Case 5:17-cv-01358-UJH-VEH Document 1 Filed 08/12/17 Page 1 of 14 FILED

2017 Aug-14 AM 08:31

U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHEASTERN DIVISION
HARAESHEO RICE, )
)
Plaintiff, )
v. )
)
MADISON COUNTY, SHERIFF BLAKE ) CIVIL ACTION NO.
DORNING, individually, OFFICER )
MALONEY, individually, LT. ) JURY DEMAND
THOMPSON, individually, OFFICER )
MARCUS MACKEY, individually, LT. )
DAVIES, individually, OFFICER DARYL )
MILLER, individually, SGT. GREEN, )
individually, )

Defendants.
COMPLAINT

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

1. This is an action for damages and other relief, arising from constitutional

violations suffered by Plaintiff, Haraesheo Rice, pursuant to the Fourteenth Amendment of the

United States Constitution.

2. This Court has jurisdiction over the claims in this lawsuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

1331, 1343(a)(3) and (4), and 1367. The Madison County jail, where Plaintiff was being

detained and where a substantial part if not all of the unlawful acts alleged herein occurred,

is located in Madison County, Alabama. Thus, venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28

U.S.C. 1391(b).

3. At all times material to Plaintiff's claims, the individual defendants were state

actors acting under color of state law. The individual defendants are sued in their individual

capacity.

4. Plaintiff is an individual with a mental disability. As such, Plaintiffs family made

 Case 5:17-cv-01358-UJH-VEH Document 1 Filed 08/12/17 Page 2 of 14

grievances to the Madison County Board of Commissioners, Defendant Dorning and the

Madison County Jail Administrator at the time, Steve Morrison on behalf of Plaintiff.

STATEMENT OF THE PARTIES

5. Plaintiff, Haraesheo Rice, is an individual over the age of nineteen (19) years and

a citizen of the United States. At all times material to this Complaint, Plaintiff was incarcerated

at the Madison County Jail, located in Madison County, Alabama. At all times relevant to this

complaint, Plaintiff was a person with a disability.

6. Defendant Madison County is a political subdivision of the State of Alabama,

which maintains the Madison County Jail. Madison County, as a local government, is a public

entity in accordance with 42 U.S.C. 12131(1) and 42 U.S.C. 12111(5). Madison County,

upon information and belief, is also a recipient of federal financial assistance, as required

under 29 U.S.C. 794. Madison County is responsible for, among other things, providing

adequate funding for the operation of the Madison County Jail, including funding for training

the Sheriff, the Sheriffs employees and the county jailers; and funding to allow for adequate

staffing of the Madison County Jail. Ala. Code (1975) 11-14-20 and 11-12-15(a)(2).

Madison County is also responsible for determining and appointing the medical staff necessary

for providing medical care to inmates of the Madison County Jail. 14-6-20(a).

7. Defendant, Blake Dorning, is an individual over the age of nineteen (19) years

and a citizen of the United States. At all times material to this complaint, Dorning was the

Madison County Sheriff. Dorning is a constitutional officer acting with the authority invested

by virtue of his position as Sheriff of Madison County, Alabama, and is a state actor under

1983. As Sheriff, Defendant Dorning was responsible for operating the Madison County Jail.

2
 Case 5:17-cv-01358-UJH-VEH Document 1 Filed 08/12/17 Page 3 of 14

That responsibility included, but was not limited to, supervising the correctional officers

(COs) in their respective duties at the jail; providing sufficient and specialized training and

creating and implementing adequate policies and procedures to ensure that inmates were

provided proper protection and efficient medical care.

8. Defendant Maloney, is an individual over the age of nineteen (19) years and a

citizen of the United States. At all times material to this complaint, Maloney was a Jailer for the

Madison County Jail. As an agent of Madison County Sheriff's Department, Maloney acted with

the authority invested by virtue of employment with Madison County Sheriff's Department,

and is a state actor under 1983.

