Hobby Lobby Complaint

AlaFile E-Notice
01-CV-2018-903747.00
To: CHRISTOPHER L BURRELL

chris@burrellmccants.com
NOTICE OF ELECTRONIC FILING

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, ALABAMA
BRIAN SPURLOCK V. HOBBY LOBBY STORES, INC

01-CV-2018-903747.00
The following complaint was FILED on 9/19/2018 11:12:40 AM
Notice Date: 9/19/2018 11:12:40 AM
ANNE-MARIE ADAMS
CIRCUIT COURT CLERK
JEFFERSON COUNTY, ALABAMA
716 N. RICHARD ARRINGTON BLVD.
BIRMINGHAM, AL, 35203
205-325-5355
anne-marie.adams@alacourt.gov
DOCUMENT 1
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
9/19/2018 11:10 AM
01-CV-2018-903747.00
State of Alabama Case Number: CIRCUIT COURT OF
COVER SHEET JEFFERSON COUNTY, ALABAMA
Unified Judicial System
CIRCUIT COURT - CIVIL CASE 01-CV-2018-903747.00
ANNE-MARIE ADAMS, CLERK
(Not For Domestic Relations Cases) Date of Filing: Judge Code:
Form ARCiv-93 Rev.5/99
09/19/2018
GENERAL INFORMATION
BRIAN SPURLOCK v. HOBBY LOBBY STORES, INC
First Plaintiff: Business Individual First Defendant: Business Individual

Government Other Government Other
NATURE OF SUIT: Select primary cause of action, by checking box (check only one) that best characterizes your action:
TORTS: PERSONAL INJURY OTHER CIVIL FILINGS (cont'd)

WDEA - Wrongful Death MSXX - Birth/Death Certificate Modification/Bond Forfeiture Appeal/
TONG - Negligence: General Enforcement of Agency Subpoena/Petition to Preserve
TOMV - Negligence: Motor Vehicle CVRT - Civil Rights

TOWA - Wantonness COND - Condemnation/Eminent Domain/Right-of-Way
TOPL - Product Liability/AEMLD CTMP - Contempt of Court
TOMM - Malpractice-Medical CONT - Contract/Ejectment/Writ of Seizure
TOLM - Malpractice-Legal TOCN - Conversion
TOOM - Malpractice-Other EQND - Equity Non-Damages Actions/Declaratory Judgment/
TBFM - Fraud/Bad Faith/Misrepresentation Injunction Election Contest/Quiet Title/Sale For Division
TOXX - Other: CVUD - Eviction Appeal/Unlawful Detainer

FORJ - Foreign Judgment
TORTS: PERSONAL INJURY FORF - Fruits of Crime Forfeiture
TOPE - Personal Property MSHC - Habeas Corpus/Extraordinary Writ/Mandamus/Prohibition
TORE - Real Properly PFAB - Protection From Abuse
EPFA - Elder Protection From Abuse
OTHER CIVIL FILINGS
FELA - Railroad/Seaman (FELA)
ABAN - Abandoned Automobile
RPRO - Real Property
ACCT - Account & Nonmortgage
WTEG - Will/Trust/Estate/Guardianship/Conservatorship
APAA - Administrative Agency Appeal
COMP - Workers’ Compensation
ADPA - Administrative Procedure Act
CVXX - Miscellaneous Circuit Civil Case
ANPS - Adults in Need of Protective Services
ORIGIN: F INITIAL FILING A APPEAL FROM O OTHER

