Skip navigation
PYHS - Header

Thompson, et al. v. Jackson, et al., GA, Amended Class Action Complaint, Inmates Denied Release, 2016

Download original document:
Brief thumbnail
This text is machine-read, and may contain errors. Check the original document to verify accuracy.
Fulton
Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 1 of
58 County Superior Court

***EFILED***TMM
Date: 10/14/2016 11:51:39 AM
Cathelene Robinson, Clerk

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY
STATE OF GEORGIA
OSWALD THOMPSON, JR.,
individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, JOSEPH
SINGLETON, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly
situated, DAEJA MITCHELL,
individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, BRIDGET
MACHOVEC, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly
situated, OLUSEUS ADENIYI
OSHINOWO, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly
situated, DARRION TRIPP,
individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, TOMMIE
DOUGLAS, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly
situated, STERLING PALMER,
individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, TWAN
TRAMMELL, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly
situated, and DONNA WRIGHT,
individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated,

CIVIL ACTION
FILE NO. 2015CV268206

Plaintiffs,
v.
SHERIFF THEODORE JACKSON,
CHIEF MARK ADGER, and JOHN
DOE DEFENDANTS,
Defendants.
1

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 2 of 58

THIRD AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
This is an action for money damages and injunctive relief brought by
ten named plaintiffs on their own behalf and on behalf of the class defined
below pursuant to Section 1983 of the Civil Rights Act of 1871, 42 U.S.C. §
1983, to enforce the Fourth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S.
Constitution, and Georgia laws governing negligence, false imprisonment,
and false arrest (such as O.C.G.A. §§ 51-1-2, 51-7-1, and 51-7-20), against
Defendants Sheriff Theodore Jackson and Chief Mark Adger, along with John
Doe Defendants for the overdetention, false arrest, and/or false imprisonment
of inmates at the Fulton County Jail in November of 2014.
The named Plaintiffs and the class Plaintiffs were overdetained at the
Fulton County Jail – held beyond the time at which the basis for their
detention had expired – when the Georgia Crime Information Center
(“GCIC”) system became inoperable, preventing jail employees from running
routine checks for warrants, holds, and detainers before releasing the
inmates. Rather than releasing the inmates when the inmates had the right
to be released, Defendants held the inmates until the GCIC system could be
accessed, overdetaining inmates for several days. These overdetentions
occurred without justification, in violation of Defendants’ ministerial duties
2

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 3 of 58

to release the inmates once the bases for their detentions had expired, and
with deliberate indifference to the constitutional rights of the inmates.
Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint included only a single named
Plaintiff, Oswald Thompson, and a single identified Defendant, Sheriff
Theodore Jackson. This Third Amended Complaint adds six plaintiffs and
Defendant Chief Mark Adger, and it includes some minor revisions to the
allegations based on discovery.
Parties, Jurisdiction, and Venue
1.

Oswald Thompson, Jr., is a natural person and citizen of the
United States of America, residing in Fulton County, Georgia, and is of
full age.

2.

This is an action brought by Oswald Thompson, Jr., on his own
behalf and on behalf of a class of individuals who were injured by
Defendants’ conduct in overdetaining these individuals in November of
2014.

3.

Joseph Singleton is a natural person and citizen of the United
States of America, and is of full age.

4.

This is an action brought by Joseph Singleton on his own behalf
and on behalf of a class of individuals who were injured by Defendants’
conduct in overdetaining these individuals in November of 2014.
3

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 4 of 58

5.

Daeja Mitchell is a natural person and citizen of the United
States of America, and is of full age.

6.

This is an action brought by Daeja Mitchell, on her own behalf
and on behalf of a class of individuals who were injured by Defendants’
conduct in overdetaining these individuals in November of 2014.

7.

Bridget Machovec is a natural person and citizen of the United
States of America, and is of full age.

8.

This is an action brought by Bridget Machovec on her own behalf
and on behalf of a class of individuals who were injured by Defendants’
conduct in overdetaining these individuals in November of 2014.

9.

Oluseus Adeniyi Oshinowo is a natural person and citizen of the
United States of America, and is of full age.

10.

This is an action brought by Oluseus Adeniyi Oshinowo on his

own behalf and on behalf of a class of individuals who were injured by
Defendants’ conduct in overdetaining these individuals in November of
2014.
11.

Darrion Tripp is a natural person and citizen of the United States

of America, and is of full age.

4

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 5 of 58

12.

This is an action brought by Darrion Tripp on his own behalf and

on behalf of a class of individuals who were injured by Defendants’
conduct in overdetaining these individuals in November of 2014.
13.

Tommie Douglas is a natural person and citizen of the United

States of America, and is of full age.
14.

This is an action brought by Tommie Douglas on her own behalf

and on behalf of a class of individuals who were injured by Defendants’
conduct in overdetaining these individuals in November of 2014.
15.

Sterling Palmer is a natural person and citizen of the United

States of America, and is of full age.
16.

