4months,CLOSED
U.S. District Court Northern District of Georgia (Atlanta) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:11−cv−03398−SCJ

Anderson v. City of Atlanta et al Assigned to: Judge Steve C. Jones Cause: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff Felicia Anderson

Date Filed: 10/06/2011 Date Terminated: 03/22/2012 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 440 Civil Rights: Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question
represented by Albert Wan Law Office of Albert Wan, P.C. Suite 110 215 Church Street Decatur, GA 30030 404−872−7760 Email: albert@albertwanlaw.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Daniel J. Grossman Daniel J. Grossman, Attorney at Law Suite 138 1579−F Monroe Drive Atlanta, GA 30324 404−664−5187 Email: dan@dangrossmanlaw.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Gerald R. Weber Law Offices of Gerry Weber P.O. Box 5391 Atlanta, GA 31107 404−522−0507 Email: wgerryweber@gmail.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant City of Atlanta

represented by Robert N. Godfrey City of Atlanta, Department of Law Suite 5000 55 Trinity Avenue Atlanta, GA 30303 404−546−4137 Fax: 404−494−1685 Email: rgodfrey@atlantaga.gov LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Alisha Irene Wyatt−Bullman City of Atlanta Law Department Suite 5000 55 Trinity Avenue, S.W. Atlanta, GA 30303−3520 404−546−4100 Email: aiwyattbullman@atlantaga.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
LaShawn W. Terry

Defendant
Officer Jeffrey A. Branum in his individual capacity

City of Atlanta, Department of Law 55 Trinity Avenue SW Atlanta, GA 30303 404−546−4178 Fax: 404−546−9535 Email: lterry@atlantaga.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Robin Joy Shahar City of Atlanta Law Department Suite 5000 55 Trinity Avenue, S.W. Atlanta, GA 30303−3520 404−546−4171 Email: rshahar@AtlantaGA.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Tamara Nikki Baines City of Atlanta, Department of Law 55 Trinity Avenue SW Atlanta, GA 30303 404−546−4115 Fax: 404−546−8366 Email: tbaines@atlantaga.gov ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Veronica L. Hoffler Veronica L. Hoffler, Attorney at Law 5617 Strathmoor Manor Circle Lithonia, GA 30058 404−226−1484 Fax: 404−739−3340. Email: vlhoffler523@bellsouth.net ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Robert N. Godfrey (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Alisha Irene Wyatt−Bullman (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
LaShawn W. Terry (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Robin Joy Shahar (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Tamara Nikki Baines (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 10/06/2011

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT with Jury Demand filed by Felicia Anderson. Consent form to proceed before U.S. Magistrate and pretrial instructions provided. ( Filing fee $ 350.00 receipt number 113E−3551583.) (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet)(eop) Please visit our website at http://www.gand.uscourts.gov to obtain Pretrial Instructions. (Entered:

10/06/2011 10/10/2011 10/14/2011
10/18/2011 10/19/2011 10/27/2011 10/31/2011 10/31/2011
11/29/2011 12/01/2011 12/02/2011 12/06/2011
12/20/2011 12/21/2011
01/24/2012 01/26/2012 01/26/2012

10/06/2011)
2 Summons Issued as to City of Atlanta. (aaq) (Entered: 10/07/2011)
3 Return of Service Executed by Felicia Anderson. City of Atlanta served on 10/6/2011, answer due 10/27/2011. (Weber, Gerald) (Entered: 10/10/2011)
4 City Defendants' Affirmative Defenses and ANSWER to 1 COMPLAINT Plaintiff's Verified Complaint by Jeffrey A. Branum, City of Atlanta. Discovery ends on 3/12/2012.(Baines, Tamara) Please visit our website at http://www.gand.uscourts.gov to obtain Pretrial Instructions. (Entered: 10/14/2011)
5 WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed by Felicia Anderson. Jeffrey A. Branum waiver mailed on 10/11/2011, answer due 12/11/2011. (Wan, Albert) Modified on 10/19/2011 to edit mail and answer due dates. (aaq). (Entered: 10/18/2011)
Set Deadlines/Hearings: Jeffrey A. Branum answer due 12/11/2011. (aaq) (Entered: 10/19/2011)
6 Consent MOTION to Stay All Proceedings by Felicia Anderson. (Wan, Albert) (Entered: 10/27/2011)
7 Court's NOTICE Of Filing INSTRUCTIONS FOR CASES ASSIGNED TOTHE HONORABLE STEVE C. JONES. (pdw) (Entered: 10/31/2011)
MINUTE ORDER granting consent 6 Motion to Stay: all proceedings in this litigation are stayed up to and including November 28, 2010; discovery in this litigation will commence on Tuesday, November 29, 2011, in the event that the parties have reached no resolution on Plaintiff's claims; and That not later than November 29, 2011, the parties are to report to this Court whether they have reached a resolution. Entered by Judge Steve C. Jones on 10/31/2011. (pdw) (Entered: 10/31/2011)
8 STATUS REPORT of Parties As to Settlement Negotiations by Felicia Anderson. (Wan, Albert) (Entered: 11/29/2011)
9 Joint PRELIMINARY REPORT AND DISCOVERY PLAN filed by Felicia Anderson. (Wan, Albert) (Entered: 12/01/2011)
10 Initial Disclosures by Felicia Anderson.(Wan, Albert) (Entered: 12/02/2011)
11 SCHEDULING ORDER on the 9 Preliminary Report and Discovery Plan. Discovery in this matter will conclude on March 29, 2012. Any motions for summary judgment or the proposed consolidated pretrial order must be filed on or before April 30, 2012. If a motion for summary judgment is filed, the proposed consolidated pretrial order must be filed within 30 days after this Courts ruling thereon. If neither motion(s) for summary judgment nor the proposed pretrial order are timely filed, the Clerk is directed to submit this matter for the Court for consideration. Signed by Judge Steve C Jones on 12/6/11. (aaq) (Entered: 12/06/2011)
12 Consent MOTION to Stay All Proceedings For Settlement Purposes by Felicia Anderson. (Wan, Albert) (Entered: 12/20/2011)
MINUTE ORDER granting the parties' 12 Consent Motion to Stay: all proceedings in this litigation are stayed up to and including 1/20/2012; discovery in this litigation will resume on 1/20/2012, in the event that the parties have reached no resolution on Plaintiff's claims; and That not later than 1/20/2012 the parties are to report to this Court whether they have reached a resolution. Entered by Judge Steve C. Jones on 12/21/2011. (pdw) (Entered: 12/21/2011)
13 STATUS REPORT of Parties As to Settlement Negotiations by Felicia Anderson. (Wan, Albert) (Entered: 01/24/2012)
14 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time re: Order on Motion to Stay, by Felicia Anderson, Jeffrey A. Branum, City of Atlanta. (Terry, LaShawn) (Entered: 01/26/2012)
MINUTE ORDER granting 14 Motion for Extension of Time, such that all proceedings in this litigation be stayed up to and including February 10, 2012;that not later than February 10, 2012, the parties shall report to thisCourt whether they have

