Toney Lawsuit

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE

CHATTANOOGA DIVISION
CHARLES TONEY,
Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. ___________________
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

v.
HAMILTON COUNTY, TENNESSEE,

SHERIFF JIM HAMMOND, Individually and
as an Employee or Agent of Hamilton County, TN
BLAKE KILPATRICK, Individually and as an
Employee or Agent of Hamilton
County, TN
JOHN DOES I-X, Individually and in their
official capacity as Employees or Agents for
Hamilton County, TN or any other unknown agency
Defendants.
PLAINTIFFS’ ORIGINAL COMPLAINT
TO THE HONORABLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT:
NOW COMES Charles Toney, Plaintiff, complaining of Defendants Hamilton County,
Tennessee (“the County”) and Blake Kilpatrick in his individual and official capacity as a
Hamilton County Sheriff’s deputy, and for cause would show the Honorable Court as follows:
NATURE OF THE ACTION
1. This is an action brought by the Plaintiff against Hamilton County, Tennessee, and
Deputy Blake Kilpatrick for his use of excessive force under the color of law in violation
of Plaintiff’s individual rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the
Case 1:19-cv-00342-HSM-CHS Document 1 Filed 12/02/19 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 1

United States Constitution and in violation of Plaintiff’s civil rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 and for related state law claims.
2. Plaintiff alleges that Hamilton County, Tennessee failed to properly supervise and/or
discipline officers who are known, or who should have been known, to engage in the use
of excessive force, including those officers repeatedly accused of such acts. The County
had a duty, but failed to implement and/or enforce policies, practices and procedures for
the Hamilton County Sheriff’s Office that respected Plaintiff’s constitutional rights.
Defendant Kilpatrick consciously disregarded the Plaintiff’s rights, knowing that the
Policymakers would approve and/or ratify his actions. Additionally, Hamilton County
failed to properly screen applicants, including Defendant Kilpatrick, to the Sheriff’s
Office resulting in the hiring of violent and unqualified individuals. Sheriff Hammond
ratified Defendant Kilpatrick’s actions by failing to implement the appropriate
disciplinary measure of immediate termination of Deputy Kilpatrick and attempting to
minimize Kilpatrick’s misconduct by placing him on desk duty within the same
department that violated Plaintiff’s rights. For these civil rights violations and other
causes of action discussed herein, Plaintiff seeks answers and compensation for damages.
PARTIES
3. Plaintiff Charles Toney is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the City of
Chattanooga, County of Hamilton, State of Tennessee.
4. Defendant, Hamilton County, Tennessee (“Defendant County”), is and was at all
relevant times mentioned, a county duly organized and existing under the laws of the
State of Tennessee.

