inman complaint
DESCRIPTION
Inman complaintTRANSCRIPT
Andrew C. Schwartz (State Bar No. 64578) CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK A Professional Corporation 2121 North California Blvd., Suite 1020 Walnut Creek, California 94596 Telephone: (925)947-1147 Facsimile: (925) 947-113.3 schwa rtzcmslaw.com )J
Karen L. Snell (State Bar No. 100266) Attorney at Law 102 Buena Vista Terrace San Francisco, CA 94117 Telephone: (415) 225-7592,:\ Facsimile: (415) 487-0748 ksnell(snelI-law.com
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
vs.
SANTA CRUZ SEASIDE COMPANY, SANTA CRUZ SEASIDE SECURITY OFFICERS ROGER BARRERA, KAITLYN COLE, JORDAN EMENY-SMITH, FABIAN GONZALEZ, SANTOS HERNANDEZ, DARRYL KRINER, ERIC NEGRETE, LUZ NIETO, JOAQUIN SEYMOUR, NICHOLAS SOLANO, SAUL VALADEZ and KEVIN WALSH, CITY OF SANTA CRUZ, SANTA CRUZ POLICE OFFICERS AHLERS, DENISE COCKRUM and BRIAN HATCHER, and DOES 1 through 100,
Defendants.
II
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
L 12
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
ANGIE INMAN, COREY INMAN,JO
ASENO. INMAN, and TYLER INMAN,
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES Plaintiffs, (Violation of Civil Rights)
CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK
2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 1020
Walnut Creek, CA 94596 TEL (925)947-1147 FAX (925) 947-1131
Angie Inman, et al., v. Santa Cruz Seaside Company, et al. Complaint
Page 1
Case5:13-cv-03235-PSG Document1 Filed07/12/13 Page1 of 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK
2121 N. California Sled., Suite 1020
Walnut Creek, CA 94596 TEL: (925) 947-1147 FAX (925) 947-1131
INTRODUCTION
1. This is an action for money damages brought by ANGIE INMAN,
COREY INMAN, JON INMAN and TYLER INMAN, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983
and 1988, the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution, and the
common law of the State of California, against SANTA CRUZ SEASIDE COMPANY,
SANTA CRUZ SEASIDE SECURITY OFFICERS ROGER BARRERA, KAITLYN
I COLE, JORDAN EMENY-SMITH, FABIAN GONZALEZ, SANTOS HERNANDEZ,
I DARRYL KRINER, ERIC NEGRETE, LUZ NIETO, JOAQUIN SEYMOUR,
I NICHOLAS SOLANO, SAUL VALADEZ and KEVIN WALSH, CITY OF SANTA
I CRUZ, SANTA CRUZ POLICE OFFICERS AHLERS, DENISE COCKRUM and
BRIAN HATCHER, and DOES I through 100.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE 2. Jurisdiction is conferred upon the United States District Court by 28
U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’
state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a).
3. The actions giving rise to Defendants’ liability, as alleged in this Complaint, occurred within the Northern District of California. Venue is therefore proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and Civil Local Rule 3-2(d).
INTRADISTRICT ASSIGNMENT
4. The events which give rise to Plaintiffs’ claims occurred in Santa Cruz,
California. This case is therefore appropriate for assignment to the San Jose Division
pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-2.
IDENTIFICATION OF PARTIES
5. At all times material to this Complaint, Plaintiffs ANGIE INMAN, COREY INMAN, JON INMAN, and TYLER INMAN were residents of Novato, California.
Angie Inman, et al., v. Santa Cruz Seaside Company, et al. Page 2 Complaint
Case5:13-cv-03235-PSG Document1 Filed07/12/13 Page2 of 13
1 Plaintiff COREY INMAN was a minor at the time of the actions described herein, but
2 all Plaintiffs are now of full age.
3 6. At all times material to this Complaint, Defendant SANTA CRUZ 4 I SEASIDE COMPANY was a private company located in Santa Cruz, California, that
5 owned and operated the Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk.
