1 14 CV 00814 SSB KLL D 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

WILLIAM RANDALL COX, MD.
3645 VINEYARD RIDGE
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45241

Plaintiff,

v.

BLUE ASH OHIO POLICE
OFFICER ROGER POHLMAN
4343 COOPER ROAD
BLUE ASH, OHIO 45242

and

OFFICER TODD STEWART
4343 COOPER ROAD

and

OFFICER STEPHEN SCHUELER
4343 COOPER ROAD

and

EVENDALE OHIO POLICE
OFFICER RICK VONDERHAAR
10500 READING ROAD

and

OFFICER WILLIAM LANTRY
10500 READING ROAD

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Case No. 14-CV-814

Judge

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
WITH REQUEST FOR
DAMAGES AND WITH JURY
DEMAND
Case: 1:14-cv-00814-SSB-KLL Doc #: 2 Filed: 10/17/14 Page: 1 of 17 PAGEID #: 36
2

and

OFFICER TINA McCORMICK
10500 READING ROAD

Defendants
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

COMPLAINT
Comes now William Randall Cox M.D., and for his complaint against Defendants
states as follows:
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1. This action is brought to redress grievances protected by the United States
Constitution, 42 U.S.C. 1983 and state law claims under the Constitution and laws of
the State of Ohio. This Court has jurisdiction over these matters under 28 U.S.C. 1331,
and 28 U.S.C. 1343. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction of the State law claims
for battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress under 28 U.S.C. 1367 and
the doctrine of pendent jurisdiction.
2. This Court is the proper venue for this matter under 28 U.S.C. 1391,
because all of the events giving rise to this action took place within this judicial district
at 3645 Vineyard Ridge, Cincinnati, OH 45241.

3

INTRODUCTION
3. W. Randall Cox, M.D. (Dr. Cox), an African American medical doctor,
was involved in a romantic relationship with Gretchen Myers (Ms. Myers), a resident
of Hamilton County, Ohio for approximately one and a half years from June, 2010
through January, 2012.
4. Ms. Myers often displayed intense insecurity regarding her relationship
with Dr. Cox, often wrongfully and irrationally accusing him of dating others. Ms.
Myers broke off her relationship with Dr. Cox in December, 2011 when Ms. Myers
appeared at Dr. Coxs home, unannounced and very intoxicated and created a scene
because he never took her anywhere.
5. Although Dr. Cox and Ms. Myers tried to reunite as a couple over the next
month, Ms. Myers insecurity became uncontrollable when she noticed Dr. Cox receiving
cell phone calls from other women. Ms. Myers again broke up with Dr. Cox and in an
angry tirade claimed he had destroyed her life.
6. In March of 2012, Ms. Myers filed for a civil protective order based on
untrue claims including that he persistently tried, over her objections, to communicate
with her, visit her and send her gifts, claiming Dr. Cox made her terrified in fear for her
life due to an alleged incident of physical harm. Based on these misrepresentations a
civil protective order against Dr. Cox was issued for a period of five years.
7. Dr. Cox filed objections to the magistrates decision granting the civil
protective order.
8. Dr. Cox had a son William who was suffering from brain cancer at the time
the above referenced incidents were occurring, and Dr. Cox continued to care for him
until he passed away from his brain cancer on July 2, 2013.
4

