Case: 1:18-cv-02418 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/18/18 1 of 14.

PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

IN THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION

SHAJUAN GRAY,
c/o Friedman and Gilbert
55 Public Square, Suite 1055
Cleveland, Ohio 44113, CASE NO.

Plaintiff, JUDGE

-vs-

CITY OF EUCLID COMPLAINT

545 E. 222nd St.
Euclid, Ohio 44123, JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

-and-

OFFICER JAMES AOKI

Euclid Police Department
545 East 222nd St.
Euclid, Ohio 44123,

Defendants.

INTRODUCTION

1. On March 27, 2017, Plaintiff Shajuan Gray was at home in her apartment. Plaintiff

Gray had recently showered and was wearing only a short, terry cloth bath wrap. Without just

cause, Defendant Euclid Police Officer James Aoki illegally entered her apartment, seized and

arrested her. As Defendant Aoki assaulted Plaintiff Gray, her wrap slipped down, exposing her

breasts. Defendant Aoki did not permit Plaintiff to dress herself. Without any legal justification,

Defendant Aoki charged Plaintiff Gray, who has no criminal background, with resisting arrest,

obstruction of official business, and a noise violation. Plaintiff faced prosecution for five months

1
 Case: 1:18-cv-02418 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/18/18 2 of 14. PageID #: 2

and was compelled to hire private defense counsel to represent her. Finally, on October 30, 2017,

a jury acquitted Plaintiff of all charges.

2. This is a civil rights action addressing the constitutional and state law violations

committed against Shajuan Gray. Plaintiff seeks damages, costs, and all other relief this Court

deems appropriate for the violations and injuries she has suffered and continues to suffer.

3. Plaintiff also seeks damages and other relief against Defendant City of Euclid for

their written and unwritten policies, practices, and/or customs of civil rights violations and

unconstitutional practices, which were the moving forces in the violations of Plaintiff’s rights

giving rise to this lawsuit.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. This action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, et. seq., as well as the Fourth

and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Jurisdiction is conferred on this

Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question) and § 1343 (civil rights). Pendent claims arise

under the laws and Constitution of the State of Ohio and supplemental jurisdiction is invoked under

28 U.S.C. § 1367.

5. Venue is appropriate in this District under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) as this cause of

action arose in the City of Euclid, County of Cuyahoga.

PARTIES

6. Plaintiff Shajuan Gray, at all times relevant to the allegations made in this

complaint, resided in the City of Euclid, County of Cuyahoga, Ohio.

7. James Aoki was, at all times relevant to the allegations made in this complaint, a

duly appointed police officer employed by the City of Euclid, acting within the scope of his

employment and under the color of state law. He is sued in his individual capacity.

2
 Case: 1:18-cv-02418 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/18/18 3 of 14. PageID #: 3

8. Defendant City of Euclid was and is a political subdivision and unit of local

government duly organized under the laws of the State of Ohio in the Northern District of Ohio

acting under the color of law. Defendant City of Euclid is a “person” under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Defendant City of Euclid is the employer and principal of Defendant Aoki, and is responsible for

the policies, practices, and customs of its Police Department.

FACTS

9. During the afternoon of March 27, 2017, Plaintiff Shajuan Gray was inside her

home. She was clothed only in a short, terry cloth bath wrap as she had just taken a shower.

10. Defendant Aoki was acting in his capacity as a Euclid Police Officer. He was

assigned to routine patrol duties.

11. Defendant Aoki was dispatched to the area of 24350 Lakeshore Blvd. for an

allegation of loud music.

12. Aoki knocked on Plaintiff Gray’s door.

13. Plaintiff Gray opened the door slightly, modestly positioning her almost naked

body behind the door, and spoke with Defendant Aoki.

14. Aoki asked Plaintiff to turn her music off.

15. Although Plaintiff Gray was playing her music at a reasonable level, she complied

with Defendant’s request and turned off her the music.