DISTRICT COURT
R REMANDED T TRANSFERRED FROM

OTHER CIRCUIT COURT
Note: Checking "Yes" does not constitute a demand for a

HAS JURY TRIAL BEEN DEMANDED? YES NO jury trial. (See Rules 38 and 39, Ala.R.Civ.P, for procedure)
RELIEF REQUESTED: MONETARY AWARD REQUESTED NO MONETARY AWARD REQUESTED
ATTORNEY CODE:
BUR070 9/19/2018 11:10:53 AM /s/ CHRISTOPHER L BURRELL
Date Signature of Attorney/Party filing this form
MEDIATION REQUESTED: YES NO UNDECIDED
Election to Proceed under the Alabama Rules for Expedited Civil Actions: YES NO
DOCUMENT 2
9/19/2018 11:10 AM
01-CV-2018-903747.00
CIRCUIT COURT OF
BRIAN SPURLOCK, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
vs. ) Civil Action No.:
)
HOBBY LOBBY STORES, INC, a corporation, and FICTITIOUS DEFENDANTS: No. 1,
the Hobby Lobby employee involved at the time of the incident described in Plaintiffs’
Complaint; No. 2, the Hobby Lobby employee acting as a manager involved at the time of
the incident described in Plaintiffs’ Complaint; No. 3, any entity which provided general
liability or premises liability or medical payment coverage to the property/business in
question or which had a duty to insure or ensure the safety and security of Plaintiff, while
at the premises involved in the occurrence made the basis of this suit; No. 4, any entity
which was involved to any degree in providing safety and security to Plaintiff in
connection with the occurrence made the basis of Plaintiff’s complaint; No. 5, any entity
which controlled and/or had a duty to control the premises involved in the occurrence
made the basis of this lawsuit at the time of or at any time before said occurrence which
caused injury and damage to Plaintiff; No. 6, being that person, firm, partnership or
corporation who contracted with Hobby Lobby, Inc. to provide training or supervision of
its employees; No. 7 being that person, firm, partnership or corporation who owned or
operated the premises in which the Plaintiff was injured, if not Hobby Lobby, Inc.;
Plaintiff avers that the identities of the Fictitious Party Defendants are otherwise unknown
to Plaintiff at this time, but their true names will be substituted when ascertained,
)
Defendants. )
COMPLAINT
PARTIES AND JURISDICTION
1. Plaintiff Brian Spurlock, is over the age of 19 years old and has been a resident of
Jefferson County, Alabama for more than six months preceding the filing of this complaint.
2. Defendant Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. (hereinafter referred to singularly as
“Defendant Hobby Lobby” or together with Fictitious Defendants as “Defendants”), is a foreign
corporation organized under the laws of the state of Oklahoma, which conducts business at
5501 Patrick Way, which is the in the Birmingham Division of Jefferson County.
3. Fictitious Defendants, described above as numbers one (1) through seven (7), are
DOCUMENT 2
those persons or entities whose names will be substituted upon learning their true identities.
4. The act or occurrence complained of and made the basis for this action
occurred at 5501 Patrick Way, which is the in the Birmingham Division of Jefferson County.
VENUE
5. Venue is proper in this Court as Plaintiff is a resident of Jefferson County, AL,
Defendant is a foreign corporation which operates a place of business in Jefferson County, AL
and all or substantially all of the wrongs complained of occurred in the Birmingham Division of
Jefferson County, Alabama.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
6. Brian Spurlock, an African American male, entered the Hobby Lobby located at
5501 Patrick Way in Birmingham, AL on May 15, 2018.
7. Spurlock was there to return an item which was purchased from the same store ten
days prior.
8. He was returning the item because it did not work properly.
9. He had the store purchase receipt for the item he was returning.
10. He approached the counter and informed Fictitious Defendant No. 1, the Hobby
Lobby employee, that he wished to return the item.
11. The store has a return policy which states that items may be returned within 90
days of purchase with receipt.
12. The store’s return policy is on the sales receipts given to customers.
13. The same return policy was printed on the sales receipt Mr. Spurlock had.
14. Fictitious Defendant No. 1, the Hobby Lobby cashier (White female) told
Spurlock the she needed to check with the manager to see if the item was returnable.
DOCUMENT 2
15. The employee spoke with Fictitious Defendant No. 2, the manager (White
female).
16. The manager said she would have to “check with corporate” to determine whether
the item could be returned and asked for Spurlock’s identification.
17. From the events that transpired after the manager “called corporate,” it can be
reasonably inferred that the manager either did not call corporate and instead called the police or
called both corporate and the police, because a police officer from the Trussville Police
Department arrived shortly after the call was made.
18. When the officer walked into the store, Spurlock thought nothing of his presence
as he was not doing anything wrong.
19. The officer approached Spurlock in an aggressive manner, asked for his
identification, and then informed him that he was “about to be trespassed.”
20. Spurlock did not have his ID because he had already given it to the Hobby Lobby
employee.
21. The manager gave the officer Spurlock’s ID and the officer left the store and went
to his police car.
22. A few minutes later, the officer returned and informed the Hobby Lobby
employee and/or manager that Spurlock had no warrants.
23. Spurlock asked the manager to explain how he was trespassing.
24. The manager then said that Spurlock “resembled” someone they had caught
returning stolen items.
25. The manager refused to show Spurlock a photo of the person she alleged he
resembled.
DOCUMENT 2
26. Spurlock’s girlfriend, Ashley Maddox, then came into the store.
27. Maddox asked the manager why she called the police on Spurlock when he was
only attempting to do what the store policy stated he was allowed to do: return an item in its
original packaging with the receipt within the prescribed 90 days.
28. The manager stated that they were “only following orders from our upper
management.”
29. Spurlock stepped away from the service desk and began speaking with another
individual.
30. The manager then threatened to have Spurlock trespassed by the police for
speaking louder than she felt he should speak.
31. After everything, Hobby Lobby finally allowed Spurlock to return the item and
issued him a refund.
32. Spurlock was only allowed to return the item after he had been racially profiled
and stereotyped as a person that had been stealing and attempting to return stolen products.
33. Spurlock was allowed to return the item, but only after the Hobby Lobby
employees attempting to have him arrested for no apparent reason since if he were returning
stolen merchandise, he would not have a receipt.
34. Spurlock was allowed to return the item, but only after his right to enforce the
contract explicit in the return policy of Hobby Lobby had been interfered with and thoroughly
molested.
35. The Hobby Lobby employees did everything they could to have Spurlock
incarcerated and therefore prevent him from enforcing the contract and returning the item in
accordance with the contract.