5. Defendant County was at all times mentioned engaged in owning, operating,
maintaining, managing and doing business as Hamilton County Sheriff’s Office, and in
the business of public safety for the residents of Hamilton County. All of the acts
complained of in this Complaint by Plaintiff against Defendant Kilpatrick were done and
performed by him while acting under the color of law.
6. Defendant Jim Hammond has been the duly elected Sheriff of Hamilton County since
2008. As Sheriff of Hamilton County, Defendant Hammond is responsible for the
establishment and enforcement of the policies, practices and customs of the Hamilton
County Sheriff’s Office. Further, as Sheriff of Hamilton County, Defendant Hammond is
responsible for the training, supervision and discipline of law enforcement officers under
his command. Sheriff Jim Hammond is sued in his individual and official capacity.
7. Defendant Blake Kilpatrick, upon information and belief, is a resident of
Chattanooga, Tennessee. At all times relevant to the Complaint, Kilpatrick was on-duty
as a Hamilton County Sheriff’s Deputy. Kilpatrick may be served at the Hamilton
County Sheriff’s Office at 600 Market St. G10, Chattanooga, TN 37402, or wherever he
may be found.
8. Service of Process may be had on Hamilton County by serving its Civil Process
Manager, William Zinkeler, at 6233 Dayton Blvd., Chattanooga, TN 37343.
9. Defendant’s John Does I-X were at all relevant times agents, employees, officers or
supervisors of Hamilton County, TN and/or Sheriff Hammond and were acting in the
course and scope of their agency or employment with Hamilton County, TN, and/or
Sheriff Hammond. At the present time, the names and identities of these persons are no
currently known or knowable to the Plaintiff after reasonable inquiry and notice.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE
10. Jurisdiction exists in this court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343 as this
action is brought under, inter alia, the Fourth Amendment of the United States
Constitution and 42 U.S.C. §1983, to redress the deprivation of rights, privileges and
immunities guaranteed to Plaintiffs by constitutional and statutory provisions. Plaintiffs
further invoke the supplemental jurisdiction of this court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367 to
adjudicate pendent claims arising under the laws of the State of Tennessee.
11. Venue is appropriate in the United States District Court; Eastern District of
Tennessee, Chattanooga Division, since Hamilton County is the location of the events
made the basis of this cause of action.
12. Plaintiff timely filed a notice of claim with the County.
FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
The Assault and False Arrest of Charles Toney
13. On Monday, December 3, 2018, at approximately 9:30 AM, Plaintiff Charles Toney
was situated outside near the front entrance of his home and speaking with a friend when
several law enforcements officers arrived at Plaintiff’s home.
14. Law enforcement officers were allegedly participating in a “warrant roundup” and
had identified Plaintiff Toney as an individual with an arrest warrant out.
15. Despite already having agreed to a voluntary surrender with prosecutors related to
the arrest warrant, Plaintiff Toney was targeted for arrest and any notion of a voluntary
surrender was quickly dismissed when law enforcement arrived at Toney’s home.
16. Law enforcement officers arrived at Plaintiff’s home in an assortment of vehicles
from different law enforcement agencies. Upon arrival and once noticing Plaintiff Toney

and his friend situated outside of the home, law enforcement officers drew and aimed
their weapons at Plaintiff Toney and his friend.
17. Plaintiff Toney and his friend surrendered immediately upon law enforcement’s
arrival and in no way attempted to resist or evade detention or arrest. In fact, Plaintiff
Toney and his friend placed their hands above their heads as law enforcement officers
quickly approached them.
18. He was approached by Defendant Kilpatrick and asked whether Plaintiff was named
“Interstate Tax,” the Plaintiff’s stage name as an aspiring artist.
19. After asking his question and without any prompting, Kilpatrick began a brutal and
vicious assault on Plaintiff Toney.
20. Defendant Kilpatrick began the assault by striking a hard blow to Plaintiff Toney’s
face, causing him to collapse onto the ground.
21. Upon falling to the ground, Plaintiff Toney was handcuffed and restrained as
Defendant Kilpatrick continued his violent assault.
22. Plaintiff Toney remained handcuffed as he was lifted from the ground and placed on
the hood of a vehicle by Defendant Kilpatrick and another law enforcement officer.
23. Kilpatrick then suddenly and without reason slammed Plaintiff Toney back onto the
hood of the vehicle, pulled him away, and slammed him again onto the ground.
24. At this point, Kilpatrick and another law enforcement officer kneel on Plaintiff
Toney although he is handcuffed and posing no threat to law enforcement.
25. Defendant Kilpatrick then accused Plaintiff Toney of having something in his hands,
although the Plaintiff is handcuffed and opens his hands to prove there is nothing there.

26. Defendant Kilpatrick continued the assault on Plaintiff Toney by aggressively and
unnecessarily forcing his knee and body onto Plaintiff’s back and legs.
27. Kilpatrick then dragged Plaintiff Toney by his shirt away from the vehicle and
repeatedly punched Plaintiff’s head, all while Plaintiff is handcuffed and not resisting.
28. When another law enforcement officer intervened, Defendant Kilpatrick took a few
steps away, only to return to his assault by kicking and repeatedly punching Toney.
29. As a result of Kilpatrick’s violent assault, Toney was left with a collapsed lung,
broken nose, several broken ribs, and a broken finger.
30. Defendant Kilpatrick then attempted to cover up his vicious assault of Toney by
fabricating false charges against him. Toney was subsequently charged with assault,
resisting arrest and tampering with evidence.
31. Upon reviewing video footage of the incident, the Hamilton County District
Attorney’s Office dismissed all the charges leveled against Plaintiff Toney.
The Systemic Failures of the Hamilton County Sheriff’s Office
32. Over the past seven years, the Hamilton County Sheriff’s Office has been in disarray,
with misconduct, racial bias, and unchecked use of excessive force.
33. These incidents evidence a department wide disdain for the rule of law and a general
culture lacking leadership and discipline.
34. Sheriff Jim Hammond has cultivated a culture within the Office of disdain for
minorities, coupled with an office wide understanding that the use of excessive and
unnecessary force would be tolerated without question.

