Case 3:08-cv-00570-CFD Document 1 Filed 04/16/08 Page 1 of 11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT JONATHAN J. DAMICO Plaintiff : : : V. : : CITY OF MIDDLETOWN; CHIEF LYNN : BALDONI, in her individual and official capacity; : OFFICER MARC DELMAURO, in his individual : and official capacity; OFFICER JAMIE SOIXES, : in her individual and official capacity; SERGEANT : STEPHEN AUGERI, in his individual and official : capacity : Defendants : COMPLAINT The Plaintiff, Jonathan J. DAmico, through his attorneys, brings this civil action for violations of his rights secured and protected by the Civil Rights Act of 1871 (42 U.S.C. 1983), the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article First 7, 8, and 9 of the Connecticut Constitution, and under the laws of the State of Connecticut, for which he seeks compensatory and punitive damages, declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as attorneys fees and costs. JURISDICTION 1. Jurisdiction in this matter is premised on 28 U.S.C. 1331, in that this District Court shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States. -1CIVIL ACTION

TRIAL BY JURY APRIL 16, 2008

Case 3:08-cv-00570-CFD Document 1 Filed 04/16/08 Page 2 of 11

2.

This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the Plaintiffs state law claims in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 1367. VENUE

3.

Venue in the District of Connecticut is proper in accordance with 28 U.S.C. 1391, in that a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred in this judicial district. PARTIES

4. 5.

The Plaintiff, Jonathan J. DAmico (Plaintiff) is a resident of Middletown, Connecticut. Upon information and belief, the Defendant City of Middletown, is and was at all times relevant hereto a municipal corporation, incorporated and existing under the laws of the State of Connecticut.

6.

Upon information and belief, the Defendant Chief Lynn Baldoni, is and was at all times relevant hereto the Chief of the Middletown Police Department, and the final policymaker in the area of law enforcement, she is being named in her individual and official capacity, and was at all times relevant hereto acting under the color of law during the course of and within the scope of her employment with the City of Middletown and/or the Middletown Police Department.

7.

Upon information and belief, the Defendant Officer Marc Delmauro, is and was at all times relevant hereto a police officer with the Middletown Police Department, he is being named

-2-

Case 3:08-cv-00570-CFD Document 1 Filed 04/16/08 Page 3 of 11

in his individual and official capacity, and was at all times relevant hereto acting under the color of law during the course of and within the scope of his employment with the City of Middletown and/or the Middletown Police Department. 8. Upon information and belief, the Defendant Officer Jamie Soixes, is and was at all times relevant hereto a police officer with the Middletown Police Department, she is being named in her individual and official capacity, and was at all times relevant hereto acting under the color of law during the course of and within the scope of her employment with the City of Middletown and/or the Middletown Police Department. 9. Upon information and belief, the Sergeant Stephen Augeri, is and was at all times relevant hereto a sergeant with the Middletown Police Department, he is being named in his individual and official capacity, and was at all times relevant hereto acting under the color of law during the course of and within the scope of his employment with the City of Middletown and/or the Middletown Police Department. 10. Upon information and belief, Defendants Marc Delmauro, Jamie Soixes, Stephen Augeri, (Defendant Officers) and various other police officers who have yet to be identified were all members of the IMPACT squad. STATEMENT OF FACTS 11. On or around December 17, 2006, at approximately 7:00 PM, the Plaintiff was in the area of the Summer Hill Apartments, in Middletown, Connecticut.

-3-

Case 3:08-cv-00570-CFD Document 1 Filed 04/16/08 Page 4 of 11

12.

After the Plaintiff parked his car an got out, he was approached by Defendant Marc Delmauro and his partner.

13.

Defendant Marc Delmauro approached the Plaintiff and demanded his keys to search his locked car.

14.

After being threatened with arrest, the Plaintiff complied with this request, and gave his keys to the officers.

15.

Defendant Marc Delmaruos partner held the Plaintiffs hands behind his back with his hands as Defendant Marc Delmauro searched the Plaintiffs car, then his person.

16.

After these searches yielded no contraband, and no arrest, Defendant Marc Delmauro began cursing at the Plaintiff and directing various offensive statements toward him.

17.

After this detention, search, and verbal assault, Defendant Marc Delmauro and his partner left the area.

18.

Subsequently, on or around January 15, 2007, the Plaintiff was in his car, again in the area of the Summer Hill Apartments, in Middletown, Connecticut.