7. At all times material to this Complaint, Defendants ROGER BARRERA, 7 I KAITLYN COLE, JORDAN EMENY-SMITH, FABIAN GONZALEZ, SANTOS 8 I HERNANDEZ, DARRYL KRINER, ERIC NEGRETE, LUZ NIETO, JOAQUIN 9 I SEYMOUR, NICHOLAS SOLANO, SAUL VALADEZ and KEVIN WALSH were
10 SANTA CRUZ SEASIDE COMPANY SECURITY OFFICERS who were acting under
11 color of law and within the course and scope of their employment with Defendant
12 SANTA CRUZ SEASIDE COMPANY. Each of these Defendants jointly participated
13 with Defendant CITY OF SANTA CRUZ and Defendant CITY OF SANTA CRUZ
iI POLICE OFFICER Defendants in the constitutional deprivations alleged herein. 15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 CASPER. MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK
2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 1020
Walnut Creek, CA 94596 TEL: (925) 947-1147 FAX (925) 947-1131
8. At all times material to this Complaint, Defendant CITY OF SANTA
CRUZ was a public entity and a person within the meeting of 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
9. At all times material to this Complaint, Defendants AHLERS, DENISE
COCKRUM and BRIAN HATCHER were CITY OF SANTA CRUZ POLICE OFFICERS
who were acting under color of law and within the course and scope of their
employment with CITY OF SANTA CRUZ. They are sued in their individual
capacities.
10. Plaintiffs are ignorant of the true names and capacities of Defendants
DOES 1 through 100, and therefore sue these Defendants by such fictitious names.
Plaintiffs will amend their Complaint when the true names and capacities of Defendant
DOES I through 100 have been ascertained. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and
on that basis allege, that Defendants DOES I through 100 are responsible in some
manner for the injuries suffered and damages incurred by Plaintiffs as alleged in this
Complaint. Any reference in this Complaint to "Defendant," "Defendants," or to a
Angie Inman, et al., v. Santa Cruz Seaside Company, et al. Page 3 Complaint
Case5:13-cv-03235-PSG Document1 Filed07/12/13 Page3 of 13
1 specifically-named Defendant refers also to Defendants DOES 1 through 100. These
2 Defendants are sued in their individual and official capacities.
3 FACTS GIVING RISE TO THIS COMPLAINT
4 11. On May 26, 2012, Plaintiff JON INMAN and his wife, Plaintiff ANGIE
5 I INMAN, took their three children - Plaintiff TYLER INMAN, age 21; Plaintiff COREY
6 INMAN, age 17; and a daughter, age 14- and two friends of their children to the Santa
7 Cruz Beach Boardwalk amusement park in Santa Cruz, California.
8 12. The Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk is owned by the SANTA CRUZ
9 SEASIDE COMPANY. It is jointly patrolled by Defendant SANTA CRUZ SEASIDE
10 COMPANY SECURITY OFFICERS and CITY OF SANTA CRUZ POLICE OFFICERS.
11
13. Plaintiffs purchased tickets from Defendant SANTA CRUZ SEASIDE
12 COMPANY which authorized them to be at the amusement park at the time of the
13 events described herein.
14 14. At approximately 10:40 p.m., as Plaintiffs exited "Fright Night," the
15 Boardwalk’s haunted house attraction, Defendants SANTA CRUZ SEASIDE
16 COMPANY SECURITY OFFICERS WALSH and COLE confronted Plaintiff TYLER
17 INMAN.
18 15. In the presence of Plaintiff TYLER INMAN’s parents, younger siblings
19 and friends, Defendant WALSH accused him of performing a "lewd act" inside the
20 haunted house. The accusation was based on a report of a "possible lewd act" by a
21 SANTA CRUZ SEASIDE COMPANY SECURITY OFFICER who had been watching
22 the attraction’s CCTV monitors. Plaintiff TYLER INMAN and his family had been
23 together inside the haunted house, and they denied the accusation, which upset them.
24 Plaintiffs asked Defendants to review the videotape that purportedly showed Plaintiff
25 TYLER IN MAN committing a "lewd act" as it would prove that Defendants’ accusation
26 was not true.