16. Plaintiff told Defendant Aoki that she would return momentarily to speak further

with him after she properly clothed herself.

17. At that time, Defendant Aoki unlawfully forced his way into Plaintiff Gray’s

residence and assaulted her.

3
 Case: 1:18-cv-02418 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/18/18 4 of 14. PageID #: 4

18. Defendant Aoki aggressively, forcefully, and without justification, pushed Plaintiff

Gray – who was wearing only a bath wrap– onto a freezer inside her apartment.

19. Several neighbors heard the commotion and came out of their apartments to see

Defendant Aoki assaulting Plaintiff without justification.

20. During the assault, Plaintiff’s wrap fell down, exposing her breasts and her naked

body to Defendant Aoki and neighbors.

21. Plaintiff Gray begged Defendant Aoki to allow her to put on clothes, but he refused.

22. Instead, Aoki asked a neighbor to assist in trying to “cover up” Plaintiff Gray while

she was exposed and handcuffed.

23. Plaintiff Gray was arrested and placed into the rear of Defendant Aoki’s cruiser,

still wearing only her short wrap, despite her repeated requests to clothe herself.

24. At no point did Plaintiff Gray resist arrest.

25. Defendant Aoki did not have reasonable suspicion or probable cause to justify or

permit his entry into Plaintiff’s home or his decision to seize her.

26. Defendant Aoki arrested Plaintiff Gray and brought her to the Euclid Police Station.

27. As a result of the false charges lodged against her by Defendant Aoki, Plaintiff was

held in the Euclid City Jail and had to post bond to gain her freedom.

28. Defendant Aoki then completed false, misleading, and incomplete official reports

and gave a false, misleading, and incomplete version of events to supervisors and prosecutors.

29. Defendant Aoki filed a criminal complaint in the Euclid Municipal Court against

Plaintiff for resisting arrest, obstructing official business, and a noise violation in case number

17CRB00569.

4
 Case: 1:18-cv-02418 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/18/18 5 of 14. PageID #: 5

30. Plaintiff, who had no criminal background, faced prosecution for over seven

months. She had to engage criminal defense counsel and defend herself against the charges at a

jury trial.

31. Defendant Aoki gave a false, misleading, and incomplete testimony at Plaintiff’s

jury trial in order to cover up his own misconduct.

32. On October 30, 2017, a jury acquitted Plaintiff of all charges and the case was

terminated in her favor.

33. In violating Plaintiff’s constitutional rights, Defendant Aoki engaged in willful,

wanton, reckless, and/or negligent conduct. This unconstitutional conduct and willful, wanton,

reckless, and/or negligent conduct was the direct, actual, and proximate cause of Plaintiff’s

injuries.

34. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant Aoki’s conduct, Plaintiff suffered

and continues to suffer lasting injuries including, inter alia, physical pain and harm, bruising, and

serious and severe mental, emotional, and psychological injuries, economic losses, loss of liberty,

and damages.

35. The injuries suffered by Plaintiff were all preventable, had Defendant Aoki not

engaged in unconstitutional conduct in violation of her fundamental rights.

36. Upon information and belief, the City of Euclid has failed to effectively investigate

or impose any discipline on Defendant Aoki for his illegal behavior and false testimony.

5
 Case: 1:18-cv-02418 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/18/18 6 of 14. PageID #: 6

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

42 U.S.C. § 1983 Claim – Unconstitutional Search and Seizure
against Defendant Aoki

37. All Paragraphs contained in this complaint are incorporated as if fully rewritten

herein.

38. Defendant Aoki’s actions, as alleged in the preceding paragraphs, were performed

under color of law and deprived Plaintiff of federally protected rights, in violation of Title 42

U.S.C. §1983.

39. Defendant Aoki deprived Plaintiff of her clearly-established right to be free from

unreasonable searches and seizures and unreasonable and excessive force in violation of the Fourth

and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.

40. The actions of Defendant Aoki were committed intentionally, and in a willful,

wanton, and/or reckless manner.