19.

At approximately 12:00 AM that morning, Defendant Marc Delmauro approached the Plaintiffs car and started banging on the window.

20.

Defendant Marc Delmauro then dragged the Plaintiff out of his car so his partner could handcuff the Plaintiff.

21.

With the Plaintiff handcuffed, Defendant Marc Delmauro again searched the Plaintiffs

-4-

Case 3:08-cv-00570-CFD Document 1 Filed 04/16/08 Page 5 of 11

vehicle and his person. 22. Again, after these searches yielded no contraband, and no arrest, Defendant Marc Delmauro began cursing at the Plaintiff and directing various offensive statements toward him. 23. After this detention, search, and verbal assault, Defendant Marc Delmauro and his partner un-handcuffed the Plaintiff. 24. After the Plaintiff was un-handcuffed and set free, Defendant Marc Delmauro and his partner left the area. 25. Subsequently, on or around January 25, 2005, at approximately 4:00 PM, the Plaintiff was at the Dunkin Donuts store on Washington Street in Middletown, Connecticut. 26. As the Plaintiff was leaving the Dunkin Donuts store, walking back to his car, Defendant Marc Delmauro, and up to seven (7) other officers were either inside, or walking into the Dunkin Donuts store. 27. The Plaintiff got into his fathers car, and closed the door, when Defendant Marc Delmauro aggressively ran toward the Plaintiff. 28. Defendant Marc Delmauro forcibly opened the car door and grabbed the Plaintiff by his shirt collar, violently shook him causing him physical injury, and screamed various profanities at him. 29. While this was occurring, Defendant Officer Jamie Soixes, Sergeant Stephen Augeri, and various other officers who have not yet been identified stood idle and did nothing to

-5-

Case 3:08-cv-00570-CFD Document 1 Filed 04/16/08 Page 6 of 11

intervene and prevent the attack from continuing. 30. Only after Defendant Marc Delmauro was approached by the Plaintiffs father, did he release his grip from the Plaintiff. 31. Later that day, the Plaintiff filed a complaint with the Middletown Police Department, and the injuries he sustained in the attack were documented. FIRST COUNT (Defendant Officers - 42 U.S.C. 1983 / Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution; Article First 7, 8, and 9 of the Connecticut Constitution) 1. The allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 31 of the Preliminary Statement are hereby reincorporated and realleged as if fully restated herein as paragraphs 1 through 31 of the First Count. 32. The Defendant Officers violated the Plaintiff's rights secured and protected by the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, Article First 7, 8, and 9 of the Connecticut Constitution, in one or more of the following ways: a. in stopping, detaining, searching, and seizing the Plaintiff without reasonable suspicion, probable cause, a warrant, and/or any exigent circumstances; b. in stopping, detaining, searching, and seizing the Plaintiffs vehicle without reasonable suspicion, probable cause, a warrant, and/or any exigent circumstances; c. d. in using unreasonable, unjustified, and excessive force upon the Plaintiff; and/or in that the Defendant Officers acted jointly and in concert with each other as they each had the duty and opportunity to protect the Plaintiff from the unlawful acts of -6-

Case 3:08-cv-00570-CFD Document 1 Filed 04/16/08 Page 7 of 11

the other officers. 33. As a direct and proximate result of the conduct of Officer Marc Delmauro, Officer Jamie Soixes, Sergeant Stephen Augeri, the Plaintiff has suffered personal injuries including but not limited to injury to his face, neck, back, as well as emotional distress, and shock to his entire system, some of which injuries are permanent in nature. SECOND COUNT (Defendant Officers - Common Law) 1. The allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 31 of the Preliminary Statement are hereby reincorporated and realleged as if fully restated herein as paragraphs 1 through 31 of the Second Count. 32. One or more of the Defendant Officers violated the Plaintiff's common law rights, in one or more of the following ways: a. in that one or more of the Defendant Officers were negligent in conducting themselves in that they should have been aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that their conduct would violate the Plaintiff's rights; b. in that one or more of the Defendant Officers were reckless in conducting themselves in that they consciously disregarded a substantial and unjustifiable risk that their actions would violate the Plaintiff's rights; c. in that the one or more of the Defendant Officers falsely imprisoned the Plaintiff in that their conduct unlawfully restrained the Plaintiff's physical liberty;