9. In an Affidavit filed on December 2, 2012, Hamilton County Municipal
Court Case No. C12CRB36939, Ms. Myers alleges that on or about November 27, 2012 at
approximately 8:15 PM Dr. Cox violated the civil protective order when he failed to
immediately vacate Shell gas station when Ms. Myers was present. Ms. Myers claimed
that Dr. Cox parked his vehicle behind Ms. Myers vehicle and Dr. Cox was also inside
when she paid. Ms. Myers claimed that she went through the car wash and Dr. Cox
blocked the exit of the car wash. Ms. Myers claims Dr. Cox pulled out and left and then
pulled up next to her on Reed Hartman Hwy (the opposite direction of his house). SEE
PLAINTIFFS EXHIBITS A- Myers Affidavit, and B- Cho Affidavit.
10. The entire representation in the above referenced Affidavit was a
fabrication and the statements where false, nevertheless based on the representations
made by Ms. Myers to the Blue Ash Police Department, a Warrant for Dr. Coxs arrest
was issued the same day by the Hamilton County Municipal Court. SEE PLAINTIFFS
EXHIBIT C- Arrest Warrant.
11. Dr. Cox was charged with violating the previously issued protection order.
12. During the course of the criminal case, the court was provided with a
Notice of Dr. Coxs alibi which established that contrary to Ms. Myers claim that he was
at the Shell station at 8:15 PM on November 27, 2012, he left home at approximately
7:45 PM and went to the Verizon store in Kenwood located at 7896 Montgomery Road,
Cincinnati, Ohio 45236 where he stayed until approximately 8:25 PM. Dr. Cox
subsequently went to Red Lobster restaurant located at 8220 Montgomery Road,
Cincinnati, Ohio 45236 where he had dinner with a patients family member and he did
not leave the restaurant until later that evening. SEE PLAINTIFFS EXHIBIT D- Notice
of Alibi.
5

13. In the course of the criminal case against Dr. Cox based on the false
allegations of Ms. Myers, Dr. Coxs attorney advised the prosecutor that they intended to
introduce video evidence both from the Verizon store showing that Dr. Cox was at that
location at the time of the alleged incident at the Shell station. Additionally, Verizon
store employees were going to be called as witnesses as further proof that Dr. Cox was at
the Verizon Store during the time Ms. Myers claimed he was at Shell. Furthermore, Dr.
Cox intended to introduce video evidence from four Shell security cameras showing one,
that Ms. Myers claim that Dr. Cox was there was false and two, showing that NOBODY
bothered Ms. Myers much less acted in a threatening or confrontational manner.
14. Subsequently on January 30, 2013 the charge against Dr. Cox was
dismissed.
15. During the criminal case for violation of the civil protective order, the
court placed Dr. Cox on house arrest severely restricting Dr. Coxs ability to practice
medicine. He had to have his attorney drive him to work and could only work from 8:30
AM to 6:00 PM. Additionally, he was required to wear a court-issued ankle bracelet
monitor.
16. This action is being filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983 for violation of
William Randall Cox M.D.s, rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to
redress injuries suffered by William Randall Cox MD., during the Defendants
unreasonable use of force during the course of his arrest.
17. William Randall Cox M.D. was deprived of his constitutional right to be
free from excessive force and unreasonable seizure by state actors under the Fourth
Amendment.
6

18. Dr. Cox is and was at all times relevant a citizen of the State of Ohio.
19. Defendant Officer Todd Stewart was at all times relevant a Blue Ash Ohio
Police Officer, wearing a Blue Ash Ohio Police Department Uniform.
20. Defendant Officer Todd Stewart is being sued in his individual capacity. At
all times relevant to this action, Defendant Officer Todd Stewart acted under color of
law.
21. Defendant Officer Stephen Schueler was at all times relevant a Blue Ash
Ohio Police Officer, wearing a Blue Ash Ohio Police Department Uniform.
22. Defendant Officer Stephen Schueler is being sued in his individual
capacity. At all times relevant to this action, Defendant Officer Stephen Schueler acted
under color of law.
23. Defendant Officer Roger Pohlman was at all times relevant a Blue Ash
Ohio Police Officer, wearing a Blue Ash Ohio Police Department Uniform.
24. Defendant Officer Roger Pohlman is being sued in his individual capacity.
At all times relevant to this action, Defendant Officer Roger Pohlman acted under color
of law.
25. Defendant Officer Rick Vonderhaar was at all times relevant an Evendale
Ohio Police Officer, wearing an Evendale Ohio Police Department Uniform.
26. Defendant Officer Rick Vonderhaar is being sued in his individual
capacity. At all times relevant to this action, Defendant Officer Rick Vonderhaar acted
under color of law.
27. Defendant Officer William Lantry was at all times relevant an Evendale
28. Defendant Officer William Lantry is being sued in his individual capacity.
7