41. As a direct and proximate result of the misconduct of the Defendant, Plaintiff

suffered and continues to suffer injuries and damages as set forth in the Complaint.

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

42 U.S.C. § 1983 Claim – Malicious Prosecution
against Defendant Aoki

42. All Paragraphs contained in this complaint are incorporated as if fully rewritten

herein.

43. Defendant Aoki’s actions, as alleged in the preceding paragraphs, were performed

under color of law and deprived Plaintiff of federally protected rights, in violation of Title 42

U.S.C. §1983.

44. Defendant Aoki accused Plaintiff of criminal activity knowing those accusations to

be without genuine probable cause.

6
 Case: 1:18-cv-02418 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/18/18 7 of 14. PageID #: 7

45. Defendant Aoki instigated, influenced, or participated in the decision to prosecute

Plaintiff knowing there was no probable cause for the criminal prosecution.

46. Defendant Aoki also engaged in conduct, including but not limited to making

statements to supervisors, prosecutors, and a jury, which continued the judicial proceedings against

Plaintiff without probable cause.

47. The charges were terminated in favor of Plaintiff.

48. Defendant Aoki deliberately engaged in arbitrary and conscience-shocking conduct

that contravened fundamental canons of decency and fairness and violated Plaintiff’s substantive

due process rights and in violation of the Due Process Clause, and the Fourteenth and Fourth

Amendments to the United States Constitution.

49. As a direct and proximate cause of Defendant Aoki’s misconduct, Plaintiff suffered

and continues to suffer injury and damages as set forth in this Complaint.

THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF

42 U.S.C. § 1983 – Monell Claim
against Defendant City of Euclid

50. All Paragraphs contained in this complaint are incorporated as if fully rewritten

herein.

51. The actions of Defendant Aoki, as alleged above, were taken pursuant to one or

more interrelated de facto policies (even if not official written edicts), practices and/or customs of

civil rights violations and unconstitutional practices of the City of Euclid and its Police

Department.

52. The City of Euclid, at all times relevant herein, approved, authorized, and

acquiesced in the unlawful and unconstitutional conduct of its respective employees and/or agents

and consequently is directly liable for the acts of those agents, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

7
 Case: 1:18-cv-02418 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/18/18 8 of 14. PageID #: 8

53. Though the facts and circumstances surrounding Plaintiff’s arrest clearly

demonstrate that Defendant Aoki’s actions were unreasonable and unlawful upon information and

belief, the City of Euclid has failed to effectively investigate or impose any discipline on Defendant

Aoki for his illegal behavior.

54. At all times material to this complaint, the Defendant City of Euclid and its Police

Department had interrelated de facto policies, practices, and customs which included, inter alia:

a. the failure to properly hire, train, supervise, discipline, transfer, monitor,

counsel and/or otherwise control City of Euclid police officers who engage in
unjustified use of excessive and unreasonable force, unlawful searches and
seizures, and malicious prosecution;

b. the police code of silence;

c. the encouragement of excessive and unreasonable force, unlawful

searches and seizures, and malicious prosecution;

d. the failure to properly investigate use of excessive and unreasonable

force, unlawful searches and seizures, and malicious prosecution against
civilians, particularly African-Americans, by City of Euclid police
officers; and

e. the failure to properly discipline, supervise, monitor, counsel, and

otherwise control City of Euclid police officers who engage in
unjustified use of excessive and unreasonable force, unlawful searches
and seizures, or malicious prosecution.

55. Recently, a slew of allegations of excessive force and misconduct against Euclid

police officers have arisen, some of which are captured on video.

56. The aforementioned de facto policies, practices, and customs of the Euclid Police

Department include a pattern of acts of excessive use of force, unlawful searches and seizures, and

malicious prosecution, and other willful, wanton, and/or reckless behavior leading to harmful

consequences to citizens.