DOCUMENT 2
36. They did this simply because Spurlock is a young African American male, and
under the guise that he “resembled” a thief.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

FALSE IMPRISONMENT
37. Plaintiff realleges all previous paragraphs as if set out here in full, and further
alleges:
38. Defendants committed the tort of False Imprisonment upon the Plaintiff during
the incident made the basis of this Complaint when they asked for his identification under the
guise of checking for the returnability of his merchandise, then calling the police on him,
alleging that he resembled a thief.
39. The Defendants only asked for identification and called the police after the
Plaintiff questioned the return policy.
40. The Defendants assertions were completely unreasonable, as the Plaintiff had a
valid receipt for the item he was returning.
41. The Defendants gave the police the Plaintiff’s identification, which further
detained him as the police searched for warrants on him.
42. The Defendants’ actions deprived the Plaintiff of his personal liberty and has
caused the Plaintiff pain and suffering, emotional distress, mental anguish, embarrassment, out of
pocket expenses, and a fear of loss of standing in the community of their peers.
43. Defendant Hobby Lobby is specifically vicariously liable for the tort of False
Imprisonment through the theory of respondeat superior because Fictitious Defendants No. 1 and
No. 2, at all times relevant and material, during the committing of the False Imprisonment, were
acting in furtherance of the business of Hobby Lobby, albeit wrongfully so.

DOCUMENT 2
44. Defendant Hobby Lobby is specifically vicariously liable for the tort of False
Imprisonment through the theory of respondeat superior because Fictitious Defendants No. 1 and
No. 2, at all times relevant and material, during the committing of the False Imprisonment, were
acting in the line and scope of their employment with Hobby Lobby, and/or because Hobby Lobby
authorized, participated in, and/or ratified the False Imprisonment committed by Fictitious
Defendants No. 1 and No. 2.
45. As a result of the actions described herein, the Plaintiff has suffered injuries and
damages as described below.
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

NEGLIGENCE
alleges:
47. Fictitious Defendants No. 1 and No. 2 owed the Plaintiff a duty to refrain from
discriminating, falsely imprisoning, harassing, or otherwise injuring the Plaintiff, which they
breached when they did the complete opposite.
48. Defendant Hobby Lobby had a duty to ensure that as employers, superiors, and
overseers of employees of Hobby Lobby, that a customer such as the Plaintiff was to be provided
a reasonably safe environment, free from, among other things, Discrimination and False
Imprisonment.
49. Defendant Hobby Lobby owed the Plaintiff a duty of care to ensure that its
facilities were kept in a safe and reasonable manner and to remove any open and obvious
dangers, including Fictitious Defendants No. 1 and No. 2, prior to the May 15, 2018 incident.
DOCUMENT 2
50. Defendant Hobby Lobby breached its duties when it allowed Fictitious
Defendants No. 1 and No. 2 to remain on its premises after it should have been aware of their
discriminatory propensities.
51. The inattention, thoughtlessness, heedlessness and lack of due care on behalf of
Defendant Hobby Lobby in their actions and inactions in allowing the aforementioned situation
to occur during business hours constituted a breach of the duty of care owed by Defendant
Hobby Lobby to the Plaintiff. Such negligence was one of the proximate causes of injuries
suffered by the Plaintiff.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

