united states district court eastern …media.nola.com/crime_impact/other/hervey farrell...united...

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTEASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

HERVEY FARRELL CIVIL DOCKET: 14-772

VERSUS JUDGE:

MITCHELL J. LANDRIEU, MAYOR MAGISTRATE:OF THE CITY OF NEW ORLEANS; RONAL W. SERPAS, SUPERINTENDENT JURY TRIAL REQUESTEDOF THE NEW ORLEANS POLICE DEPARTMENT, OFFICER ALFRED MORAN, SERGEANT RICHARD HUNTER, OFFICER JACK BUZALI MANNING, AND JENNIFER GAUBERT

******************************************************************************

COMPLAINT

1.

This complaint of Hervey Farrell, of lawful age and resident of the city of New Orleans,

Louisiana, within this judicial district, respectfully represents:

I. JURISDICTION

2.

Jurisdiction is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1343(3) and 1331 for this cause of

action arising under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 and 1988, the Civil Rights Act as amended.

3.

Plaintiff also asserts claims under pendant and supplemental jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C.

Section 1367, for claims cognizable under the laws of the State of Louisiana for false arrest,

kidnapping, and violation of plaintiff’s constitutional rights and privileges.

Case 2:14-cv-00772-ILRL-MBN Document 1 Filed 04/04/14 of 14

II. PARTIES

4.

Made defendants herein are:

a. Mitchell J. Landrieu, the duly elected mayor of the City of New Orleans and a resident of

the city of New Orleans, Louisiana, who is herein sued in his official capacity;

b. Ronal W. Serpas, the superintendent of the New Orleans Police Department, and a

resident of the city of New Orleans, Louisiana, who is herein sued in his official capacity;

c. Officer Alfred Moran, a police officer employed by the New Orleans Police Department,

a resident of the city of New Orleans, Louisiana, who is herein sued in his individual and

official capacity;

d. Sergeant Richard Hunter, a police officer employed by the New Orleans Police

Department, a resident of the city of New Orleans, Louisiana, who is herein sued in his

individual and official capacity;

e. Officer Jack Buzali Manning, a police officer employed by the New Orleans the New

Orleans Police Department, a resident of the city of New Orleans, Louisiana, who is

herein sued in his individual and official capacity;

f. Jennifer Gaubert, a resident of the City of New Orleans, who is herein sued in her

individual capacity.

III. ALLEGATIONS


5.

On the morning of April 6, 2012, plaintiff, Mr. Farrell, was operating a White Fleet taxi

cab on or about Bourbon Street and Bienville Street, located in New Orleans, Louisiana.

Plaintiff observed an individual attempting to hail his cab, and thus pulled his taxi cab to the

corner of Bourbon Street and Bienville Street. The individual advised that he was seeking a taxi

cab service for a female individual, later identified as defendant, Jennifer Gaubert.

6.

Defendant, Jennifer Gaubert, entered the cab and appeared visibly intoxicated.

Defendant advised Mr. Farrell to bring her to 6640 Vicksburg Street, located in the city of New

Orleans. Mr. Farrell proceeded to drive defendant, Jennifer Gaubert, to that address. Upon

arrival at 6640 Vicksburg Street, defendant , Jennifer Gaubert, advised Mr. Farrell that this was

the incorrect address, and stated that she wanted him to keep driving.

7.

Mr. Farrell continued to drive the defendant down Vicksburg Street, until he again asked

defendant for the address or intersection at which she wished to be dropped off. Defendant,

Jennifer Gaubert, then advised Mr. Farrell that she wished for him to proceed down an alleyway

behind a row of homes. Mr. Farrell advised that he would not proceed down this alleyway, and

again asked defendant for the address or intersection at which she wished to be dropped off.

8.

Defendant, Jennifer Gaubert, proceeded to climb into the front seat of Mr. Farrell’s

vehicle, prompting Mr. Farrell to order defendant out of the vehicle. Ms. Gaubert refused, and


began to attempt to touch Mr. Farrell inappropriately, and conducted herself in a lewd and

lascivious manner while making sexually suggestive remarks and asking Mr. Farrell to touch

her. On one occasion, defendant touched Mr. Ferrell’s clothing located over his genital area.

9.

Mr. Farrell again ordered the defendant to get out of the vehicle, but Ms. Gaubert again

refused. Alarmed, and in order to protect himself, Mr. Farrell activated the video camera on his

mobile phone, and rested the phone against the driver’s side window in order to obtain as full a

view of the inside of the vehicle as possible. Mr. Farrell again, while on video, ordered Ms.

