mhughes2@stlouisco.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Priscilla Frances Gunn ST. LOUIS COUNTY COUNSELOR'S OFFICE 41 S. Central Avenue Clayton, MO 63105 314−615−7042 Fax: 314−615−3732 Email: pgunn@stlouisco.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Peter J. Dunne (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Robert T. Plunkert (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by

Defendant Ferguson, Missouri, City of TERMINATED: 01/31/2019
Defendant David Ryan TERMINATED: 01/31/2019
Defendant Terrence McCoy TERMINATED: 01/31/2019

Michael E. Hughes (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Priscilla Frances Gunn (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Peter J. Dunne (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Aarnarian (Apollo) D. Carey LEWIS RICE, LLC 600 Washington Suite 2500 St. Louis, MO 63101 314−444−7788 Fax: 314−612−7788 Email: acarey@lewisrice.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Robert T. Plunkert (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ronald A. Norwood LEWIS RICE, LLC 600 Washington Suite 2500 St. Louis, MO 63101 314−444−7759 Fax: 314−612−7759 Email: rnorwood@lewisrice.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael E. Hughes (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Peter J. Dunne (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Priscilla Frances Gunn (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael E. Hughes (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Priscilla Frances Gunn

Defendant Michael McCann TERMINATED: 01/31/2019
Defendant Derik Jackson TERMINATED: 01/31/2019
Defendant Joe Patterson
Defendant Aaron Vinson
Defendant William Bates
Defendant Nicholas Payne

(See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael E. Hughes (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Priscilla Frances Gunn (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael E. Hughes (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Priscilla Frances Gunn (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael E. Hughes (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Priscilla Frances Gunn (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael E. Hughes (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Priscilla Frances Gunn (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael E. Hughes (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Priscilla Frances Gunn (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by

Defendant Daniel Hill TERMINATED: 01/31/2019
Defendant Antonio Valentine TERMINATED: 01/31/2019
Defendant Matt Delia TERMINATED: 01/31/2019
Defendant Officer Devouton TERMINATED: 01/31/2019
Defendant Officer McKinnon TERMINATED: 01/31/2019

Michael E. Hughes (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Priscilla Frances Gunn (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael E. Hughes (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Priscilla Frances Gunn (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Michael E. Hughes (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Priscilla Frances Gunn (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Peter J. Dunne (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Peter J. Dunne (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Peter J. Dunne (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 08/28/2014
08/28/2014

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT against defendant All listed Defendants. 8 Summons(es) issued, Jury Demand,, filed by Kerry White, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Tracey White, Theophilus Green. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Original Filing Form)(DLT) Modified on 8/28/2014 (DLT). (Entered: 08/28/2014)
2 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice, Reginald A. J. Greene, by Plaintiffs Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. The Certificate of Good Standing was attached.(Filing fee $100 pd.) (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Good Standing)(DLT) (Entered: 08/28/2014)

08/28/2014
08/28/2014
08/28/2014
08/28/2014
08/28/2014
08/28/2014 08/28/2014 08/28/2014 08/28/2014 08/28/2014 08/28/2014 10/02/2014
10/23/2014 10/24/2014 10/24/2014 10/24/2014 10/24/2014

3 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 2 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice, Reginald A. J. Greene, by Plaintiffs Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. ORDERED : GRANTED AND SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 8/28/14. (CEL) (Entered: 08/28/2014)
4 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Malik Z. Shabazz. The Certificate of Good Standing was attached.(Filing fee $100) by Plaintiffs Damon Coleman, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Good Standing)(CEL) (Entered: 08/28/2014)
5 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 4 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Malik Z. Shabazz. by Plaintiffs Damon Coleman, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. ORDERED : GRANTED AND SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 8/28/14. (CEL) (Entered: 08/28/2014)
6 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Gregory L. Lattimer. The Certificate of Good Standing was attached.(Filing fee $100) by Plaintiffs Damon Coleman, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Good Standing)(CEL) (Entered: 08/28/2014)
7 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 6 MOTION for Leave to Appear Pro Hac Vice Gregory L. Lattimer. by Plaintiffs Damon Coleman, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. ORDERED : GRANTED AND SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 8/28/14. (CEL) (Entered: 08/28/2014)
8 NOTICE OF PROCESS SERVER by Plaintiffs Damon Coleman, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White Process Server: Michael Montgomery (Attachments: # 1 Summons)(DLT) (Entered: 08/28/2014)
Case Opening Notification: 8 Summons(es) issued. Attorney Reginald Greene will pick up today. Judge Assigned: U.S. District Judge Henry E. Autrey. (DLT) (Entered: 08/28/2014)
Receipt 4644044929 in the amount of $100.00 for PRO HAC VICE on behalf of Malik Shabazz (CCAM) (Entered: 08/29/2014)
Receipt 4644044931 in the amount of $100.00 for PRO HAC VICE on behalf of Reginald Greene (CCAM) (Entered: 08/29/2014)
Receipt 4644044928 in the amount of $400.00 for CIVIL FILING FEE on behalf of Malik Z. Shabazz Esq (CCAM) (Entered: 08/29/2014)
Receipt 4644044929 in the amount of $100.00 for PRO HAC VICE on behalf of Gregory Lattimer (CCAM) (Entered: 08/31/2014)
9 AMENDED COMPLAINT against defendant All Defendants,Terminating W. D. (a minor, by and through, ) Amendment to 1 Complaint, Jury demand, , filed by Kerry White, W. D., Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Tracey White, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Sandy Bowers, William Davis, Nathan Burns, Kia Bowers. Related document: 1 Complaint, filed by Kerry White, Tracey White, Damon Coleman, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr..(Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 10/02/2014)
10 ENTRY of Appearance by Michael E. Hughes for Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 10/23/2014)
11 ENTRY of Appearance by Robert T. Plunkert for Defendants Justin Cosmo, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson. (Plunkert, Robert) (Entered: 10/24/2014)
12 ENTRY of Appearance by Peter J. Dunne for Defendants Justin Cosmo, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson. (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 10/24/2014)
13 Joint MOTION to Dismiss Case by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson. (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 10/24/2014)
14 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 13 Joint MOTION to Dismiss Case filed by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson. (Dunne,

10/27/2014 10/27/2014
10/27/2014 10/30/2014
10/30/2014
10/30/2014
11/06/2014 11/06/2014 11/26/2014 11/26/2014 11/26/2014 11/26/2014 11/26/2014 11/26/2014 11/26/2014 11/26/2014

Peter) (Entered: 10/24/2014)
15 ENTRY of Appearance by Priscilla Frances Gunn for Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 10/27/2014)
16 Docket Text ORDER: Entry of appearance and request for 30 days to file reponsive pleadings on behalf of defts. J. Belmar and St. Louis County. Filed by defts. GRANTED HEA. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 10/27/14. (CLA) (Entered: 10/27/2014)
17 Joint ANSWER to 9 Amended Complaint, by Justin Cosmo, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson.(Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 10/27/2014)
18 MOTION for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A − Second Amended Complaint)(Greene, Reginald) (Entered: 10/30/2014)
19 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 18 MOTION for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint filed by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Greene, Reginald) (Entered: 10/30/2014)
20 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 13 Joint MOTION to Dismiss Case by City of Ferguson, Jackson and Cosma filed by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 10/30/2014)
21 RESPONSE to Motion re 18 MOTION for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint filed by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson. (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 11/06/2014)
22 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 13 Joint MOTION to Dismiss Case filed by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson. (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 11/06/2014)
23 MOTION to Dismiss Party Tracey White and William Davis by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 11/26/2014)
24 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 23 MOTION to Dismiss Party Tracey White and William Davis filed by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 11/26/2014)
25 MOTION to Dismiss Party Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr. by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 11/26/2014)
26 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 25 MOTION to Dismiss Party Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr. filed by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 11/26/2014)
27 MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiffs Damon Coleman and Theophilus Green by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 11/26/2014)
28 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 27 MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiffs Damon Coleman and Theophilus Green filed by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 11/26/2014)
29 MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiffs Kerry White, Kia Bowers and Sandy Bowers by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 11/26/2014)
30 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 29 MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiffs Kerry White, Kia Bowers and Sandy Bowers filed by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 11/26/2014)

11/26/2014 11/26/2014 11/26/2014 11/26/2014 11/26/2014 11/26/2014 12/01/2014 12/01/2014
12/01/2014 12/01/2014
12/02/2014
12/03/2014 12/03/2014

31 MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiff Antawn Harris by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 11/26/2014)
32 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 31 MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiff Antawn Harris filed by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 11/26/2014)
33 MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiff Nathan Burns by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 11/26/2014)
34 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 33 MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiff Nathan Burns filed by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 11/26/2014)
35 MOTION to Sever by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 11/26/2014)
36 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 35 MOTION to Sever filed by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 11/26/2014)
37 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 18 MOTION for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint filed by Kia Bowers, W. D., Tracey White, Damon Coleman, Kerry White, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Antawn Harris, William Davis; GRANTED − SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 12/1/14. (KJS) (Entered: 12/01/2014)
38 AMENDED COMPLAINT against defendant All Defendants Amendment to 1 Complaint. Summons(es) issued none, Waivers issued none, Consents issued none, Jury Demand demand,, filed by Kerry White, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Antawn Harris, Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Damon Coleman, Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. Related document: 1 Complaint, filed by Kerry White, Tracey White, Damon Coleman, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr..(KJS) (Entered: 12/01/2014)
39 RESPONSE to Motion re 35 MOTION to Sever filed by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson. (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 12/01/2014)
40 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 30 Memorandum in Support of Motion, 36 Memorandum in Support of Motion, 29 MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiffs Kerry White, Kia Bowers and Sandy Bowers, 24 Memorandum in Support of Motion, 35 MOTION to Sever , 26 Memorandum in Support of Motion, 28 Memorandum in Support of Motion, 27 MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiffs Damon Coleman and Theophilus Green, 31 MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiff Antawn Harris, 32 Memorandum in Support of Motion, 33 MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiff Nathan Burns, 25 MOTION to Dismiss Party Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., 23 MOTION to Dismiss Party Tracey White and William Davis, 34 Memorandum in Support of Motion by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 12/01/2014)
41 AMENDED COMPLAINT Second Amended Complaint against defendant All Defendants Amendment to 9 Amended Complaint, 1 Complaint, Second Amended Complaint, filed by Kerry White, W. D., Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Antawn Harris, Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Damon Coleman, Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. Related document: 9 Amended Complaint, filed by Kia Bowers, W. D., Tracey White, Damon Coleman, Kerry White, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Antawn Harris, William Davis, 1 Complaint, filed by Tracey White, Damon Coleman, Kerry White, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr..(Greene, Reginald) (Entered: 12/02/2014)
42 First MOTION to Dismiss Party Defendants Green and Coleman by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 12/03/2014)
43 First MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiff Nathan Burns by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 12/03/2014)