This is an action brought by Sterling Palmer on his own behalf

and on behalf of a class of individuals who were injured by Defendants’
conduct in overdetaining these individuals in November of 2014.
17.

Twan Trammell is a natural person and citizen of the United

States of America, and is of full age.
18.

This is an action brought by Twan Trammell on his own behalf

and on behalf of a class of individuals who were injured by Defendants’
conduct in overdetaining these individuals in November of 2014.
19.

Donna Wright is a natural person and citizen of the United

States of America, and is of full age.
5

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 6 of 58

20.

This is an action brought by Donna Wright on her own behalf and

on behalf of a class of individuals who were injured by Defendants’
conduct in overdetaining these individuals in November of 2014.
21.

Defendant Sheriff Theodore Jackson (“Defendant Jackson”) is an

individual who was, at all times relevant to the allegations in this
complaint, Sheriff of the Fulton County Sheriff’s Office, acting under
color of law.
22.

Defendant Chief Mark Adger (“Defendant Adger”) is an

individual who was, at all times relevant to the allegations in this
complaint, Chief Jailer of the Fulton County Jail, holding the rank of
Colonel with the Fulton County Sheriff’s Office, acting under color of
law.
23.

John Doe Defendants are individuals who were, at all times

relevant to the allegations in this complaint, employees of the Fulton
County Sheriff’s Office, employed in the Fulton County Jail, acting
under color of law (Defendant Jackson, Defendant Adger, and John Doe
Defendants are hereinafter “Defendants”).
24.

All of the parties herein are subject to the personal jurisdiction of

this Court and venue is proper in Fulton County.

6

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 7 of 58

Class Action Allegations
25.

Oswald Thompson, Jr., Joesph Singleton, Daeja Mitchell, Bridget

Machovec, Oluseun Adeniyi Oshinowo, Darrion Tripp, Tommie
Douglas, Sterling Palmer, Twan Trammell, and Donna Wright
(hereinafter “Named Plaintiffs”) bring this action under Section 1983 of
the Civil Rights Act of 1871, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, to enforce the Fourth,
Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, and
O.C.G.A. § 9-11-23 on behalf of a class consisting of such persons who,
in November of 2014, were incarcerated at the Fulton County Jail and
who were overdetained (the “Class Plaintiffs”). To “overdetain” means
to hold an inmate in the Fulton County Jail past the time at which the
basis for the inmate’s detention has expired absent justification for the
inmate’s continued detention. Examples of situations in which the
basis for the individual’s detention has expired include but are not
limited to: (a) tender and acceptance of bail and/or bond; (b) receipt of
court order indicating that the individual is to be released on his or her
own reconnaissance; (c) expiration of and/or completion of the
individual’s sentence; (d) dismissal/nolle prosequi of the charges that
serve as the basis for the detention; and (e) quashing of the indictment
that serves as the basis for the detention.
7

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 8 of 58

26.

Certification of a class under O.C.G.A. § 9-11-23(a) is appropriate

because Defendants acted on grounds generally applicable to the class
when they overdetained every member of the class, thereby making
appropriate final declaratory relief with respect to the class as a whole.
27.

Certification of a class under O.C.G.A. § 9-11-23(b)(3) is

appropriate because questions of law and fact common to Class
Plaintiffs predominate over any questions affecting only individual
members, and a class action is superior to other available methods for
the fair and efficient adjudication of the controversy. Among the
questions of law and fact common to the class are:
a. Whether Defendants have a ministerial duty to release an inmate
once the basis for the inmate’s detention has expired absent
justification for the continued detention. Examples of situations
in which the basis for the individual’s detention has expired
include but are not limited to: (a) tender and acceptance of bail
and/or bond; (b) receipt of court order indicating that the
individual is to be released on his or her own reconnaissance; (c)
expiration of and/or completion of the individual’s sentence; (d)
dismissal/nolle prosequi of the charges that serve as the basis for

8

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 9 of 58

the detention; and (e) quashing of the indictment that serves as
the basis for the detention;
b. Whether Defendants were justified in failing to release Class
Plaintiffs due to the Georgia Crime Information Center (“GCIC”)
system being inoperable at the Fulton County Jail;
c. Whether Defendant Jackson’s and/or Defendant Adger’s actions
as alleged herein violate O.C.G.A. §§ 51-7-1 or 51-7-20;
d. Whether Defendants were deliberately indifferent to the rights of
Class Plaintiffs who were overdetained and whether Defendants
have therefore violated the U.S. Constitution by overdetaining
these inmates;
e. Whether the U.S. Constitution establishes a bright line,
maximum length of time measured in hours beyond which
Defendants cannot hold a person in custody after a judge has
ordered release or the person has posted bail and/or bond, or the
reason for the person’s detention has otherwise expired;
f. Whether Class Plaintiffs have sustained damages and, if so, the
proper measure of such damages;
g. Whether Defendant Jackson is entitled to official immunity;
h. Whether Defendant Adger is entitled to qualified immunity; and
9

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 10 of 58

i. Whether John Doe Defendants are entitled to official immunity.
28.