8
 Case: 1:18-cv-02418 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/18/18 9 of 14. PageID #: 9

57. The Euclid Police Department has engaged in little or no meaningful investigation

or disciplinary action in response to this pattern of misconduct, thereby creating a culture or climate

that members of the department can escape accountability with impunity.

58. The Euclid Police Department’s training is deficient and trivializes the use of

excessive force through the use of images such as the following, which was the first slide of the

training PowerPoint presentation in the Euclid Police 2017 winter in-service “Defensive Tactics

Training,” and includes an image of a police officer in riot gear striking a person lying on the

ground with hands in the air, with the caption, “serving and protecting the poop out of you”:

59. In Stewart v. Euclid, 17-cv-02122, the Honorable Judge Gwin of the Northern

District of Ohio cautioned Euclid, stating, “the Euclid Police Department seems to view the use of

force (including deadly force) with cavalier indifference.”

9
 Case: 1:18-cv-02418 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/18/18 10 of 14. PageID #: 10

60. These customs/practices/patterns are the moving force behind the conduct of

Defendant Aoki in searching, seizing, and prosecuting Plaintiff, which was not an isolated incident

of unconstitutional and unreasonably violent policing within the City of Euclid by its officers.

61. The policy, practice, and custom of a police code of silence results in police officers

refusing to report instances of police misconduct of which they are aware, including unlawful

searches, seizures, and prosecutions, despite their obligation to do so, and also includes police

officers either remaining silent or giving false and misleading information during official

investigations in order to protect themselves or fellow officers from internal discipline, civil

liability, or criminal charges in cases where they or their fellow officers have engaged in

misconduct.

62. The de facto policies, practices, and customs of failing to hire, train, supervise,

monitor, discipline, transfer, counsel and/or control police misconduct and the code of silence are

interrelated and exacerbate the effects of each other, institutionalize police lying, and immunize

police officers from discipline.

63. That the unconstitutional actions of Defendant Aoki were part and parcel of a

widespread municipal policy, practice, and/or custom is further established by the involvement in,

and ratification of, these acts by municipal supervisors and policy makers, as well as by a wide

range of other police officials, officers, and divisions of the Department.

64. The policies, practices, and/or customs alleged in this complaint, separately and

together, are the proximate cause of the injury to Plaintiff as Defendant had good reason to believe

that his misconduct would not be revealed or reported by fellow officers or supervisors, and that

he was immune from disciplinary action, thereby protecting him from the consequences of his

unconstitutional conduct.

10
 Case: 1:18-cv-02418 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/18/18 11 of 14. PageID #: 11

65. But for the belief that he would be protected both by fellow officers and the City of

Euclid Police Department from serious consequences, Defendant Aoki would not have engaged in

the conduct that resulted in the injuries to Plaintiff.

66. The interrelated policies, practices, and customs, individually and together, were

maintained and implemented with deliberate indifference and encouraged Defendant Aoki to

violate Plaintiff’s constitutional rights, and therefore were the moving force behind and to the

violations of Plaintiff’s rights.

FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Ohio Law – Malicious Prosecution
Against Defendant Aoki

67. All Paragraphs contained in this complaint are incorporated as if fully rewritten

herein.

68. In the manner described more fully above, Defendant Aoki, acting maliciously,

instituted, participated in, and/or continued the prosecution of Plaintiff without probable cause.

69. As a consequence of the criminal prosecution, Plaintiff was unlawfully seized and

deprived of liberty.

70. Plaintiff’s criminal prosecution was terminated in her favor when a jury acquitted

her of all charges.

71. Defendant Aoki committed these actions intentionally, maliciously, culpably,

and/or in a willful, wanton, or reckless manner, and in reckless disregard of Plaintiff’s rights.

72. Defendant Aoki acted under color of law and within the scope of his employment

when he took these actions.

11
 Case: 1:18-cv-02418 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/18/18 12 of 14. PageID #: 12

73. As a direct and proximate result of this malicious prosecution, Plaintiff suffered

injuries, including but not limited to, the loss of liberty, emotional distress, loss of reputation, and

other damages as set forth in this Complaint.

FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Ohio Law – Negligence - Willful, Wanton, and/or Reckless Conduct
Against Defendant Aoki

74. All Paragraphs contained in this complaint are incorporated as if fully rewritten

herein.

75. Defendant Aoki failed to exercise due care, and acted in a willful, wanton, and/or

reckless manner while engaged in police functions and activities, including but not limited to

unreasonable search and seizure and malicious prosecution against Plaintiff.

76. Defendant Aoki is not entitled to the immunities set forth in O.R.C. § 2744.01 et

seq.

77. As a direct and proximate cause of Defendant’s misconduct, Plaintiff suffered and

continues to suffer injury and damages as set forth in this complaint.

SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Ohio Law - Abuse of Process
Against Defendant Aoki

78. All Paragraphs contained in this complaint are incorporated as if fully rewritten

herein.

79. Defendant Aoki, while acting under the color of law, by instituting a legal

proceeding, did so in attempt to accomplish an ulterior purpose for which it was not designed and

that proceeding has been perverted to attempt to accomplish an ulterior purpose for which it was

not designed; and direct damage has resulted from the wrongful use of process.

12
 Case: 1:18-cv-02418 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/18/18 13 of 14. PageID #: 13

80. Defendant Aoki’s abuse of this process constitutes a deprivation of the Plaintiff’s

right to due process.

81. Defendant Aoki instituted the charges of loud noise, obstruction of official

business, and resisting arrest against the Plaintiff in an attempt to accomplish an ulterior purpose

for which it was not designed, and brought said charges in an attempt to thwart the Plaintiff’s legal

rights to bring the instant suit.

82. A jury acquitted Plaintiff of all the false charges lodged against her by Defendant

Aoki.

83. As a direct, proximate and foreseeable result of Defendant’s actions, Plaintiff

suffered and continues to suffer injuries and damages as set forth in this Complaint.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Shajuan Gray demands that judgment be entered in her favor on

all counts and prays the Court award the following relief:

(A) Compensatory and consequential damages for all the injuries identified in an amount
to be determined at trial, in excess of the Court’s jurisdictional amount, for the violation
of Plaintiff’s rights;

(B) Punitive damages in an amount to be determined at trial for the willful, wanton,
malicious, and reckless conduct of Defendant Aoki;

(C) Declaratory and injunctive relief against the City of Euclid enjoining policies, practices,
and customs shown to encourage the use of excessive and unreasonable force, unlawful
searches and seizures, and malicious prosecution against civilians, particularly African-
Americans, and ordering the institution of policies, procedures, and training for the
Euclid Police Department to bring them into compliance with constitutional standards;

(D) Attorneys’ fees, interest, the costs of this action and other costs that may be associated
with this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 1988; and

(E) Any and all other relief that this Court deems equitable, necessary, and just.

13
 Case: 1:18-cv-02418 Doc #: 1 Filed: 10/18/18 14 of 14. PageID #: 14

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff demands a trial by jury pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38(b) on all

issues so triable.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Sarah Gelsomino

SARAH GELSOMINO (0084340)
JACQUELINE C. GREENE (009273)
TERRY H. GILBERT (0021948)
FRIEDMAN & GILBERT
55 Public Square, Suite 1055
Cleveland, OH 44113
Tel: (216) 241-1430
Fax: (216) 621-0427
Email: sgelsomino@f-glaw.com
jgreene@f-glaw.com
tgilbert@f-glaw.com

MARCUS SIDOTI (0077476)

Jordan | Sidoti LLP
50 Public Sq., Suite 1900
Cleveland, OH 44113
Tel: 216-357-335-
Email : marcus@jordansidoti.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Dated: October 18, 2018

14
 Case: 1:18-cv-02418 Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 10/18/18 1 of 2. PageID #: 15
JS 44 (Rev. 06/17) CIVIL COVER SHEET
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as
provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the
purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)

I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

Shajuan Gray City of Euclid and Officer James Aoki

(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff Cuyahoga County of Residence of First Listed Defendant Cuyahoga
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF
THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.

