Case 1:16-cv-00748-SEB-MJD Document 1 Filed 04/05/16 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
WENDY PYLE,
Plaintiff,
v.
INDIANA STATE POLICE TROOPER
BRIAN HAMILTON, in his individual
capacity,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 1:16-cv-748

JURY TRIAL REQUESTED

Complaint for Damages

Introduction
1.

After conducting a traffic stop at which Indiana State Police Trooper Brian Hamilton

presented Wendy Pyle with a warning ticket, Trooper Hamilton proceeded to prolong the stop by
asking Ms. Pyle what church she attended and whether she had been saved. He then told her
about his church and gave Ms. Pyle directions to it. Trooper Hamilton has previously been sued
for similar proselytizing behavior that prolonged a traffic stop and, on information and belief, has
been counseled not to engage in such behavior. Ms. Pyle was extremely uncomfortable about
this interaction. The actions of defendant Trooper Hamilton violated Ms. Pyles rights under
both the First and Fourth Amendments to the United States Constitution. Ms. Pyle is entitled to
both compensatory and punitive damages.
Jurisdiction, venue, and cause of action
2.

This Court has jurisdiction of this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1343.

3.

Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391 inasmuch as the events

giving rise to the claim took place in Fayette County, Indiana.

~1~

Case 1:16-cv-00748-SEB-MJD Document 1 Filed 04/05/16 Page 2 of 5 PageID #: 2

4.

This case is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983 to redress the deprivation, under color

of state law, of rights secured by the Constitution of the United States.

Parties
5.

Wendy Pyle is an adult resident of Fayette County, Indiana.

6.

Trooper Brian Hamilton is an adult employed by the Indiana State Police.

Facts
7.

In January of 2016 Ms. Pyle was stopped by Trooper Brian Hamilton, who was on duty,

as she pulled into the driveway to her home.

8.

Trooper Hamilton was driving a marked Indiana State Police car.

9.

Trooper Hamilton informed her that she had been speeding and that he would give her a

warning ticket.
10.

Trooper Hamilton returned to his patrol car and then came back to Ms. Pyle, who

remained in her car in her driveway, with a warning ticket.

11.

Trooper Hamilton parked his car in such a way that Ms. Pyle could not have backed her

car out if she had wanted to leave.

12.

Trooper Hamilton handed Ms. Pyle her warning ticket.

13.

Trooper Hamilton did not, after delivering the ticket, end the traffic stop.

14.

Instead, Trooper Hamilton asked Ms. Pyle what church she attended and whether he was

saved.
15.

Ms. Pyle was extremely uncomfortable with these questions. In order to hopefully end

these inquiries Ms. Pyle indicated That she did attend a church and that she was saved.
16.

However, Trooper Hamilton did not end the stop, but instead invited Ms. Pyle to his

church and gave her directions to it.

~2~

Case 1:16-cv-00748-SEB-MJD Document 1 Filed 04/05/16 Page 3 of 5 PageID #: 3

17.

Only then did Trooper Hamilton return to his car and end the traffic stop.

18.

Prior to this time Ms. Pyle did not feel free to leave and a reasonable person would not

have felt that she was free to leave.

19.

Ms. Pyle filed a formal complaint about Trooper Hamiltons behavior and was told that

the matter would be taken care of and that she would suffer no backlash.
20.

Nevertheless, shortly thereafter Ms. Pyle was approached by someone who attended

church with Trooper Hamilton who informed her that Trooper Hamilton had placed her on a
prayer list.
21.

Ms. Pyle believes that everyone has a First Amendment right to believe and worship as

they wish. However, she found it very intimidating to be blocked in by Trooper Hamilton while
he asked her extremely personal and inappropriate questions.
22.

Given all the circumstances, the proselytizing by Trooper Hamilton of Ms. Pyle was

coercive. It was unwanted.

23.

It was also extremely upsetting.

24.

The proselytizing and coercive questions about religion and religious beliefs

unreasonably prolonged the traffic stop.

25.

Trooper Hamilton was alleged to have engaged in similar behavior in litigation entitled

Bogan v. Hamilton, No. 1:14-cv-1545- RLY-DML (S.D. Ind.).

26.

That litigation was settled.

The settlement involved, among other things, Trooper

Hamilton receiving an Employee Counseling Behavior that, on information and belief,

concerned not engaging in such proselytizing behavior during traffic stops.
27.

At all times defendant acted under color of state law.

~3~

Case 1:16-cv-00748-SEB-MJD Document 1 Filed 04/05/16 Page 4 of 5 PageID #: 4

28.

Trooper Hamilton acted with the intention of violating Ms. Pyles rights or with reckless

or callous indifference regarding those rights and is therefore liable for punitive damages.
Jury trial demand
29.

Plaintiff requests a trial by jury of all claims so triable.

Legal claims
30.

To the extent that Trooper Hamilton unreasonably extended the length of the traffic stop

beyond the time necessary to present Ms. Pyle with a warning ticket Trooper Hamilton violated
the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
31.

Trooper Hamiltons proselytizing and coercive questions concerning Ms. Pyles religious

beliefs violated the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Request for relief
WHEREFORE, Wendy Pyle requests that this Court:
a.

Accept jurisdiction of this case and set it for hearing at the earliest opportunity.

b.

Award her damages and punitive damages after a trial by jury.

c.

Award her costs and reasonable attorneys fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1988.

d.