At all times relevant to this action, Defendant Officer William Lantry acted under color
of law.
29. Defendant Officer Tina McCormick was at all times relevant an Evendale
30. Defendant Officer Tina McCormick is being sued in his individual
capacity. At all times relevant to this action, Defendant Officer Tina McCormick acted
under color of law.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
31. On December 2, 2012 William Randall Cox along with several friends and
family were hosting a birthday party at 3645 Vineyard Ridge, Cincinnati, Ohio 45241 for
Dr. Coxs terminally ill son William.
32. On December 2, 2012, Blue Ash Ohio Police Officers, accompanied with
Evendale Police Officers came to the address of 3645 Vineyard Ridge in reference to an
alleged Protection Order Violation.
33. Defendants Vonderhaar, Stewart, and Pohlman were the three officers that
first arrived execute the arrest warrant.
34. Defendants Stewart and Pohlman work for the Blue Ash Police
Department and Vonderhaar works for the Evendale Police Department.
35. Vonderhaars assistance was required because the residence of Dr. Cox
falls under Evendales jurisdiction.
36. Defendant Stewart rang the doorbell, which was answered by a young
woman who then got Dr. Cox to come to the door.
8

37. Dr. Cox was asked to come out onto the front porch, because there were
other people in the house and the porch would give more privacy. Dr. Cox complied with
the request.
38. Defendants informed Dr. Cox that he was under arrest for a violating a
protection order.
39. Dr. Cox stepped on to the front porch and turned to his daughter and
informed her to call his lawyer.
40. Defendants Todd Stewart and Pohlman then grabbed Dr. Cox by the neck
and forced him to the ground.
41. Dr. Cox landed on his chest with his arms underneath his body.
42. Defendant Todd Stewart put his knee on Dr. Coxs back.
43. Defendant Todd Stewart was able to get one arm free from under Dr. Cox.
44. Defendant Todd Stewart ordered Dr. Cox to put his other hand behind his
back.
45. Dr. Cox stated he was unable to put his hand behind his back because the
officer was on top of him.
46. Defendant Pohlman tased Dr. Cox, and again ordered Dr. Cox to place his
hand behind his back.
47. Dr. Cox again stated that he could not do so, and was having trouble
breathing.
48. Defendant Pohlman once again tased Dr. Cox.
49. Dr. Cox again stated that he was unable to breathe.
50. Officers placed Dr. Cox in a position on his knees.
51. Dr. Cox continued to state that he was having trouble breathing.
9

52. By standing witnesses advised the police officers that Dr. Cox suffered
from panic attacks and had medicine to help with this condition.
53. Officer Stewart ordered Dr. Cox to stand up.
54. Dr. Cox, having trouble breathing, was unable to do so.
55. Officer Pohlman again tased Dr. Cox.
56. At no point in time did Dr. Cox resist the officers during the course of
arrest.
57. Multiple bystanders observed Dr. Cox with his arms behind his back as if
handcuffed.
58. A bystander observed Dr. Cox being hog tied with his wrists tied down
towards his ankles.
59. Dr. Cox suffered a heart attack and kidney failure as a result of the force
used during the course of his arrest.
60. Dr. Cox continues to suffer from complications of those medical issues and
continues to suffer as a result of the force used in his arrest.

COUNT I VIOLATION OF FOURTH AMENDMENT USE OF
EXCESSIVE FORCE LIABILITY ASSERTED UNDER 42 U.S.C. 1983

61. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each and every allegation contained in
the above paragraphs.
62. Dr. Cox had a right to be free from excessive force in the context of an
arrest or investigatory stop under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the
United States Constitution. Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 394 (1989).
10