9. Defendant Thompson, is an individual over the age of nineteen (19) years and

a citizen of the United States. At all times material to this complaint, Thompson was a Jailer

for the Madison County Jail. As an agent of Madison County Sheriff's Department, Thompson

acted with the authority invested by virtue of employment with Madison County Sheriff's

Department, and is a state actor under 1983.

10. Defendant Mackey, is an individual over the age of nineteen (19) years and a

citizen of the United States. At all times material to this complaint, Mackey was a Jailer for the

Madison County Jail. As an agent of Madison County Sheriff's Department, Mackey acted with

the authority invested by virtue of employment with Madison County Sheriff's Department,

and is a state actor under 1983.

11. Defendant Davies, is an individual over the age of nineteen (19) years and a

citizen of the United States. At all times material to this complaint, Davies was a Jailer for the

Madison County Jail. As an agent of Madison County Sheriff's Department, Davies acted with

3
 Case 5:17-cv-01358-UJH-VEH Document 1 Filed 08/12/17 Page 4 of 14

the authority invested by virtue of employment with Madison County Sheriff's Department,

and is a state actor under 1983.

12. Defendant Miller, is an individual over the age of nineteen (19) years and a

citizen of the United States. At all times material to this complaint, Miller was a Jailer for the

Madison County Jail. As an agent of Madison County Sheriff's Department, Miller acted with

the authority invested by virtue of employment with Madison County Sheriff's Department,

and is a state actor under 1983.

13. Defendant Green, is an individual over the age of nineteen (19) years and a

citizen of the United States. At all times material to this complaint, Green was a Jailer for the

Madison County Jail. As an agent of Madison County Sheriff's Department, Miller acted with

the authority invested by virtue of employment with Madison County Sheriff's Department,

and is a state actor under 1983.

STATEMENT OF THE FACTS

14. Plaintiff is an individual with a disability. Specifically, Plaintiff suffers from

bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. Because of his mental illness, Plaintiff needs proper

medication to treat his condition.

15. In August, 2015, Plaintiff was a pre-trial detainee in the Madison County Jail .

16. Plaintiff was known by Madison County Jail personnel, including each of the

named defendants, to be an individual with a mental illness who needed proper medication.

17. Defendant Dorning, as Sheriff of Madison County, and each of the individual

defendants, failed to ensure that detainees received adequate and prompt medical care,

including but not limited to, creating and implementing sufficient policies and procedures

4
 Case 5:17-cv-01358-UJH-VEH Document 1 Filed 08/12/17 Page 5 of 14

regarding providing medical care to detainees, ensuring adequate and sufficient training

regarding medical care for detainees, providing proper supervision and discipline of jailers and

ensuring sufficient staffing to prevent deliberate indifference to the medical needs of inmates.

18. The policies and procedures at the Madison County jail made it more difficult for

inmates to receive medical care and placed the decision of whether medical care was needed

in the hands of jailers as opposed to medical personnel on staff.

19. On or near August 12, 2015, jail personnel determined that a cell extraction was

needed on Plaintiff.

20. Plaintiff was inside of his cell and in a distressed state because he was not receiving

the proper medical attention and treatment he required. Further, a sprinkler in Plaintiffs cell was

broken and water was entering the cell at a fast pace.

21. Upon information and belief, the individual defendants other than Dorning

(collectively referred to as C.O.s), prepared to perform a cell extraction of Plaintiff to move him

to a new location.

22. The C.O.s were not properly trained or certified to perform cell extractions.

23. The C.O.s were not properly trained or certified in dealing with mentally inmates.

24. No medical personnel was contacted to evaluate the type of medical crisis Plaintiff

was experiencing at the time.