12/03/2014 12/03/2014 12/03/2014 12/03/2014 12/03/2014
12/15/2014 12/15/2014 12/15/2014 12/26/2014
12/29/2014 01/05/2015 01/05/2015
01/05/2015
01/05/2015

44 First MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiff Antwan Harris by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 12/03/2014)
45 First MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiff Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr. by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 12/03/2014)
46 First MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiffs Tracey White and William Davis by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 12/03/2014)
47 First MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiffs Kerry White, Kai Bowers and Sandy Bowers by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 12/03/2014)
48 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 40 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply filed by Kia Bowers, W. D., Tracey White, Damon Coleman, Kerry White, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Antawn Harris, William Davis; GRANTED − SO ORDERED ( Response to Court due by 1/5/2015.) Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 12/3/14. (KJS) (Entered: 12/04/2014)
49 Defendants' City of Ferguson, Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson and Police Office Justin Cosma's Joint Answer ANSWER to 41 Amended Complaint,, by Ferguson, Missouri, City of.(Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 12/15/2014)
50 MOTION to Dismiss :Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 41) by Defendant Ferguson, Missouri, City of. (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 12/15/2014)
51 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 50 MOTION to Dismiss :Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 41) filed by Defendant Ferguson, Missouri, City of. (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 12/15/2014)
52 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 50 MOTION to Dismiss :Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 41) filed by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 12/26/2014)
53 REPLY to Response to Motion re 50 MOTION to Dismiss :Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 41) filed by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson. (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 12/29/2014)
54 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 35 MOTION to Sever filed by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 01/05/2015)
55 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 23 MOTION to Dismiss Party Tracey White and William Davis filed by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 01/05/2015)
56 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 29 MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiffs Kerry White, Kia Bowers and Sandy Bowers, 47 First MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiffs Kerry White, Kai Bowers and Sandy Bowers filed by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 01/05/2015)
57 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 42 First MOTION to Dismiss Party Defendants Green and Coleman, 27 MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiffs Damon Coleman and Theophilus Green filed by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 01/05/2015)

01/05/2015
01/05/2015
01/05/2015
01/09/2015 01/12/2015 01/27/2015 01/27/2015 01/27/2015 01/27/2015 01/27/2015 01/27/2015 01/27/2015 03/16/2015

58 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 31 MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiff Antawn Harris, 44 First MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiff Antwan Harris filed by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 01/05/2015)
59 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 45 First MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiff Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., 25 MOTION to Dismiss Party Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr. filed by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 01/05/2015)
60 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 33 MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiff Nathan Burns, 43 First MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiff Nathan Burns filed by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 01/05/2015)
61 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to Motions to Dismiss and Motion to Sever by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 01/09/2015)
62 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 61 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply filed by Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri; GRANTED − SO ORDERED ( Response to Court due by 1/27/2015.) Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 1/12/15. (KJS) (Entered: 01/13/2015)
63 REPLY to Response to Motion re 23 MOTION to Dismiss Party Tracey White and William Davis filed by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 01/27/2015)
64 REPLY to Response to Motion re 25 MOTION to Dismiss Party Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr. filed by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 01/27/2015)
65 REPLY to Response to Motion re 27 MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiffs Damon Coleman and Theophilus Green filed by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 01/27/2015)
66 REPLY to Response to Motion re 29 MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiffs Kerry White, Kia Bowers and Sandy Bowers filed by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 01/27/2015)
67 REPLY to Response to Motion re 31 MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiff Antawn Harris filed by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 01/27/2015)
68 REPLY to Response to Motion re 33 MOTION to Dismiss Party Plaintiff Nathan Burns filed by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 01/27/2015)
69 REPLY to Response to Motion re 35 MOTION to Sever filed by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 01/27/2015)
70 OPINION, MEMORANDUM, AND ORDER − IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the St. Louis County Defendants Motions to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint [Doc. Nos. 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 ] are GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Ferguson Defendants Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint [Doc. No. 50 ] is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the St. Louis County Defendants Motion to Sever [Doc. No. 35 ] is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress are DISMISSED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs claims for negligent supervision are DISMISSED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff William Daviss claim for assault and battery is DISMISSED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the St. Louis County Defendants Motions to Dismiss the Complaint [Doc. Nos. 23 , 25 , 27 , 29 , 31 , 33 ] are DENIED AS MOOT. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Ferguson Defendants Motion to Dismiss the

03/26/2015 04/16/2015
04/16/2015 04/22/2015 04/23/2015 04/24/2015 04/24/2015
04/27/2015 04/28/2015
04/28/2015
05/27/2015
05/29/2015 05/29/2015

Complaint [Doc. No. 13 ] is DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 3/16/15. (KJS) (Entered: 03/16/2015)
71 ANSWER to 41 Amended Complaint,, by Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri.(Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 03/26/2015)
72 ORDER SETTING RULE 16 CONFERENCE This case is assigned to Track: 2: A Scheduling Conference pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 16 is set for Tuesday, May 5, 2015, at 10:30 a.m. by telephone with the undersigned with the Court initiating the call. The parties are to notify the Court of the name and telephone number of the member of counsel who will be participating in the call by filing an electronic Notice. Joint Scheduling Plan due by 4/30/2015. Rule 16 Conference set for 5/5/2015 10:30 AM in Telephone before District Judge Henry Edward Autrey. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 04/16/2015. (CLK) (Entered: 04/16/2015)
73 NOTICE by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson re 72 Rule 16 Order,, (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 04/16/2015)
74 JOINT SCHEDULING PLAN by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson. . (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 04/22/2015)
75 MOTION for leave to file an amended joint proposed scheduling plan by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson. (Dunne, Peter) Modified on 4/24/2015 (CLA). (Entered: 04/23/2015)
76 NOTICE Rule 16 Order: by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Kerry White, Tracey White re 72 Rule 16 Order,, (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 04/24/2015)
77 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 75 MOTION for leave to file an amended joint proposed scheduling plan by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson. (Dunne, Peter) Modified on 4/24/2015 (CLA). filed by Justin Cosmo, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson; GRANTED HEA. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 4/24/15. (CLA) (Entered: 04/24/2015)
78 MEMORANDUM Notice of Participation in Rule 16 Telephone Conference by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 04/27/2015)
79 ORDER − IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the scheduling conference pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 16 set for Tuesday, May 5, 2015, is vacated. The Case Management Order will be issued based on the dates provided by the parties in their Joint Proposed Scheduling Plan [Doc. # 75 ]. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 4/28/15. (KJS) (Entered: 04/28/2015)
80 CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER This case is assigned to Track: 2−Standard Motion to Join Parties due by 5/27/2015. Discovery Completion due by 11/24/2015. ADR Future Reference 9/4/2015. Dispositive Motions due by 12/22/2015. Jury Trial set for 4/18/2016 09:30 AM before District Judge Henry Edward Autrey. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 4/28/15. (KJS) (Entered: 04/28/2015)
81 AMENDED COMPLAINT Third against defendant All Defendants no Summons(es) issued, Waivers issued no, Consents issued no, jury demand demand, Third, filed by Kerry White, W. D., Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Antawn Harris, Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Damon Coleman, Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green.(Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 05/27/2015)
82 MEMORANDUM to Clerk Requesting Summons by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Attachments: # 1 Summons)(Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 05/29/2015)
83 NOTICE by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Kerry White, Tracey White re 82 Memorandum, Notice of Intent to Use Process Server (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 05/29/2015)

06/01/2015
06/10/2015 06/10/2015 06/10/2015 06/10/2015 06/24/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015

84 Summons Issued as to defendant William Bates, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Officer McKinnon, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. The summons was emailed to e−mailed to Plaintiff's Attorney Gregory Lattimer. (Attachments: # 1 Summons, # 2 Summons, # 3 Summons, # 4 Summons, # 5 Summons, # 6 Summons, # 7 Summons, # 8 Summons, # 9 Summons, # 10 Summons, # 11 Summons, # 12 Summons)(CLK) (Entered: 06/01/2015)
85 ANSWER to 81 Amended Complaint, by Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri.(Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 06/10/2015)
86 ANSWER to 81 Amended Complaint, by Justin Cosmo, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson.(Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 06/10/2015)
87 MOTION to Dismiss Case by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson. (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 06/10/2015)
88 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 87 MOTION to Dismiss Case filed by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson. (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 06/10/2015)
89 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 87 MOTION to Dismiss Case filed by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 06/24/2015)
90 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. Derik Jackson served on 6/4/2015, answer due 6/25/2015. (Lattimer, Gregory) (**Incomplete PDF. Attorney to refile correctly.**) Modified on 6/25/2015 (KJS). (Entered: 06/25/2015)
91 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. Antonio Valentine served on 6/4/2015, answer due 6/25/2015. (Lattimer, Gregory) (**Incomplete PDF. Attorney to refile correctly.**) Modified on 6/25/2015 (KJS). (Entered: 06/25/2015)
92 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. Daniel Hill served on 6/4/2015, answer due 6/25/2015. (Lattimer, Gregory) (**Incomplete PDF. Attorney to refile correctly.**) Modified on 6/25/2015 (KJS). (Entered: 06/25/2015)
93 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. David Ryan served on 6/4/2015, answer due 6/25/2015. (Lattimer, Gregory) (**Incomplete PDF. Attorney to refile correctly.**) Modified on 6/25/2015 (KJS). (Entered: 06/25/2015)
94 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. Aaron Vinson served on 6/4/2015, answer due 6/25/2015. (Lattimer, Gregory) (**Incomplete PDF. Attorney to refile correctly.**) Modified on 6/25/2015 (KJS). (Entered: 06/25/2015)
95 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. Joe Patterson served on 6/4/2015, answer due 6/25/2015. (Lattimer, Gregory) (**Incomplete PDF. Attorney to refile correctly.**) Modified on 6/25/2015 (KJS). (Entered: 06/25/2015)
96 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. Officer Devouton served on 6/4/2015, answer due 6/25/2015. (Lattimer, Gregory)(**Incomplete PDF. Attorney to refile correctly.**) Modified on 6/25/2015 (KJS). (Entered: 06/25/2015)