Gaubert to exit the vehicle. Instead of complying, Ms. Gaubert continued to make sexually

suggestive remarks and exposed herself by lifting her dress.

10.

After several minutes of this activity, Ms. Gaubert finally complied and exited the

vehicle after she threatened Plaintiff. Plaintiff immediately telephoned the New Orleans Police

Department and advised that he had been sexually battered. A police officer arrived on scene,

observed the video taken by Mr. Farrell, and made a report of the incident. Misdemeanor

charges against Jennifer Gaubert were initiated in Orleans Parish Municipal Court as a result of

her actions against Plaintiff.

11.

Plaintiff, Mr. Farrell, also filed a civil complaint against Jennifer Gaubert, in order to

seek damages and an admission of her actions for purposes of maintaining his excellent record

with White Fleet Cab Company. During the course of this litigation, Mr. Ferrell’s attorney


sought settlement of the civil matter with Ms. Gaubert’s attorney, and conferred with her counsel

both through email and by telephone. At no time did Mr. Farrell ever email, or contact the

defendant in any way.

12.

Approximately one year after defendant sexually battered and threatened Plaintiff, on the

morning of April 5, 2013, Jennifer Gaubert contacted the New Orleans Police Department.

Defendant, Officer Alfred Moran, assigned to the Third District of the New Orleans Police

Department, arrived to conduct an investigation.

13.

Ms. Gaubert advised Officer Alfred Moran that on April 6, 2012, she entered Mr.

Farrell’s taxi cab while intoxicated. She further advised that she was allowed to get into the

passenger seat of the taxi and that she engaged in consensual kissing with Mr. Farrell. Ms.

Gaubert further advised that Mr. Farrell stopped the vehicle, and used his cellphone to record

video of Ms. Gaubert with her skirt lifted and her exposed genetalia, and that she never gave Mr.

Farrell permission to record her. Ms. Gaubert further told Officer Moran that her attorney, Ms.

Brigid Collins, received a copy of the video from Mr. Farrell via email, and that Mr. Farrell

indicated that if he was paid $1000, the video and the charges filed against Ms. Farrell would go

away. Ms. Gaubert’s exchange with Officer Moran may be found by referencing NOPD

Incident/Item Number D-06425-13.


14.

Based upon the false information provided to Officer Moran by Ms. Gaubert, and based

solely on that statement, Officer Moran and defendant, Sergeant R. Hunter, obtained an arrest

warrant for Mr. Farrell for an alleged violation of La. R.S. 14:66 relative to extortion, and La.

R.S. 14:263 relative to video voyeurism. At no time did Officer Moran or Sergeant Hunter ask

Ms. Gaubert to show them the alleged email from Mr. Farrell, which did not exist. At no time

did Officer Moran or Sergeant Hunter attempt to contact Mr. Farrell relative to this investigation,

despite having his full name, date of birth, social security number, and home address on the face

sheet of the arrest report. At no time did Officer Morgan or Sergeant Hunter view or ask to view

the videotape that was the subject of Ms. Gaubert’s fraudulent complaint. At no time did Officer

Moran or Sergeant Hunter seek out or investigate the original report of the incident, which was

filed the same day of its occurrence by Mr. Farrell. At no time did Officer Moran or Sergeant

Hunter investigate the pending charges against Ms. Gaubert at Municipal Court that arose out of

this same incident.

15.

Several months later, without ever receiving any notice of an outstanding warrant, nor

without ever receiving any contact from the New Orleans Police Department, Mr. Farrell was

operating his taxi cab on August 19, 2013. Mr. Farrell was stopped pursuant to an alleged traffic

violation, at which time defendant, Officer Jack Buzali Manning, checked Mr. Farrell’s name

through the NOPD MOTIONS system, which revealed the warrants for Mr. Farrell’s arrest.

Without probable cause, Officer Manning placed Mr. Farrell under arrest and transported him to

central lock up. Reference NOPD Incident/Item Number D-06425-13 (Supplemental).


16.

As a result of the illegal and unlawful actions of Ms. Gaubert, Officer Moran, Sergeant

Hunter, and Officer Manning, Mr. Farrell was incarcerated in Orleans Parish Prison for over 27

hours. Mr. Farrell was forced to post a $21,000.00 bail bond in order to secure his release. Mr.

Farrell’s name and photo were placed alongside Ms. Gaubert and the New Orleans Police

Department’s fictitious story in the local newspapers, as well as on websites which receive views

nationwide. Mr. Farrell was forced to surrender his taxi cab license pending the outcome of an

investigation, and was thus unable to work or support himself for several months.

17.