NEGLIGENT RETENTION, TRAINING AND SUPERVISION
alleges:
54. Defendant’s actions violated Ala. Code § 6-11-27, because they knew or should
have known of the unfitness of the agents, employees, and/or servants, and employed them or
continued to employ them, or used their services without proper instruction with a disregard of the
rights or safety of others and authorized the wrongful conduct.
55. Defendant Hobby Lobby knew or should have known that its/their employees were
persons unworthy, by habits, temperaments, and nature, to deal with other persons on the
employers' premises.
56. Defendant Hobby Lobby was negligent and/or wanton in hiring and/or
supervising Fictitious Defendants No. 1 and No. 2 when they knew or should have known of
Fictitious Defendants No. 1 and No. 2’s incompetency and unfitness.

DOCUMENT 2
57. Defendant Hobby Lobby furthermore failed to properly train and supervise
Fictitious Defendants No. 1 and No. 2.
58. Such inaction on the part of Defendant Hobby Lobby contributed to Fictitious
Defendants No. 1 and No. 2’s aforementioned actions in dealing with the Plaintiff.
59. Defendant Hobby Lobby, as master of Fictitious Defendants No. 1 and No. 2, is
liable for negligent supervision for permitting, or failing to prevent, negligent or other tortious
conduct by persons, whether or not servants or agents, upon the premises or with
instrumentalities under their control, and for the resulting injuries to Plaintiffs.
FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

NEGLIGENCE PER SE
61. Plaintiff readopts each allegation herein and further alleges that Defendants’ actions
constitute negligence per se, because the complained of acts are in violation of certain codified
state laws.
62. Specifically, Defendant Hobby Lobby’s actions in the negligent hiring and
supervision of the Defendants violates Ala. Code § 6-11-27; 6-5-300; and, 25-6-1.

DOCUMENT 2
RELIEF REQUESTED
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff having set forth claims for relief against Defendant
respectfully pray of the Court as follows:
a. That Plaintiff have and recover against Defendants a sum to be determined by a jury of
peers in the form of actual, incidental, and consequential damages (including mental
anguish);
b. That Plaintiff have and recover against Defendants a sum to be determined by a jury of
peers in the form of punitive damages;
c. That Plaintiff have and recover against a sum to be determined by a jury of peers in the
form of statutory damages;
d. That Defendant be immediately and permanently enjoyed from continuing to violate the
civil rights laws;
e. That Plaintiff have reasonable attorney’s fees, costs, expenses;
f. That Plaintiff have such other, further and proper relief as the Court may deem just and
proper and as justice may require.
/s/ Christopher L. Burrell

Christopher L. Burrell, Esq. (BUR070)
/s/ Terrell E. McCants

Terrell E. McCants, Esq. (MCC176)
Attorneys for the Plaintiff
Burrell & McCants, LLC

712 32nd St. S.
Birmingham, AL 35233
Ph: (205) 202-5599
Email: chris@burrellmccants.com
terrell@burrellmccants.com
DOCUMENT 2
PLEASE SERVE DEFENDANTS BY CERTIFIED MAIL
Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.

