Geer Ave. Lawsuit

RETURN DATE; OCTOBER 31, 2018

SUPERIOR COURT

RAFAEL RIVERA, YAHAIRA TORRES, JOSE D. TORRES,JOSE A. TORRES,

J.D. OF NEW HAVEN

AND DEBORAH TORRES

AT NEW HAVEN

Plaintiffs, V.

CITY OF MERIDEN, CHIEF OF POLICE JEFFRY W. COSSETTE,

in his official and individual capacity: OFF/CER JOHN RASZCEWSKI,

in his official and individual capacity; OFFICER JAMES DECRISANTIS, in his official

and individual capacity; OFFICER RICHARD GIAMMARCO, in his official and individual capacity; OFFICER MICHAEL FONDA, in his official and individual capacity; OFFICER BRIAN WILKINSON, in his official

and individual capacity; OFFICER SHANE PHILLIPS, in his official

and individual capacity; OFFICER DAVID D'ONOFRIO, in his official and individual capacity; OFFICER JOHN-PAUL DORAIS, in his official and individual capacity; OFFICER CHRISTOPHER GRIFFIN, in his official and individual capacity; OFFICER JAD HADIR, in his official

and individual capacity; OFFICER RAYNICK VAZQUEZ, in his official and individual capacity; OFFICER CHRISTIAN RODRIGUEZ, in his official and individual capacity; AND RETIRED OFFICER STEVE LEGERE, in his official and individual capacity Defendants.

AUGUST 21, 2018

COMPLAINT

Come now the Plaintiffs, Rafael Torres, Yahaira Torres, Jose Daniel Torres, Jose

Adrian Torres, and Deborah Torres, and for their causes of action, complain and allege against the Defendants, Meriden Police Officers Sergeant John Raszcewski, James Decrisantis, Richard Giammarco, Michael Fonda, Shane Phillips, David D'Onofrio, John-

Paul Dorais, Christopher Griffin, Jad Hadir, Raynick Vazquez, Christian Rodriguez, Steve Legere, and Brian Wilkinson, Chief of Police Jeffry W. Cossette, and the City of Meriden: INTRODUCTION

1.

This action arises under the Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the

United States Constitution. 42 U.S.C. §§1983 and 1988, and under the common law of the State of Connecticut for intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress,

negligence, and statutory indemnification pursuant to sections 7-465 and 52-557n of the Connecticut General Statutes.

2.

Plaintiffs Rafael and Yahaira Torres are husband and wife, and residents of

City of Meriden, Connecticut.

3.

Rafael and Yahaira Torres have three minor children, Jose Daniel, Jose

Adrian, and Deborah.

4.

The Defendants, Sergeant John Raszcewski, Officers Shane Phillips, David

D'Onofrio, John-Paul Dorais, Christopher Griffin. Jad Hadir, Raynick Vazquez, Christian

Rodriguez, Steve Legere, Brian Wilkinson. James Decrisantis. Richard Giammarco, Michael Fonda, and Brian Wilkinson were at all times material to the allegations in this

Complaint, acting in their capacities as a police officers employed by the City of Meriden and were acting under color of state law.

5.

The Defendant, the City of Meriden, Connecticut, is a municipality and a

political subdivision of the State of Connecticut, for which the individual Defendants serve as police officers.

6.

The City of Meriden has established or delegated to Defendant, Chief of

Police Jeffrey Cossette, the responsibility for establishing and implementing policies, practices, procedures, and customs used by law enforcement officers employed by City of Meriden regarding searches and seizures.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

7.

On November 28, 2017, following the devastation of Hurricane Maria, the

family relocated from Puerto Rico to Connecticut, and were subsequently housed at 14 Greer Avenue, Apartment 1 in the City of Meriden, Connecticut, pursuant to a Federal

Emergency Management Agency(FEMA) program that facilitated such relocations.

8.

On February 2, 2018. the Defendant officers applied for, and were granted, a

search warrant to search for the premises located at 14 Greer Avenue. Apartment 1, in the City of Meriden. The premises were suspected of containing drugs and drug paraphernalia, cash, records of drug transactions, firearms, and other evidence of drug related activity by Andres Concepcion and other co-conspirators. However, the Torres family had no connection or other relationship with that criminal activity.

9.

On February 8, 2018, at approximately 5:00 am. the Defendant officers.

Memers of the Special Weapons and Tactics(SWAT) unit of the Meriden Police Department, executed the warrant. The Defendants forcibly broke into the residence, armed with military style weapons, and used tear gas, K-9 Units, and explosive devices.

10.

During the search Jose Daniel opened his bedroom door and was confronted

by three of the Defendant officers. Although Jose Daniel was unarmed, went down to his knees, and raised his hands in surrender, one of the Defendant while acting under the color of state law, used unreasonable and/or excessive force while arresting the Plaintiff, by kicking him in the face.

11.