06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015

97 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. Officer McKinnon served on 6/4/2015, answer due 6/25/2015. (Lattimer, Gregory)(**Incomplete PDF. Attorney to refile correctly.**) Modified on 6/25/2015 (KJS). (Entered: 06/25/2015)
98 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. Michael McCann served on 6/4/2015, answer due 6/25/2015. (Lattimer, Gregory) (**Incomplete PDF. Attorney to refile correctly.**) Modified on 6/25/2015 (KJS). (Entered: 06/25/2015)
99 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. Nicholas Payne served on 6/4/2015, answer due 6/25/2015. (Lattimer, Gregory) (**Incomplete PDF. Attorney to refile correctly.**) Modified on 6/25/2015 (KJS). (Entered: 06/25/2015)
100 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. Terrence McCoy served on 6/4/2015, answer due 6/25/2015. (Lattimer, Gregory) (**Incomplete PDF. Attorney to refile correctly.**) Modified on 6/25/2015 (KJS). (Entered: 06/25/2015)
101 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. William Bates served on 6/4/2015, answer due 6/25/2015. (Lattimer, Gregory) (**Incomplete PDF. Attorney to refile correctly.**) Modified on 6/25/2015 (KJS). (Entered: 06/25/2015)
102 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. Matt Delia served on 6/4/2015, answer due 6/25/2015. (Lattimer, Gregory) (**Incomplete PDF. Attorney to refile correctly.**) Modified on 6/25/2015 (KJS). (Entered: 06/25/2015)
103 ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Ferguson Defendants Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 87] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent supervision are DISMISSED from Plaintiffs Third Amended Complaint. 87 Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 6/25/15. (CLA) (Entered: 06/25/2015)
104 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 06/25/2015)
105 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 06/25/2015)
106 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 06/25/2015)
107 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 06/25/2015)
108 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 06/25/2015)

06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/25/2015 06/29/2015 06/29/2015 07/06/2015 08/07/2015 08/12/2015

109 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 06/25/2015)
110 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 06/25/2015)
111 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 06/25/2015)
112 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 06/25/2015)
113 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 06/25/2015)
114 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 06/25/2015)
115 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 06/25/2015)
116 SUMMONS Returned Executed filed by Nathan Burns, William Davis, Tracey White, Kia Bowers, Kerry White, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Damon Coleman, Sandy Bowers, Theophilus Green. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 06/25/2015)
117 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re 81 Amended Complaint, by Defendant St. Louis County, Missouri. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 06/25/2015)
118 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 117 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re 81 Amended Complaint, by Defendant St. Louis County, Missouri. (Gunn, Priscilla) filed by St. Louis County, Missouri; GRANTED HEA. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 6/29/15. (CLA) (Entered: 06/29/2015)
119 Defendants' ANSWER to 81 Amended Complaint, Third by Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Officer McKinnon.(Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 06/29/2015)
120 ANSWER to 81 Amended Complaint, (third) by William Bates, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson.(Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 07/06/2015)
121 Consent MOTION for Extension of: Case Management Order by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 08/07/2015)
122 AMENDED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER − TRACK 2: STANDARD re: 121 Consent MOTION for Extension of: Case Management Order filed by Plaintiffs; This case is assigned to Track: 2( Discovery Completion due by 12/24/2015., ADR Future Reference 10/4/2015., Dispositive Motions due by 1/21/2016., Jury Trial set for 5/23/2016 09:30 AM in Courtroom 10N before District Judge Henry Edward Autrey.). Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 08/12/2015. (CLK) Modified on 8/21/2015 (CLK).(document replaced to correct year from 2015 to 2016 on Dispositive ddln and Daubert ddln.and resent nef) (Main Document 122 replaced on

08/28/2015
09/01/2015 09/01/2015 09/10/2015 09/11/2015 09/21/2015 09/22/2015 10/27/2015
10/28/2015 11/10/2015 11/10/2015
11/12/2015 11/12/2015

8/21/2015) (CLK). (Entered: 08/12/2015)
123 ORDER REFERRING CASE TO ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION. This case is referred to: Mediation Designation of Lead Counsel: Gregory L. Lattimer ADR Completion Deadline due by 12/4/2015. ADR Compliance Report Deadline due by 12/18/2015. Designation of Neutral/Conference Report due by 10/26/2015. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 08/28/2015. (CLK) (Entered: 08/28/2015)
124 MOTION to Compel by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 09/01/2015)
125 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 124 MOTION to Compel filed by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 09/01/2015)
126 MOTION for Leave to Join St. Louis County's Motion to Compel by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson. (Plunkert, Robert) (Entered: 09/10/2015)
127 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 126 Motion for Leave to Join St. louis County's Motion To Compel;ORDERED LEAVE TO JOIN IN MOTION IS GRANTED HEA. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 09/11/2015. (CLK) (Entered: 09/14/2015)
128 RESPONSE to Motion re 124 MOTION to Compel DISCOVERY filed by Plaintiff Kia Bowers. (Shabazz, Malik) (Entered: 09/21/2015)
129 REPLY re 124 MOTION to Compel filed by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) Modified on 9/23/2015 (CLA). (Entered: 09/22/2015)
130 Designation of Neutral by parties and ADR Conference Report by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Kerry White, Tracey White Neutral: Shaw, Booker T. Date of Conference: 12/1/2015 time: 9:00 a.m. Location: Neutral's Office(Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 10/27/2015)
131 NOTICE of Appointment of Neutral. Neutral name: Shaw, Booker T. Neutral selected by Parties. Neutral notified by email.(CLA) (Entered: 10/28/2015)
132 MOTION for Extension of: Case Management Order by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 11/10/2015)
133 RESPONSE in Opposition re 132 MOTION for Extension of: Case Management Order filed by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E)(Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 11/10/2015)
134 RESPONSE to Motion re 132 MOTION for Extension of: Case Management Order filed by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon. (Plunkert, Robert) (Entered: 11/12/2015)
135 REPLY to Response to Motion re 132 MOTION for Extension of: Case Management Order filed by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1− Certificate of Discovery, # 2 Exhibit 2 − E−mail dated August 31, 2015 from Defendant's counsel to Plaintiffs' counsel with discovery responses, # 3 Exhibit 3 − E−mail dated August 31, 2015 from Plaintiffs' counsel to defendants' counsel regarding deficiencies in discovery responses, # 4 Exhibit 4 − Letter dated September 8, 2015 from plaintiffs' counsel to defendants' counsel setting forth the deficiencies in discovery responses, # 5 Exhibit 5 − Email

11/24/2015 12/14/2015
12/14/2015
12/16/2015 04/07/2016 04/07/2016
04/07/2016 04/07/2016 04/07/2016 04/07/2016
04/07/2016

dated August 20, 2015 from defendants' counsel to plaintiffs' counsel regarding scheduling of depositions, # 6 Exhibit 6 − E−mail dated Nov 9 2015 from plaintiff's counsel to defendants' counsel regarding modification of Case Management Order)(Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 11/12/2015)
136 AMENDED CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER Discovery Completion due by 3/30/2016. Dispositive Motions due by 4/29/2016. Jury Trial set for 9/26/2016 09:30 AM before District Judge Henry Edward Autrey. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 11/24/15. (CLA) (Entered: 11/24/2015)
137 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 132 MOTION for Extension of: Case Management Order by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) filed by Kia Bowers, W. D., Tracey White, Damon Coleman, Kerry White, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Antawn Harris, William Davis ; ORDERED MTN. MOOT HEA. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 12/14/15. (CLA) (Entered: 12/14/2015)
138 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 124 MOTION to Compel by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) filed by Terrence McCoy, Nicholas Payne, Jon Belmar, Aaron Vinson, St. Louis County, Missouri, Michael McCann, Daniel Hill, Joe Patterson, Antonio Valentine, Derik Jackson, David Ryan, William Bates ; ORDERED DOC. WITHDRAWN SO ORDERED HEA. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 12/14/15. (CLA) (Entered: 12/14/2015)
139 ADR COMPLIANCE REPORT by Neutral: Shaw, Booker T.. Date of Conference: 12/1/15. The parties participated in good faith. The parties did not achieve a settlement.(KJS) (Entered: 12/16/2015)
140 MOTION for Leave to File in Excess of Page Limitation by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon. (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 04/07/2016)
141 MOTION for Leave to File Sealed Document by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon. (Dunne, Peter) (Main Document 141 replaced on 4/8/2016) (CLK). Modified on 4/8/2016 (CLK).(Wrong titled document attached,Atty. sent corrected document and Clerk reattached the doc. and resent nef notification) (Entered: 04/07/2016)
142 NOTICE of Filing Exhibit with the Clerk's Office in paper format by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 04/07/2016)
143 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon. (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 04/07/2016)
144 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 143 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon. (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 04/07/2016)
145 STATEMENT of Material Facts re 143 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit I, # 9 Exhibit J, # 10 Exhibit K, # 11 Exhibit L, # 12 Exhibit M, # 13 Exhibit N, # 14 Exhibit P, # 15 Exhibit Q, # 16 Exhibit R, # 17 Exhibit S, # 18 Exhibit T, # 19 Exhibit U, # 20 Exhibit V)(Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 04/07/2016)
146 MOTION to Exclude Expert Testimony Pursuant to Daubert by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon. (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 04/07/2016)