-7-

Case 3:08-cv-00570-CFD Document 1 Filed 04/16/08 Page 8 of 11

d.

in that one or more of the Defendant Officers negligently inflicted emotional distress upon the Plaintiff in that they should have realized that their conduct involved an unreasonable risk of causing emotional distress and that distress, might result in illness or bodily harm, further the fear or distress experienced by the Plaintiff was reasonable in light of the conduct; and/or

e.

in that one or more of the Defendant Officers intentionally inflicted emotional distress upon the Plaintiff in that they (1) intended to inflict emotional distress upon the Plaintiff or that they knew or should have known that emotional distress was the likely result of their conduct; (2) that their conduct was extreme and outrageous; (3) that their conduct was the cause of the Plaintiff's distress; and (4) that the emotional distress sustained by the Plaintiff was severe.

33.

As a direct and proximate result of the conduct of Officer Marc Delmauro, Officer Jamie Soixes, Sergeant Stephen Augeri, the Plaintiff has suffered personal injuries including but not limited to injury to his face, neck, back, as well as emotional distress, and shock to his entire system, some of which injuries are permanent in nature.

THIRD COUNT (City of Middletown and Chief Lynn Baldoni - 42 U.S.C. 1983 / Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution; Article First 7, 8, and 9 of the Connecticut Constitution) 1. The allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 31 of the Preliminary Statement are hereby reincorporated and realleged as if fully restated herein as paragraphs 1 through 31 of the

-8-

Case 3:08-cv-00570-CFD Document 1 Filed 04/16/08 Page 9 of 11

Third Count. 32. At all times relevant hereto, the City of Middletown was acting by and through Chief Lynn Baldoni, who is the final policy maker in the area of law enforcement, and had in effect actual and/or de facto policies, practices, and customs. 33. These actual and/or de facto policies, practices, and customs include, but are not limited to the following: a. the failure to properly screen, discipline, transfer, counsel, and/or otherwise control police officers engaged in the law of search and seizure; the law of using unreasonable, unjustified, and excessive force; and the duty to intervene to protect and secure individual civil rights; and/or b. the failure to properly train and supervise police officers in the law of search and seizure; the law of using unreasonable, unjustified, and excessive force; and the duty to intervene to protect and secure individual civil rights. 34. These actual and/or de facto policies, practices, and customs constitutive a deliberate indifference to the rights of the citizens and residents of the City of Middletown and the State of Connecticut, and were a moving force behind the Defendant Officers constitutional violations. 35. As a direct and proximate result of the conduct the City of Middletown, and Chief Lynn Baldoni, the Plaintiff has suffered personal injuries including but not limited to injury to his

-9-

Case 3:08-cv-00570-CFD Document 1 Filed 04/16/08 Page 10 of 11

face, neck, back, as well as emotional distress, and shock to his entire system, some of which injuries are permanent in nature. FOURTH COUNT (City of Middletown - Conn. Gen. Stat. 52-557n; Conn. Gen. Stat. 7465) 1. The allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 31 of the Preliminary Statement are hereby reincorporated and realleged as if fully restated herein as paragraphs 1 through 31 of the Fourth Count. 32. The City of Middletown is liable to the Plaintiff in accordance with one or more of the following statutes: a. Conn. Gen. Stat. 52-557n in that a municipal employee(s) negligence caused damage to the Plaintiff, who was at all times relevant hereto an identifiable victim that was subjected to immanent harm; and/or b. Conn Gen. Stat. 7-465 in that the municipality is required to indemnify municipal employee(s) who cause physical injury and/or violate an individuals civil rights. 33. As a direct and proximate result of the conduct of the municipal employees of the City of Middletown, the Plaintiff has suffered personal injuries including but not limited to injury to his face, neck, back, as well as emotional distress, and shock to his entire system, some of which injuries are permanent in nature.

- 10 -

Case 3:08-cv-00570-CFD Document 1 Filed 04/16/08 Page 11 of 11

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. A trial by a jury of his peers; Punitive damages; Compensatory damages; Attorneys fees and costs; Injunctive relief; Any and all other equitable relief in accordance with the claims of the Plaintiff, as the Court deems appropriate.

THE PLAINTIFF

_______________________ A. Paul Spinella, Esq. Spinella & Associates One Lewis Street Hartford, CT 06103 860.728.4900 (Tel) 860.728.4909 (Fax) attorneys@spinella-law.com Federal Bar: ct00078

- 11 -