03/15/2012 03/19/2012 03/22/2012
03/22/2012 02/17/2015
03/03/2015 03/03/2015 03/03/2015 03/17/2015
03/24/2015 03/24/2015 03/27/2015

reached a resolution of the issues presented by this Litigation; that, if the parties are unable to settle this matter, the parties file their Joint Preliminary Report and Discovery Plan and Initial Disclosures by February 16, 2012. Entered by Judge Steve C Jones on 1/256/2012. (pdw) (Entered: 01/26/2012)
MINUTE ORDER (by docket entry only) re Order granting Motion for Extension of Time: the parties are hereby ORDERED to file a status report no later than MONDAY, MARCH 19, 2012. Entered by Judge Steve C. Jones on 3/15/2012. (pdw) (Entered: 03/15/2012)
15 Consent MOTION for Settlement by Felicia Anderson. (Grossman, Daniel) (Entered: 03/19/2012)
16 ORDER granting the 15 Motion for Settlement. Defendant City of Atlanta is ORDERED to pay Plaintiffs the sum of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00) inclusive of prevailing party attorney fees and costs; (B) Defendant City of Atlanta is ORDERED permanently to implement the revisions to the Atlanta Police Department Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) set forth in Exhibit A hereto; (C) Defendant City of Atlanta is ORDERED to conduct mandatory in−person training of all Atlanta police officers every two years regarding these SOP revisions, concurrent with the mandatory training required under the Order issued in Calhoun v. Pennington, 1:09−cv−3286−TCB (N.D. Ga. Dec. 15, 2011); and (D) this case is DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed by Judge Steve C Jones on 03/22/12. (aaq) (Entered: 03/22/2012)
Civil Case Terminated. (aaq) (Entered: 03/22/2012)
17 MOTION for Contempt and Sanctions Against City of Atlanta with Brief In Support by Felicia Anderson. (Attachments: # 1 APD.SOP.2011 General Conduct (old and current versions), # 2 Dec. 10, 2010 Email from Karen Gilpin Thomas to Dan Grossman, # 3 APD Training Materials Given to WABE, # 4 Declaration of John Ruch, # 5 Declaration of Caroline Croland, # 6 Declaration of Marlon Kautz, # 7 Dec. 12, 2014 Letter from Dan Grossman to Cathy Hampton, # 8 Dec. 19, 2014 and Jan. 15, 2015 Letters from Karen Gilpin Thomas to Dan Grossman, # 9 APD Training Documents (Part 1 of 5), # 10 APD Training Documents (Part 2 of 5), # 11 Apd Training Documents (Part 3 of 5), # 12 APD Training Documents (Part 4 of 5), # 13 APD Training Documents (Part 5 of 5), # 14 Jan. 27, 2015 Letter from Dan Grossman to Karen Gilpin Thomas, # 15 National Review article on police transparency)(Wan, Albert) (Entered: 02/17/2015)
18 RESPONSE in Opposition re 17 MOTION for Contempt and Sanctions Against City of Atlanta filed by City of Atlanta. (Attachments: # 1 Affidavit of Chief Davis, # 2 Affidavit of Elizabeth Espy, # 3 Affidavit of Jesse Webb, # 4 Exhibit Chimino OPS Report Part 1)(Terry, LaShawn) (Entered: 03/03/2015)
19 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM with Brief In Support by City of Atlanta. (Hoffler, Veronica) (Entered: 03/03/2015)
20 Withdrawal of Motion 19 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by City of Atlanta filed by City of Atlanta. (Hoffler, Veronica) (Entered: 03/03/2015)
21 REPLY to Response to Motion re 17 MOTION for Contempt and Sanctions Against City of Atlanta filed by Felicia Anderson. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A − Letter from IBPO Local 623 to Federal Judges, # 2 Exhibit B − Declaration of Clayton Adams, Esq., # 3 Exhibit C − Joint Status Report filed in Calhoun v. Pennington et al, # 4 Exhibit D − Second Motion for Contempt filed in Calhoun v. Pennington et al, # 5 Exhibit E − Order entered in Walker v. Reed et al)(Wan, Albert) (Entered: 03/17/2015)
Submission of the 17 MOTION for Contempt and Sanctions Against City of Atlanta to District Judge Steve C Jones. (aaq) (Entered: 03/24/2015)
22 MOTION for Order For Leave of Absence by Felicia Anderson. (Grossman, Daniel) (Entered: 03/24/2015)
MINUTE ORDER granting 22 Motion for leave of absence by counsel for Plaintiff, from April 1−23, 2015. Entered by Judge Steve C Jones on 3/27/2015. (pdw) (Entered: 03/27/2015)