04/07/2016 04/08/2016 04/08/2016
04/26/2016 04/28/2016 04/29/2016
04/29/2016 04/29/2016 05/03/2016 05/06/2016

147 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 146 MOTION to Exclude Expert Testimony Pursuant to Daubert filed by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon. (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 04/07/2016)
148 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 140 MOTION for Leave to File in Excess of Page Limitation by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon. (Dunne, Peter) filed by Officer McKinnon, Matt Delia, Justin Cosmo, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson ; ORDERED GRANTED HEA. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 04/08/2016. (CLK) (Entered: 04/08/2016)
149 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 141 MOTION for Leave to File Sealed Document by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon. (Dunne, Peter) (Main Document 141 replaced on 4/8/2016) (CLK). Modified on 4/8/2016 (CLK).(Wrong titled document attached,Atty. sent corrected document and Clerk reattached the doc. and resent nef notification) filed by Officer McKinnon, Matt Delia, Justin Cosmo, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson ; ORDERED GRANTED HEA. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 04/08/2016. (CLK) (Entered: 04/08/2016)
150 MOTION for Extension of: Time to File Motion for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 04/26/2016)
151 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 144 Memorandum in Support of Motion, 146 MOTION to Exclude Expert Testimony Pursuant to Daubert, 143 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 04/28/2016)
152 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 150 MOTION for Extension of: Time to File Motion for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) filed by Terrence McCoy, Nicholas Payne, Jon Belmar, Aaron Vinson, St. Louis County, Missouri, Michael McCann, Daniel Hill, Joe Patterson, Antonio Valentine, Derik Jackson, David Ryan, William Bates ; GRANTED HEA. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 4/29/16. (CLA) (Entered: 04/29/2016)
153 MOTION for Daubert Hearing by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit A, # 2 Affidavit Jon Belmar, # 3 Exhibit Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit Exhibit C, # 5 Exhibit Pusins Deposition)(Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 04/29/2016)
154 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 153 MOTION for Daubert Hearing filed by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 04/29/2016)
155 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 151 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply filed by Kia Bowers, W. D., Tracey White, Damon Coleman, Kerry White, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Antawn Harris, William Davis; GRANTED − SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 5/3/16. (KJS) (Entered: 05/03/2016)
156 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Motion for Summary Judgment ;Proposed extension date May 13th 2016 by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/06/2016)

05/09/2016
05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016

157 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 156 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Motion for Summary Judgment ;Proposed extension date May 13th 2016 by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) filed by Terrence McCoy, Nicholas Payne, Jon Belmar, Aaron Vinson, St. Louis County, Missouri, Michael McCann, Daniel Hill, Joe Patterson, Antonio Valentine, David Ryan, William Bates ; ORDERED GRANTED HEA. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 05/09/2016. (CLK) (Entered: 05/09/2016)
158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
159 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
160 MOTION for Leave to File in Excess of Page Limitation by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
161 STATEMENT of Material Facts re 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
162 MOTION for Leave to File Sealed Document by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
163 SEALED DOCUMENT by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
164 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
165 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
166 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
167 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
168 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael)

05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016

(Entered: 05/13/2016)
169 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
170 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
171 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
172 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
173 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
174 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
175 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
176 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
177 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
178 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
179 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)

05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/13/2016 05/18/2016

180 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
181 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
182 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
183 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
184 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
185 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
186 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
187 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
188 SUPPLEMENTAL re 161 Statement of Material Facts, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 05/13/2016)
189 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 160 MOTION for Leave to File in Excess of Page Limitation by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) filed by Terrence McCoy, Nicholas Payne, Jon Belmar, Aaron Vinson, St. Louis County, Missouri, Michael McCann, Daniel Hill, Joe Patterson, Antonio Valentine, Derik Jackson, David Ryan, William Bates, 162 MOTION for Leave to File Sealed Document by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) filed by Terrence McCoy, Nicholas Payne, Jon Belmar, Aaron Vinson, St. Louis County, Missouri, Michael McCann, Daniel Hill, Joe Patterson, Antonio Valentine, Derik Jackson, David Ryan, William Bates ; ORDERED LEAVE GRANTED HEA. Signed

05/19/2016 05/23/2016
05/24/2016 05/25/2016 05/25/2016
05/25/2016 05/25/2016 05/26/2016 05/30/2016

by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 5/18/16. (CLA) (Entered: 05/18/2016)
190 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to Defendants City of Ferguson, Thomas Jackson, Justin Cosma, Matt Delia, Brandon McKinnon, and Ryan Devouton's Joint Motion for Summary Judgment and Motion to Exclude Expert by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 05/19/2016)
191 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 190 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to Defendants City of Ferguson, Thomas Jackson, Justin Cosma, Matt Delia, Brandon McKinnon, and Ryan Devouton's Joint Motion for Summary Judgment and Motion to Exclude Expert by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) filed by Kia Bowers, W. D., Tracey White, Damon Coleman, Kerry White, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Antawn Harris, William Davis ; ORDERED GRANTED HEA. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 5/23/16. (CLA) (Entered: 05/23/2016)
192 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 154 Memorandum in Support of Motion, 153 MOTION for Daubert Hearing by Plaintiff Tracey White. (Shabazz, Malik) (Entered: 05/24/2016)
193 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 192 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 154 Memorandum in Support of Motion, 153 MOTION for Daubert Hearing by Plaintiff Tracey White. (Shabazz, Malik) filed by Tracey White ; ORDERED GRANTED HEA. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 5/25/16. (CLA) (Entered: 05/25/2016)
194 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 143 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by City of Ferguson, et al. filed by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1− Green Deposition Excerpts, # 2 Exhibit 2 − D Coleman Deposition Excerpts, # 3 Exhibit 3 − Frenc Deposition Excerpts, # 4 Exhibit 4 − Pusins Deposition Excerpts, # 5 Exhibit 5 − Belmar Deposition Excerpts, # 6 Exhibit 6 − Delia Deposition Excerpts, # 7 Exhibit 7 − Devouton Deposition Excerpts, # 8 Exhibit 8 − McKinnon Deposition Excerpts, # 9 Exhibit 9 − Thomas Jackson Deposition Excerpts, # 10 Exhibit 10− DOJ After−Action Assessment Report)(Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 05/25/2016)
195 RESPONSE to Statement of Material Facts re 145 Statement of Material Facts,, filed by City of Ferguson, et al. filed by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 05/25/2016)
196 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 146 MOTION to Exclude Expert Testimony Pursuant to Daubert filed by City of Ferguson, et al. filed by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Pusins' Report, # 2 Exhibit Pusins Deposition Excerpts)(Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 05/25/2016)
197 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 153 MOTION for Daubert Hearing by St. Louis County Defendants filed by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1−Pusins' Report, # 2 Exhibit 2 − Pusins' Deposition Excerpts)(Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 05/26/2016)
198 MOTION to Strike 143 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Ferguson Defendants' Exhibits D and S by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 05/30/2016)

05/31/2016 06/01/2016 06/01/2016 06/01/2016 06/02/2016 06/02/2016 06/02/2016 06/02/2016 06/06/2016 06/20/2016
06/21/2016 06/28/2016

199 REPLY to Response to Motion re 143 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon, David Ryan. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit W)(Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 05/31/2016)
200 MOTION for Leave to File Exhibits Out of Time by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon, David Ryan. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A (to Motion to Exclude), # 2 Exhibit B (to Motion to Exclude))(Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 06/01/2016)
201 REPLY to Response to Motion re 146 MOTION to Exclude Expert Testimony Pursuant to Daubert filed by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon, David Ryan. (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 06/01/2016)
202 RESPONSE to Motion re 198 MOTION to Strike 143 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Ferguson Defendants' Exhibits D and S filed by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon, David Ryan. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 06/01/2016)
203 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 200 MOTION for Leave to Exhibits Out of Time filed by Officer McKinnon, Matt Delia, Justin Cosmo, Officer Devouton, David Ryan, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson; GRANTED − SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 6/2/16. (KJS) (Entered: 06/02/2016)
204 EXHIBITS Received: A and B Re: 146 Motion to Exclude by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon. (KJS) (Entered: 06/02/2016)
205 REPLY to Response to Motion re 153 MOTION for Daubert Hearing filed by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 06/02/2016)
206 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 06/02/2016)
207 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 206 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply filed by Kia Bowers, W. D., Tracey White, Damon Coleman, Kerry White, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Antawn Harris, William Davis; GRANTED − SO ORDERED ( Response to Court due by 6/21/2016.) Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 6/6/16. (KJS) (Entered: 06/06/2016)
208 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 184 Supplemental, 174 Supplemental, 168 Supplemental, 183 Supplemental, 161 Statement of Material Facts, 178 Supplemental, 187 Supplemental, 180 Supplemental, 171 Supplemental, 173 Supplemental, 182 Supplemental, 175 Supplemental, 159 Memorandum in Support of Motion, 170 Supplemental, 166 Supplemental, 167 Supplemental, 186 Supplemental, 164 Supplemental, 169 Supplemental, 179 Supplemental, 188 Supplemental, 181 Supplemental, 177 Supplemental, 172 Supplemental, 185 Supplemental, 165 Supplemental, 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment , 176 Supplemental, by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 06/20/2016)
209 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 208 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply; GRANTED − SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 6/21/16. (KJS) (Entered: 06/22/2016)
210 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment by St. Louis Defendants filed by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton

06/28/2016 07/01/2016 07/05/2016
07/11/2016 07/12/2016 07/19/2016 07/19/2016 07/19/2016

Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1−Eyer Deposition Excerpts, # 2 Exhibit 2− Tracey White Deposition Excerpts, # 3 Exhibit 3 − Davis Deposition Excerpts, # 4 Exhibit Ryan Deposition Excerpts, # 5 Exhibit 5 − McCoy Deposition Excerpts, # 6 Exhibit 6 − Delia Deposition Excerpts, # 7 Exhibit 7 − D. Jackson Deposition Excerpts, # 8 Exhibit 8 − Patterson Deposition Excerpts, # 9 Exhibit 9− − Bates Deposition Excerpts, # 10 Exhibit 10 − Vinson Deposition Excerpts, # 11 Exhibit 11 − S. Bowers Deposition Excerpts, # 12 Exhibit 12 − K. Bowers Deposition Excerpts, # 13 Exhibit Kerry White Deposition Excerpts, # 14 Exhibit 14 − harris Deposition Excerpts, # 15 Exhibit 15 − Menzenwerth Deposition Excerpts, # 16 Exhibit 16 − Burns Deposition Excerpts, # 17 Exhibit 17 − Shearer Deposition Excerpts, # 18 Exhibit 18 − McCann Deposition Excerpts, # 19 Exhibit 19 − Belmar Deposition Excerpts, # 20 Exhibit 20 − Pusins Expert Report, # 21 Exhibit Pusins Deposition Excerpts, # 22 Exhibit Davis' Interrogatory Answers, # 23 Exhibit 23 − Inmate Arrest & Charge Information, # 24 Exhibit 24 − Thomas Jackson Deposition Excerpts, # 25 Exhibit COPS After−Assessment Report Excerpts)(Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 06/28/2016)
211 RESPONSE to Statement of Material Facts re 161 Statement of Material Facts, by St. Louis Defendants filed by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 06/28/2016)
212 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 211 Response to Statement of Material Facts, 210 Memorandum in Opposition to Motion,,,,,, by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 07/01/2016)
213 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 212 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 211 Response to Statement of Material Facts, 210 Memorandum in Opposition to Motion,,,,,, by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) filed by Terrence McCoy, Nicholas Payne, Jon Belmar, Aaron Vinson, St. Louis County, Missouri, Michael McCann, Daniel Hill, Joe Patterson, Antonio Valentine, Derik Jackson, David Ryan, William Bates ; ORDERED REQUEST FOR EXT. OF TIME IS GRANTED; HEA. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 7/5/16. (CLA) (Entered: 07/05/2016)
214 Amended MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 07/11/2016)
215 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 214 Amended MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply filed by Terrence McCoy, Nicholas Payne, Jon Belmar, Aaron Vinson, St. Louis County, Missouri, Michael McCann, Daniel Hill, Joe Patterson, Antonio Valentine, Derik Jackson, David Ryan, William Bates; GRANTED − SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 7/12/2016. (Response to Court due by 7/19/2016.) (GGB) (Entered: 07/12/2016)
216 MOTION for Leave to File in Excess of Page Limitation for the Reply by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 07/19/2016)
217 REPLY to Response to Motion re 158 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit EE, # 2 Exhibit FF, # 3 Exhibit GG, # 4 Exhibit HH)(Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 07/19/2016)
218 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 216 MOTION for Leave to File in Excess of Page Limitation for the Reply filed by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered:

07/20/2016
09/12/2016 09/12/2016 09/12/2016 09/12/2016 09/12/2016 09/12/2016 09/12/2016 09/12/2016 09/12/2016 09/12/2016 09/12/2016 09/12/2016 09/12/2016

07/19/2016)
219 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 216 MOTION for Leave to File in Excess of Page Limitation for the Reply filed by Terrence McCoy, Nicholas Payne, Jon Belmar, Aaron Vinson, St. Louis County, Missouri, Michael McCann, Daniel Hill, Joe Patterson, Antonio Valentine, Derik Jackson, David Ryan, William Bates; LEAVE GRANTED − SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 7/20/2016. (GGB) (Entered: 07/21/2016)
220 WITNESS LIST by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon. (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 09/12/2016)
221 TRIAL BRIEF by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon. (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 09/12/2016)
222 Joint MOTION in Limine by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon. (Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 09/12/2016)
223 MOTION in Limine by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 09/12/2016)
224 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 223 MOTION in Limine filed by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 09/12/2016)
225 Exhibit List and witness list and deposition list by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 09/12/2016)
226 TRIAL BRIEF by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 09/12/2016)
227 MOTION for Leave to File in Excess of Page Limitation for Trial Brief by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 09/12/2016)
228 Supplemental MOTION in Limine to Join St. Louis County Motions in Limine by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon. (Plunkert, Robert) (Entered: 09/12/2016)
229 WITNESS LIST by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 09/12/2016)
230 TRIAL BRIEF by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 09/12/2016)
231 WITNESS LIST by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Kerry White, Tracey White as to Jury Trial. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 09/12/2016)
232 Exhibit List by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Kerry White, Tracey White as to Jury Trial. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 09/12/2016)

09/13/2016
09/13/2016 09/13/2016 09/13/2016 09/14/2016
09/19/2016 09/19/2016 09/19/2016 09/19/2016 09/19/2016 09/19/2016
09/19/2016

233 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 227 MOTION for Leave to File in Excess of Page Limitation for Trial Brief by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael); LEAVE GRANTED − SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 9/13/2016. (GGB) (Entered: 09/13/2016)
234 Proposed Jury Instructions by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 09/13/2016)
235 MOTION for Leave to File Amended Pretrial Exhibit List by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 09/13/2016)
236 Exhibit List First Amended by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 09/13/2016)
237 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 235 MOTION for Leave to File Amended Pretrial Exhibit List by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla); LEAVE GRANTED − SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 9/14/2016. (GGB) (Entered: 09/15/2016)
238 OBJECTION to Pretrial Compliance with Order of Court Relating to Trial by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit After−Action Assessment of the Police Response to the August 2014 Demonstrations in Ferguson, Missouri)(Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 09/19/2016)
239 Proposed Jury Instructions by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Jury Instructions)(Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 09/19/2016)
240 MOTION for Leave to Amend Witness List by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 09/19/2016)
241 WITNESS LIST by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 09/19/2016)
242 OBJECTION to Pretrial Submission of Plaintiffs by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 09/19/2016)
243 Proposed Jury Instructions by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, Tracey White, # 2 Exhibit B, William Davis, # 3 Exhibit C, Dwayne Matthes, # 4 Exhibit D, Kerry White, # 5 Exhibit E, Kai Bowers, # 6 Exhibit F, Sandy Bowers, # 7 Exhibit G, Nathan Burns)(Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 09/19/2016)
244 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 228 Supplemental MOTION in Limine to Join St. Louis County Motions in Limine, 223 MOTION in Limine by St. Louis County Defendants filed by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 09/19/2016)

09/20/2016 09/20/2016
09/20/2016 09/20/2016 09/20/2016 09/20/2016 09/21/2016 09/21/2016 09/21/2016

245 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to Defendants' Pretrial Submissions by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 09/20/2016)
246 OBJECTION to Pretrial re 225 Exhibit List, 236 Exhibit List, by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. Related document: 225 Exhibit List, filed by Terrence McCoy, Nicholas Payne, Jon Belmar, Aaron Vinson, St. Louis County, Missouri, Michael McCann, Daniel Hill, Joe Patterson, Antonio Valentine, Derik Jackson, David Ryan, William Bates, 236 Exhibit List, filed by Terrence McCoy, Nicholas Payne, Jon Belmar, Aaron Vinson, St. Louis County, Missouri, Michael McCann, Daniel Hill, Joe Patterson, Antonio Valentine, Derik Jackson, David Ryan, William Bates.(Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 09/20/2016)
247 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 240 MOTION for Leave to Amend Witness List by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla); LEAVE GRANTED − SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 9/20/2016. (GGB) (Entered: 09/20/2016)
248 OBJECTION to Pretrial re 220 Witness List (Pretrial Submission filed by Ferguson Defendants) by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. Related document: 220 Witness List filed by Officer McKinnon, Matt Delia, Justin Cosmo, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson.(Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 09/20/2016)
249 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 222 Joint MOTION in Limine by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 09/20/2016)
250 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 222 Joint MOTION in Limine filed by Ferguson Defendants filed by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 09/20/2016)
251 ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the trial in this matter set for Monday, September 26, 2016, is vacated. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the trial in this matter is reset to Monday, December 5, 2016, in the courtroom of the undersigned. Jury Trial set for 12/5/2016 09:30 AM before District Judge Henry Edward Autrey. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 9/21/16. (CLA) (Entered: 09/21/2016)
252 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 222 Joint MOTION in Limine , 228 Supplemental MOTION in Limine to Join St. Louis County Motions in Limine filed by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Robert Pusins Dep. 232:6−233:21)(Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 09/21/2016)
253 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 249 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 222 Joint MOTION in Limine filed by Kia Bowers, W. D., Tracey White, Damon Coleman, Kerry White, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Antawn Harris, William Davis; LEAVE GRANTED − SO ORDERED. 245 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply to Defendants' Pretrial Submissions filed by Kia Bowers, W. D., Tracey White, Damon Coleman, Kerry White, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Antawn Harris, William Davis; LEAVE GRANTED − SO ORDERED.. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 9/21/16. (KJS) (Entered: 09/21/2016)

09/27/2016 09/30/2016
09/30/2016 10/03/2016 10/04/2016
10/12/2016 10/12/2016 10/21/2016
10/21/2016 11/07/2016 11/07/2016 11/07/2016

