PLAINTIFFS ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

Attorney Names

Attorneys’ Business Address

City, ST ZIP Code

Phone | Fax

Email

Attorney for Plaintiff

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA

PETER PARKER,Plaintiff,vs.STOREY COUNTY SHERIFF; AND DOES 1-10 INCLUSIVE,Defendant Case No.: Numberplaintiff’s original complaint

NOW COMES Plaintiff, Peter Parker, and files this Complaint against the Storey County Sheriff, Defendant, and for cause would show this Honorable Court as follows:

  1. NATURE OF THE ACTION
  2. This is an action for violation of Peter Parker’s rights as well as other torts committed against him when he was arrested by Defendant. The foregoing causes of action and others are discussed herein, and Plaintiff seeks compensation.
  1. PARTIES
  1. Plaintiff Peter Parker is a male adult of sound mind and a law-abiding citizen residing in Storey County, Nevada.
  2. Defendant Storey County Sheriff is the Sheriff for Storey County. His duties include law enforcement within Storey County.
  3. Defendants DOES 1-10 Inclusive are law enforcement officers attached to the Storey County Sheriff’s Department. Plaintiff will amend this Complaint to include their names once they become clear through discovery.
  1. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
  1. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S. Code § 1331 (federal question), and 28 U.S. Code § 1343 (civil rights).
  2. Venue is proper in this Court in accordance with 28 U.S. Code § 1391(b), which states that: “A civil action may be brought in – (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred.” The causes of action took place in the State of Nevada.
  1. STATEMENT OF FACTS
  1. On or around (Date), Plaintiff was peacefully riding in Virginia City to attend the Street Vibrations motorcycle rally. 
  2. Out of nowhere, Defendants pulled him over and began to ask him questions about a motorcycle gang known as the Spidermen. Plaintiff chose to exercise his right to remain silent.
  3. Defendants did not give Plaintiff any reason why they stopped him.
  4. When Plaintiff remained silent, Defendants handcuffed Plaintiff, bundled him into the back of the police car, and took him to jail.
  5. Defendants continued attempts to interrogate Plaintiff, but he continued to exercise his right to remain silent.
  6. While interrogating Plaintiff, Defendants refused to give Plaintiff water. They also refused to grant Plaintiff an opportunity to use the restroom. Plaintiff was interrogated by Defendants for 3 hours.
  7. Defendants became angry at Plaintiff’s exercise of his right to remain silent and the subsequent silence when they asked him questions.
  8. One of the Defendants became angry and slapped Plaintiff in the face.
  9. Finally, the district attorney informed Defendants that there was no basis to prosecute Plaintiff, and he was released.
  1. CAUSES OF ACTION

Lack of Probable Cause for Arrest

  1. Plaintiff incorporates by reference Paragraphs 7-15 of this Complaint as if set out in full herein.
  2. Defendants did not have probable cause to arrest Plaintiff on (Date).
  3. In Brown v. Darcy, No. 2:09-CV-0956-LDG-RJJ (2011), it was held that probable cause exists “when officers have knowledge or reasonably trustworthy information sufficient to lead a person of reasonable caution to believe that an offense has been or is being committed by the person being arrested.” Fayer v. Vaughn, 649 F.3d 1061, 1064 (9th Cir. 2011) (quoting United States v. Lopez, 482 F.3d 1067, 1072 (9th Cir. 2007)).
  4. Defendants did not have knowledge or reasonably trustworthy information that Plaintiff had committed or was committing an offense at the time he was pulled over. 
  5. Plaintiff was simply riding his motorcycle to attend the Street Vibrations motorcycle rally. 
  6. There were other people going to the Street Vibrations motorcycle rally, but they were not pulled over by Defendants. The Street Vibrations motorcycle rally was a lawful event being attended by Plaintiff, a law-abiding citizen who had not committed any offense, nor was he committing an offense.
  7. Just like the other people who attended the Street Vibrations motorcycle rally, Plaintiff too had a right to attend the event. His enthusiasm for the rally made him ride his motorcycle to attend it. He went to enjoy and have a good time, not to commit any offense.
  8. When the district attorney analyzed the facts, he came to a conclusion that there was no basis upon which to prosecute Plaintiff, and he was released.
  9. The burden of proof lies on Defendants to prove that they had knowledge or reasonably trustworthy information to believe that he had committed an offense, or he was committing an offense.

Violation of Plaintiff’s Fifth Amendment Rights

  1. Plaintiff incorporates by reference Paragraphs 7-15 of this Complaint as if set out in full herein.
  2. The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution stipulates as follows: “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on  presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice out in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
  3. The drafters of the United States Constitution intended the Fifth Amendment to protect U.S. citizens from giving self-incriminating evidence. In doing so, they have the right to remain silent when being questioned by a law enforcement officer before and after arrest.
  4. Plaintiff exercised his right to remain silent and kept quiet as Defendants asked him questions. 
  5. Before Plaintiff was arrested, he exercised this right and remained silent as he was being questioned by Defendants. As a result, Defendants arrested him and continued to interrogate him while in jail. Being aware of his rights, Plaintiff continued to remain silent as he was being interrogated. He did not want to say anything that could incriminate him, putting him in trouble. 
  6. In order to compel Plaintiff to give self-incriminating evidence, Defendants declined to give him water and to offer Plaintiff the opportunity to use the restroom upon request when they interrogated him for 3 hours.
  7. In a desperate attempt to make Plaintiff give self-incriminating evidence, one of the Defendants got agitated and slapped Plaintiff.
  8. In Fidelity Bankers Life Insurance Company v. Wedco Inc. et. al., 586 F. Supp. 1123 (1984), the court held that: “The mere possibility of criminal prosecution is all that is necessary for the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination to be properly invoked.”
  9. Plaintiff knew that there was a possibility of criminal prosecution when he was pulled over by Defendants. It is a reasonable assumption made by anyone pulled over by law enforcement officers such as Defendants.
  10. Eventually, Plaintiff was arrested and taken to jail. The district attorney was contacted, but he concluded that there was no basis for prosecution.
  11. Defendants are liable for the violation of Plaintiff’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