63. Dr. Cox had a constitutional right to be free from excessive force pursuant
to the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution guaranteed by 42 U.S.C.
1983.
64. The Defendants, while acting under the color of state law, deprived Dr.
Cox of his rights, privileges, and immunities secured by the United States Constitution
and the Ohio Constitution. Marvin v. City of Taylor, 509 F.3d 234, 243 (6th Cir. 2007).
65. Defendant Todd Stewart was wearing his Blue Ash Ohio Police
Department uniform during the course of his duties and acting as a Police Officer, or
under the authority of his title as a Blue Ash Ohio Police Officer, under the color of state
law, during all times relevant to this action.
66. Defendant Todd Stewart made an attempted arrest, or other seizure of Dr.
Cox, after receiving a complaint that he had violated a protection order. See Graham v.
Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 395 (1989).
67. Defendant Roger Pohlman was wearing his Blue Ash Ohio Police
68. Defendant Roger Pohlman made an attempted arrest, or other seizure of
Dr. Cox, after receiving a complaint that he had violated a protection order. See
Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 395 (1989).
69. Defendant Stephen Schueler was wearing his Blue Ash Ohio Police
11

70. Defendant Stephen Schueler made an attempted arrest, or other seizure of
71. Defendant Rick Vonderhaar was wearing his Evendale Ohio Police
under the authority of his title as an Evendale Ohio Police Officer, under the color of
state law, during all times relevant to this action.
72. Defendant Rick Vonderhaar made an attempted arrest, or other seizure of
73. Defendant William Lantry was wearing his Evendale Ohio Police
74. Defendant William Lantry made an attempted arrest, or other seizure of
75. Defendant Tina McCormick was wearing her Evendale Ohio Police
Department uniform during the course of her duties and acting as a Police Officer, or
76. Defendant Tina McCormick made an attempted arrest, or other seizure of
12

77. Defendants used unreasonable force against Dr. Cox, when they choked
him, slammed him to the ground, and continually tased him.
78. An objectively reasonable officer of the imposing size of Officer Pohlman
would not have mercilessly beat and tased a man of the same stature as Dr. Cox, because
this amount of force would not have been necessary for the restraint or arrest when the
physical differences between the parties is so drastic.
79. An objectively reasonable officer of the imposing size of Officer Stewart
would not have mercilessly beat and tased a man of the same stature as Dr. Cox, because
this amount of force would not have been necessary for the restraint or arrest when the
physical differences between the parties is so drastic.
80. An objectively reasonable officer of the imposing size of Officer
Vonderhaar would not have mercilessly beat and tased a man of the same stature as Dr.
Cox, because this amount of force would not have been necessary for the restraint or
arrest when the physical differences between the parties is so drastic.
81. Dr. Cox suffered from severe and lasting physical and emotional injury as
a result of the Defendants actions.

COUNT II- EXCESSIVE FORCE FAILURE TO INTERVENE
82. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each and every allegation in paragraphs
above.
83. Defendant William Lantry was wearing his Evendale Ohio Police
13

84. Defendant Tina McCormick was wearing her Evendale Ohio Police
Department uniform during the course of her duties and acting as a Police Officer, or
85. Defendant Stephen Schueller was wearing his Blue Ash Police Department
uniform during the course of her duties and acting as a Police Officer, or under the
authority of his title as an Evendale Ohio Police Officer, under the color of state law,
during all times relevant to this action.
86. Defendants Willam Lantry, Stephen Schueller, and Tina McCormick
observed the amount of force being used upon the Plaintiff, heard the Plaintiff inform
the Defendants that he could not breath, and did nothing to help or prevent the amount
of force from being used against the Plaintiff.
COUNT III- BATTERY
87. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each and every allegation in paragraphs
above.
88. Defendant Todd Stewart intentionally used significantly more force than
necessary in detaining or arresting Dr. Cox.
89. Defendant Todd Stewarts actions in trying to effectuate the arrest of Dr.
Cox were reckless and Defendant Stewart was aware that his conduct created an
unreasonable risk of physical harm to Dr. Cox.
90. Defendant Todd Stewart acted in bad-faith, or objectively unreasonably,
when he mercilessly tased Dr. Cox when he was accused of minor crimes, when he was
not physically imposing, and that Officer Stewart could have used a fraction of the force
that he used to effectuate either arrest or seizure.
14