35. In 2012, Sheriff Hammond while addressing civic leaders, was quoted when
discussing alleged black gang members, “We need to run them out of town, put them in
jail or send them to the funeral home.
36. Sheriff Hammond has repeatedly publicly stood behind officers who have
demonstrably engaged in misconduct, including the documented unlawful strip and body
cavity search of James Mitchell by Deputies Wilkey and Brewer.
Rodney Terrell
37. The County failed to suspend or terminate officer Rodney Terrell after Terrell
unlawfully used a Taser on Nancy Mason while in the custody of the Sheriff in March
2015.
38. In an effort to cover-up his unreasonable use of force on Mason, Terrell wrote a use
of force report wherein he fabricated a false basis for his use of force. This fabricated
report initially resulted in his use of force being deemed appropriate by the County.
39. However, the County reopened the investigation and the Internal Affairs
investigation determined that Terrell used excessive force resulting in a fractured arm to
Mason.
40. Despite determining that Terrell used excessive force and fabricated a use of force
report, Sheriff Hammond declined to discipline or terminate Terrell.
41. In fact, Terrell was subsequently promoted to Lieutenant.
Daniel Hendrix
42. On August 15, 2015, the late Deputy Daniel Hendrix savagely assaulted a fully
handcuffed prisoner named Leslie Hayes.
43. The horrific beating was captured in its entirety on video.

44. In an effort to cover up his excessive force, Hendrix brought false charges against
Hayes and lied to Sheriff’s Department investigators.
45. Charges were initially brought against Hendrix for his conduct, but were dropped
when County authorities claimed not to know the whereabouts of Hayes despite actual
knowledge that Hayes was in custody in Sequatchie County.
46. Despite knowledge of his excessive use of force and falsification of police records,
the County did not permanently terminate Hendrix, and he continued as a Deputy.
47. Unsurprisingly, Hendrix’s violent conduct shortly resurfaced in March of 2017.
48. On March 29, 2017, Hendrix drew his county issued firearm after becoming violent
with two women.
49. Chattanooga Police responded to the scene and when Hendrix refused to drop his
weapon and threatened officers, he was shot and killed by Chattanooga Police.
Daniel Wilkey
50. Deputy Daniel Wilkey has engaged in an unlawful road-side strip search of citizens on
at least two separate occasions.
51. In April of 2019, Wilkey stopped six minors occupying a motor vehicle for an alleged
window having too much tint.
52. Following the stop, Wilkey claimed to “smell marijuana” and ordered the minors out
of the car.
53. Wilkie then ordered one of the male minors to strip at the roadside in the presence
of other female minors and engaged in an inappropriate and groping pat down of a
female.

54. Despite three separate attempts by a parent of one of the victims to file a complaint
and trigger an investigation, to date no investigation has been instituted.
55. Emboldened by the reprisal free culture of the Sheriff’s Office, on July 10, 2019,
Wilkie again stopped a vehicle for a window tint violation and ordered the occupants out
claiming to “smell weed.”
56. Wilkie assaulted the male occupant of the vehicle by beating him with his fists and
feet and slamming him to the ground.
57. Wilkie subsequently stripped the male’s pants off, pulled down his underwear and
conducted an unlawful street-side anal cavity search.
58. The Hamilton County District Attorney dismissed all the false charges leveled
against the male by Wilkie.
59. Despite complaints and a lawsuit, no investigation took place into Wilkie’s
conduct. He remains an active Sheriff’s Deputy.
Defendant Blake Kilpatrick
60. Prior to being hired as a County Deputy, Kilpatrick was a defendant in an Order of
Protection filed by Sylvana Johnson in Meigs County, Tennessee under the case number
OP370.
61. Kilpatrick was named as a defendant after he broke into Ms. Johnson’s residence
by force and physically attacked Ms. Johnson and her companion “Matt.”
62. Despite this violent felony criminal history, Kilpatrick was hired to be a law
enforcement officer by Hamilton County.
63. Defendant Deputy Kilpatrick has a history of misuse of force that has gone ignored
by Hamilton County.