The class is so numerous that joinder of all members is

impracticable. The exact number of class members is unknown at this
time but is believed to number more than 100.
29.

Defendants and the Fulton County Jail have within their records

the names and addresses of all Class Plaintiffs in the Fulton County
Jail computer systems and physical files.
30.

Defendants and the Fulton County Jail have within the Fulton

County Jail computer systems and physical files the documents
showing precisely when the Fulton County Jail received notice that
each Class Plaintiff was to be released (showing time of payment of bail
and/or bond, showing time of court order indicating that the inmate is
to be released on his or her own reconnaissance, showing time of court
order that the inmate has completed his or her sentence, or showing
time of other notice that the basis for the inmate’s detention has
expired), and showing precisely when the Class Plaintiffs were actually
released. These records will show the precise amount of overdetention
of each Class Plaintiff – i.e. how many hours each class member was
overdetained. These records will be relevant to determining liability,
and in determining damages on a class-wide basis.
10

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 11 of 58

31.

Named Plaintiffs’ claims are typical of the claims of Class

Plaintiffs because Named Plaintiffs and Class Plaintiffs were injured
by exactly the same means: by Defendants’ decision to overdetain
inmates while the GCIC system was inoperable at the Fulton County
Jail.
32.

Named Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately protect the interest of

Class Plaintiffs. Named Plaintiffs have retained counsel who are
competent and experienced in prisoners’ rights litigation.
33.

Named Plaintiffs have no interests that are contrary to, or in

conflict with, Class Plaintiffs.
34.

Named Plaintiffs know of no difficulty that will be encountered in

the management of this litigation that would preclude its maintenance
as a class action. This class action is superior to any other available
means to resolve the issues raised on behalf of class. This class action
will be manageable because record systems at the Fulton County Jail
exist which will allow identification of Class Plaintiffs, and damages
can be ascertained on a class-wide basis using a damages matrix
established by a jury or by trying the damages of a statistically valid
sample of the class to a jury and extrapolating the damages to the class
as a whole.
11

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 12 of 58

Factual Allegations
GCIC Inoperability and Jail Release Policies
35.

On 10 or more days in November of 2014, the GCIC system

became inoperable at the Fulton County Jail.
36.

On information and belief, the GCIC system became inoperable

at the Fulton County Jail in November of 2014 because the Fulton
County Jail’s computer system had not been properly updated.
37.

The written policy of the Fulton County Jail in effect in

November of 2014 requires that, as part of the Fulton County Jail’s
release procedures, inmates who are to be released must be run
through the GCIC system to check for active warrants, detainers, or
holds.
38.

This policy of the Fulton County Jail is not required by any state

or federal law, rule, or regulation, other than the written policy of the
Fulton County Jail.
39.

Defendant Jackson, as the Fulton County Sheriff and the official

jailer of the Fulton County Jail, has the authority to waive this policy
and to release an inmate without running the inmate through the
GCIC system.

12

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 13 of 58

40.

Defendant Adger, as Chief Jailer of the Fulton County Jail, has

the authority to waive this policy and to release an inmate without
running the inmate through the GCIC system.
41.

Prior to November of 2014, the GCIC system became inoperable

at the Fulton County Jail on at least three separate occasions for
durations of one to four days.
42.

As a result of these GCIC outages, Defendant Adger enacted a

directive directing employees of the Fulton County Jail to release
inmates during prolonged GCIC outages if the inmates met certain
criteria (e.g., if the inmate had been booked into the jail within 48
hours of GCIC becoming inaccessible).
43.

In November of 2014, Defendants Jackson and Adger did, on at

least one occasion, waive this policy and release inmates without
running the inmates through the GCIC system.
Named Plaintiffs’ Overdetentions
44.

On several days in November of 2014, many inmates – including

all Named Plaintiffs and all Class Plaintiffs – were overdetained and/or
falsely imprisoned.

13

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 14 of 58

45.

For example, Plaintiff Oswald Thompson, Jr. was booked in and

committed to the Fulton County Jail on November 13, 2014 for the
offense of Speeding.
46.

Plaintiff Thompson was soon thereafter issued a bond which was

paid on November 14, 2014, by an Atlanta-based bonding
company/surety and accepted by the Fulton County Jail.
47.

Despite the fact that Plaintiff Thompson had posted bond on

November 14, 2014, the Fulton County Jail would not release him due
to the GCIC system inoperability. Plaintiff Thompson remained in the
Fulton County Jail until he was released on November 19, 2014 at
approximately 9:38 a.m. subsequent to further judicial order and nolle
prosequi of the charge for which he was arrested.
48.

Plaintiff Thompson was therefore overdetained and/or falsely

imprisoned for approximately 106 hours.
49.