03/27/2015 04/30/2015
04/30/2015 05/04/2015
05/05/2015 05/07/2015 05/08/2015
05/08/2015 05/11/2015 05/13/2015
05/13/2015
06/03/2015

NOTICE of Hearing on Motion re: 17 MOTION for Contempt and Sanctions Against City of Atlanta. Motion Hearing set for 4/30/2015 at 02:00 AM in ATLA Courtroom 1907 before Judge Steve C Jones. Each side will be allowed 1 hour for argument and/or presentation of evidence.(pdw) (Entered: 03/27/2015)
23 Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Steve C Jones: Motion Hearing held on 4/30/2015 on Plaintiff's motion for contempt (doc. no. 17). The Courtheard oral argument and took the matter under advisement. The Courtdirected counsel for Plaintiff to submit a proposed order and affidavitregarding attorneys' fees on or before Monday, May 4th. The 17 Motion for Contempt TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT.(Court Reporter David Ritchie)(kdw) (Entered: 04/30/2015)
24 COURT'S NOTICE Of Filing: By direction of the Court, the attached documents provided to the Court by counsel for Plaintiff during a 23 hearing held on April 30, 2015, and marked as Exhibits 1, 2 and 3 to this notice, shall be made part of the record in this matter. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibits 1−3)(kdw) (Entered: 05/01/2015)
25 NOTICE Of Filing by Felicia Anderson as per Court's direction at 4/30/15 Hearing (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A − Proposed Order, # 2 Exhibit B − IBPO Letter to Judge Jones dated May 4, 2015, # 3 Exhibit C − Declaration of Clayton Adams re: OPS complaints, # 4 Exhibit D − Declaration of Gerald Weber re: fees and expenses, # 5 Exhibit E − Declaration of Daniel Grossman re: fees and expenses, # 6 Exhibit F − Declaration of Albert Wan re: fees and expenses, # 7 Exhibit G − Declaration of Clayton Adams re: fees and expenses)(Wan, Albert) (Entered: 05/04/2015)
26 NOTICE Of Filing Court Ordered Documents by City of Atlanta re 23 Order on Motion to Hold in Contempt, Motion Hearing,, (Terry, LaShawn) (Entered: 05/05/2015)
27 MOTION for Leave to File City of Atlanta's Response to Plaintiff's Proposed Order on Motion for Contempt Sanctions by City of Atlanta. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit)(Terry, LaShawn) (Entered: 05/07/2015)
28 ORDER granting the 27 Motion for Leave to Respond to Plaintiff's Proposed Order on Motion for Contempt Sanctions. The Court seeks to resolve Plaintiff's Motion for Contempt and Sanctions (Doc. No. 17 ) as soon as possible, thus Plaintiff is ORDERED to file a reply brief in support of its proposed order, should it choose to do so, by 5:00 PM on May 11,2015. Signed by Judge Steve C Jones on 5/8/15. (kdw) (Entered: 05/08/2015)
29 RESPONSE re 25 and 17 MOTION for Contempt and Sanctions Against City of Atlanta filed by City of Atlanta. (Terry, LaShawn) Modified on 5/12/2015 to edit text and add document link (kdw). (Entered: 05/08/2015)
30 RESPONSE re 25 and 29 Response to Motion (Response to City of Atlanta Comments on Proposed Order) filed by Felicia Anderson. (Weber, Gerald) Modified on 5/12/2015 to edit text and add document link (25) and remove document link (26) (kdw). (Entered: 05/11/2015)
31 ORDER granting the 17 Motion to Hold in Contempt and Sanctions. Defendant is ORDERED to comply with the Court's March 2012 Order (Doc. No. 16 ) and the sanctions imposed under this Order. Defendant is further ORDERED to pay Plaintiff's counsel attorneys' fees and costs in the following amounts within fifteen days of entry of this Order: Gerald Weber: $10.400.00, Daniel Grossman: $10,400.00, Albert Wan: $4,603.50, and Clayton Adams: $460.00. Signed by Judge Steve C Jones on 5/12/15. (kdw) (Entered: 05/13/2015)
32 CLERK'S ATTORNEY FEE JUDGMENT in favor of Plaintiff against Defendant. Plaintiff Felicia Anderson, recovers $10,400.00 for Attorney Gerald Weber, $10,400.00 for Attorney Daniel Grossman, $4,603.50 for Attorney Albert Wan, and $460.00 for Attorney Clayton Adams in attorneys fees and costs from defendant City of Atlanta. (kdw)−−Please refer to http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov to obtain an appeals jurisdiction checklist−− (Entered: 05/13/2015)
33 NOTICE by City of Atlanta re 31 Order on Motion to Hold in Contempt,, (NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE WITH MAY 13, 2015 ORDER) (Terry, LaShawn) (Entered: 06/03/2015)