64. A federal lawsuit filed against Kilpatrick in July 2013 outlines his vicious assault
and use of excessive force against an individual. In that incident, Kilpatrick repeatedly
struck a man sending him to the hospital to treat a head injury which required six staples.
65. Despite this incident and the litigation that put the County on notice of his unlawful
behavior, Kilpatrick was not disciplined in any way.
66. A separate federal lawsuit filed in 2018 put the County on notice of further
excessive force by Kilpatrick, namely his role in the fatal shooting of Christopher Sexton.
67. On January 17, 2017, Sexton was stopped by Kilpatrick and other Sheriff’s officers.
68. Once stopped, Sexton exited his vehicle and began walking away from the officers.
69. The officers, including Kilpatrick, began shooting their firearms at Sexton striking
him in the back and buttocks, killing him.
70. The County did not discipline or terminate Kilpatrick for this unlawful use of
excessive force.
71. Despite all warning, the Hamilton County Sheriff’s Office repeatedly ratified
Defendant Kilpatrick’s behavior and failed to punish and/or adequately supervise
Defendant Kilpatrick for his past and current abusive behavior. For the incident at bar,
Defendant Kilpatrick once again escaped proper punishment, receiving only a suspension
while the Justice Department conducts an investigation into Kilpatrick’s assault.
Kilpatrick’s suspension came almost three weeks after the assault took place, and the
Sheriff’s Office has not indicated that Kilpatrick should be terminated.
72. Defendant Hamilton County failed to acknowledge or properly punish Defendant
Kilpatrick for the unjustified and improper assault of Plaintiff Toney, thereby ratifying
his behavior.

73. Plaintiff was subjected to a violent assault and excessive force by Defendant
Kilpatrick all while being handcuffed and restricted in movement as other law
enforcement officers failed to intervene.
74. Despite making it known that he was not armed or had anything dangerous on his
person, Toney was still brutally assaulted without explanation, justification or
intervention from surrounding law enforcement officers at the scene of the assault.
75. Upon information and belief, the Hamilton County Sheriff’s Department, by and
through its employees, acted with conscience indifference and with objective
unreasonableness when they either participated in an assault of Mr. Toney and/or failed
to intervene to protect Mr. Toney from assault which resulted in significant injuries.
COUNT I
EXCESSIVE FORCE BY DEFENDANT
42 U.S.C. § 1983
76. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference, as though fully set forth here, each
and every allegation set forth in the above paragraphs. Plaintiff would show that the
Defendant Deputy’s actions on the occasion in question were wrongful, malicious and
reckless in depriving Toney of his constitutional rights, as alleged more fully below.
77. Plaintiff would show that at all times material hereto, the Defendants had a duty to
avoid infliction of unjustified bodily injury to Toney, to protect his bodily integrity and to
not trample on his constitutional rights.
78. This cause of action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 and the United States
Constitution.