25. Defendant C.O.s entered Plaintiffs cell dressed in full combat gear and jail-issued

weapons and shields. The appearance and agressive nature of the C.O.s caused Plaintiff to

experience an even greater crises. As soon as the C.O.s entered Plaintiffs cell, they began beating

Plaintiff violently and throwing him around the cell. The C.O.s then fully restrained Plaintiff in a

5
 Case 5:17-cv-01358-UJH-VEH Document 1 Filed 08/12/17 Page 6 of 14

restraint chair. Plaintiffs hands, legs and body were fully strapped and secured. Plaintiff did not

pose any threat to the C.O.s, nor was he a flight risk. However, Defendant C.O.s continued to strike

Plaintiff in his face, neck and head.

26. While fully restrained, the last thing Plaintiff recalls is Defendant Maloney choking,

then striking Plaintiff in the face. Plaintiff was knocked unconscious.

27. Inmates who witnessed the assault were able to get in touch with the family of

Plaintiff and tell them what happened.

28. Plaintiff was rushed to the hospital as result of the injuries he received from the

Defendants.

29. None of the named Defendant C.O.s present during the assault intervened to stop the

other C.O.s from beating and choking Plaintiff even after he was fully restrained and not resisting.

30. Madison County Jail was insufficiently funded to provide proper and adequate

training and certification for its employees to perform cell extractions. Additionally, the jail was

overcrowded and improperly staffed to properly house, medicate, and protect Plaintiff who was an

individual with a disability.

31. Although on notice of Madison County Jail C.O.s use of excessive force, Defendant

Dorning failed to discipline those involved in the constitutional violations of Plaintiff. Further,

although excessive force incidents had occurred in the past, Dorning failed to properly train and

supervise the Madison County Jail corrections officers.

COUNT I
VIOLATIONS OF SECTION 504 OF THE REHABILITATION ACT
(Defendants Madison County and Dorning )

6
 Case 5:17-cv-01358-UJH-VEH Document 1 Filed 08/12/17 Page 7 of 14

32. The Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the above paragraphs with

the same force and effect as if fully set out in specific detail herein.

33. Plaintiff was diagnosed with bipolar disorder and schizophrenia and as such was

a person with a qualified disability as the term is defined under the 504. Plaintiff had a

mental impairment that substantially limited at least one major life activity, and as such had

a "disability" as defined under 29 U.S.C. 705(9).

34. The operations of Madison County's jail constitute a "program or activity" as

defined under 29 U.S.C. 794. Madison County is a department, agency, or other instrumentality

of the State of Alabama, which is extended federal financial assistance. Madison County

Sheriffs Office also receives federal financial assistance, directly and/or through funding from

Madison County.

35. Madison County is responsible for, among other things, providing adequate

funding for the operation of the Madison County Jail, including funding for training the Sheriff,

the Sheriffs employees and the county jailers; and funding to allow for adequate staffing of the

Madison County Jail. Madison County is also responsible for determining and appointing the

medical staff necessary for providing medical care to inmates of the Madison County Jail.

36. The Sheriff, Defendant Blake Dorning, is responsible for the operation and

administration of the Madison County Jail including, but not limited to, developing,

implementing, and maintaining the policies, practices, procedures and customs of the Madison

County Jail.

37. Section 504 provides that persons otherwise qualified but under disability shall

not by reason of the disability be denied the benefits of or be subjected to discrimination under

7
 Case 5:17-cv-01358-UJH-VEH Document 1 Filed 08/12/17 Page 8 of 14

any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.

38. Section 504 requires that recipients of federal financial assistance reasonably

accommodate persons with disabilities so that they are not harmed by, but can benefit from,

correctional services as fully as persons without disabilities.

39. Heedless of its obligations under 504, and despite knowledge of the availability

of practices, procedures, policies and training to regarding mentally ill inmates, Madison

County and Sheriff Dorning failed to provide its jailers with appropriate training for dealing

with mentally ill inmates or determining when medical assistance is needed. Madison County

and Dorning also failed to establish, implement and maintain practices, procedures and

policies to ensure that inmates with disabilities were not discriminated against or otherwise

harmed as a result of their disabilities during their detention in the Madison County Jail.