5501 Patrick Way
Corporation Service Company Inc.

Registered Agent for Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.
641 South Lawrence St.
Montgomery, AL 36104
DOCUMENT 3
9/19/2018 11:10 AM
01-CV-2018-903747.00
CIRCUIT COURT OF
BRIAN SPURLOCK, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
vs. ) Civil Action No.:
)
HOBBY LOBBY STORES, INC, a corporation, and FICTITIOUS DEFENDANTS: No. 1,
the Hobby Lobby employee involved at the time of the incident described in Plaintiffs’
Complaint; No. 2, the Hobby Lobby employee acting as a manager involved at the time of
the incident described in Plaintiffs’ Complaint; No. 3, any entity which provided general
liability or premises liability or medical payment coverage to the property/business in
question or which had a duty to insure or ensure the safety and security of Plaintiff, while
at the premises involved in the occurrence made the basis of this suit; No. 4, any entity
which was involved to any degree in providing safety and security to Plaintiff in
connection with the occurrence made the basis of Plaintiff’s complaint; No. 5, any entity
which controlled and/or had a duty to control the premises involved in the occurrence
made the basis of this lawsuit at the time of or at any time before said occurrence which
caused injury and damage to Plaintiff; No. 6, being that person, firm, partnership or
corporation who contracted with Hobby Lobby, Inc. to provide training or supervision of
its employees; No. 7 being that person, firm, partnership or corporation who owned or
operated the premises in which the Plaintiff was injured, if not Hobby Lobby, Inc.;
Plaintiff avers that the identities of the Fictitious Party Defendants are otherwise unknown
to Plaintiff at this time, but their true names will be substituted when ascertained,
)
Defendants. )
PLAINTIFF’S FIRST INTERROGATORIES AND

REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION TO DEFENDANT
COMES NOW the Plaintiff, Brian Spurlock (“Plaintiff” or “Mr. Spurlock”), by and
through the counsel of record, and submits the following Interrogatories and Requests for
Production of Documents to the Defendant, Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. (“Defendant”). These
discovery requests are to be answered separately and fully in writing and under oath, in
accordance with the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure, Rules 33 and 34, and within 30 days as
required by law.
DOCUMENT 3
DEFINITIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS
For purposes of these discovery requests:
(a) “You” and “your” means the Defendant, Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. and agents,
employees, attorneys, and all other persons who have acted on your behalf.
(b) Each request for production of documents contained herein extends to all
documents in your possession, custody or control in the possession, custody or control of anyone
acting on your behalf. A document is deemed to be within your possession, custody or control
(a) if it is in your physical custody of (b) if it is in the physical custody of any other person and
you (i) own such document in whole or in part, (ii) have a right, by contract, statue or otherwise,
to use, inspect, examine or copy such document on any terms, (iii) have an understanding,
express or implied, that you may use, inspect, examine or copy such document on any terms or
(iv) have, as a practical matter, been able to use, inspect, examine or copy such document when
you sought to do so.
(c) The terms “document” and “documents” are used in their broadest sense allowed
by Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure – and include, but are not limited to, any kind of tangible
material, whether written, recorded, microfilmed, microfiched, photographed, computerized,
reduced to an electronic or magnetic impulse or otherwise preserved or rendered, and also
including, but not limited to, writings, drawings, graphs, charts, photographs, phonographs
records, tape recordings, notes, diaries, calendars, checkbooks, books, papers, agreements,
contracts, accounts, electronic or videotape recordings, and any computer-generated, computer
stored, or electronically-stored matter from which information can be obtained and translated, if
necessary, into reasonably useable form. The definition of “document” includes e-mail
DOCUMENT 3
communications, text messages, phone records, information contained in any computer or stored
separately in electronic media or removable media (even if not previously printed out).
(d) “Identify” when used with the reference to: (i) an individual person means to state
his or her full name, employer, job title, present or last known address and telephone number,
and present or last known business address and telephone number; (ii) a document means to state
the type of document (e.g., letter, memorandum, etc.) and its date, author, addressee, general
subject matter and present location and custodian. (If any document was, but no longer is, in
your possession, state what disposition was made of it and the facts or reasons for such
disposition; (iii) A meeting or discussion, state the date, location, persons attending, topics
discussed in the meeting or discussion, (iv): an event means to state the date and time of the
event, the people present, the location and circumstances surrounding the event.
(e) “Person” or “persons” means any natural person, firm, proprietorship, partnership,
joint venture, corporation, association, or other business entity, and all present and former
officers, directors, agents, employees, and others acting for or purporting to act on behalf of such
natural person, firm, proprietorship, partnership, joint venture, corporation, association, or other
business entity with respect to the matter referred to in the discovery request and/or your answer
thereto.
(f) “Relate(s) to” or “relating to” means refer(s) to, reflect(s) or in any way logically
or factually connect(s) with the matter described in the discovery request.
(g) If any discovery request cannot be answered in full, then answer to the extent
possible and state the reason or reasons for your inability to provide a complete answer.
(h) With regard to your answer to each discovery request, identify the person(s)
providing the information contained in the answer and state whether the information furnished is
DOCUMENT 3
within the personal knowledge of the person providing the information and, if not, the identity, if
known, of each person with whom the information is a matter of personal knowledge.
(i) These discovery requests shall be deemed continuing, and supplemental answers
shall be filed to the extent required by the Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure. If further
information is obtained of the nature sought by these discovery requests after the service of your
answer, you are specifically requested to supply such further information to the Plaintiff.
(j) If any privilege is claimed with respect to the information requested in any
discovery request, state the privilege claimed and the basis for asserting such privilege. Provide
the following information for each document withheld on the basis of an assertion of privilege:
1) its date;
2) its title;
3) its author;
4) its addressee;
5) the identity of each person who received or saw the original or any copy;
6) the claim of privilege under which it is withheld;
7) its general subject matter;
8) its present custodian; and
9) a description of the document that you would consider adequate to support your
contention that it is privileged.
(k) “Communication” includes any statement or utterance, whether written or oral,
made by one person to another, or in the presence of another, and any document (as defined
below) delivered or sent from one person to another.
(l) The terms “relating to” and “relate to” mean directly or indirectly mentioning,
DOCUMENT 3
describing, pertaining to, being connected with, or reflecting upon the subject matter of the
specific request.
(m) The use of the singular shall be deemed to include the plural, and the use of one
gender shall include all other as are appropriate in the context.
(n) The term “and/or,” “or” and “and” are used inclusively, not exclusively.
(o) “Personal knowledge” means information or belief based on events you
personally saw, heard, or otherwise perceived. “Personal knowledge” excludes information or
belief based on statements of others that you did not personally witness or experience.
(p) “Plaintiff” means Brian Spurlock.
(q) “Complaint” means the complaint filed in the above-captioned action pending in
the Circuit Court of Alabama.
(r) You are advised that these Interrogatories and Requests for Production are
“continuing” in nature, and that should any information come to your attention after the filing of
your answers, your answers should be immediately amended to reflect such additional
information.
(s) A request is not necessarily objectionable merely because an answer to the
discovery request involves an opinion or contention that relates to the fact or the application of
law to fact. When facts to support your contention are requested, consider this as also a request
to name the source of such facts, including the name and address of any witness who will testify
to such facts or the identification of any documents which will serve as proof of such facts.
DOCUMENT 3
INTERROGATORIES
Plaintiff, Brian Spurlock (“Plaintiff” or “Mr. Spurlock”), pursuant to Rule 33 of the

Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure, propounds to the Defendant, Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.
(“Defendant”), the following Interrogatories:
1. State the full name, position, and company address of the individual who will be the
Defendant’s corporate representative pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6) of the Alabama Rules of Civil
Procedure.
ANSWER:
2. State the full name, date of birth, and title of the individual (white female) who worked the
customer service return desk on May 15, 2018.
ANSWER:
3. State the full name, date of birth, and title of the individual (white female) who worked as a
manager or supervisor, and was consulted by the individual who worked the customer service
return desk on May 15, 2018.
ANSWER:
4. Describe the Defendant’s education, training, and supervision, of the individuals described in
Interrogatories 2 and 3.
ANSWER:
5. State whether the Defendant Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. has been a plaintiff or defendant in
any civil or criminal proceeding (including both past litigation and any suit which may
currently be pending and including any Federal, State or local administrative proceeding)
other than the instant case filed against Defendant in the past 5 years, in which breach of
contract or bad faith were claimed against the Defendant. If so, please state: the style of each
such case (including the names of all parties to the case); the name and city of the court
where each such case was or is pending; the approximate date when each such case was filed;
the nature of each such case and the outcome, including a statement of any damages or other
relief awarded.
ANSWER:
6. Do you understand that these Interrogatory answers require timely supplementation upon the
discovery of additional information pertinent to the answer to these Interrogatories?
ANSWER:
7. Do you understand that you are making these answers under oath, and are stating they are
true and correct, and that they may be used at trial?
ANSWER:
DOCUMENT 3
REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS
Plaintiff, Brian Spurlock (“Plaintiff” or “Mr. Spurlock”), pursuant to Rule 34 of the

Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure, propounds to the Defendant, Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.
(“Defendant”), the following Requests for Production:
1. Copies of any and all audio or video surveillance of the Hobby Lobby store at 5501
Patrick Way on the date of May 15, 2018.
2. Color copies of any photographs or stills of the Hobby Lobby store at 5501 Patrick Way
on the date of May 15, 2018.
3. Copies or transcripts of any and all notes, reports or memorandums of any agent,
employee, or representative of the Defendant who was involved in the incident or had
interaction with the Plaintiff on May 15, 2018.
4. Copies of any and all education or training materials supplied by the Defendant to any
agent, employee, or representative of the Defendant who was involved in the incident or
had interaction with the Plaintiff on May 15, 2018.
5. Copies of any and all manuals, policies or procedures supplied by the Defendant to any
6. Copies of any and all documents related to the hiring, supervision and training of any
/s/ Christopher L. Burrell

Christopher L. Burrell, Esq. (BUR070)
/s/ Terrell E. McCants

Terrell E. McCants, Esq. (MCC176)
Attorneys for the Plaintiff
Burrell & McCants, LLC

712 32nd St. S.
Ph: (205) 202-5599
Email: chris@burrellmccants.com
terrell@burrellmccants.com
DOCUMENT 3
PLEASE SERVE DEFENDANTS BY CERTIFIED MAIL
Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.

5501 Patrick Way
Corporation Service Company Inc.

Registered Agent for Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.
641 South Lawrence St.
Montgomery, AL 36104

Hobby Lobby Complaint

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Hobby Lobby Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AlaFile E-Notice

To: CHRISTOPHER L BURRELL

NOTICE OF ELECTRONIC FILING

BRIAN SPURLOCK V. HOBBY LOBBY STORES, INC

The following complaint was FILED on 9/19/2018 11:12:40 AM

Notice Date: 9/19/2018 11:12:40 AM

First Plaintiff: Business Individual First Defendant: Business Individual

TORTS: PERSONAL INJURY OTHER CIVIL FILINGS (cont'd)

TOMV - Negligence: Motor Vehicle CVRT - Civil Rights

TOXX - Other: CVUD - Eviction Appeal/Unlawful Detainer

ORIGIN: F INITIAL FILING A APPEAL FROM O OTHER

R REMANDED T TRANSFERRED FROM

Note: Checking "Yes" does not constitute a demand for a

RELIEF REQUESTED: MONETARY AWARD REQUESTED NO MONETARY AWARD REQUESTED

MEDIATION REQUESTED: YES NO UNDECIDED

PARTIES AND JURISDICTION

2. Defendant Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. (hereinafter referred to singularly as

“Defendant Hobby Lobby” or together with Fictitious Defendants as “Defendants”), is a foreign

5. Venue is proper in this Court as Plaintiff is a resident of Jefferson County, AL,

Defendant is a foreign corporation which operates a place of business in Jefferson County, AL

Jefferson County, Alabama.

5501 Patrick Way in Birmingham, AL on May 15, 2018.

8. He was returning the item because it did not work properly.

Lobby employee, that he wished to return the item.

days of purchase with receipt.

the item could be returned and asked for Spurlock’s identification.

Department arrived shortly after the call was made.

as he was not doing anything wrong.

identification, and then informed him that he was “about to be trespassed.”

to his police car.

employee and/or manager that Spurlock had no warrants.

23. Spurlock asked the manager to explain how he was trespassing.

returning stolen items.

original packaging with the receipt within the prescribed 90 days.

speaking louder than she felt he should speak.

issued him a refund.

stolen merchandise, he would not have a receipt.

accordance with the contract.

under the guise that he “resembled” a thief.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

alleging that he resembled a thief.

Plaintiff questioned the return policy.

valid receipt for the item he was returning.

detained him as the police searched for warrants on him.

acting in furtherance of the business of Hobby Lobby, albeit wrongfully so.

Defendants No. 1 and No. 2.

damages as described below.

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

breached when they did the complete opposite.

suffered by the Plaintiff.

damages as described below.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

rights or safety of others and authorized the wrongful conduct.

Fictitious Defendants No. 1 and No. 2’s incompetency and unfitness.

Fictitious Defendants No. 1 and No. 2.

damages as described below.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

damages as described below.

respectfully pray of the Court as follows:

peers in the form of punitive damages;

form of statutory damages;

civil rights laws;

e. That Plaintiff have reasonable attorney’s fees, costs, expenses;

proper and as justice may require.