Ms. Gaubert contacted several news and media outlets and spread her false claims

against Mr. Farrell. The story was picked up by Nola.com, The Times Picayune, the Advocate,

Above the Law, WWL, and countless media outlets across the United States and abroad. The

information has been published online, in print, and on tv, with the fraudulent allegations against

Mr. Farrell, and including a photo of Mr. Farrell, which has also been widely distributed.

18.

Due to Ms. Gaubert’s false accusations, the media portrayed Mr. Farrell as a criminal

who committed video voyeurism and extortion. As a result of her false accusations, Mr. Farrell

was forced to surrender his taxi cab license and was unable to work. Mr. Farrell also had to

undergo an investigation and hearing by the taxicab bureau.


19.

Ms. Gaubert’s false accusations have caused immense damage to Mr. Farrell and his

family as they have destroyed his reputation in the community. As a result of Ms. Gaubert’s

baseless claims, Mr. Farrell was unable to work for several months and suffered depression and

emotional distress, having to struggle to support his family for approximately two months while

Ms. Gaubert’s baseless charges were pending.

20.

Despite knowing that the information she had been circulating was false, neither Ms.

Gaubert nor the NOPD took any steps to rectify the situation by removing or correcting the false

information that had been circulating regarding Mr. Farrell.

21.

The criminal investigation of the incident was turned over to the office of the Honorable

District Attorney for the Parish of Orleans. After conducting a thorough investigation, unlike the

New Orleans Police Department, all charges against Mr. Farrell were refused and dismissed. As

a result of this investigation, the Honorable District Attorney charged Ms. Gaubert pursuant to

La. R.S. 14:126.2, making false statements which led to the denial of Mr. Farrell’s constitutional

rights, a felony under Louisiana law.

22.

On April 2, 2014, Jennifer Gaubert was convicted of Simple Battery, under Louisiana

Revised Statutes § 14:35, against Mr. Farrell in Orleans Parish Municipal Court, Case #1122563,

relative to the incident herein complained of.


23.

Mr. Farrell has suffered difficulty eating and sleeping since the events alleged herein

took place.

24.

The actions of the defendants were wanton, reckless, deliberate, and were such an abuse

of power as to shock the conscience and exceed the ordinary bounds of acceptable behavior.

25.

All of the acts of all of the defendants were done in concert with each other, and with the

approval and complicity of upper management of the New Orleans Police Department and City

of New Orleans, including Superintendent Serpas and Mayor Landrieu. As a result of Ms.

Gaubert’s status as a radio host and local attorney, she was provided preferential treatment by

the New Orleans Police Department and her statements were knowingly used as the basis to

obtain a warrant despite knowledge of the prior report of this incident in the NOPD’s own

computer systems.

26.

By failing to properly and diligently conduct their investigation in their application for a

warrant, defendants acted with reckless disregard for the truth.

27.

Mayor Landrieu and Superintendent Serpas have created an atmosphere and practice of

allowing the officers of the New Orleans Police Department to have unlimited authority, to make


decisions on arresting citizens without conducting proper investigations, to seek arrest warrants

based and make arrests based upon false information, and exposing the citizens of New Orleans

and the plaintiff to the dangers of law enforcement officers acting unlawfully in concert without

any authority. In creating this atmosphere, defendants have created a policy and custom that

permits officers to violate citizens’ civil rights.

28.

Mayor Landrieu and Superintendent Serpas have failed to adequately or properly train or

supervise the officers of the New Orleans Police Department, and this lack of training or

supervision has led to a violation of the plaintiff’s rights. Mayor Landrieu and Superintendent

Serpas did not even require the minimal step of requiring a search of prior reports regarding this

incident, or open criminal litigation in the parish in which these officers operate, prior to issuing

a baseless arrest warrant.

29.

Defendants are not entitled to a finding of qualified immunity because the law was

clearly established at the time of the incident.

IV. LOUISIANA CLAIMS

30.

The plaintiff realleges and reurges all the allegations hereinabove, and asserts violations

of Louisiana law relative to negligence and lack of training and supervision of the New Orleans

Police Department and failure to properly monitor the officers of the New Orleans Police


Department. In addition, defendants are liable to plaintiff for false arrest, false imprisonment,

malicious prosecution, and kidnapping.

31.

Defendants Officer Moran and Sergeant Hunter knowingly and intentionally acted with

the full knowledge and authority of Superintendent Serpas in completing an application for, and

securing an arrest warrant for plaintiff without conducting any investigation. In doing so,

defendants acted pursuant to policy and custom of the New Orleans Police Department.

32.