254 REPLY to Response to Motion re 223 MOTION in Limine filed by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 09/27/2016)
255 OPINION MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the City of Ferguson, Thomas Jackson, Justin Cosma, Matt Delia, Brandon McKinnon, and Ryan Devoutons Motion for Summary Judgment, [Doc. No. 143], is GRANTED.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that John Belmar, David Ryan, Terrence McCoy, Michael McCann, Derik Jackson, Joe Patterson, Aaron Vinson, William Bates, Nicholas Payne, Daniel Hill, Antonio Valentine and St. Louis County, Missouris Motion for Summary Judgment, [Doc. No. 158], is GRANTED. A separate judgment in accordance with this Opinion, Memorandum and Order is entered this same date. 143 158 Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 9/30/16. (CLA) (Entered: 10/03/2016)
256 JUDGMENT IT IS HEREBY ORDERED ADJUDGED AND DECREED thatjudgment is entered in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiffs. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 9/30/16. (CLA) (Entered: 10/03/2016)
257 NOTICE OF APPEAL as to 256 Judgment − (Case), 255 Memorandum & Order,, by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. Filing fee $ 505, receipt number 0865−5612761. (Entered: 10/03/2016)
258 NOTIFICATION OF APPEAL AND NOA SUPPLEMENT by clerk to USCA regarding 256 Judgment − (Case), 255 Memorandum & Order,,. Notice of Appeal filed on 10/03/2016 by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., W. D., Kerry White, Tracey White. NOTIFICATION TO COUNSEL AND PRO SE PARTY: FILE REQUEST FOR TRANSCRIPT WITH DISTRICT COURT CLERKS OFFICE.(MFG) (Entered: 10/04/2016)
259 Initial Notification from USCA for 257 Notice of Appeal, filed by Kia Bowers, W. D., Tracey White, Damon Coleman, Kerry White, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Antawn Harris, William Davis USCA Appeal Number: 16−3897 Notice of Appeal forwarded to panel: Yes(GGB) (Entered: 10/12/2016)
260 Briefing Schedule from USCA for 257 Notice of Appeal, filed by Kia Bowers, W. D., Tracey White, Damon Coleman, Kerry White, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Antawn Harris, William Davis USCA Appeal Number: 16−3897 Method of Appendix due: 10/26/2016 Notice of Appeal forwarded to panel: Yes(GGB) (Entered: 10/12/2016)
261 MOTION for Bill of Costs by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, Subpoena costs, # 2 Exhibit B, Court Reporter Costs, # 3 Exhibit C, Copy costs medical records, # 4 Exhibit D, Other costs)(Hughes, Michael) Modified on 11/9/2016 (GGB). (Entered: 10/21/2016)
262 MOTION for Bill of Costs by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit A)(Dunne, Peter) Modified on 11/9/2016 (GGB). (Entered: 10/21/2016)
263 Bill of Costs Taxed in amount of $8,032.27 against Plaintiffs 262 . (GGB) (Entered: 11/07/2016)
264 Bill of Costs Taxed in amount of $13,249.78 against Plaintiffs 261 (GGB) (Entered: 11/07/2016)
265 NOTICE by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Kerry White, Tracey White of Filing Plaintiffs' Objection to St. Louis County defendants' Bill of Costs (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 11/07/2016)

11/07/2016 11/08/2016
11/09/2016 11/10/2016 11/18/2016 12/14/2016 06/28/2017
06/28/2017 06/30/2017 07/05/2017 07/07/2017 07/10/2017 07/10/2017

266 NOTICE by Plaintiffs Kia Bowers, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Damon Coleman, William Davis, Theophilus Green, Antawn Harris, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Kerry White, Tracey White of Filing Plaintiffs' Objection to Ferguson defendants' Bill of Costs (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 11/07/2016)
267 NOTICE by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Matt Delia, Officer Devouton, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson, Officer McKinnon re 266 Notice (Other), Defendants City of Ferguson, Thomas Jackson, Justin Cosma, Matt Delia, Brandon McKinnon, and Ryan DeVouton's Reply Memorandum to Plaintiffs' Objections to Defendants Bill of Costs (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Ex A.)(Dunne, Peter) (Entered: 11/08/2016)
268 Docket Text ORDER: 263 Bill of Costs Taxed in amount of $8,032.27 against Plaintiffs and 264 Bill of Costs Taxed in amount of $13,249.78 against Plaintiffs are hereby VACATED as erroneously entered by the Court. SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 11/9/2016. (GGB) (Entered: 11/09/2016)
269 REPLY to Response to Motion re 261 MOTION for Bill of Costs filed by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael E.) Modified on 11/14/2016 (GGB). (Entered: 11/10/2016)
270 ENTRY of Appearance by Ronald A. Norwood for Defendant Ferguson, Missouri, City of. (Norwood, Ronald) (Entered: 11/18/2016)
271 ENTRY of Appearance by Aarnarian (Apollo) D. Carey for Defendant Ferguson, Missouri, City of. (Carey, Aarnarian (Apollo)) (Entered: 12/14/2016)
272 OPINION MEMORANDUM AND ORDER − IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that St. Louis County and the Individual St. Louis County Defendants Bill of Costs, [Doc. No. 261 ] is approved in the amount of $10,169.30. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the City of Ferguson, Thomas Jackson and Officer Justin Cosmas Bill of Costs, [Doc. 262 ], is approved in the amount of $6,782.27. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall tax costs in favor of Defendants St. Louis County and the Individual County Defendants and against Plaintiffs in the amount of $10,169.30. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall tax costs in favor of the City of Ferguson, Thomas Jackson and Officer Justin Cosma and against Plaintiffs in the amount of $6,782.27. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 6/28/17. (KJS) (Entered: 06/28/2017)
***REMARK − Sent parties an email requesting a copy of an amended AO 133 Bill of Costs Form. (KJS) (Entered: 06/28/2017)
273 Amended MOTION for Bill of Costs by Defendants Justin Cosmo, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson. (Plunkert, Robert) (Entered: 06/30/2017)
274 Bill of Costs Taxed in amount of $ 6,782.27 against pltffs. 273 Amended MOTION for Bill of Costs filed by Justin Cosmo, Ferguson, Missouri, City of, Thomas Jackson. (CLA) (Entered: 07/05/2017)
275 Second MOTION for Bill of Costs by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit Exhibit C)(Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 07/07/2017)
276 Third MOTION for Costs by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Daniel Hill, Derik Jackson, Michael McCann, Terrence McCoy, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, David Ryan, St. Louis County, Missouri, Antonio Valentine, Aaron Vinson. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit Exhibit C)(Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 07/10/2017)
277 Bill of Costs Taxed in amount of $10,169.30 against Plaintiffs 276 Amended MOTION for Bill of Costs filed by Terrence McCoy, Nicholas Payne, Jon Belmar, Aaron Vinson, St. Louis County, Missouri, Michael McCann, Daniel Hill, Joe Patterson, Antonio Valentine, Derik Jackson, David Ryan, William Bates (KJS) (Entered: 07/10/2017)

08/01/2017 08/01/2017
08/02/2017
08/09/2017 08/18/2017 09/06/2017 09/11/2017 09/27/2017 10/25/2017 06/13/2018 06/14/2018 08/09/2018
08/16/2018

278 OPINION from USCA re 257 Notice of Appeal, : For these reasons we affirm in part and reverse and remand in part, as describedabove. (CLA) (Entered: 08/01/2017)
279 USCA JUDGMENT as to 257 Notice of Appeal, filed by Kia Bowers, W. D., Tracey White, Damon Coleman, Kerry White, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Antawn Harris, William Davis After consideration, it is hereby ordered and adjudged that the judgment of the districtcourt in this cause is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded to the district court forproceedings consistent with the opinion of this court.(CLA) (Entered: 08/01/2017)
280 ORDER − In light of the remand from the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals as to Plaintiff Matthews case, this matter is set for a telephonic status conference on August 9, 2017 at 11:45 a.m. The Court will initiate the telephone conference. Prior to the conference, the parties shall notify the Court of a telephone number at which they can be contacted. The parties are ordered to meet and confer in advance of the status conference in order to inform the Court of the status of the case and to discuss the logistics of the matter henceforth. (Telephone Status Conference set for 8/9/2017 11:45 AM before District Judge Henry Edward Autrey.) Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 8/2/17. (KJS) (Entered: 08/02/2017)
281 Minute Entry for proceedings held before District Judge Henry Edward Autrey: TelephonicStatus Conference held on 8/9/2017. (Court Reporter:G. Madden) (KJS) (Entered: 08/09/2017)
282 ORDER of USCA USCA Appeal #: 16−3897 The motion for clarification filed by Mr. Peter J. Dunne for appellees is granted.The court has affirmed the district courts grant of summary judgment in favor of the Fergusondefendants with respect to all claims.(CLA) (Entered: 08/18/2017)
283 ORDER of USCA as to 257 Notice of Appeal, filed by Kia Bowers, W. D., Tracey White, Damon Coleman, Kerry White, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Antawn Harris, William Davis: Appellants shall recover from the appellees the sum of $300.00 (Three hundred dollars and zero cents.) as taxable costs on appeal. USCA Appeal #: 16−3897. (JAB) (Entered: 09/06/2017)
284 ORDER of USCA as to 257 Notice of Appeal, filed by Kia Bowers, W. D., Tracey White, Damon Coleman, Kerry White, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Antawn Harris, William Davis USCA Appeal #: 16−3897. The petition for rehearing en banc is denied. The petition for rehearing by the panel is also denied. (CLO) (Entered: 09/11/2017)
285 MANDATE of USCA as to 257 Notice of Appeal, filed by Kia Bowers, W. D., Tracey White, Damon Coleman, Kerry White, Sandy Bowers, Nathan Burns, Theophilus Green, Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr., Antawn Harris, William Davis USCA #:16−3897 (CLA) (Entered: 09/27/2017)
286 MOTION for Bill of Costs for Notice of Appeal Filing Fee by Plaintiff Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr.. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 10/25/2017)
***REMARK − 286 MOTION for Bill of Costs for Notice of Appeal Filing Fee was forwarded to the Clerk of Court/Chief Deputy for ruling. (KJS) (Entered: 06/13/2018)
287 Bill of Costs Taxed in amount of $505.00 against St. Louis County, MO 286 MOTION for Bill of Costs for Notice of Appeal Filing Fee filed by Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr. (KJS) (Entered: 06/14/2018)
288 ORDER − IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is set for a JURY trial on October 29, 2018, at 09:30 AM. This is a 1−week docket. A pretrial conference will be held on October 24, 2018, at 11:30 a.m. in the courtroom of the undersigned. (See Order For More Details) (Jury Trial set for 10/29/2018 09:30 AM in Courtroom 10N before District Judge Henry Edward Autrey. Pretrial Conference set for 10/24/2018 11:30 AM in Courtroom 10N before District Judge Henry Edward Autrey.). Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 08/09/2018. (AAS) (Entered: 08/09/2018)
289 MOTION to Continue Motion for New Trial Date by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 08/16/2018)