79. On December 3, 2018, Plaintiff possessed the rights guaranteed by the United States
Constitution, included but not limited to the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights
against unlawful and unreasonable search, seizure, and excessive force.
80. Plaintiff would show that the Defendant Kilpatrick failed to act as a reasonable
officer would have acted in the same or similar circumstances. That is, the Defendant
deputy, without justification and the need to do so, used excessive force as described
above and severely injured Toney without legal justification. Toney did not make any
threatening gestures towards Kilpatrick and did not pose an immediate threat to the safety
of Kilpatrick or other officers on the scene. In fact, Toney was restrained in handcuffs
throughout much of the assault.
81. Defendant Kilpatrick was not provoked when he began violently assaulting Toney
for no lawful or justifiable reason. Toney received a collapsed lung, broken ribs, a broken
nose and a broken finger as a result of Kilpatrick’s brutal attack.
82. The unjustified and excessive force used by Kilpatrick was not reasonable, nor was
it necessary under the circumstances. Plaintiff Toney was restrained, handcuffed, and
monitored on a scene with several surrounding officers while the assault was taking place
with no justification.
83. Defendant Kilpatrick’s actions on that day were not objectively reasonable because
they were designed to inflict excessive force in restraining an individual in a non-
threatening situation that included several surrounding law enforcement officers.
84. The Plaintiff would show that the Defendant denied Toney his right to be free from
the use of excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment to the United States
Constitution.

85. The force used by Defendant Kilpatrick was unnecessary, excessive and
unreasonable under the circumstances, as Toney did not pose an immediate threat to the
safety of Kilpatrick or other law enforcement officers on the scene. Because there was no
threat to law enforcement, the assault on Toney was excessive and none of Kilpatrick’s
violent attacks were necessary under the circumstances. The Defendant embarked on a
willful, malicious, reckless and outrageous course of conduct that was intended to cause
and, in fact, caused Toney to suffer extreme and severe mental and emotional distress,
agony, anxiety and physical harm.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in his favor, and against Defendant Kilpatrick
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, in an amount in excess of Two Hundred and Fifty Thousand Dollars
($250,000.00), including interest, delay damages, costs of suit, general and specific damages,
punitive and exemplary damages, attorneys’ fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1985 and 1988, and any other
remedies legally appropriate.
COUNT II
MUNICIPAL LIABILITY
86. The conduct of Defendant Kilpatrick as set forth in the preceding paragraphs evinces
the excessive and unreasonable use of force in violation of Plaintiff’s constitutional rights.
87. The conduct set forth supra evinces a custom of using excessive or improper force,
a pattern of disregard for the rule of law, a pattern of racial discrimination against black
citizens, and a practice of training and disciplinary failures resulting in officers ill-equipped
to handle citizen confrontations equipped with firearms and the authority of law.

88. The County exhibited wanton and deliberate indifference to the constitutional rights
of its citizens by paying only lip service to formal policymaking and completely ignoring
the multiple signs that the Hamilton County Sheriff’s Office regularly utilized unnecessary
and excessive force, lacked proper training on how to confront citizens and what level of
force to use, lacked adequate training in de-escalation tactics, lacked adequate training in
techniques for detaining individuals in motor vehicles, lacked adequate training on
identifying an actual or imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury, had a custom and
culture set forth by the administration that ignored the rule of law, had a custom and culture
set forth by the administration which discriminated against black citizens and tolerated
such discrimination. Additionally, the County failed to properly screen applicants to the
Sheriff’s Office.
89. These customs, patterns, and practices were a moving force in the deprivation of
Plaintiff’s constitutional rights.
90. By reason of the aforementioned customs, policies, and practices of Defendant,
Plaintiff experienced severe pain and suffering for which he is entitled to recover damages.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in his favor, and against Defendant Hamilton
County pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, in an amount in excess of Two Hundred and Fifty Thousand
Dollars ($250,000.00), including interest, delay damages, costs of suit, general and specific
damages, attorneys’ fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1985 and 1988, and any other remedies legally
appropriate.
COUNT III
ASSAULT AND BATTERY

91. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference, as though fully set forth here, each
and every allegation set forth in the above paragraphs.
92. On December 3, 2018, Defendant Kilpatrick, while acting within the course and
scope of his duties as a law enforcement official for the HCSO, without provocation,
necessity or legal justification, assaulted and battered Plaintiff Toney by repeatedly
punching, wrestling and attacking Toney while he was in handcuffs with unreasonable
and excessive force and violence, thereby causing Toney’s injuries as herein described.
93. Defendant Hamilton County is liable for the unlawful acts of its Deputy, Defendant
Kilpatrick pursuant to Tennessee Code § 8-8-302.
94. As a result of all Defendants’ acts and omissions as described, Toney suffered a
traumatic and brutal assault by Defendant Kilpatrick that lead to broken ribs, a collapsed
lung, a broken nose, and a broken finger.
95. Defendants each committed the aforementioned acts and omissions knowingly,
willfully, maliciously and with the expressed intent to harm Toney and conscious or
reckless disregard for the harm that resulted from the assault. By reason thereof, Plaintiff
seeks punitive and exemplary damages from Defendant Kilpatrick, in an amount
according to proof at trial.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in his favor, and against Defendants in an amount in
excess of Two Hundred and Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000.00), including interest, delay
damages, costs of suit, general and specific damages, punitive and exemplary damages, attorneys’
fees under 42 U.S.C. § 1985 and 1988, and any other remedies legally appropriate.
Defendant’s John Does I-X failed to comply with these constitutional duties when they either

participated and/or failed
TRIAL BY JURY
96. Plaintiff demands a trial by jury.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff prays that Defendants be cited to appear
and answer herein; that upon final trial hereof Plaintiff has and recovers judgment from
Defendants; actual damages, exemplary damages, pre-judgment interest at the legal rate; interest
on said judgment at the legal rate; costs of court; and such other and further relief, both general
and special, at law and in equity, to which Plaintiff may show himself justly entitled.
Respectfully submitted,
MERRITT LAW FIRM
/s/ S. Lee Merritt

S. Lee Merritt, Esquire
1910 Pacific Ave., Suite 8000
Dallas, TX 75201
(215) 545-8800
lee@leemerrittesq.com
THE COCHRAN FIRM MID-SOUTH
/s/ Howard B. Manis

Howard B. Manis
One Commerce Square, Suite 1700
Memphis, TN 38103
(901) 523-1222
hmanis@cochranfirmmidsouth.com
/s/Andrew C. Clarke
Andrew C. Clarke
Memphis, TN 38103

(901) 523-1222
aclarke@cochranfirmmidsouth.com

Case 1:19-cv-00342-HSM-CHS Document 1-1 Filed 12/02/19 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 18
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the
Eastern District
__________ DistrictofofTennessee
__________
Charles Toney )
)
)
)
Plaintiff(s) )
)
v. Civil Action No.
)
Hamilton County, Tennessee, Sheriff Jim Hammond, )
Individually and as an Employee or Agent or Hamiton )
County, TN, Blake Kilpatrick, Individually and as an )
Employee or Agent of Hamilton County, TN et al. )
Defendant(s) )
SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION
To: (Defendant’s name and address) Blake Kilpatrick

600 Market St. G10
Chatanooga, TN 37402
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 plaintiff’s attorney,
whose name and address are:
Howard Manis
The Cochran Firm Mid-South
Memphis, TN 38103
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

AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)
Civil Action No.
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 individual’s 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 individual’s 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 $ 0.00 .
I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.
Date:
Server’s signature
Printed name and title
Server’s address
Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

Print Save As... Reset

for the
Eastern District
__________
Charles Toney )
)
)
)
Plaintiff(s) )
)
v. Civil Action No.
)
Defendant(s) )
To: (Defendant’s name and address) Hamilton County, Tennessee

c/o William Zinkeler, Civil Process Manager
6233 Dayton Blvd.
Howard Manis
Memphis, TN 38103
CLERK OF COURT
Date:

Civil Action No.
PROOF OF SERVICE


on (date) ; or

on (date) ; or
.
Date:
Server’s address


for the
Eastern District
__________
Charles Toney )
)
)
)
Plaintiff(s) )
)
v. Civil Action No.
)
Defendant(s) )
To: (Defendant’s name and address) Sheriff Jim Hammond

c/o William Zinkeler, Civil Process Manager
6233 Dayton Blvd.
Howard Manis
Memphis, TN 38103
CLERK OF COURT
Date:

Civil Action No.
PROOF OF SERVICE


on (date) ; or

on (date) ; or
.
Date:
Server’s address


Toney Lawsuit

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Toney Lawsuit

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE

Plaintiff, CIVIL ACTION NO. ___________________

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

HAMILTON COUNTY, TENNESSEE,

PLAINTIFFS’ ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

TO THE HONORABLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT:

NOW COMES Charles Toney, Plaintiff, complaining of Defendants Hamilton County,

NATURE OF THE ACTION

Case 1:19-cv-00342-HSM-CHS Document 1 Filed 12/02/19 Page 1 of 17 PageID #: 1

§ 1983 and for related state law claims.

failed to properly screen applicants, including Defendant Kilpatrick, to the Sheriff’s

ratified Defendant Kilpatrick’s actions by failing to implement the appropriate

disciplinary measure of immediate termination of Deputy Kilpatrick and attempting to

Chattanooga, County of Hamilton, State of Tennessee.

4. Defendant, Hamilton County, Tennessee (“Defendant County”), is and was at all

Case 1:19-cv-00342-HSM-CHS Document 1 Filed 12/02/19 Page 2 of 17 PageID #: 2

performed by him while acting under the color of law.

2008. As Sheriff of Hamilton County, Defendant Hammond is responsible for the

County Sheriff’s Office. Further, as Sheriff of Hamilton County, Defendant Hammond is

7. Defendant Blake Kilpatrick, upon information and belief, is a resident of

as a Hamilton County Sheriff’s Deputy. Kilpatrick may be served at the Hamilton

Manager, William Zinkeler, at 6233 Dayton Blvd., Chattanooga, TN 37343.

Case 1:19-cv-00342-HSM-CHS Document 1 Filed 12/02/19 Page 3 of 17 PageID #: 3

immunities guaranteed to Plaintiffs by constitutional and statutory provisions. Plaintiffs

made the basis of this cause of action.

12. Plaintiff timely filed a notice of claim with the County.

The Assault and False Arrest of Charles Toney

several law enforcements officers arrived at Plaintiff’s home.

had identified Plaintiff Toney as an individual with an arrest warrant out.

16. Law enforcement officers arrived at Plaintiff’s home in an assortment of vehicles

Case 1:19-cv-00342-HSM-CHS Document 1 Filed 12/02/19 Page 4 of 17 PageID #: 4

their weapons at Plaintiff Toney and his friend.

quickly approached them.

“Interstate Tax,” the Plaintiff’s stage name as an aspiring artist.

vicious assault on Plaintiff Toney.

face, causing him to collapse onto the ground.

Defendant Kilpatrick continued his violent assault.

Toney although he is handcuffed and posing no threat to law enforcement.

Case 1:19-cv-00342-HSM-CHS Document 1 Filed 12/02/19 Page 5 of 17 PageID #: 5

broken nose, several broken ribs, and a broken finger.

resisting arrest and tampering with evidence.

The Systemic Failures of the Hamilton County Sheriff’s Office

with misconduct, racial bias, and unchecked use of excessive force.

culture lacking leadership and discipline.

unnecessary force would be tolerated without question.

Case 1:19-cv-00342-HSM-CHS Document 1 Filed 12/02/19 Page 6 of 17 PageID #: 6

jail or send them to the funeral home.

cavity search of James Mitchell by Deputies Wilkey and Brewer.

report, Sheriff Hammond declined to discipline or terminate Terrell.

41. In fact, Terrell was subsequently promoted to Lieutenant.

handcuffed prisoner named Leslie Hayes.

43. The horrific beating was captured in its entirety on video.

Case 1:19-cv-00342-HSM-CHS Document 1 Filed 12/02/19 Page 7 of 17 PageID #: 7

Hayes and lied to Sheriff’s Department investigators.

knowledge that Hayes was in custody in Sequatchie County.

47. Unsurprisingly, Hendrix’s violent conduct shortly resurfaced in March of 2017.

with two women.

at least two separate occasions.

window having too much tint.

Case 1:19-cv-00342-HSM-CHS Document 1 Filed 12/02/19 Page 8 of 17 PageID #: 8

and trigger an investigation, to date no investigation has been instituted.

claiming to “smell weed.”

feet and slamming him to the ground.