06/18/2015 07/06/2015 01/17/2017 01/18/2017 01/18/2017 01/18/2017 01/18/2017 01/18/2017 01/18/2017 02/09/2017
02/22/2017 03/07/2017 03/08/2017 08/17/2017

34 NOTICE Of Filing Declaration of Chief George N. Turner by City of Atlanta (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Declaration)(Terry, LaShawn) (Entered: 06/18/2015)
35 NOTICE Of Filing Declaration of Major Paul Guerrucci by City of Atlanta , et al. (Terry, LaShawn) (Entered: 07/06/2015)
36 NOTICE Of Filing by Jeffrey A. Branum, City of Atlanta Notice of Filing the Attached Petition and Supporting Brief (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Attachment − Petition & Brief)(Shahar, Robin) (Entered: 01/17/2017)
37 NOTICE of Appearance by Alisha Irene Wyatt−Bullman on behalf of Jeffrey A. Branum, City of Atlanta (Wyatt−Bullman, Alisha) (Entered: 01/18/2017)
38 NOTICE by Jeffrey A. Branum, City of Atlanta Notice of Withdrawal of Counsel − Tamara Baines (Shahar, Robin) (Entered: 01/18/2017)
39 NOTICE by Jeffrey A. Branum, City of Atlanta Notice of Withdrawal of Counsel − Robert Godfrey (Shahar, Robin) (Entered: 01/18/2017)
40 NOTICE by Jeffrey A. Branum, City of Atlanta Notice of Withdrawal of Counsel − LaShawn Terry (Shahar, Robin) (Entered: 01/18/2017)
41 NOTICE of Appearance by Robin Joy Shahar on behalf of Jeffrey A. Branum, City of Atlanta (Shahar, Robin) (Entered: 01/18/2017)
42 NOTICE by Jeffrey A. Branum, City of Atlanta Notice of Withdrawal of Counsel − Veronica Hoffler (Shahar, Robin) (Entered: 01/18/2017)
43 NOTICE Of Filing by Felicia Anderson Response to "Petition for Emergency Relief" with Exhibits (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Ex. 1 − Response to "Petition for Emergency Relief", # 2 Exhibit Ex. 2 − David Rudovsky Declaration, # 3 Exhibit Ex. 3 − Lawrence Fox Declaration, # 4 Exhibit Ex. 4 − Chart of Claims, # 5 Exhibit Ex. 5 − Emails, # 6 Exhibit Ex. 6 − Rule 11 Motion)(Grossman, Daniel) (Entered: 02/09/2017)
44 NOTICE Of Filing by Jeffrey A. Branum, City of Atlanta (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit City's Reply)(Shahar, Robin) (Entered: 02/22/2017)
45 NOTICE Of Filing by Jeffrey A. Branum, City of Atlanta (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit City's Response, # 2 Exhibit Exhibit A−B to City's Response)(Shahar, Robin) (Entered: 03/07/2017)
46 ORDER denying City's Petition for Emergency Relief; denying Plaintiffs' Motion for Rule 11 Sanctions and denying Plaintiffs' Motion to Strike Reply. Signed by Judge Richard W. Story on 3/8/2017. (bdb) (Entered: 03/08/2017)
47 NOTICE by City of Atlanta Notice of Complaince with Training Requirement Affidavit of Lieutenant Jesse Webb (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(Wyatt−Bullman, Alisha) (Entered: 08/17/2017)

 
 Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 1 Filed 10/06/11 Page 1 of 20

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

FELICIA ANDERSON,

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

vs.

)

)

CITY OF ATLANTA,

)

OFFICER JEFFREY A. BRANUM, )

in his individual capacity,

)

)

Defendants.

)

Civil Action No.

VERIFIED COMPLAINT COMES NOW Felicia Anderson, the Plaintiff, and brings this Complaint seeking damages for the violations of her First and Fourth Amendment rights under the United States Constitution, corollary rights under the Georgia Constitution as well as state law claims arising primarily from an incident when Anderson peaceably monitored and photographed police activity but officers in tum approached and arrested Anderson, seized her camera, and damaged, deleted and/or altered images.