08/17/2018 08/21/2018
09/04/2018 09/04/2018 09/04/2018 09/04/2018 09/04/2018 09/11/2018 09/12/2018 09/24/2018 09/25/2018
09/25/2018

290 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 289 MOTION to Continue Motion for New Trial Date by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) filed by Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, Jon Belmar, Aaron Vinson, St. Louis County, Missouri, William Bates ; GRANTED. ORDER RESETTING TRIAL DATE TO ISSUE.. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 08/17/2018. (AAS) (Entered: 08/17/2018)
291 ORDER − IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is set for a JURY trial on February 4, 2019, at 09:30 AM. This is a 1−week docket. A pretrial conference will be held on January 30, 2019, at 11:30 a.m. in the courtroom of the undersigned. Pursuant to Local Rule 8.04 the court may tax against one or all parties the per diem, mileage, and other expenses of providing a jury for the parties, when the case is terminated or settled by the parties at a time too late to cancel the jury attendance or to use the summoned jurors in another trial, unless good cause for the delayed termination or settlement is shown. In this case, unless otherwise ordered by the Court, the attorneys shall, not less than fourteen (14) days prior to the date set for trial: (See order for full details.) Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 8/21/18. (KJS) (Entered: 08/21/2018)
292 MOTION for Summary Judgment by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 09/04/2018)
293 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 292 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 09/04/2018)
294 STATEMENT of Material Facts re 292 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit Jon Belmar, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B)(Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 09/04/2018)
295 MOTION TO EXCLUDE PLAINTIFFS EXPERT; MOTION for Daubert Hearing by Defendants Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla). (**Added MOTION to Exclude on 10/15/2018**) (KJS). (Entered: 09/04/2018)
296 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 295 MOTION for Daubert Hearing filed by Defendants Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Affidavit Jon Belmar)(Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 09/04/2018)
297 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 295 MOTION for Daubert Hearing by Plaintiff Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr.. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 09/11/2018)
298 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 297 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 295 MOTION for Daubert Hearing filed by Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr. ; ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRANTED UP TO AND INCLUDING SEPTEMBER 25,2018 − SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 9/12/18. (KJS) (Entered: 09/12/2018)
299 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 293 Memorandum in Support of Motion, 292 MOTION for Summary Judgment , 294 Statement of Material Facts, by Plaintiff Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr.. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 09/24/2018)
300 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 299 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 293 Memorandum in Support of Motion, 292 MOTION for Summary Judgment , 294 Statement of Material Facts, by Plaintiff Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr.. (Lattimer, Gregory) filed by Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr.; ADDITIONAL TIME IS GRANTED TO FILE ANSWER UP TO AN INCLUDING OCTOBER 25, 2018; HEA. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 9/25/18. (CLA) (Entered: 09/25/2018)
301 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 295 MOTION for Daubert Hearing filed by Plaintiff Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr.. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 09/25/2018)

10/02/2018 10/02/2018 10/03/2018
10/04/2018 10/09/2018 10/10/2018
10/11/2018 10/15/2018 10/25/2018 10/31/2018
11/08/2018 11/13/2018

302 ORDER − IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a Daubert hearing is set in this matter for Wednesday, October 10, 2018, at 10:00 a.m. in the courtroom of the undersigned. (Daubert Hearing set for 10/10/2018 10:00 AM before District Judge Henry Edward Autrey.) Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 10/2/18. (KJS) (Entered: 10/02/2018)
303 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 301 Memorandum in Opposition to Motion by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 10/02/2018)
304 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 303 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to 301 Memorandum in Opposition to Motion filed by Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, Jon Belmar, Aaron Vinson, St. Louis County, Missouri, William Bates ; GRANTED. ADDITIONAL TIME GRANTED UP TO AND INCLUDING OCTOBER 15, 2018. HEARING SET FOR OCTOBER 10 IS VACATED. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 10/3/18. (KJS) (Entered: 10/03/2018)
305 ORDER − IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a Daubert hearing is set in this matter for Wednesday, October 17, 2018, at 10:00 a.m. in the courtroom of the undersigned. (Daubert Hearing set for 10/17/2018 10:00 AM before District Judge Henry Edward Autrey.) Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 10/4/18. (KJS) (Entered: 10/04/2018)
306 MOTION for Hearing re 305 Order, To Change Hearing Date or Time by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 10/09/2018)
307 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 306 MOTION for Hearing re 305 Order, To Change Hearing Date or Time by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) filed by Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, Jon Belmar, Aaron Vinson, St. Louis County, Missouri, William Bates ; GRANTED. A SEPARATE ORDER WILL FOLLOW WITH DATE AND TIME FOR HEARING.. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 10/10/2018. (AAS) (Entered: 10/10/2018)
308 ORDER − IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that a Daubert hearing is set in this matter for Wednesday, October 31, 2018, at 10:30 a.m. in the courtroom of the undersigned. ( Daubert Hearing set for 10/31/2018 10:30 AM before District Judge Henry Edward Autrey.) Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 10/11/18. (KJS) (Entered: 10/11/2018)
309 REPLY to Response to Motion re 295 MOTION for Daubert Hearing filed by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit F COPS Report)(Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 10/15/2018)
310 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 292 MOTION for Summary Judgment from Belmar, St Louis County filed by Plaintiff Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr.. (Attachments: # 1 Attachment statement of material facts, # 2 Exhibit exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit exhibit 2, # 4 Exhibit exhibit 3, # 5 Exhibit exhibit 4)(Shabazz, Malik) (Entered: 10/25/2018)
311 Minute Entry for proceedings held before District Judge Henry Edward Autrey: Daubert Hearing held on 10/31/2018. It is hereby ordered that Motion to Exclude Plaintiffs Expert Motion for Daubert Hearing 295 is taken under submission. Oral motion from defense counsel for an extension of time (7 days) to file their reply to plaintiff response to motion for summary judgment 292 .; GRANTED. (Court Reporter:Susan Moran, Susan_Moran@moed.uscourts.gov, 314−244−7983) (AAS) (Entered: 10/31/2018)
312 REPLY to Response to Motion re 292 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Jon Belmar, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 11/08/2018)
313 OPINION MEMORANDUM AND ORDER − IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants motion to exclude or limit the testimony of Mr. Robert Pusins [Doc. No. 295 ] is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The motion is GRANTED to the

01/21/2019 01/21/2019 01/21/2019 01/21/2019 01/21/2019 01/21/2019 01/21/2019 01/21/2019 01/21/2019 01/21/2019 01/21/2019 01/21/2019 01/21/2019 01/22/2019
01/22/2019 01/25/2019

extent that Mr. Pusins will not be permitted to testify regarding: (1) whether there was probable cause to arrest Plaintiff Matthews or (2) opinions based solely on the conduct of police agencies other than St. Louis County Police Department. The motion is DENIED in all other respects. Specifically, Mr. Pusins will be permitted to testify regarding his opinions specific to the conduct of St. Louis County Police Department, including the documentation and review of arrests and the use of force. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 11/13/18. (KJS) (Entered: 11/14/2018)
314 Stipulation of Uncontested Facts by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 01/21/2019)
315 WITNESS LIST by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 01/21/2019)
316 Exhibit List by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 01/21/2019)
317 Deposition Designations by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson.. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 01/21/2019)
318 Proposed Jury Instructions by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 01/21/2019)
319 TRIAL BRIEF by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 01/21/2019)
320 MOTION in Limine by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 01/21/2019)
321 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 320 MOTION in Limine filed by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 01/21/2019)
322 MOTION to Bifurcate Trial by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 01/21/2019)
323 MEMORANDUM in Support of Motion re 322 MOTION to Bifurcate Trial filed by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (Hughes, Michael) (Entered: 01/21/2019)
324 WITNESS LIST by Plaintiff Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr. as to Jury Trial. (Lattimer, Gregory) Modified on 1/22/2019 (KJS). (Entered: 01/21/2019)
325 Exhibit List by Plaintiff Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr. as to Jury Trial. (Lattimer, Gregory) Modified on 1/22/2019 (KJS). (Entered: 01/21/2019)
326 Proposed Voir Dire by Plaintiff Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr.. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 01/21/2019)
327 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 320 MOTION in Limine filed by Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, Jon Belmar, Aaron Vinson, St. Louis County, Missouri, William Bates; PLAINTIFF IS HEREBY ORDERED TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT'S MOTOIN IN LIMINE BY JANUARY 28, 2019. 322 MOTION to Bifurcate Trial filed by Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, Jon Belmar, Aaron Vinson, St. Louis County, Missouri, William Bates; PLAINTIFF IS HEREBY ORDERED TO RESPOND TO MOTION TO BIFURCATE TRIAL BY JANUARY 25, 2019. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 1/22/19. (KJS) (Entered: 01/22/2019)
328 TRIAL BRIEF by Plaintiff Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr.. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 01/22/2019)
329 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 322 MOTION to Bifurcate Trial filed by Plaintiff Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr.. (Greene, Reginald) (Entered: 01/25/2019)