Plaintiff Joseph Singleton was booked in and committed to the

Fulton County Jail on November 13, 2014 for the offenses of Simple
Battery and Cruelty to Children in the 3rd Degree.
50.

Plaintiff Singleton was soon thereafter issued a bond which was

paid on or about November 13, 2014 by an Atlanta-based bonding
company/surety and accepted by the Fulton County Jail.
14

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 15 of 58

51.

Despite the fact that Plaintiff Singleton had posted bond on or

about November 14, 2014, the Fulton County Jail would not release
him due to the GCIC system inoperability. Plaintiff Singleton remained
in the Fulton County Jail until he was released on November 17, 2014.
52.

Plaintiff Singleton was therefore overdetained and/or falsely

imprisoned for approximately four days.
53.

Plaintiff Daeja Mitchell was booked in and committed to the

Fulton County Jail on November 18, 2014 for the offenses of
Obstruction, Expired License, Driving with Suspended License, Failing
to Maintain Lane, Reckless Driving, and Hit-and-Run.
54.

Plaintiff Mitchell was soon thereafter issued a signature bond on

November 18, 2014, through pre-trial services, whereby she signed the
paperwork and promised to follow all pre-trial release conditions.
55.

Plaintiff Mitchell was also issued a bond which was paid on or

about November 18, 2014, by an Atlanta-based bonding
company/surety and accepted by the Fulton County Jail.
56.

Despite the fact that Plaintiff Mitchell had posted bond on or

about November 18, 2014, the Fulton County Jail would not release her
due to the GCIC system inoperability. Plaintiff Mitchell remained in
the Fulton County Jail until she was released on November 22, 2014.
15

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 16 of 58

57.

Plaintiff Mitchell was therefore overdetained and/or falsely

imprisoned for approximately four days.
58.

Plaintiff Bridget Machovec was booked in and committed to the

Fulton County Jail on November 15, 2014, for the offenses of Reckless
Driving and Driving Under the Influence.
59.

Plaintiff Machovec was soon thereafter issued a signature bond

on November 15, 2014, through pre-trial services, whereby she signed
the paperwork and promised to follow all pre-trial release conditions.
60.

Plaintiff Machovec was also issued a bond which was paid on or

about November 15, 2014, by an Atlanta-based bonding
company/surety and accepted by the Fulton County Jail.
61.

Plaintiff Machovec reached out to her attorney, who sought

assistance of the Court, which issued an Order on November 17, 2014,
to release Plaintiff Machovec “regardless of ‘system issues.’”
62.

Despite the fact that Plaintiff Machovec had posted bond on or

about November 15, 2014, the Fulton County Jail would not release her
due to the GCIC system inoperability. Plaintiff Machovec remained in
the Fulton County Jail until she was released on November 18, 2014.
63.

Plaintiff Machovec was therefore overdetained and/or falsely

imprisoned for approximately three days.
16

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 17 of 58

64.

Plaintiff Oluseun Adeniyi Oshinowo was booked in and

committed to the Fulton County Jail on November 14, 2014 for two
counts of Simple Battery.
65.

Plaintiff Oshinowo was soon thereafter issued a signature bond

on November 14, 2014 through pre-trial services, whereby he signed
the paperwork and promised to follow all pre-trial release conditions.
66.

Plaintiff Oshinowo reached out to his attorney, who sought

assistance of the Court, which issued an Order on November 17, 2014,
to release Plaintiff Oshinowo “regardless of ‘system issues.’”
67.

Despite the fact that Plaintiff Oshinowo signed his bond

paperwork on or about November 14, 2014, the Fulton County Jail
would not release him due to the GCIC system inoperability. Plaintiff
Oshinowo remained in the Fulton County Jail until he was released on
November 17, 2014.
68.

Plaintiff Oshinowo was therefore overdetained and/or falsely

imprisoned for approximately three days.
69.

Plaintiff Darrion Tripp was booked in and committed to the

Fulton County Jail on September 6, 2014, for the offenses of Family
Violence Battery (misdemeanor) and Cruelty to Children in the 1st
Degree.
17

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 18 of 58

70.

Plaintiff Tripp was soon thereafter issued a bond which was paid

on or about November 15 or November 16, 2014, by an Atlanta-based
bonding company/surety and accepted by the Fulton County Jail.
71.

Despite the fact that Plaintiff Tripp had posted bond on or about

November 15 or November 16, 2014, the Fulton County Jail would not
release him due to the GCIC system inoperability. Plaintiff Tripp
remained in the Fulton County Jail until he was released on November
19, 2014.
72.

Plaintiff Tripp was therefore overdetained and/or falsely

imprisoned for approximately three or four days.
73.

Plaintiff Tommie Douglas was booked in and committed to the

Fulton County Jail on November 17, 2014, for the offenses of Criminal
Damage to Property 2nd Degree and Criminal Trespass. At the time
Plaintiff Douglas went by the name Tommie Lorraine Blackerby;
Plaintiff Douglas has married since November 17, 2014, and changed
her last name to Douglas.
74.