No defendant had probable cause to seek or secure an arrest warrant, nor did any

defendant have any probable cause to arrest the plaintiff at any time.

33.

Defendants are liable to the Plaintiff for restraining Mr. Farrell and detaining him against

his will and without statutory authority, and for transporting Mr. Farrell against his will.

34.

Defendants are liable to the Plaintiff for malicious prosecution for the commencement of

their criminal case against Mr. Farrell without probable cause and due to the case against Mr.

Farrell being terminated in his favor. Defendants’ actions in their malicious prosecution of the

Plaintiff caused him to suffer harm and distress.


35.

Defendants’ actions violated the constitution of the United States, the Fourteenth

Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, the Sixth Amendment, and the Eighth Amendment as well

as the correlative provisions of Louisiana law prohibiting arrest and confinement without due

process as well as kidnapping and malicious prosecution.

36.

Defendants’ actions, by way of their extreme and outrageous actions, intentionally or

recklessly caused Mr. Farrell to suffer severe emotional distress.

37.

Defendant, Jennifer Gaubert, committed a battery against Mr. Farrell by causing him to

suffer a harmful or offensive contact.

38.

Defendant, Jennifer Gaubert, is liable to Mr. Farrell, and Mr. Farrell seeks recovery, in

addition to all other claims, for the amount of the bond he incurred as a result of her fraudulent

charges against him, and for all other costs or expenses incurred therefrom.

V. DAMAGES

39.

Plaintiff respectfully requests all relief to which the plaintiff is entitled to as a matter of

law, that defendants be held jointly, severally, and solidarily liable for all damages suffered by

state and federal violations as set forth herein and as authorized by law, including but not limited


to expenses incurred, attorneys’ fees, costs, interest, and punitive damages, as well as all general

and equitable relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 and §1988.

VI. JURY DEMAND

40.

Plaintiff requests a trial by jury pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure.

41.

WHEREFORE, the plaintiff, Hervey Farrell, respectfully requests that this Honorable

Court enter judgment in his favor and against defendants for all relief to which the plaintiff is

entitled to as a matter of law, and that defendants be held jointly, severally, and solidarily liable

for all damages, attorneys’ fees, costs, pre-judgment interest, post-judgment interest, punitive

damages, as well as all general and equitable relief under Louisiana and federal law.

Respectfully Submitted,

USRY, WEEKS & MATTHEWS

By: s/Timothy R. Richardson TIMOTHY R. RICHARDSON, (#27625)BLAKE J. ARCURI (#32322)1615 Poydras Street, Suite 1250New Orleans, Louisiana 70112Telephone: (504) 592-4600Facsimile: (504) 592-4641


CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I do hereby certify that, on this 4th day of April, 2014, a copy of the foregoing was filed

electronically with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system. Notice of this filing will be

sent by operation of the court’s electronic filing system. I also certify that a copy of the

foregoing will be sent to all non-CM/ECF participants by United States Mail, properly addressed

and postage prepaid.

By: s/Timothy R. RichardsonTIMOTHY R. RICHARDSON


JS 44 (Rev. 12/12) CIVIL COVER SHEETThe JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except asprovided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for thepurpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)

I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff County of Residence of First Listed Defendant(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)

NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.

(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)

’ 1 U.S. Government ’ 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEFPlaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State ’ 1 ’ 1 Incorporated or Principal Place ’ 4 ’ 4

of Business In This State

’ 2 U.S. Government ’ 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State ’ 2 ’ 2 Incorporated and Principal Place ’ 5 ’ 5Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State

Citizen or Subject of a ’ 3 ’ 3 Foreign Nation ’ 6 ’ 6 Foreign Country

IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only)CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES

’ 110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY ’ 625 Drug Related Seizure ’ 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 ’ 375 False Claims Act’ 120 Marine ’ 310 Airplane ’ 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 ’ 423 Withdrawal ’ 400 State Reapportionment’ 130 Miller Act ’ 315 Airplane Product Product Liability ’ 690 Other 28 USC 157 ’ 410 Antitrust’ 140 Negotiable Instrument Liability ’ 367 Health Care/ ’ 430 Banks and Banking’ 150 Recovery of Overpayment ’ 320 Assault, Libel & Pharmaceutical PROPERTY RIGHTS ’ 450 Commerce

& Enforcement of Judgment Slander Personal Injury ’ 820 Copyrights ’ 460 Deportation’ 151 Medicare Act ’ 330 Federal Employers’ Product Liability ’ 830 Patent ’ 470 Racketeer Influenced and’ 152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability ’ 368 Asbestos Personal ’ 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations

Student Loans ’ 340 Marine Injury Product ’ 480 Consumer Credit (Excludes Veterans) ’ 345 Marine Product Liability LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY ’ 490 Cable/Sat TV

’ 153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY ’ 710 Fair Labor Standards ’ 861 HIA (1395ff) ’ 850 Securities/Commodities/ of Veteran’s Benefits ’ 350 Motor Vehicle ’ 370 Other Fraud Act ’ 862 Black Lung (923) Exchange

’ 160 Stockholders’ Suits ’ 355 Motor Vehicle ’ 371 Truth in Lending ’ 720 Labor/Management ’ 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) ’ 890 Other Statutory Actions’ 190 Other Contract Product Liability ’ 380 Other Personal Relations ’ 864 SSID Title XVI ’ 891 Agricultural Acts’ 195 Contract Product Liability ’ 360 Other Personal Property Damage ’ 740 Railway Labor Act ’ 865 RSI (405(g)) ’ 893 Environmental Matters’ 196 Franchise Injury ’ 385 Property Damage ’ 751 Family and Medical ’ 895 Freedom of Information

’ 362 Personal Injury - Product Liability Leave Act Act Medical Malpractice ’ 790 Other Labor Litigation ’ 896 Arbitration

REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS ’ 791 Employee Retirement FEDERAL TAX SUITS ’ 899 Administrative Procedure’ 210 Land Condemnation ’ 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: Income Security Act ’ 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff Act/Review or Appeal of ’ 220 Foreclosure ’ 441 Voting ’ 463 Alien Detainee or Defendant) Agency Decision’ 230 Rent Lease & Ejectment ’ 442 Employment ’ 510 Motions to Vacate ’ 871 IRS—Third Party ’ 950 Constitutionality of’ 240 Torts to Land ’ 443 Housing/ Sentence 26 USC 7609 State Statutes’ 245 Tort Product Liability Accommodations ’ 530 General’ 290 All Other Real Property ’ 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - ’ 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION

Employment Other: ’ 462 Naturalization Application’ 446 Amer. w/Disabilities - ’ 540 Mandamus & Other ’ 465 Other Immigration

Other ’ 550 Civil Rights Actions’ 448 Education ’ 555 Prison Condition

’ 560 Civil Detainee - Conditions of Confinement

V. ORIGIN (Place an “X” in One Box Only)

’ 1 OriginalProceeding

’ 2 Removed fromState Court

’ 3 Remanded fromAppellate Court

’ 4 Reinstated orReopened

’ 5 Transferred fromAnother District(specify)

’ 6 MultidistrictLitigation

VI. CAUSE OF ACTION

Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity): Brief description of cause:

VII. REQUESTED IN COMPLAINT:

’ CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTIONUNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P.

DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:JURY DEMAND: ’ Yes ’ No

VIII. RELATED CASE(S) IF ANY (See instructions):

JUDGE DOCKET NUMBERDATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE

Case 2:14-cv-00772-ILRL-MBN Document 1-1 Filed 04/04/14 Page 1 of 2

JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 12/12)

INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44

Authority For Civil Cover Sheet

The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers asrequired by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, isrequired for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk ofCourt for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:

I.(a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use only the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and then the official, giving both name and title.

(b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land condemnation cases, the county of residence of the "defendant" is the location of the tract of land involved.)

(c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, notingin this section "(see attachment)".

II. Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.Cv.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an "X" in one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below.United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an "X" in this box.Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment to the Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes precedence, and box 1 or 2 should be marked.Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the citizenship of the different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversity cases.)

III. Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark thissection for each principal party.

IV. Nature of Suit. Place an "X" in the appropriate box. If the nature of suit cannot be determined, be sure the cause of action, in Section VI below, is sufficient to enable the deputy clerk or the statistical clerk(s) in the Administrative Office to determine the nature of suit. If the cause fits more than one nature of suit, select the most definitive.

V. Origin. Place an "X" in one of the six boxes.Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts.Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441. When the petition for removal is granted, check this box.Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filing date.Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date.Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or multidistrict litigation transfers.Multidistrict Litigation. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1407. When this box is checked, do not check (5) above.

VI. Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553 Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service

VII. Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "X" in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.Demand. In this space enter the actual dollar amount being demanded or indicate other demand, such as a preliminary injunction.Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded.

VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pending cases, if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket numbers and the corresponding judge names for such cases.

Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.


AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTfor the

__________ District of __________

))))))))))))

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if youare the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 ofthe Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk


AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .

’ I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

’ I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

’ I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

’ I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

’ Other (specify):

.

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:




__________ District of __________

))))))))))))

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)






CLERK OF COURT