During the search, Yahaira, in a panic from being surrounded by men with

military style weapons, attempted to run and was injured when she fell to the ground.

12.

The Plaintiffs were handcuffed and detained during the search for 30-40

minutes.

13.

As a direct result of the defendants' actions, the plaintiffs suffered

psychological trauma, physical injury, humiliation, pain and suffering, and damage to their reputations in violation of his rights as guaranteed under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, as secured by 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983.

14.

Statutory notice of the Plaintiffs' claims and intention to bring this action was

sent to the City of Meriden in accordance with ยง 7-1 Ola and ยง 7-465 of the General Statutes.

FIRST COUNT: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Use of Excessive Force In Violation of the Fourth Amendment

(against the Defendant Officers)

1-14. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate herein by reference the allegations set forth In paragraphs 1-14, above.

15.

During the search Jose Daniel opened his bedroom door and was confronted

by three of the Defendant officers. Although Jose Daniel was unarmed, went down to his 4

knees, and raised his hands In surrender, one of the Defendant while acting under the color of state law, used unreasonable and/or excessive force while arresting the Plaintiff, by kicking him in the face.

16.

As a direct result of the defendants' actions, the plaintiff suffered

psychological trauma, physical injury, humiliation, pain and suffering, and damage to his reputation and character, as well as other injuries and damages more particularly set forth herein, in violation of his rights as guaranteed under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, as secured by 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983.

17.

As a direct and proximate result of the violation of his constitutional rights the

Plaintiff has suffered damages and is entitled to relief under 42 U.S.C ยง 1983.

SECOND COUNT

42 U.S.C.ยง 1983: FAILURE TO INTERVENE (against the Defendant Officers)

1-15. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate herein by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1-15 of the First Count.

16.

Although in a reasonable position to do so, the Defendant officers failed to

intervene to prevent and/or stop the unreasonable and unjustifiable seizure of Jose Daniel, despite the duty to do so.

17.

As a direct and proximate consequence of the Defendants' action, Jose

Daniel Torres suffered damages, including physical injury and psychological trauma, as set forth above.

THIRD COUNT

42 U.S.C.ยง 1983: False Arrest in Violation of the Fourth Amendment

(against the Defendant Officers)

1-15. The Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 15 of the First Count as though fully set forth herein.

16.

The defendants falsely arrested the plaintiffs, in that they restrained their

physical liberty of the plaintiffs against their will, and without their consent, and without legal justification to do so.

17.

As a result of the defendants' conduct, the plaintiff suffered damages, as set

forth above.

FOURTH COUNT: RECKLESSNESS

(against the Defendant Officers)

1-15. The Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in Paragraph 1 through 15 of the First Count as though fully set forth herein.

16.

The defendant officers acted recklessly in one or more of the following ways: a. By failing and/or refusing to determine whether the Plaintiffs posed an actual threat before arresting them;

b. By failing or refusing to intervene to assist Plaintiffs to prevent the false arrest;

c. By failing to investigate whether the home that was subject to the search was the subject of criminal activity;

d. By conducting the search and seizure in such a manner calculated to cause the Plaintiffs extreme emotional distress.

17.As a result of the defendants' actions, the plaintiff suffered damages, as set forth above.

FIFTH COUNT: NEGLIGENCE

(against the defendant officers)

1-15. The Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in Paragraph 1

through 15 of the First Count as though fully set forth herein.

16. As police officers for the City of Meriden, the defendant officers owed the

Plaintiffs a duty to use reasonable care in executing the search warrant.

17. The defendant officers breached that duty of care, which had no justification or excuse in law. and were instead illegal, improper and unrelated to any activity in which law enforcement officers may rightfully engage in the course of protecting persons or property or ensuring civil order.

18. As a result of the defendants' actions, the plaintiff suffered damages, as set forth above.

SIXTH COUNT

NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

(against the defendant officers) 1-15. The Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in Paragraph 1 through 15 of the First Count as though fully set forth herein.

16.

The defendant officers were negligent in causing the Plaintiffs to suffer

emotional distress in that the defendants should have realized that their conduct involved

an unreasonable risk of causing emotional distress, and that that distress might result in illness or bodily harm and did cause the plaintiffs bodily harm.

17.

As a result of the defendants' negligence, the plaintiffs suffered damages, as

set forth above.

SEVENTH COUNT

MONELL VIOLATION

42 U.S.C. ยง1983 (against the City of Meriden)

1-15. The Plaintiff incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in Paragraph 1 through 15 of the First Count as though fully set forth herein.

16. The Defendant, Chief of Police Jeffrey Cossette, in his capacity as Chief of Police for the City of Meriden Police Department, and the Defendant, the City of Meriden, failed to adequately train and the individual Defendant Officers in the seizure of its citizens,

in the establishment and perpetuation of policies, as described more particularly herein, as follows, to wit: The Defendants failed to establish and implement adequate training, guidelines, rules and procedures which relate to safe and proper methods of surveillance

and apprehension of citizens by its officers, including the Defendant Police Officers.