Enter all other necessary and proper relief.

s/ Kenneth J. Falk
Kenneth J. Falk
No. 6777-49
ACLU of Indiana
1031 E. Washington St.
Indianapolis, IN 46202
317/635-4059
fax: 317/635-4105
kfalk@aclu-in.org

s / Jan P. Mensz
Jan P. Mensz
ACLU of Indiana
~4~

Case 1:16-cv-00748-SEB-MJD Document 1 Filed 04/05/16 Page 5 of 5 PageID #: 5

1031 E. Washington St.

Indianapolis, IN 46202
317/635-4059
fax: 317/635-4105
jmensz@aclu-in.org
Attorneys for Plaintiff

~5~

4/4/2016

IndianaSouthernCivilCoverSheet
Case 1:16-cv-00748-SEB-MJD Document
1-1 Filed 04/05/16 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 6

JS44(Rev09/10)

UNITEDSTATESDISTRICTCOURT
SOUTHERNDISTRICTOFINDIANA
CIVILCOVERSHEET
ThisautomatedJS44conformsgenerallytothemanualJS44approvedbytheJudicialConferenceoftheUnitedStatesin
September1974.ThedataisrequiredfortheuseoftheClerkofCourtforthepurposeofinitiatingthecivildocketsheet.The
informationcontainedhereinneitherreplacesnorsupplementsthefilingandserviceofpleadingsorotherpapersasrequired
bylaw.

Plaintiff(s):

Defendant(s):

FirstListedPlaintiff:
WENDYPYLE
CountyofResidence:FayetteCounty

FirstListedDefendant:
INDIANASTATETROOPERBRIANHAMILTON
CountyofResidence:MadisonCounty

CountyWhereClaimForReliefArose:FayetteCounty

Plaintiff'sAttorney(s):
Defendant'sAttorney(s):
KennethJFalk(WENDYPYLE)
ACLUofIndiana
1031EWashingtonSt
Indianapolis,Indiana46202
Phone:3176354059
Fax:3176354059
Email:kfalk@acluin.org

OfficeoftheAttorneyGeneral(BRIANHAMILTON)
IGCS5thFloor302W.WashingtonSt.
Indianapolis,Indiana46204
Phone:317/2326201
Fax:317/2327979
Email:

JanPMensz
ACLUofIndiana
1031EWashingtonSt
Indianapolis,Indiana46202
Phone:3176354059
Fax:3176354059
Email:jmensz@acluin.org

BasisofJurisdiction:3.FederalQuestion(U.S.notaparty)

CitizenshipofPrincipalParties(DiversityCasesOnly)
Plaintiff:N/A

Defendant:N/A

Origin:1.OriginalProceeding

NatureofSuit:440AllOtherCivilRights
CauseofAction:Defendant,aStateTrooper,prolongedatrafficstopwithplaintifftoengageinnon
consensualreligiousdiscussionsinviolationofboththeFirstandFourthAmendments.

1/2

4/4/2016

IndianaSouthernCivilCoverSheet
Case 1:16-cv-00748-SEB-MJD Document
1-1 Filed 04/05/16 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 7

RequestedinComplaint
ClassAction:NotfiledasaClassAction
MonetaryDemand(inThousands):
JuryDemand:Yes
RelatedCases:IsNOTarefilingofapreviouslydismissedaction

Signature:s/KennethJ.Falk
Date:April5,2016
Ifanyofthisinformationisincorrect,pleaseclosethiswindowandgobacktotheCivilCoverSheetInputformtomakethecorrectionand
generatetheupdatedJS44.Oncecorrected,printthisform,signanddateit,andsubmititwithyournewcivilaction.

2/2

Case 1:16-cv-00748-SEB-MJD Document 1-2 Filed 04/05/16 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 8

United States District Court

for the
Southern District of Indiana
WENDY PYLE,
Plaintiff,
vs.
INDIANA STATE POLICE TROOPER BRIAN
HAMILTON, in his individual capacity,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Cause No: 1:16-cv-748

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

TO:
Indiana State Police Trooper Brian Hamilton
9022 South State Road 67
Pendleton, IN 46064
A lawsuit has been filed against you. Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting
the day you received it) or 60 days if you are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or
employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) you must serve on the plaintiff an
answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer
or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiffs attorney, whose name and address are:
Kenneth J. Falk
ACLU of Indiana
1031 E. Washington St.
Indianapolis, IN 46202
If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the
complaint. You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date: ______________________

_______________________________________
Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

Case 1:16-cv-00748-SEB-MJD Document 1-2 Filed 04/05/16 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 9

Civil Summons (Page 2)

Civil Action Number: 1:16-cv-748

PROOF OF SERVICE
(this section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(l))
This summons for (name of individual and title, if any) ______________________________________
was received by me on (date)__________________.
I personally served the summons on the individual at (place) __________________________________
________________________________________________ on (date) __________________; or
I left the summons at the individuals residence or usual place of abode with (name)________________
_____________________________________, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,
on (date) __________________, and mailed a copy to the individuals last known address; or
I served the summons on (name of individual) ________________________________________, who is
designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization) _________________
________________________________________on (date) __________________; or
I returned the summons unexecuted because _____________________________________________; or
Other (specify):

My fees are $ _____________for travel and $_______________for services, for a total of $_______________.
I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.
Date: ____________________

__________________________________________________
Servers Signature
__________________________________________________
Printed name and title

__________________________________________________
Servers address
Additional information regarding attempted service, etc.