Assault and Battery

  1. Plaintiff incorporates by reference Paragraphs 7-15 of this Complaint as if set out in full herein.
  2. “To state an assault claim, a plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant: (1) intended to cause harmful or offensive physical contact; and (2) the victim was put in apprehension of such contact.” Sandoval v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, 854 Supp. 2d 860, 882 (D. Nev. 2012) (citing Restatement (Second) of Torts, § 21 (1965)), reversed on other grounds by Sandoval v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Department, 756 F.3d 1154 (9th Cir. 2014).
  3. “To state a battery claim, plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant: (1) intended to cause harmful or offensive contact; and (2) such contact occurred.” Burns v. Mayer, 175 F. Supp. 2d 1259, 1269 (D. Nev. 2001) (citing Restatement (Second) of Torts §§ 13, 18 (1965)).
  4. “In Nevada, police officers are privileged to use the amount of force reasonably necessary.” See Yada v. Simpson, 112 Nev. 254, 913 P.2d 1261, 1262 (1996), superseded by statute on other grounds as recognized by RTTC Commc’n, LLC v. Saratoga Flier Inc., 121 Nev. 34, 110 P.3d 24, 29 (2005).
  5. “Officers are liable for battery to the extent that they use more force than is reasonably necessary.” Gordon v. Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep’t., No. 2:13-CV-01095-GMN-GWF, 2015 WL 5344549, at *11 (D. Nev. Sept. 14, 2015); Ramirez v. City of Reno, 925 F. Supp. 681, 691 (D. Nev. 1996) (applying Nevada Law); see Yada, 913 P.2d at 1262.
  6. The Defendant who slapped Plaintiff did not do it accidentally. It was intentional to cause harmful contact. He was angry at Plaintiff for exercising his right to remain silent and his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. He intended to cause physical contact with Plaintiff, and he put Plaintiff in the apprehension of contact with his hand that slapped him. Therefore, the Defendant is liable for assault and battery.
  7. In this circumstance, it was completely unnecessary for the Defendant to slap Plaintiff. Plaintiff was not resisting arrest, nor was he causing any physical trouble to warrant the slap. It was unreasonable for the Defendant to slap Plaintiff when he was just seated, calm, and silent. The Defendant is liable for battery.

False Arrest and False Imprisonment

  1. Plaintiff incorporates by reference Paragraphs 7-24 of this Complaint as if set out in full herein.
  2. In Toliver v. Pacheco, No. 2:20-CV-00383-GMN-NJK (Dist. Court., D. Nev., 2020), the court stated the following: “Under Nevada law, to establish false imprisonment of which false arrest is an integral part, it is necessary to prove that the person [was] restrained of his liberty under the probable imminence of force without any legal cause or justification.” 
  3. Plaintiff has already established that Defendants did not have probable cause for arresting him. He was simply riding his motorcycle to attend the Street Vibrations motorcycle rally. 
  4. There was probable imminence of force if Plaintiff had resisted arrest or tried to cause trouble with Defendants. Instead, he remained calm and chose to remain silent until he was arrested by Defendants. 
  5. By arresting Plaintiff for no reason, Plaintiff was restrained of his liberty without probable cause or justification. 
  6. While in jail, Defendants interrogated Plaintiff for 3 hours and declined to give him water or the opportunity to use the restroom when he requested. Defendants did not have probable cause to bring Plaintiff to jail, nor did they have justification for denying him water and the opportunity to use the restroom.
  7. Defendants are liable for false arrest and false imprisonment.
  1. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

REASONS WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Honorable Court to grant him the following reliefs:

  1. Grant judgment in his favor;
  2. Issue a Declaration that Defendants violated Plaintiff’s Fifth Amendment rights guaranteed under the United States Constitution;
  3. Award Plaintiff damages for violation of his Fifth Amendment rights in the sum of $______;
  4. Award Plaintiff damages for assault and battery in the sum of $______;
  5. Award Plaintiff damages for false arrest and false imprisonment in the sum of $________;
  6. Award Plaintiff punitive damages;
  7. Award Plaintiff pre and post-judgment interests and costs of this suit as allowed by law;
  8. Award Plaintiff such equitable relief as may be appropriate under the circumstances; and
  9. Award such further relief as this Honorable Court deems necessary and proper.

Dated this 29th day of November 2021.

Respectfully Submitted,

___________________________________

Your Name,

Your State Bar No.

Attorney for Plaintiff

VERIFICATION

I, Peter Parker, being duly sworn depose and say that I am the Plaintiff in the above-entitled action, that I have read the foregoing Original Complaint and know the contents thereof. That the same is true of my own knowledge except as to those matters and things stated upon information and belief, and as to those things, I believe them to be true.

_________________________________

(Sign in the presence of a Notary Public)

Sworn to and subscribed before me this ___ day of ___________________, 2021.

______________________________

Notary Public

________________________________________

(Printed name of Notary Public)

My Commission Expires: ____________________

At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, The LegalPen will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible. You can send us your quick enquiry ( here )