27 16. Defendant SOLANO did review the videotape, and was indeed unable to
28 CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK
2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 1020
Walnut Creek, CA 94596 TEL: (925) 947-1147 FAX (925) 947-1131
confirm that a lewd act had been committed. Defendant SOLANO updated the
Angie Inman, et al., v. Santa Cruz Seaside Company, et at. Complaint
Page 4
Case5:13-cv-03235-PSG Document1 Filed07/12/13 Page4 of 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK
2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 1020
Walnut Creek, CA 94596 TEL (925) 947-1147 FAX (925) 947-1131
officers on scene of this fact. But rather than apologizing to Plaintiffs, Defendant
I WALSH told Plaintiffs, in a rude and aggressive manner, that he wanted them to leave
the amusement park.
17. By this time several additional SANTA CRUZ SEASIDE COMPANY
SECURITY OFFICERS, including Defendants COLE, GONZALEZ, HERNANDEZ,
KRINER, NEGRETE and SEYMOUR, and at least three Defendant CITY OF SANTA
I CRUZ POLICE OFFICERS, including Defendants AHLERS, COCKRUM and
HATCHER, had arrived on scene. While Plaintiffs were continuing to discuss the
I situation with Defendants, Defendant HATCHER crept up behind Plaintiff TYLER
INMAN and attempted to grab his wrist. Having been given no warning and unaware
who was grabbing him, Plaintiff TYLER INMAN instinctively pulled away. Defendants
responded by escalating the use of force, becoming more and more physically
aggressive. Defendant HATCHER placed Plaintiff TYLER INMAN in a head lock with
physical assistance from several other defendants. Defendant HERNANDEZ shot him
with his Taser gun twice. Defendant COCKRUM struck him repeatedly with her metal
baton. Defendant NEGRETE kicked him in the groin. Defendants broke two of
Plaintiff TYLER INMAN’s ribs, caused ligament damage, and inflicted massive
contusions and lacerations on his knee, head, and back. Defendant HATCHER then
placed Plaintiff TYLER INMAN in handcuffs.
18. When Plaintiff TYLER INMAN’s family members reacted to Defendants’
treatment of TYLER by crying out and reaching toward him, they too were subjected to
excessive force by Defendants. Defendants, including Defendants COLE,
HERNANDEZ, SEYMOUR and SOLANO, deliberately pushed Plaintiff ANGIE INMAN
against a wall, bruising her arms. Defendants grabbed her and dragged her along
when she couldn’t keep up. In so doing, they broke her wrist. Defendants handcuffed
Plaintiff ANGIE IN MAN and placed her in a paddy wagon. Her wrist became so
swollen that the handcuffs cut into her skin. Only after she made repeated requests
did Defendants loosen the handcuffs.
Angie Inman, et al., v. Santa Cruz Seaside Company, et al. Page 5 Complaint
Case5:13-cv-03235-PSG Document1 Filed07/12/13 Page5 of 13
1 19. Defendants, including Defendants WALSH, SOLANO and VALADEZ,
forced Plaintiff JON INMAN onto the ground and Defendant WALSH applied a choke
3 hold to his neck. Plaintiff JON INMAN was beaten by Defendants until he became
4 unconscious. Defendants sprayed Olesoresin Capsicum, also known as pepper
5 spray, in Plaintiff JON INMAN’s eyes, nose, and mouth at very close range.
6 Thereafter, Defendants, including Defendants HERNANDEZ and BARRERA, failed to
7 provide Plaintiff JON INMAN with first aid. In addition to the injuries he suffered to his
8 eyes and airways, Defendants caused Plaintiff JON INMAN to suffer abrasions to his
9 feet, arms, legs, and head. Defendants then handcuffed Plaintiff JON IN MAN and
10 placed him in a paddy wagon.
11
20. When Plaintiff COREY INMAN reached for his brother during
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK
2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 1020
Walnut Creek, CA 94596 TEL. (925) 947-1147 FAX (925) 947-1131
I Defendants’ assault on Plaintiff TYLER INMAN, Defendants, including BARRERA,
I SEYMOUR, EMENY-SMITH and HERNANDEZ, took Plaintiff COREY INMAN to the
ground, spraining his back and scraping his knees. Defendants then arrested him.
21. Based on Defendants’ false allegations, Plaintiffs were charged with
criminal offenses. Plaintiff TYLER IN MAN was charged with battery against a police
officer, public intoxication and trespassing. Plaintiff ANGIE IN MAN was charged with
resisting arrest. Plaintiff JON IN MAN was charged with resisting arrest and battery.