01/28/2019 01/28/2019 01/29/2019 01/29/2019 01/30/2019
01/31/2019 02/04/2019
02/05/2019
02/06/2019 02/06/2019 02/06/2019

330 OBJECTION to Pretrial Submissions of Defendants by Plaintiff Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr.. (Attachments: # 1 Form Plaintiff's Proposed Verdict Form)(Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 01/28/2019)
331 MEMORANDUM in Opposition re 320 MOTION in Limine filed by Plaintiff Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr.. (Lattimer, Gregory) (Entered: 01/28/2019)
332 REPLY to Response to Motion re 322 MOTION to Bifurcate Trial filed by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 01/29/2019)
333 OBJECTION to Pretrial re 330 Objection to Pretrial by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. Related document: 330 Objection to Pretrial filed by Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr..(Gunn, Priscilla) (Entered: 01/29/2019)
334 ELECTRONIC MINUTE ENTRY (no pdf attached) for proceedings held before District Judge Henry Edward Autrey: Final Pretrial Conference held on 1/30/2019. Discussion held and arguments hear re: 292 Motion for Summary Judgment by Defendants, 320 Motion in Limine by Defendants, 322 Motion to Bifurcate Trial by Defendants. Motion 292 is DENIED. Motion 320 is ruled per the record. Motion 322 is overruled and DENIED as to Motion to Bifurcate and Punitive Damages. (Court Reporter:Susan Moran, Susan_Moran@moed.uscourts.gov, 314−244−7983) (proceedings started: 11:35 am) (proceedings ended: 12:28 pm)(Deputy Clerk: Chelsea Olliges)(Appearance for Plaintiff: Gregory L. Lattimer, Malik Z. Shabazz, Reginald A. Greene (all by phone))(Appearance for Defendant: Michael E. Hughes, Priscilla F. Gunn) (CLO) (Entered: 01/30/2019)
335 OPINION MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion for Summary Judgment, [Doc. No. 292], is DENIED. 292 Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 1/31/19. (CLA) (Entered: 01/31/2019)
336 ELECTRONIC MINUTE ENTRY (no pdf attached) for proceedings held before District Judge Henry Edward Autrey: Jury Trial held on 2/4/2019 ; day 1. Jury voir dire commenced but not concluded. Proceedings to continue on 2/5/19 at 9:30 am. (Court Reporter:Angela Daley, Angela_Daley@moed.uscourts.gov, 314−244−7978) (proceedings started: 10:15 am − 11:50 am) (proceedings ended: 12:50 pm − 2:15 pm)(Deputy Clerk: K. Shirley)(Appearance for Plaintiff: Malik Shabazz/Gregory Lattimer/Reginald Greene)(Appearance for Defendant: Michael Hughes/Priscilla Gunn) (KJS) (Entered: 02/05/2019)
337 ELECTRONIC MINUTE ENTRY (no pdf attached) for proceedings held before District Judge Henry Edward Autrey: Jury Trial resumed but not concluded 2/5/2019 ; day 2. Plaintiff evidence commenced but not concluded. Proceedings to continue on 2/6/19 at 9:30 am. (Court Reporter:Angela Daley, Angela_Daley@moed.uscourts.gov, 314−244−7978) (proceedings started: 9:15 am − 12:00 am) (proceedings ended: 1:30 pm − 5:30 pm)(Deputy Clerk: K. Shirley)(Appearance for Plaintiff: Malik Shabazz/Gregory Lattimer/Reginald Greene)(Appearance for Defendant: Michael Hughes/Priscilla Gunn) (KJS) (Entered: 02/05/2019)
338 MOTION for Judgment as a Matter of Law at the close of plaintiff's case by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (KJS) (Entered: 02/06/2019)
339 Docket Text ORDER: Re: 338 MOTION for Judgment as a Matter of Law at the close of plaintiff's case by Defendants William Bates, Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson. (KJS) filed by Joe Patterson, Nicholas Payne, Jon Belmar, Aaron Vinson, St. Louis County, Missouri, William Bates ; OVERRULED. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 2/6/19. (KJS) (Entered: 02/06/2019)
340 ELECTRONIC MINUTE ENTRY (no pdf attached) for proceedings held before District Judge Henry Edward Autrey: Jury Trial resumed but not concluded 2/6/2019 ; day 3. Plaintiff evidence resumed and concluded. Defense evidence commenced but not concluded. Motion for judgment of as a matter of law made at at close of plaintiffs case. Motion is overruled. Proceedings to continue on 2/7/19 AT 9:30AM. (Court Reporter:Susan Moran, Susan_Moran@moed.uscourts.gov, 314−244−7983) (proceedings started: 9:30 AM − 12:00 PM) (proceedings ended: 1:00 PM − 5:30

02/07/2019
02/07/2019 02/07/2019 02/08/2019
02/08/2019 02/08/2019 02/08/2019 02/08/2019 02/12/2019 03/25/2019
03/25/2019
03/25/2019

PM)(Deputy Clerk: K. Shirley)(Appearance for Plaintiff: Malik Shabazz/Gregory Lattimer/Reginald Greene)(Appearance for Defendant: Michael Hughes/Priscilla Gunn) (KJS) (Entered: 02/06/2019)
341 ELECTRONIC MINUTE ENTRY (no pdf attached) for proceedings held before District Judge Henry Edward Autrey: Jury Trial resumed but not concluded 2/7/2019 ; day 4. Defense evidence resumed and concluded. Motion for judgment of as a matter of law made at at close of defendants case. Motion is overruled. Proceedings to continue on 2/8/19 at 9:15 AM for jury instructions. Jury to report in at 10:30 a.m. (Court Reporter:Susan Moran, Susan_Moran@moed.uscourts.gov, 314−244−7983) (proceedings started: 9:30 AM − 12:40 PM) (proceedings ended: 1:30 PM − 5:00PM)(Deputy Clerk: K. Shirley)(Appearance for Plaintiff: Malik Shabazz/Gregory Lattimer/Reginald Greene)(Appearance for Defendant: Michael Hughes/Priscilla Gunn) (KJS) (Entered: 02/07/2019)
347 CLERKS WITNESS LIST as to Jury Trial. (KJS) (Entered: 02/11/2019)
348 CLERKS Exhibit List as to Jury Trial. (KJS) (Entered: 02/11/2019)
342 ELECTRONIC MINUTE ENTRY (no pdf attached) for proceedings held before District Judge Henry Edward Autrey: JURY VERDICT completed on 2/8/2019 ; day 5. Closing arguments made. Jury is charged and retires to consider its verdict at 1:15 pm. Verdict returned at 3:45 pm. Verdict returned in favor of defendants. Jury was not polled. (Court Reporter:Susan Moran, Susan_Moran@moed.uscourts.gov, 314−244−7983) (proceedings started: 11:45 am − 1:15 pm) (proceedings ended: 3:45 pm − 3:55 pm)(Deputy Clerk: K. Shirley)(Appearance for Plaintiff: Malik Shabazz/Gregory Lattimer/Reginald Greene)(Appearance for Defendant: Michael Hughes/Priscilla Gunn) (KJS) (Entered: 02/08/2019)
343 Jury Instructions filed. (KJS) (Entered: 02/08/2019)
344 Jury Note Filed. (KJS) (Entered: 02/08/2019)
345 JURY VERDICT − the Jury finds in favor of Defendants Jon Belmar, Joe Patterson, Aaron Vinson, William Bates, Nicholas Payne, and St. Louis County, Missouri and against Plaintiff Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr. (KJS) (Entered: 02/08/2019)
346 CLERK'S JUDGMENT in a Civil Case in favor of St. Louis County, Missouri, Aaron Vinson, Joe Patterson, Jon Belmar, Nicholas Payne, William Bates against Dwayne Anton Matthews, Jr. (KJS) (Entered: 02/08/2019)
349 ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the jury in this cause be kept together in the custody of the United States Marshal and the jury meals shall be furnished at the expense of the United States (to be paid through the USDC financial management system). Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 2/12/19. (KJS) (Entered: 02/12/2019)
350 TRANSCRIPT of 336 (JURY TRIAL) volume 1 held on 2/4/19 before Judge Autrey. Court Reporter/Transcriber Angela Daley, Angela_Daley@moed.uscourts.gov, 314−244−7978. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Redaction Request due 4/15/2019. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 4/25/2019. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 6/24/2019. (CLA) (Entered: 03/25/2019)
351 TRANSCRIPT of 337 (JURY TRIAL) volume 2 held on 2/5/19 before Judge Autrey. Court Reporter/Transcriber Angela Daley, Angela_Daley@moed.uscourts.gov, 314−244−7978. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Redaction Request due 4/15/2019. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 4/25/2019. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 6/24/2019. (CLA) (Entered: 03/25/2019)
352 TRANSCRIPT of 340 (JURY TRIAL) held on 2/6/19 before Judge Autrey. Court Reporter/Transcriber Susan Moran, Susan_Moran@moed.uscourts.gov, 314−244−7983. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Redaction Request due

03/25/2019 03/25/2019

4/15/2019. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 4/25/2019. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 6/24/2019. (CLA) (Entered: 03/25/2019)
353 TRANSCRIPT of 341 (JURY TRIAL) held on 2/7/19 before Judge Autey. Court Reporter/Transcriber Susan Moran, Susan_Moran@moed.uscourts.gov, 314−244−7983. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Redaction Request due 4/15/2019. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 4/25/2019. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 6/24/2019. (CLA) (Entered: 03/25/2019)
354 TRANSCRIPT of 342 (JURY TRIAL) held on 2/8/19 before Judge Autey. Court Reporter/Transcriber Susan Moran, Susan_Moran@moed.uscourts.gov, 314−244−7983. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Transcriber before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Redaction Request due 4/15/2019. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 4/25/2019. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 6/24/2019. (CLA) (Entered: 03/25/2019)