91. Defendant Roger Pohlman intentionally used significantly more force than
92. Defendant Roger Pohlmans actions in trying to effectuate the arrest of Dr.
Cox were reckless and Defendant Pohlman was aware that his conduct created an
93. Defendant Roger Pohlman acted in bad-faith, or objectively unreasonably,
not physically imposing, and that Officer Pohlman could have used a fraction of the
force that he used to effectuate either arrest or seizure.
94. Defendant Stephen Schueler intentionally used significantly more force
than necessary in detaining or arresting Dr. Cox.
95. Defendant Stephen Schuelers actions in trying to effectuate the arrest of
Dr. Cox were reckless and Defendant Schueler was aware that his conduct created an
96. Defendant Stephen Schueler acted in bad-faith, or objectively
unreasonably, when he mercilessly tased Dr. Cox when he was accused of minor crimes,
when he was not physically imposing, and that Officer Schueler could have used a
fraction of the force that he used to effectuate either arrest or seizure.
97. Defendant Rick Vonderhaar intentionally used significantly more force
98. Defendant Rick Vonderhaars actions in trying to effectuate the arrest of
Dr. Cox were reckless and Defendant Vonderhaar was aware that his conduct created an
15

99. Defendant Rick Vonderhaar acted in bad-faith, or objectively
when he was not physically imposing, and that Officer Vonderhaar could have used a
100. Defendant William Lantry intentionally used significantly more force than
101. Defendant William Lantrys actions in trying to effectuate the arrest of Dr.
Cox were reckless and Defendant Lantry was aware that his conduct created an
102. Defendant William Lantry acted in bad-faith, or objectively unreasonably,
not physically imposing, and that Officer Lantry could have used a fraction of the force
that he used to effectuate either arrest or seizure.
103. Defendant Tina McCormick intentionally used significantly more force
104. Defendant Tina McCormicks actions in trying to effectuate the arrest of
Dr. Cox were reckless and Defendant McCormick was aware that his conduct created an
105. Defendant Tina McCormick acted in bad-faith, or objectively
unreasonably, when she mercilessly tased Dr. Cox when he was accused of minor
crimes, when he was not physically imposing, and that Officer McCormick could have
used a fraction of the force that she used to effectuate either arrest or seizure.
106. Defendant Deputy John Doe 1 intentionally used significantly more force
16

107. Defendant Deputy John Doe 1s actions in trying to effectuate the arrest of
Dr. Cox were reckless and Defendant John Doe 1 was aware that his conduct created an
108. Defendant Deputy John Doe 1 acted in bad-faith, or objectively
when he was not physically imposing, and that Deputy John Doe 1 could have used a
COUNT IV INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
109. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each and every allegation in the
paragraphs above.
110. Defendants intended to, and in fact, caused emotional distress to the
Plaintiff.
111. Defendants conduct was so extreme and outrageous as to go beyond the
bounds of decency and was such that the conduct can be considered utterly intolerable
in a civilized society.
112. Defendants conduct was the proximate and actual cause of the Plaintiff's
psychiatric and emotional injuries, mental anguish, suffering, and distress.
113. The distress and anguish suffered by the Plaintiff is so serious and of a
nature no reasonable man or woman could be expected to endure.

COUNT V PUNITIVE DAMAGES
114. As a consequence of all the Defendants' wrongful conduct, William Randall
Cox experienced unnecessary pain and suffering and severe and unjustified mental and
emotional distress, and for which the Plaintiff is entitled to recover actual damages.
17

115. Furthermore, all of the Defendants' violations of the Plaintiffs rights were
knowing, intentional, cruel and malicious, entitling the Plaintiff to recover punitive
damages from Defendants in order to deter such conduct in the future.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Plaintiff requests a trial by jury, all compensatory and punitive damages, costs,
reasonable attorney's fees, all equitable relief as deemed necessary and proper and all
other relief that this Court deems fitting and proper.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Benjamin M. Maraan II
Benjamin M. Maraan II, Esq.
Attorney at Law
Fourth & Walnut Centre
105 East Fourth Street, Suite 705
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202
Phone: (513) 448-7024
Email: bmaraanlaw@yahoo.com

Case: 1:14-cv-00814-SSB-KLL Doc #: 2-1 Filed: 10/17/14 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 53

1 14 CV 00814 SSB KLL D 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

1 14 CV 00814 SSB KLL D 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

You might also like