Plaintiff Douglas was soon thereafter issued a signature bond on

November 17, 2014, through pre-trial services, whereby she signed the
paperwork and promised to follow all pre-trial release conditions.

18

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 19 of 58

75.

Despite the fact that Plaintiff Douglas signed her bond

paperwork on or about November 17, 2014, the Fulton County Jail
would not release her due to the GCIC system inoperability. Plaintiff
Douglas remained in the Fulton County Jail until she was released on
November 20, 2014.
76.

Plaintiff Douglas was therefore overdetained and/or falsely

imprisoned for approximately three days.
77.

Plaintiff Sterling Palmer was booked in and committed to the

Fulton County Jail on November 15, 2014, for the offense of
misdemeanor Battery.
78.

Plaintiff Palmer was soon thereafter issued a signature bond on

November 15, 2014, through pre-trial services, whereby he signed the
paperwork and promised to follow all pre-trial release conditions.
79.

Despite the fact that Plaintiff Palmer signed his bond paperwork

on or about November 15, 2014, the Fulton County Jail would not
release him due to the GCIC system inoperability. Plaintiff Palmer
remained in the Fulton County Jail until he was released on November
18, 2014.
80.

Plaintiff Palmer was therefore overdetained and/or falsely

imprisoned for approximately three days.
19

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 20 of 58

81.

Plaintiff Twan Trammell was booked in and committed to the

Fulton County Jail on November 17, 2014, for the offenses of Cruelty to
Children in the 3rd degree and Battery.
82.

Plaintiff Trammell was soon thereafter issued a $5000 surety

bond which was paid on November 17, 2014, by an Atlanta-based
bonding company/surety and accepted by the Fulton County Jail.
83.

Despite the fact that Plaintiff Trammell’s bond was paid on

November 17, 2014, the Fulton County Jail would not release him due
to the GCIC system inoperability. Plaintiff Trammell remained in the
Fulton County Jail until he was released on November 20, 2014.
84.

Plaintiff Trammell was therefore overdetained and/or falsely

imprisoned for approximately three days.
85.

Plaintiff Donna Wright was booked in and committed to the

Fulton County Jail on November 17, 2014, for the offense of
misdemeanor Shoplifting.
86.

Plaintiff Wright was soon thereafter issued a $2000 bond which

was paid on November 17, 2014, by Atlanta-based bonding
company/surety Jet Bonding Company and accepted by the Fulton
County Jail.

20

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 21 of 58

87.

Despite the fact that Plaintiff Wright’s bond was paid on

November 17, 2014, the Fulton County Jail would not release her due
to the GCIC system inoperability. Plaintiff Wright remained in the
Fulton County Jail until she was released on November 20, 2014.
88.

Plaintiff Wright was therefore overdetained and/or falsely

imprisoned for approximately three days.
Illegality of Overdetentions
89.

The overdetention and false imprisonment of Class Plaintiffs1

was unlawful because there was no legal justification for their
overdetentions and Defendants acted with deliberate indifference to
these overdetentions.
90.

It is the custom and practice at the jail, when a GCIC system

failure might lead to overdetentions, that the Chief Jailer would inform
the Sheriff of the potential overdetentions.
91.

It is the custom and practice at the jail that both the Sheriff and

the Chief Jailer would have the authority to address the treatment of
inmates when a GCIC system failure might lead to overdetentions.

1

The term “Class Plaintiffs” includes Named Plaintiffs.
21

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 22 of 58

92.

These jail customs and practices have been confirmed with

former and current jail employees.
93.

Consistently with the jail’s custom and practice, Defendants

Jackson and Adger directly participated in the overdetention of Class
Plaintiffs.
94.

Consistently with the jail’s custom and practice, Defendant

Jackson instructed the Chief Jailer and/or other subordinates to
overdetain Class Plaintiffs.
95.

Consistently with the jail’s custom and practice, Defendant Adger

instructed other subordinates to overdetain Class Plaintiffs.
96.

As Sheriff of Fulton County Defendant Jackson has a supervisory

role at the Fulton County Jail.
97.

Defendant Jackson supervises the Chief Jailer, who in turn

supervises all jail employees.
98.

Likewise, as Chief Jailer, Defendant Adger has a supervisory role

at the Fulton County Jail.
99.

In his supervisory capacity, Defendant Jackson’s actions were

causally connected to Class Plaintiffs’ overdetentions.
100.

In his supervisory capacity, Defendant Adger’s actions were

causally connected to Class Plaintiffs’ overdetentions.
22

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 23 of 58

101.

In November of 2014, Defendants Jackson and Adger were aware

of previous GCIC system errors.
102.

In November of 2014, Defendants Jackson and Adger were aware

that a GCIC system error could lead to the overdetention of an inmate.
103.

By November of 2014, aware of the GCIC system failures and

aware that these failures could lead to overdetentions, Defendants
Jackson and Adger authorized their subordinates to overdetain inmates
during CGIC system failures.
104.