40. The above violations of 504 proximately caused the Plaintiff to be improperly

and insufficiently medicated; improperly housed and supervised; and improperly handled

while experiencing a medical crisis as the result of his illness.

41. Madison County failed to ensure adequate funding which resulted in a lack of

adequately trained and certified jail personnel, and severe overcrowding issues, which

prevented Plaintiff from receiving the treatment he needed both physically and mentally as

an inmate with a disability.

42. As a result, Plaintiff suffered physical and mental injury.

Count II
Excessive Force
Defendants Maloney, Thompson, Mackey, Davies, Miller, Green

43. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the above paragraphs with the same

8
 Case 5:17-cv-01358-UJH-VEH Document 1 Filed 08/12/17 Page 9 of 14

force and affect as if fully set forth herein.

44. Defendants intentionally and with wilful disregard used excessive force on Plaintiff

while removing him from a cell. Defendants continually beat Plaintiff although he was fully

restrained, and posed no risk of flight or threat of physical safety to the Defendants.

45. This use of excessive force was deliberate and intentional and was not objectively

reasonable under the circumstances. Specifically, Defendants recognized that Plaintiff was in a state

of medical and or psychiatric distress.

46. Defendants were able to fully restrain Plaintiff. However, Defendants continued to

use physical force which resulted in Plaintiff being knocked unconscious and required emergency

hospital treatment.

47. By using excessive force on Plaintiff, Defendants deprived Plaintiff of rights,

remedies, privileges and immunities guaranteed to every citizen of the United States, in violation of

rights enforceable under 42 U.S.C. 1983, including rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth

Amendment to the United States Constitution.

48. The actions and/or inactions by Defendants were of an intentional nature and

manifested a conscious disregard of the well-being and constitutional rights of Plaintiff.

49. Defendants acted under color of state law. Defendants acted willfully and they

knowingly deprived Plaintiff of his constitutional rights secured through 42 U.S.C. 1983 and by

the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, resulting in physical and mental injury.

Count III
Failure to Intervene
Defendants Maloney, Thompson, Mackey, Davies, Miller, Green

9
 Case 5:17-cv-01358-UJH-VEH Document 1 Filed 08/12/17 Page 10 of 14

50. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the above paragraphs with the same

force and affect as if fully set forth herein.

51. Defendants, acting under color of law, deprived Plaintiff of his constitutional rights

secured through 42 U.S.C. 1983, by the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution,

resulting in physical and mental injury.

52. Defendants had an affirmative duty to intervene to protect the constitutional rights

of Plaintiff from infringement by other corrections officers in their presence. However, Defendants

failed to intervene to protect Plaintiff as he was being beaten so severely, even after fully restrained,

that he was knocked unconscious and required hospitalization.

53. The Defendants were personally involved in violating Illidges constitutional rights

through either direct participation or by their failure to intervene.

54. Because Plaintiffs constitutionally protected rights were being violated in the

presence of the Defendants and they failed to intervene, each Defendant that was present is liable

for the harm that was caused to Plaintiff.

55. The Defendants conscious disregard for the health and safety of Plaintiff violated his

constitutional rights.

Count IV
Failure to Train and Supervise
Defendant Dorning

56. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the above paragraphs with the same

force and affect as if fully set forth herein.

57. Defendant, acting under color of law, directly or indirectly deprived Plaintiff of his

10
 Case 5:17-cv-01358-UJH-VEH Document 1 Filed 08/12/17 Page 11 of 14

constitutional rights secured through 42 U.S.C. 1983, by the Fourteenth Amendment of the United

States Constitution, resulting in injury.

58. Defendant had a duty to adequately train and supervise his agents and/or employees

regarding the use of excessive force, proper handling of mentally ill inmates, and their duty to

intervene in the event a constitutional violation is occurring before them. Further, Defendant had a

duty to ensure his agents were properly trained and certified to perform cell extractions.