1

Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 1 Filed 10/06/11 Page 2 of 20
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1.
This action arises under the authority vested in this Court by virtue of 42 U.S.C. § 1983, 28 U.S.C. § 1331, 28 U.S.C. § 1343 (a)(3), the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments ofthe United States Constitution, and pendent jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367 under Article I, § 1, ~~ V, XIII ofthe Georgia Constitution. The actions of defendants were under color of law. Venue is proper in this Court.
PARTIES
2.
Plaintiff currently resides in New York State. At all times during the incident that is the subject of this complaint, Plaintiff resided at 1614 Westwood Avenue, Atlanta, Georgia, 3031 0.
3. Defendant City of Atlanta, Georgia is a body corporate and politic and a political subdivision of the State of Georgia, duly established under its laws and Constitution. The Atlanta Police Department ("APD") is a division ofthe City of Atlanta and the public employer of Officer Branum, a defendant named in this complaint. At the time ofthis incident, Defendant City of Atlanta had a policy or
2

Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 1 Filed 10/06/11 Page 3 of 20
practice encouraging officers to seize cameras of citizens monitoring police activity.
4. Defendant Jeffrey Branum is an officer with the Atlanta Police Department. He is sued in his individual capacity. Defendant Branum was acting under the color of state law at all times during the incident that is the subject of this complaint.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 5.
On October 14, 2009, several officers from the Atlanta Police Department ("APD"), including officers from the APD's now-disbanded RED DOG unit, raided a house at 1620 Westwood Avenue, Atlanta, Georgia, 3031 0.
6. Plaintiff was then inside her home at 1614 Westwood Avenue and went outside when she heard people shouting and yelling. She saw several police vehicles parked on the street including a van with the word "Narcotics" written on the side of it. She also observed officers with a battering ram in front of 1614 Westwood Avenue. All of the officers present were wearing official uniforms,
3

Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 1 Filed 10/06/11 Page 4 of 20
some of whom also had badges clearly visible. Several of Ms. Anderson's neighbors had also come outside in response to the police activity.
7.
Plaintiff crossed the street from her home and continued to observe the police investigation unfold. As Ms. Anderson crossed the street she saw several police officers repeatedly kick a male civilian while he was lying on the ground, handcuffed. Several of Ms. Anderson's neighbors also witnessed this brutal assault.
8. Ms. Anderson returned to her home and came back outside with her camera. She witnessed the same officers whom she had previously seen assaulting and kicking the male civilian on the ground. Ms. Anderson began to document the situation with her camera while standing on a public sidewalk at the opposite side of the street from where the assault was taking place. At this point, the officers were dragging the subject on the ground but stopped when they saw Ms. Anderson.
9. While engaged in this constitutionally protected free speech activity, several of the officers who were participating in the assault shouted at Ms. Anderson and
4

Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 1 Filed 10/06/11 Page 5 of 20
demanded that she stop photographing them. The officers gave no reasons for their demands and threatened Ms. Anderson with arrest if she did not stop.
10. With Plaintiff still standing on the sidewalk, Officer Branum approached Plaintiff and demanded that Plaintiff give him her cell phone. Plaintiff refused and responded that the officer had no authority to take her cell phone from her. Officer Branum again commanded Plaintiff to give him her cell phone. Plaintiff still refused. Officer Branum then forcibly grabbed Plaintiff's cell phone from her hand.
11.
Plaintiff started to walk back to her home while still on the public sidewalk. Officer Branum followed Plaintiff. Ms. Anderson became flustered and she dropped her camera on the ground, at which time Officer Branum seized it from Ms. Anderson.
12. Officer Branum ordered Ms. Anderson offthe sidewalk and into the middle of the street. He demanded Ms. Anderson's identification, and she produced it, providing Branum with an official identification card issued by the State of Michigan, her prior state of residence. Demanding Ms. Anderson's identification
5

Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 1 Filed 10/06/11 Page 6 of 20
by force of his authority constituted a search for which Defendant Branum had neither probable cause nor exigent circumstances. Taking Ms. Anderson's identification, in these circumstances, constituted a seizure of Ms. Anderson as no reasonable person would have felt free to leave before her identification had to her.
13. Ms. Anderson asked for her camera back but Officer Branum refused. Branum and another APD officer then began to visibly manipulate Ms. Anderson's camera. Branum boasted to Ms. Anderson that he had deleted the close-up photos that she had taken, leaving the ones where, in Branum's words, "you can't see shit." Several of Ms. Anderson's neighbors witnessed Branum delete the photos from Ms. Anderson's camera.
14. Officer Branum stated to Ms. Anderson that he "didn't like her attitude" and that he would "take her on a trip downtown." Officer Branum declared to Ms. Anderson, "I run this shit" and "this isn't the ACLU." He and other APD officers continued to hurl obscenities at Ms. Anderson.
15. Officer Branum then handcuffed Plaintiff, placed her under arrest. Officer Branum cited Plaintifffor the following offenses: (a) no driver's license, under
6

Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 1 Filed 10/06/11 Page 7 of 20
O.C.G.A. § 40-5-20; (b) pedestrian walking in roadway, under O.C.G.A. § 40-696; and (c) disorderly conduct, under section 106-81.7 of Atlanta's Code of Ordinances.
16. At no time during the incident at issue was Ms. Anderson driving a motor vehicle as that term is defined under Georgia statutory law. In fact, Ms. Anderson did not know how to drive; she owned a motorized scooter.
17. At no time during the incident at issue did Ms. Anderson physically obstruct Defendant Branum or any other APD officer in their "lawful occupation" under the disorderly conduct ordinance at issue. Moreover, there is nothing "lawful" about officers physically assaulting and battering a restrained individual under color of law.
18. At all times during the incident at issue, Ms. Anderson exercised her constitutional right to peaceably observe and record police activity while situated on a public sidewalk at a distance from the officers. The first time she entered a roadway or street was when she was directed to do so by Officer Branum.
19.
7

Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 1 Filed 10/06/11 Page 8 of 20
Ms. Anderson was shoved up against a wall with several other arrestees after her arrest by Officer Branum. While against the wall, APD officers, including Officer Branum, cursed at and taunted Plaintiff.
20. The stop, search, and seizure of plaintiff and her property was without probable cause, arguable probable cause, or reasonable suspicion of any criminal activity; rather such conduct was carried out for the purpose of harming Plaintiff, chilling speech and suppressing information gathered about police activity.
21. The actions ofthe defendant during the incident were pursuant to a policy, custom and practice of the APD and City of Atlanta that encouraged police seizure of cameras of citizens monitoring police activity and/or was done with the final approval or ratification ofthe final decision-maker for such issues. All actions were done under color oflaw, and with deliberate indifference to clearly established rights of the plaintiff. Such policies, customs and practices caused the violation ofMs. Anderson's rights in this case.
22.
8

Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 1 Filed 10/06/11 Page 9 of 20
The relevant APD policy then in effect, APD Standard Operating Procedure
3020, Subsection 4.3.1, is both unconstitutional and authorized the suspicionless seizure in this case.1
23.
The Atlanta Police Department also has an unconstitutional policy, custom,
and practice to detain "suspicious" individuals without reasonable articulable
suspicion that the individual being detained is involved in criminal activity, as
reflected, among other places, by APD Standard Operating Procedure (S.O.P.)
3065 ("Field Interviews") (which authorizes and directs Atlanta police officers to
detain and check the IDs of"suspicious persons" without requiring reasonable
1 SOP 3020 Subsection 4.3.1 provides: 1. There is a constitutional preference for searches to be conducted pursuant to a warrant rather than without one. Searches conducted without a warrant, are per se unreasonable, subject to only a few specifically and well-delineated exceptions. 2. To justifY a warrantless search, two essential elements must exist: a. It must be established that the circumstances at the time of the search were sufficient to require immediate action, which necessitated not complying with the restrictions of the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment. b. The marmer and scope of the search that was conducted must be reasonably related to the justification of the search. 3. In a lawful search without a warrant, officers may seize any contraband, stolen property, or mere evidence of a crime which is in plain view and which is immediately recognizable as such, provided that the scope of the search was strictly tied to and justified by the circumstances that rendered it permissible when initiated. In this case the officer/investigator should make every effort to 'Freeze' the scene and obtain a warrant before searching the premises more thoroughly.
9

Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 1 Filed 10/06/11 Page 10 of 20

articulable suspicion regarding the individual being detained.) This policy was in

effect at the time Branum arrested Ms. Anderson.

24.

;_I

As of October 14, 2009, the City were deliberately indifferent to the need for

a policy, custom or practice to provide guidelines governing the search and seizure

of individuals within constitutional standards. The knowledge that such a policy

was needed would have been obvious to the City based, in part, on the number of

prior instances in which APD officers detained individuals which were later

determined by a judicial body to be unlawful or which resulted in lawsuits against
i~
and settlements by the City with the aggrieved parties or their representatives.

That the City failed to implement such a policy amounts to deliberate indifference

to the constitutional rights of Ms. Anderson since her unlawful arrest of October

14, 2009 was the direct result of the City's failure to implement and adopt such a

policy.

25.

The APD has demonstrated a pervasive failure to train officers regarding the

requirements of the Fourth Amendment, including when it would or would not be

permissible for APD officers to search and seize an individual engaged in

protected First Amendment activity.

10

Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 1 Filed 10/06/11 Page 11 of 20
26. Prior to October 12, 2009, APD officers routinely searched and detained individuals engaged in protected First Amendment activity, particularly when such activity was intended to document police activity. Such unlawful conduct included either the search or the seizure (or both) of the instrument or thing- for example, a camera or a cell phone equipped with recording capability- which was being used by the individual as his or her means of engaging in First Amendment activity.
27.
On July 9, 2009 at or around 1400 Donald Lee Hollowell Parkway, APD Officer Dominique Pattillo forcibly confiscated the cell phone of Frankie Turner who had used his cell phone to film police activity involving the now disbanded RED DOG unit. Mr. Turner's cell phone is still in APD custody despite repeated requests by Mr. Turner that the phone be returned to him.
28. Moreover, on at least four separate occasions, officers from the Atlanta Police Department ordered members of a local community organization called Copwatch of East Atlanta ("Copwatch") to cease filming police activity, and have threatened or attempted to confiscate cameras on at least three occasions. During
11

Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 1 Filed 10/06/11 Page 12 of 20
each such incident, members of Copwatch documented police activity that took place in public and did not interfere with the activities of the officers.
29. Subsequent to the events in this lawsuit, on or around February 10, 20 11, the APD agreed to adopt a policy that prohibits officers from interfering with and arresting individuals who are documenting police activity, either by photography or video. This policy was adopted as part of a settlement between APD and Copwatch of East Atlanta. Branum's conduct in this case would have clearly contravened such a policy.
30. Even after the adoption ofthis policy, however, APD officers have continued to prevent citizens and residents from filming police activity in public. On or around August 30, 2011, members ofCopwatch documented an incident in downtown Atlanta in which APD officers had "pepper sprayed" an individual. This incident occurred on a public sidewalk. During the filming ofthis incident, APD officer T. Dziamba repeatedly requested members of Copwatch ifthey had "media credentials." Another APD officer ordered members of Copwatch to stop filming. This same officer then began recording the physical descriptions ofthe Copwatch members with his cell phone in a retaliatory manner.
12

Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 1 Filed 10/06/11 Page 13 of 20
31. The Atlanta Police Department has demonstrated a pervasive failure to discipline police officers for unlawful conduct involving unreasonable seizures of persons and property.
32. As an example, although the Atlanta Citizen Review Board ("ACRB") has sustained complaints against dozens of police officers for unlawful conduct the Atlanta Police Department has never once followed the ACRB's recommendation to impose discipline.
33. As just one specific example among many, the ACRB recommended that discipline be imposed against the officer who unlawfully arrested an individual by the name of Minnie Carey because Ms. Carey did not move from a public sidewalk after being commanded to do so by the arresting APD officer. The Chief of Police rejected that recommendation.
34. Nor has the City of Atlanta disciplined any ofthe many APD officers who have been involved in "drug raids" which were carried out by the now-disbanded RED DOG unit (like the one that forms the basis of this complaint) despite
13

Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 1 Filed 10/06/11 Page 14 of 20
numerous complaints by residents that officers involved in these raids routinely violated their constitutional rights.
35. In defending the conduct of APD officers including those who participated in the Atlanta Eagle Raid and the RED DOG drug raids rather than imposing discipline upon these officers, the City of Atlanta has demonstrated a deliberate indifference to the violation of Fourth Amendment protections. Had the City, in fact, disciplined these officers, Defendant Branum would not have abused his authority as an officer in seizing Ms. Anderson's camera, deleting its contents, and then arresting her without arguable probable cause and in retaliation for her having engaged in protected First Amendment activity.
36. Moreover, numerous Fourth Amendment violations by APD officers have demonstrated the compelling need for effective training regarding constitutional law on search and seizure which the APD has failed or refused to provide.
37. On July 14, 2009, the Atlanta Citizen Review Board ("ACRB") recommended that the Atlanta Police Department conduct training regarding Fourth Amendment issues including "Terry stops." The Chief of Police rejected this recommendation.
14

Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 1 Filed 10/06/11 Page 15 of 20
38. In connection with its investigation of a raid conducted by APD officer on the Atlanta Eagle bar the ACRB reviewed "records concerning the department's inservice training for officers during 2008 and 2009. There was no indication officers received training concerning constitutional law."
39. The ACRB "Study of Supervisory Responsibility" regarding the Atlanta Eagle Raid also reported that: "It became evident during the course of the investigation that many officers are unfamiliar with the constitutional requirements for conducting a search and/or seizure."
40. Deposition testimony and public statements related to the Atlanta Eagle Raid by senior APD commanders including former ChiefRichard Pennington, Deputy Chief Carlos Banda, and Major Debra Williams also suggest a pervasive lack of training regarding basic Fourth Amendment concepts such as the requirements of a lawful Terry stop; the requirements of a lawful frisk; and the definition of an arrest, among other subjects. These statements suggest both the failure of the Atlanta Police Department to train these employees themselves, as well as the improper training provided by senior commanders to the subordinates
15

Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 1 Filed 10/06/11 Page 16 of 20
who look to them for guidance. 41.
As a result of her arrest, Ms. Anderson spent several hours at the City of Atlanta Detention Center. She was subjected to prosecution and has hired an attorney to assist in her defense. This prosecution is ongoing, with the case currently being "bound over" from Atlanta Municipal Court to Fulton County State Court. Plaintiffs last court date in this underlying matter came on December 16, 2009 in Atlanta Municipal Court. She has not received any notice from Fulton County State Court since that time. Ms. Anderson believes that the charges have been "dead docketed."
CLAIMS FOR RELIEF 42.
The allegations set forth in all the preceding paragraphs are incorporated by reference herein for each and every claim for relief.
43. Citizens have a First Amendment right to document police conduct occurring on public property in a non-disruptive way. Thus, Plaintiff was within her rights to film police activity in a public place. By preventing filming, seizing a camera from Plaintiff as she peaceably monitored police activity, and then
16

Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 1 Filed 10/06/11 Page 17 of 20
destroying images from that camera; Defendant deprived Plaintiff of her right to freedom of speech as protected by the First and Fourteenth Amendments, as well as the Georgia Constitution Article I, Section I, Paragraphs V and IX.
44. The Fourth Amendment prohibits the police from detaining a person or seizing ones belongings without probable cause or reasonable suspicion of unlawful activity. Defendant Branum seized Ms. Anderson and seized her camera- violating her right to be secure in her person and be free from unreasonable searches and seizures as protected by the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution, as well as the Georgia Constitution Article I, Section 1, Paragraph I, VII, and XIII.
45. The actions ofthe APD officers, including Officer Branum, were in violation of clearly established constitutional rights which a reasonable officer should have known.
46. By arresting Ms. Anderson and seizing her camera without legal authority, Defendant falsely imprisoned her in violation ofO.C.G.A. § 16-5-41.
47.
17

Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 1 Filed 10/06/11 Page 18 of 20
By arresting Ms. Anderson and seizing her camera without legal authority, Defendant, with malice and oppression, falsely imprisoned Ms. Anderson under color oflegal process in violation ofO.C.G.A. § 16-5-42.
48. By arresting Ms. Anderson and seizing her camera without legal authority, Defendant falsely imprisoned her in violation of O.C.G.A. §§ 51-7-20, 22.
49. By seizing Ms. Anderson's possessions, Defendant deprived plaintiff of possessions in violation ofO.C.G.A. § 51-10-1.
50. By seizing Ms. Anderson's possessions, Defendant trespassed on personalty inviolationofO.C.G.A. § 51-10-3.
51. By intentionally and with force touching and seizing Anderson and her camera, Defendant committed battery against her in violation of O.C.G.A. § 16-523.
52. By subjecting Ms. Anderson to a criminal prosecution with malice and without any probable cause that a crime had been committed, Defendant
18

Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 1 Filed 10/06/11 Page 19 of 20
committed the offense of malicious prosecution in violation ofO.C.G.A. § 51-7-40 for the "dead docketed" charges leveled against her.
PRAYERS FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, on the basis of the foregoing, Plaintiff respectfully prays that this Court: (A) Assume jurisdiction over this action; (B) Award nominal and modest compensatory damages against each Defendant in an amount subject to proof; (C) Award punitive damages to Anderson, if any, against Defendant Branum according to federal and state law; (D) Award reasonable attorneys fees, expenses, and costs oflitigation pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988 and other applicable state and federal laws; (E) Award such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. DATED: This the 6th day of October, 2011.
Respectfully submitted,
/1Yt ~--
Is Gerald Weber
Gerald Weber (Georgia Bar No. 744878) Southern Center for Human Rights 83 Poplar Street, N.W.
19

Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 1 Filed 10/06/11 Page 20 of 20

Atlanta, Georgia 30303 wgerryweber@gmail.com (404) 688-1202

Is Albert Wan
Albert Wan (Georgia Bar No. 334224)

Albert Wan, Attorney at Law 1201 Peachtree Street NE 400 Colony Square, Suite 200 Atlanta, GA 30361 albert@albertwanlaw.com (404) 872-7760

Is Daniel J. Grossman
Daniel J. Grossman (Georgia BarNo. 313815)

Law Office of Daniel J. Grossman 1579 Monroe Drive, Ste F-138 Atlanta, GA 30324 Dan@DanGrossmanLaw.com (404) 654-0326

20

 
 Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 16 Filed 03/22/12 Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION

_______________________________________

FELICIA ANDERSON

)

)

Plaintiff,

)

)

vs.

)

)

CITY OF ATLANTA, et al.

)

)

)

Defendants.

)

_______________________________________)

CIVIL ACTION FILE NO. 1:11-CV-3398-SCJ

ORDER Pursuant to the settlement negotiated by the parties, Defendant City of Atlanta is ORDERED to pay Plaintiffs the sum of Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000.00) inclusive of prevailing party attorney fees and costs; (B) Defendant City of Atlanta is ORDERED permanently to implement the revisions to the Atlanta Police Department Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) set forth in Exhibit A hereto; (C) Defendant City of Atlanta is ORDERED to conduct mandatory in-person training of all Atlanta police officers every two years regarding these SOP revisions, concurrent with the mandatory training required
5

Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 16 Filed 03/22/12 Page 2 of 3 under the Order issued in Calhoun v. Pennington, 1:09-cv-3286-TCB (N.D. Ga. Dec. 15, 2011); and (D) this case is DISMISSED with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 22nd day of March, 2012. s/Steve C. Jones Steve C. Jones United States District Judge
6

Case 1:11-cv-03398-SCJ Document 16 Filed 03/22/12 Page 3 of 3
Exhibit A Permanent Revisions to Atlanta Police Department SOP
General Conduct (APD.SOP.2011) Section 4.4.1 (“Interference with Citizen’s Right to Record”) shall be amended to read as follows: 1. All employees shall be prohibited from interfering with a citizen’s right to record police activity by photographic, video, or audio means. This prohibition is in effect only as long as the recording by the citizen does not physically interfere with the performance of an officer’s duties. 2. Employees shall not intentionally delete or destroy the original or sole copy any photograph, audio, or video recording of police activity created by a member of the public. 3. Employees shall not intentionally delete or destroy the original or sole copy of any photograph, audio, or video recording relating to any use of force described under the “Reporting Requirements” section of APD SOP 3010 (“Use of Force”).
Disciplinary Process (APD.SOP.2020) Section 4.3.5(3) shall be revised to designate violation of the above-
referenced rule regarding “Interference with Citizen’s Right to Record” as a Category D (Dismissal) offense.
7