By November of 2014, aware of the GCIC system failures and

aware that these failures could lead to overdetentions, Defendants
Jackson and Adger knew that subordinates would refuse to timely
release inmates during GCIC failures, unlawfully, as they had done in
the past.
105.

Aware that subordinates would refuse to timely release inmates

during GCIC failures, Defendants Jackson and Adger did not act to
stop their subordinates from overdetaining inmates.
106.

Defendants Jackson and Adger were put on notice of the

widespread abuse related to overdetention through former lawsuits
(including without limitation Powell et al. v. Barrett et al., Northern
District of Georgia, Civil Action Number 04-CV-01100-RWS and Harper
23

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 24 of 58

et al. v. Fulton County et al., Northern District of Georgia, Civil Action
Number 04-CV-1416-MHS), consent orders, and audits of the GCIC
system operability.
107.

Aware of the history of widespread abuse related to

overdetentions, Defendants Jackson and Adger knew that they needed
to correct the practices leading to overdetentions but did not take any
such action.
108.

John Doe Defendants are involved in the process of calculating

release times and/or processing inmate releases at the Fulton County
Jail.
109.

John Doe Defendants, including without limitation any Fulton

County Sheriff’s Office employee working at the Release Office of the
Fulton County Jail in November of 2014, were personally aware that
these overdetentions were occurring.
110.

There are particular employees of Defendant Jackson, John Doe

Defendants, who are charged with the responsibility of all inmate
release matters. These John Doe Defendants were aware of the
overdetentions and acted with deliberate indifference when they
continued to falsely detain Class Plaintiffs.

24

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 25 of 58

111.

There are particular employees of Defendant Jackson, John Doe

Defendants, who are charged with the responsibility of all inmate
release matters. These John Doe Defendants were aware of the
overdetentions and acted in violation of their ministerial duties when
they continued to falsely detain Class Plaintiffs.
112.

Defendant’s employee provided a televised statement to the

media regarding his knowledge of the overdetentions and/or false
imprisonment and acknowledged the known existing problem with
GCIC.
113.

Despite knowing that the false imprisonment was occurring,

Defendants Jackson and Adger did not release these inmates.
114.

Despite knowing that the false imprisonment was occurring,

John Doe Defendants did not release these inmates.
115.

Despite knowing that the false imprisonment was occurring,

Defendants Jackson and Adger specifically failed to release Class
Plaintiffs.
116.

Despite knowing that the false imprisonment was occurring,

John Doe Defendants specifically failed to release Class Plaintiffs.
117.

Despite knowing that the false imprisonment was occurring,

Defendants failed to take any corrective action to ensure that Class
25

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 26 of 58

Plaintiffs were released when the reasons for their respective
incarcerations had terminated.
118.

Class Plaintiffs were run through the GCIC system upon being

booked into the jail. Defendants knew, therefore, whether every
member of the class had warrants, holds, or detainers at the time the
inmate was booked into the Fulton County Jail.
119.

Defendants have a ministerial duty to release a Fulton County

Jail inmate when the basis for the individual’s detention has expired,
absent justification for continued detention.
120.

Defendants have a ministerial duty to release a Fulton County

Jail inmate upon tender and acceptance of bail and/or bond.
121.

Defendants have a ministerial duty to release a Fulton County

Jail inmate upon receiving notice of a court order indicating that the
inmate is to be released on his or her own reconnaissance.
122.

Defendants have a ministerial duty to compute the time

remaining on an inmate’s custodial sentence.
123.

Defendants have a ministerial duty to release a Fulton County

Jail inmate upon completion of the inmate’s sentence.

26

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 27 of 58

124.

O.C.G.A. § 42-4-7 requires, “An inmate sentenced to confinement

as a county inmate shall be released at the expiration of his or her
sentence less the time deducted for earned time allowances.”
125.

O.C.G.A. § 17-6-1(j) requires, “For all persons who have been

authorized by law or the court to be released on bail, sheriffs and
constables shall accept such bail; provided, however, that the sureties
tendered and offered on the bond are approved by the sheriff of the
county in which the offense was committed.”
126.

O.C.G.A. § 17-6-15(b)(1) requires, “No person shall be imprisoned

under a felony commitment when bail has been fixed, if the person
tenders and offers to give bond in the amount fixed, with sureties
acceptable to the sheriff of the county in which the alleged offense
occurred….”
127.

O.C.G.A. § 17-6-1(f)(1) requires, “Except as provided in subsection

(a) of this Code section or as otherwise provided in this subsection, the
judge of any court of inquiry may by written order establish a schedule
of bails and unless otherwise ordered by the judge of any court, a
person charged with committing any offense shall be released from
custody upon posting bail as fixed in the schedule.”

27

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 28 of 58

128.