Plaintiff COREY IN MAN was charged with resisting arrest and battery.
22. After Defendants handcuffed Plaintiff TYLER INMAN, he was driven in
an ambulance to Dominican Hospital where he was treated by doctors. Defendants
then took him to the Santa Cruz County Jail, where he was booked into custody.
Plaintiff TYLER INMAN was not released from the Jail until the following day, after
posting $5000 bail. After Plaintiffs ANGIE INMAN and COREY INMAN were
handcuffed, detained, advised of their rights, and asked to give a statement, they were
cited and released. Plaintiff JON INMAN was taken to Santa Cruz County Jail and
booked into custody, where he remained until 5:30 a.m. the following day, at which
point he was released from the Jail on his promise to appear in court.
Angie Inman, et at., v. Santa Cruz Seaside Company, et at. Page 6 Complaint
Case5:13-cv-03235-PSG Document1 Filed07/12/13 Page6 of 13
23. Plaintiffs were required to retain criminal defense attorneys to represent
them in their criminal cases. Plaintiffs were required to participate in the criminal case,
I which caused them to miss work and school. All Plaintiffs suffered the mental stress
of knowing there were criminal charges pending against them for more than a year.
24. Finally, on June 10, 2013, at the request of the Santa Cruz County
District Attorney’s Office, all charges against Plaintiffs were dismissed. The dismissal
was due to the District Attorney’s conclusion that there was insufficient evidence that
Plaintiffs had committed any of the offenses Defendants had alleged.
DAMAGES
25. Plaintiffs suffered physical injuries, wage loss, medical expenses, future
medical expenses, emotional distress, and they were forced to pay bond and
attorney’s fees. Plaintiffs have also suffered the violation of their constitutional rights
and the loss of their sense of security, dignity, and pride as citizens and residents of
the United States of America.
26. The individually named Defendants acted with malice and oppression,
as described herein. These Defendants’ conduct was intended to harm Plaintiffs or
was despicable, carried out with a conscious disregard of Plaintiffs’ rights and safety.
Defendants’ conduct also subjected Plaintiffs to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious
disregard of Plaintiffs’ rights. Plaintiffs therefore are entitled to recover exemplary
damages from these Defendants.
27. Plaintiffs have retained civil attorneys to pursue their rights as asserted
in this Complaint. Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees
incurred in the prosecution of this action against Defendants pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF 42 U.S.C. § 1983 - 4th Amendment
(By All Plaintiffs Against All Defendants)
28. Plaintiffs incorporate the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint as
28 CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK
2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 1020
Walnut Creek, CA 94596 TEL: (925) 947-1147 FAX (925) 947-1131
though fully set forth in this claim for relief.
Angie Inman, et al., v. Santa Cruz Seaside Company, et at. Complaint
Page 7
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Case5:13-cv-03235-PSG Document1 Filed07/12/13 Page7 of 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
29. Plaintiffs claim damages for the injuries set forth above under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 against all of the Defendants for violation of Plaintiffs’ 4th Amendment
constitutional rights, including their rights to be free from excessive force and unlawful
I arrest.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek relief as hereafter set forth.
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF 42 U.S.C. § 1983 - 4th and 14th Amendment
(By Plaintiff JON INMAN Against Defendants HERNANDEZ and BARRERA And Does I through 100)
30. Plaintiff incorporates the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set forth in this claim for relief.
31. Plaintiff JON INMAN claims damages for the injuries set forth above
under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendants HERNANDEZ and BARRERA and Does
1 through 100 for violation of Plaintiff’s 4 and 14th Amendment constitutional right to
adequate medical care.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff seeks relief as hereafter set forth.
THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF 42 U.S.C. § 1983 - Monell
(By Plaintiffs Against Defendants SANTA CRUZ SEASIDE COMPANY and CITY OF SANTA CRUZ and Does I through 100)
32. Plaintiffs incorporate the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint
as though fully set forth in this claim for relief.