(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)
Sarah Gelsomino, Jacqueline C. Greene, Terry H. Gilbert of
Friedman & Gilbert, 55 Public Square, Suite 1055, Cleveland, OH 44113
(216) 241-1430

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff
(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)
’ 1 U.S. Government ’ 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF
Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State ’ 1 ’ 1 Incorporated or Principal Place ’ 4 ’ 4
of Business In This State

’ 2 U.S. Government ’ 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State ’ 2 ’ 2 Incorporated and Principal Place ’ 5 ’ 5
Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State

Citizen or Subject of a ’ 3 ’ 3 Foreign Nation ’ 6 ’ 6

Foreign Country
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only) Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES
’ 110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY ’ 625 Drug Related Seizure ’ 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 ’ 375 False Claims Act
’ 120 Marine ’ 310 Airplane ’ 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 ’ 423 Withdrawal ’ 376 Qui Tam (31 USC
’ 130 Miller Act ’ 315 Airplane Product Product Liability ’ 690 Other 28 USC 157 3729(a))
’ 140 Negotiable Instrument Liability ’ 367 Health Care/ ’ 400 State Reapportionment
’ 150 Recovery of Overpayment ’ 320 Assault, Libel & Pharmaceutical PROPERTY RIGHTS ’ 410 Antitrust
& Enforcement of Judgment Slander Personal Injury ’ 820 Copyrights ’ 430 Banks and Banking
’ 151 Medicare Act ’ 330 Federal Employers’ Product Liability ’ 830 Patent ’ 450 Commerce
’ 152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability ’ 368 Asbestos Personal ’ 835 Patent - Abbreviated ’ 460 Deportation
Student Loans ’ 340 Marine Injury Product New Drug Application ’ 470 Racketeer Influenced and
(Excludes Veterans) ’ 345 Marine Product Liability ’ 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations
’ 153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY ’ 480 Consumer Credit
of Veteran’s Benefits ’ 350 Motor Vehicle ’ 370 Other Fraud ’ 710 Fair Labor Standards ’ 861 HIA (1395ff) ’ 490 Cable/Sat TV
’ 160 Stockholders’ Suits ’ 355 Motor Vehicle ’ 371 Truth in Lending Act ’ 862 Black Lung (923) ’ 850 Securities/Commodities/
’ 190 Other Contract Product Liability ’ 380 Other Personal ’ 720 Labor/Management ’ 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) Exchange
’ 195 Contract Product Liability ’ 360 Other Personal Property Damage Relations ’ 864 SSID Title XVI ’ 890 Other Statutory Actions
’ 196 Franchise Injury ’ 385 Property Damage ’ 740 Railway Labor Act ’ 865 RSI (405(g)) ’ 891 Agricultural Acts
’ 362 Personal Injury - Product Liability ’ 751 Family and Medical ’ 893 Environmental Matters
Medical Malpractice Leave Act ’ 895 Freedom of Information
REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS ’ 790 Other Labor Litigation FEDERAL TAX SUITS Act
’ 210 Land Condemnation ’ 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: ’ 791 Employee Retirement ’ 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff ’ 896 Arbitration
’ 220 Foreclosure ’ 441 Voting ’ 463 Alien Detainee Income Security Act or Defendant) ’ 899 Administrative Procedure
’ 230 Rent Lease & Ejectment ’ 442 Employment ’ 510 Motions to Vacate ’ 871 IRS—Third Party Act/Review or Appeal of
’ 240 Torts to Land ’ 443 Housing/ Sentence 26 USC 7609 Agency Decision
’ 245 Tort Product Liability Accommodations ’ 530 General ’ 950 Constitutionality of
’ 290 All Other Real Property ’ 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - ’ 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION State Statutes
Employment Other: ’ 462 Naturalization Application
’ 446 Amer. w/Disabilities - ’ 540 Mandamus & Other ’ 465 Other Immigration
Other ’ 550 Civil Rights Actions
’ 448 Education ’ 555 Prison Condition
’ 560 Civil Detainee -
Conditions of
Confinement
V. ORIGIN (Place an “X” in One Box Only)
’ 1 Original ’ 2 Removed from ’ 3 Remanded from ’ 4 Reinstated or ’ 5 Transferred from ’ 6 Multidistrict ’ 8 Multidistrict
Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened Another District Litigation - Litigation -
(specify) Transfer Direct File
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
Section 1983
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:
Excessive force, malicious prosecution, false arrest and state law claims
VII. REQUESTED IN ’ CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:
COMPLAINT: UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P. JURY DEMAND: ’ Yes ’ No
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
(See instructions):
IF ANY JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER
DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
10/18/2018 /s/ Sarah Gelsomino
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE

Print Save As... Reset

 Case: 1:18-cv-02418 Doc #: 1-1 Filed: 10/18/18 2 of 2. PageID #: 16
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

I. Civil Categories: (Please check one category only).

1. General Civil
2. Administrative Review/Social Security
3. Habeas Corpus Death Penalty
*If under Title 28, §2255, name the SENTENCING JUDGE:

CASE NUMBER:
II. RELATED OR REFILED CASES. See LR 3.1 which provides in pertinent part: "If an action is filed or removed to this Court
and assigned to a District Judge after which it is discontinued, dismissed or remanded to a State court, and
subsequently refiled, it shall be assigned to the same Judge who received the initial case assignment without regardfor
the place of holding court in which the case was refiled. Counsel or a party without counsel shall be responsible for
bringing such cases to the attention of the Court by responding to the questions included on the Civil Cover Sheet."

This action: is RELATED to another PENDING civil case is a REFILED case was PREVIOUSLY REMANDED

If applicable, please indicate on page 1 in section VIII, the name of the Judge and case number.

III. In accordance with Local Civil Rule 3.8, actions involving counties in the Eastern Division shall be filed at any of the
divisional offices therein. Actions involving counties in the Western Division shall be filed at the Toledo office. For the
purpose of determining the proper division, and for statistical reasons, the following information is requested.

ANSWER ONE PARAGRAPH ONLY. ANSWER PARAGRAPHS 1 THRU 3 IN ORDER. UPON FINDING WHICH
PARAGRAPH APPLIES TO YOUR CASE, ANSWER IT AND STOP.

(1) Resident defendant. If the defendant resides in a county within this district, please set forth the name of such
county
COUNTY:
Corporation For the purpose of answering the above, a corporation is deemed to be a resident of that county in which
it has its principal place of business in that district.

(2) Non-Resident defendant. If no defendant is a resident of a county in this district, please set forth the county
wherein the cause of action arose or the event complained of occurred.
COUNTY:

(3) Other Cases. If no defendant is a resident of this district, or if the defendant is a corporation not having a principle
place of business within the district, and the cause of action arose or the event complained of occurred outside
this district, please set forth the county of the plaintiff's residence.
COUNTY:

IV. The Counties in the Northern District of Ohio are divided into divisions as shown below. After the county is
determined in Section III, please check the appropriate division.

EASTERN DIVISION

AKRON (Counties: Carroll, Holmes, Portage, Stark, Summit, Tuscarawas and Wayne)
CLEVELAND (Counties: Ashland, Ashtabula, Crawford, Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake,
Lorain, Medina and Richland)
YOUNGSTOWN (Counties: Columbiana, Mahoning and Trumbull)

WESTERN DIVISION

TOLEDO (Counties: Allen, Auglaize, Defiance, Erie, Fulton, Hancock, Hardin, Henry,
Huron, Lucas, Marion, Mercer, Ottawa, Paulding, Putnam, Sandusky, Seneca
VanWert, Williams, Wood and Wyandot)