59. Defendants agents were not properly trained or certified to perform cell extractions

of unruly and/or mentally ill inmates at the time a cell extraction was done on Plaintiff which

resulted in Plaintiff being beaten, knocked unconscious after fully restrained, and hospitalized.

60. Defendant Dorning had knowledge, either actual or presumed, that his agents and/or

employees were incompetent or in need of proper training and/or supervision with respect to the use

of force, failure to intervene and the use of force on mentally ill inmates. However, Defendant

Dorning breached this duty by failing to adequately train and/or supervise his agents/employees. The

incompetence of Defendants COs were the proximate cause of Plaintiffs injuries.

Count V
Failure to Discipline
Defendant Dorning

61. The Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the above paragraphs with the

same force and effect as if fully set out in specific detail herein.

62. Defendant, acting under color of law, directly or indirectly deprived Plaintiff of his

constitutional rights secured through 42 U.S.C. 1983, and promulgated a custom or policy of

deliberate indifference to the safety of individuals because of the failure to discipline and correct his

agents and/or employees for their use of excessive force on inmates.

11
 Case 5:17-cv-01358-UJH-VEH Document 1 Filed 08/12/17 Page 12 of 14

63. Defendant Dorning had knowledge of his employees using excessive force. Dorning

failed to discipline, properly train or supervise the responsible employees.

64. As a proximate result of Defendants failure to discipline, employees continued to

use excessive force, including on fully restrained individuals, amounting to a deliberate indifference

to the health and safety of inmates at the Madison County Jail.

65. The deliberate indifference by Dorning to the conduct of his agents, which includes

repeated failures to follow guidelines, unnecessary use of excessive force and roughness on

restrained individuals, led to the violation of Plaintiffs constitutionally protected rights. The failure

of Dorning to take corrective action or to discipline after learning of instances of misconduct, and

the failure to properly train the agents led to these violations.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays that this Court will assume jurisdiction of this

action and, after trial, provide relief as follows:

1. Issue an Order requiring the Defendants to make the Plaintiff whole by awarding

compensatory damages.

2. Awarding punitive damages where appropriate.

3. An award of litigation costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1988 and other applicable statutes.

4. Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

PLAINTIFF DEMANDS TRIAL BY STRUCK JURY

ON ALL ISSUES TRIABLE BY JURY

Respectfully Submitted,

12
 Case 5:17-cv-01358-UJH-VEH Document 1 Filed 08/12/17 Page 13 of 14

/s/ Sidney M. Jackson

Samuel Fisher
Sidney Jackson
Attorneys for the Plaintiff
Wiggins, Childs, Pantazis, Fisher
& Goldfarb, LLC
The Kress Building
301 19th Street North
Birmingham, Alabama 35203
Telephone: (205) 314-0500
Facsimile: (205) 254-1500
sf@wigginschilds.com
sjackson@wigginschilds.com

Notice of Lawsuit and Request for Waiver of Service to Be Sent by Certified Mail to the
Following:

Madison County Sheriffs Office

C/O Sheriff Blake Dorning
815 Wheeler Ave
Huntsville, AL 35801

Madison County
C/O Legal Department
100 North Side Square
Huntsville, AL 35801

Madison County Sheriffs Office

C/O Corrections Officer Maloney
815 Wheeler Ave
Huntsville, AL 35801

Madison County Sheriffs Office

C/O Lt. Thompson
815 Wheeler Ave
Huntsville, AL 35801

Madison County Sheriffs Office

C/O Corrections Officer Mackey
815 Wheeler Ave
Huntsville, AL 35801

13
 Case 5:17-cv-01358-UJH-VEH Document 1 Filed 08/12/17 Page 14 of 14

Madison County Sheriffs Office

C/O Corrections Officer Daryl Miller
815 Wheeler Ave
Huntsville, AL 35801

Madison County Sheriffs Office

C/O Sgt. Green
815 Wheeler Ave
Huntsville, AL 35801

Madison County Sheriffs Office

C/O Lt. Davies
815 Wheeler Ave
Huntsville, AL 35801

14