33. At all times relevant, Defendants SANTA CRUZ SEASIDE COMPANY
and CITY OF SANTA CRUZ and Does I through 100 developed and maintained
policies or customs exhibiting deliberate indifference to the constitutional rights of
people in Santa Cruz and people visiting the Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk, which
caused the violations of Plaintiffs’ rights.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek relief as hereafter set forth. 26
27
28 CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK
2121 N. California Blvd., Sude 1020
Walnut Creek, CA 94596 TEL. (925) 947-1147 FAX (925) 947-1131
FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF Assault
(By All Plaintiffs Against All Defendants)
34. Plaintiffs incorporate the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint as
Angie Inman, et al., v. Santa Cruz Seaside Company, et al. Complaint
Page 8
Case5:13-cv-03235-PSG Document1 Filed07/12/13 Page8 of 13
1
though fully set forth in this claim for relief.
2 35. On November 27, 2012, Defendant CITY OF SANTA CRUZ received the
3 government claims Plaintiffs timely filed pursuant to the provisions of the California
4 Tort Claims Act, California Government Code §§ 910 et seq. Defendant CITY OF
5 SANTA CRUZ denied the claims by letter dated January 23, 2013.
6 36. The SANTA CRUZ SEASIDE COMPANY SECURITY OFFICERS and
7 the CITY OF SANTA CRUZ POLICE OFFICERS committed their alleged actions in
8 the course and scope of their employment with SANTA CRUZ SEASIDE COMPANY
9 and CITY OF SANTA CRUZ.
10, 37. The CITY OF SANTA CRUZ POLICE OFFICER Defendants are liable
11 pursuant to California Government Code § 820.1(a), which renders a public employee
12 liable for injury caused by his or her act or omission to the same extent as a private
13 person. The CITY OF SANTA CRUZ is liable pursuant to Government Code § 815.2,
14 which renders a public entity liable for injury proximately caused by an act or omission
15 of an employee of a public entity within the scope of his or her employment if the act
16 or omission would give rise to a cause of action against the public employee.
17 38. On May 26, 2012, Defendants, and each of them, intended to harm or
18 come into offensive contact with Plaintiffs.
19 39. Plaintiffs reasonably apprehended that Defendants were about to touch
20 them in a harmful or offensive manner.
21 40. Defendants also threatened to touch Plaintiffs in a harmful or offensive
22 manner and Plaintiffs reasonably apprehended that each Defendant was about to
23 carry out that threat.
24 41. Plaintiffs did not consent to the conduct of any of the Defendants and
25 were harmed thereby.
26 42. Each Defendant’s conduct was a substantial factor in causing the
27 alleged harm.
28 CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ& COOK
2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 1020
Walnut Creek. CA 94596 TEL (925) 947-1147 FAX (925) 947-1131
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek relief as hereafter set forth.
Angie Inman, et al., v. Santa Cruz Seaside Company, et al. Complaint
Page 9
Case5:13-cv-03235-PSG Document1 Filed07/12/13 Page9 of 13
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK
2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 1020
Walnut CreeK, CA 94596 TEL: (925) 947-1147 FAX (925) 947-1131
FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF Battery
(By All Plaintiffs Against All Defendants) 43. Plaintiffs incorporate the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint as
though fully set forth in this claim for relief.
44. On May 26, 2012, Defendants, and each of them, touched Plaintiffs or
caused Plaintiffs to be touched with the intent of harming or offending Plaintiffs.
45. Plaintiffs did not consent to the conduct of any of the Defendants.
46. Plaintiffs were harmed by Defendants’ conduct.
47. A reasonable person in Plaintiffs’ situation would have been offended by
Defendants’ conduct.
48. Each Defendant’s conduct was a substantial factor in causing the
alleged harm.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek relief as hereafter set forth.
SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF False Arrest and Illegal Imprisonment
(By All Plaintiffs Against All Defendants) 49. Plaintiffs incorporate the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint as
though fully set forth in this claim for relief.
50. On May 26, 2012, Defendants, and each of them, arrested Plaintiffs
without process and prohibited Plaintiffs from moving freely.
51. Defendants deprived Plaintiffs of this freedom of movement by use of
force, threats of force, and unreasonable duress.
52. Plaintiffs did not consent to their false arrest and false imprisonment and
were harmed thereby.
53. Each Defendant’s conduct was a substantial factor in causing the
alleged harm.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek relief as hereafter set forth.