17.

Additionally, the Defendants failed to establish and impiement adequate

training, guidelines, rules and procedures which relate to its police officers, including the Defendant Police Officers.

18.

Furthermore, the Defendants, at all pertinent times, failed to adequately

screen, hire and/or monitor its candidates for police officer, including the Defendant Police Officers.

19.

The aforementioned failures by the Defendants to provide adequate

screening, training, placement, staffing, guidelines, supervision, investigation, monitoring and/or discipline of its police officers as aforesaid, served to embolden, encourage and/or accommodate its officers, including the Defendant Police Officers, in the violation of the civil rights of citizens such as the Plaintiff.

20.

As such, these policies, or acts and practices, on the part of the Defendants,

which involved a pattern of practice over a long period of time, as described herein,

constituted the moving force behind and therefore directly and proximately produced, the 8

violation of the constitutional rights of the Plaintiff, and the resultant losses and damages to his estate, as well, as more particularly described herein.

21.

As a result of this deliberate indifference to the Plaintiff's rights, the Plaintiff

suffered damages, as set forth above, and is entitled to relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

EIGHTH COUNT

INDEMNIFICATION PURSUANT TO CONN. GEN.STAT.§ 52-557n (against the City of Merlden)

1.

The allegations of the Fifth Count are incorporated by reference as though

fully set forth herein.

2.

The allegations of the Sixth Count are incorporated by reference as though

fully set forth herein.

3.

The City of Meriden is liable to indemnify the Defendant officers pursuant to

Connecticut General Statutes §§ 52-557n for their negligent conduct that were committed in the course and scope of their employment and that directly and proximately caused Plaintiffs' injuries and damages, as set forth more particularly herein.

NINTH COUNT

INDEMNIFICATION PURSUANT TO CONN. GEN. STAT.§ 7-465 (against the City of Meriden)

1.

The allegations of the First Count are incorporated by reference as though

fully set forth herein.

2.

The allegations of the Second Count are incorporated by reference as

though fully set forth herein.

3.

The City of Meriden is liable to pay on behalf of the Defendant Officers by

reason of the aforesaid causes of action imposed upon such employees by law for

damages awarded for the infringement of the civil rights and physical damages to the person and/or property of Plaintiff as a result of the events complained of herein.

DEMAND FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE,the Plaintiff claims;

1.

Actual, compensatory and just damages;

2.

Dignatory damages;

3.

Punitive damages;

4.

Attorneys'fees and costs; and

5.

Such other legal and equitable relief as the Court deems just and proper.

THE PLAINTIFF DEMANDS A TRIAL BY JURY ON ALL COUNTS

THE PLAINTIFFS,

BY:

Isl A. PaulSpineiia

A. Paul Spinella, Esq. Spinella & Associates One Lewis Street

Hartford, CT 06103 Tel: 860.728.4900 Fax: 860.728.4909 attornevs@spinella-law.com

10

RETURN DATE: OCTOBER 31, 2018

SUPERIOR COURT

RAFAEL RIVERA, YAHAIRA TORRES, JOSE D. TORRES,JOSE A. TORRES,

J.D. OF NEW HAVEN

AND DEBORAH TORRES

AT NEW HAVEN

Plaintiffs, V.

CITY OF MERIDEN, CHIEF OF POLICE JEFFRY W. COSSETTE,

in his official and individual capacity; OFF/CER JOHN RASZCEWSKI,

in his official and individual capacity; OFFICER JAMES DECRISANTIS. in his official and individual capacity: OFFICER RICHARD GIAMMARCO, in his official

and individual capacity; OFFICER MICHAEL FONDA, in his official and individual capacity; OFFICER BRIAN WILKINSON, in his official

and individual capacity; OFFICER SHANE PHILLIPS, in his official

and individual capacity: OFFICER DAVID D'ONOFRIO, in his official and individual capacity; OFFICER JOHN-PAUL DORAIS, in his official and individual capacity; OFFICER CHRISTOPHER GRIFFIN, in his official and individual capacity; OFFICER JAD HADIR, in his official and individual capacity; OFFICER RAYNICK VAZQUEZ, in his official and individual capacity; OFFICER CHRISTIAN RODRIGUEZ, in his official and individual capacity; AND RETIRED OFFICER STEVE LEGERE, in his official and individual capacity Defendants.

AUGUST 21, 2018

11

STATEMENT RE AMOUNT IN DEMAND

The amount, legal interest or property In demand Is not less than fifteen thousand dollars, exclusive of interest and costs.

THE PLAINTIFF,

BY: Isl A. Paul Spinella

A. Paul Spinella, Esq. Spinella & Associates One Lewis Street

Hartford, CT 06103 Telephone: (860) 728-4900 Fax: (860)728-4909 Email: attornevs@spinella-law.com

12