O.C.G.A. § 42-4-7(a) requires, “The sheriff shall keep a record of

all persons committed to the jail of the county of which he or she is
sheriff. This record shall contain the name of the person committed,
such person’s age, sex, race, under what process such person was
committed and from what court the process issued, the crime with
which the person was charged, the date of such person’s commitment to
jail, the day of such person’s discharge, under what order such person
was discharged, and the court from which the order issued.”
129.

As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ failure to release

Class Plaintiffs when the bases for their detention had expired, Class
Plaintiffs’ state law rights were violated. Class Plaintiffs suffered the
loss of freedom, anxiety, and other general and special damages as a
result of overdetention and/or false imprisonment.
130.

In addition, the moving force behind Class Plaintiffs’

overdetentions was the deliberate indifference of Defendants to Class
Plaintiffs’ Due Process rights under the U.S. Constitution.
131.

Defendants had both actual and constructive knowledge that

Class Plaintiffs were suffering constitutional injury by being
overdetained and/or falsely imprisoned.

28

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 29 of 58

132.

Defendants engaged in a pattern of inaction in the face of

overdetentions at the Fulton County Jail, such overdetentions
representing violations of inmates’ rights under the Fourth, Eighth,
and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
133.

Defendants’ actions and pattern of inaction described herein

directly, proximately, and affirmatively caused the violations of the
Fourth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution
suffered by Class Plaintiffs.
134.

Class Plaintiffs suffered the loss of freedom, anxiety, and other

general and special damages as a result of these violations of the
Fourth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
Count I
State Law – Breach of Ministerial Duty through False Arrest, False
Imprisonment, and/or Negligence (Defendants Jackson and Adger)
135.

The preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference as

though fully set forth.
136.

At all times relevant hereto, Defendant Jackson was the Sheriff of

Fulton County and official jailer of Fulton County and the Fulton County
Jail.
137.

At all times relevant hereto, Defendant Adger was the Chief Jailer

of the Fulton County Jail.
29

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 30 of 58

138.

In his individual capacity as Fulton County Sheriff, Defendant

Jackson is charged with ensuring the release of Fulton County Jail
inmates upon receiving notice that an inmate was to be released – a
ministerial duty.
139.

In his individual capacity as Chief Jailer of the Fulton County Jail,

Defendant Adger is charged with ensuring the release of Fulton County
Jail inmates upon receiving notice that an inmate was to be released – a
ministerial duty.
140.

“A ‘ministerial act’ is commonly one that is simple, absolute, and

definite, arising under conditions admitted or proved to exist, and
requiring merely the execution of a specific duty.” Austin v. Clark, 294
Ga. 773, 773 (2014) (internal citation omitted).
141.

Defendants Jackson and Adger have a ministerial duty to release

a Fulton County Jail inmate when the basis for detention has expired.
142.

Defendants Jackson and Adger have a ministerial duty to release

a Fulton County Jail inmate upon tender and acceptance of bail and/or
bond.
143.

Defendants Jackson and Adger have a ministerial duty to release

a Fulton County Jail inmate upon the Fulton County Jail’s receipt of

30

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 31 of 58

court order indicating that the inmate is to be released on his or her
own reconnaissance.
144.

Defendants Jackson and Adger have a ministerial duty to release

a Fulton County Jail inmate upon completion of the inmate’s sentence.
145.

Defendants Jackson and Adger have a ministerial duty to release

a Fulton County Jail inmate upon receiving notice that the charges
and/or prosecution of the inmate have been dismissed, a nolle prosequi
order has been entered, or the inmate’s indictment has been quashed.
146.

Defendants

Jackson

and

Adger

have

deliberately

and/or

negligently failed to implement and enforce procedures needed to ensure
the timely release of inmates.
147.

Defendants Jackson and Adger have breached their ministerial

duties because they knew that Fulton County Jail inmates were being
overdetained as a result of the GCIC system becoming inoperable at the
Fulton County Jail, and they took no adequate action to stop these
overdetentions.
148.

Defendants Jackson and Adger’s failure to implement and enforce

procedures needed to ensure the timely release of inmates, and their
deliberate failure to ensure that Class Plaintiffs were released in a

31

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 32 of 58

timely manner, caused the overdetention and/or false imprisonment of
Class Plaintiffs.
149.

“False imprisonment” under common law is the “…intent to

confine, an act resulting in confinement, and the victim’s awareness of
confinement.” Campbell v. Johnson, 586 F.3d 835, 840 (11th Cir. 2009).
150.

Defendants Jackson and Adger’s implementation and continued

enforcement of procedures that required employees to depend on the
operability of the GCIC system for every inmate prior to authorizing
their release, and their deliberate failure to ensure that Class Plaintiffs
were released in a timely manner, caused the overdetention and/or false
imprisonment of Class Plaintiffs.
151.

As a result of the said deliberate acts and negligence of Defendants

Jackson and Adger, Class Plaintiffs suffered the injuries described in
this Complaint – loss of freedom, anxiety, and other general and special
damages.
Count II
False Arrest and False Imprisonment (John Doe Defendants)
152.

The preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference as

though fully set forth.