I’
ll
Angie Inman, et al., v. Santa Cruz Seaside Company, et al. Page 10 Complaint
Case5:13-cv-03235-PSG Document1 Filed07/12/13 Page10 of 13
I
SEVENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
Intentional Infliction Of Emotional Distress
2 (By All Plaintiffs Against All Defendants)
3 54. Plaintiffs incorporate the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint as
4 though fully set forth in this claim for relief.
5 55. On May 26, 2012, Defendants, and each of them, either engaged in
6 outrageous conduct intended to cause Plaintiffs emotional distress or acted with
7 reckless disregard of the probability that Plaintiffs would suffer emotional distress
8 56. Plaintiffs suffered severe emotional distress.
9 57. Each Defendant’s conduct was a substantial factor in causing the
10 I alleged severe emotional distress.
11
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek relief as hereafter set forth.
12 EIGHTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF Negligence
13 (By All Plaintiffs Against All Defendants)
14 58. Plaintiffs incorporate the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint as
15 .1 though fully set forth in this claim for relief.
16 59. On May 26, 2012, Defendants, and each of them, were negligent in
17 doing the acts alleged in this Complaint.
18 60. Plaintiffs were injured as a result of that negligence.
19 61. As a proximate result of that negligence, Plaintiffs suffered damages
20 including severe emotional distress.
21 62. Each Defendant’s conduct was a substantial factor in causing the
22 alleged damages including severe emotional distress.
23 WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek relief as hereafter set forth.
24 NINTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF California Civil Code §§ 52, 52.1
25 (By All Plaintiffs Against All Defendants)
63. Plaintiffs incorporate the foregoing paragraphs of this Complaint as
27
28 CASPER, MEADOWS. SCHWARTZ & COOK
2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 1020
Walnut Creek, CA94596 TEL: (925) 947-1 147 FAX (925) 947-1131
II though fully set forth in this claim for relief.
Angie Inman, et al., v. Santa Cruz Seaside Company, et al. Complaint
Page 11
Case5:13-cv-03235-PSG Document1 Filed07/12/13 Page11 of 13
I 64. On May 26, 2012, Defendants, and each of them, using threats,
2 coercion and intimidation, interfered with and threatened to interfere with Plaintiffs’
3 rights guaranteed by the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments tothe United States
4 Constitution and Art. 1, § 13 of the California Constitution.
5 65. The actions of these Defendants, and each of them, was a substantial
6 factor in causing Plaintiffs to sustain harm and the special and general damages
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK
2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 1020
Walnut Creek, CA 94596 TEL: (925) 947-1147 FAX (925) 947-1131
which Plaintiffs will establish at trial.
66. The individually named Defendants acted with malice and oppression.
These Defendants’ conduct was intended to harm Plaintiffs or was despicable, carried
out with a conscious disregard of Plaintiffs’ rights or safety. Defendants’ conduct also
subjected Plaintiffs to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of Plaintiffs’
rights. Plaintiffs are entitled to such statutory damages allowed by California Civil
Code §§ 52, and 52.1(b).
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek relief as hereafter set forth.
1. For general, pecuniary and special damages, according to proof;
2. For exemplary damages against all individually sued Defendants;
3. For statutory damages pursuant to California Civil Code §§ 52.1
and 52;
4. For reasonable attorney’s fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988 on
Plaintiffs’ First, Second and Third Claims for Relief.
5. For reasonable attorney’s fees pursuant to California Civil Code
§§ 51.2 and 52 on Plaintiffs’ Tenth Claim for Relief.
6. For prejudgment interest pursuant to Civil Code § 3288, or as
otherwise permitted by law;
7. For costs of suit; and
8. For such other and further relief as the court may deem just and
proper.
II
Angie Inman, et al., v. Santa Cruz Seaside Company, et al. Page 12 Complaint
Case5:13-cv-03235-PSG Document1 Filed07/12/13 Page12 of 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK
2121 N. California Blvd., Suite 1020
Walnut Creek, CA 94596 TEL. (925) 947-1147 FAX (925) 947-1131
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiffs hereby demand a jury trial in this action.
Dated: July It, 2013 / ( Andrew C. Schwartz CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Angie Inman, et al., v. Santa Cruz Seaside Company, et al. Page 13 Complaint
Case5:13-cv-03235-PSG Document1 Filed07/12/13 Page13 of 13