32

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 33 of 58

153.

At all times relevant hereto, John Doe Defendants were employees

of the Fulton County Sheriff’s Office, employed in the Fulton County Jail.
154.

John Doe Defendants include without limitation any Fulton

County Sheriff’s Office employee working within the Records or Release
Department, were tasked with the responsibility of handling any
function within the release procedures and/or GCIC terminal operation,
at the Fulton County Jail in November 2014.
155.

John Doe Defendants are involved in the process of calculating

release times and/or processing inmate releases at the Fulton County
Jail.
156.

“A ‘ministerial act’ is commonly one that is simple, absolute, and

definite, arising under conditions admitted or proved to exist, and
requiring merely the execution of a specific duty.” Austin v. Clark, 294
Ga. 773, 773 (2014) (internal citation omitted).
157.

John Doe Defendants have a ministerial duty to release a Fulton

County Jail inmate when the basis for detention has expired.
158.

John Doe Defendants have a ministerial duty to release a Fulton

County Jail inmate upon tender and acceptance of bail and/or bond.
159.

John Doe Defendants have a ministerial duty to release a Fulton

County Jail inmate upon the Fulton County Jail’s receipt of court order
33

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 34 of 58

indicating that the inmate is to be released on his or her own
reconnaissance.
160.

John Doe Defendants have a ministerial duty to release a Fulton

County Jail inmate upon completion of the inmate’s sentence.
161.

John Doe Defendants have a ministerial duty to release a Fulton

County Jail inmate upon receiving notice that the charges and/or
prosecution of the inmate have been dismissed, a nolle prosequi order
has been entered, or the inmate’s indictment has been quashed.
162.

John Doe Defendants knew that Fulton County Jail inmates were

being overdetained and/or falsely imprisoned as a result of the GCIC
system becoming inoperable at the Fulton County Jail, and took no
adequate action to stop these overdetentions.
163.

John Doe Defendants’ failure to ensure the timely release of

inmates, and their deliberate failure to ensure that Class Plaintiffs were
released in a timely manner, caused the overdetention and/or false
imprisonment of Class Plaintiffs.
164.

“False imprisonment” under common law is the “…intent to

confine, an act resulting in confinement, and the victim’s awareness of
confinement.” Campbell v. Johnson, 586 F.3d 835, 840 (11th Cir. 2009).

34

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 35 of 58

165.

As a result of the said deliberate acts and negligence of John Doe

Defendants, Class Plaintiffs suffered the injuries described in this
Complaint – loss of freedom, anxiety, and other general and special
damages.
Count III
42 U.S.C. Section 1983 Claims for False Imprisonment /
Overdetention in Violation of the U.S. Constitution
(Defendants Jackson and Adger)
166.

The preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference as

though fully set forth.
167.

At all times relevant hereto, Defendant Jackson was the Sheriff of

Fulton County and official jailer of Fulton County and the Fulton County
Jail.
168.

In his individual capacity as Sheriff of Fulton County and official

jailer of Fulton County and the Fulton County Jail, Defendant Jackson
is charged with ensuring the release of Fulton County Jail inmates upon
receiving notice that an inmate was to be released.
169.

At all times relevant hereto, Defendant Adger was the Chief Jailer

of the Fulton County Jail.

35

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 36 of 58

170.

In his individual capacity as Chief Jailer of the Fulton County Jail,

Defendant Adger is charged with ensuring the release of Fulton County
Jail inmates upon receiving notice that an inmate was to be released.
171.

Defendants Jackson and Adger have a duty under the U.S.

Constitution to release a Fulton County Jail inmate when the basis for
detention has expired.
172.

Defendants Jackson and Adger have a duty under the U.S.

Constitution to release a Fulton County Jail inmate upon tender and
acceptance of bail and/or bond.
173.

Defendants Jackson and Adger have a duty under the U.S.

Constitution to release a Fulton County Jail inmate upon the Fulton
County Jail’s receipt of court order indicating that the inmate is to be
released on his or her own reconnaissance.
174.

Defendants Jackson and Adger have a duty under the U.S.

Constitution to release a Fulton County Jail inmate upon completion of
the inmate’s sentence.
175.

Defendants Jackson and Adger have a duty under the U.S.

Constitution to release a Fulton County Jail inmate upon receiving
notice that the charges and/or prosecution of the inmate have been

36

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 37 of 58

dismissed, a nolle prosequi order has been entered, or the inmate’s
indictment has been quashed.
176.

Defendants Jackson and Adger deliberately failed to implement

and enforce procedures needed to ensure the timely release of inmates.
177.

It is the custom and practice at the jail, when a GCIC system

failure might lead to overdetentions, that the Chief Jailer would inform
the Sheriff of the potential overdetentions.
178.

It is the custom and practice at the jail that both the Sheriff and

the Chief Jailer would have the authority to address the treatment of
inmates when a GCIC system failure might lead to overdetentions.
179.

These jail customs and practices have been confirmed with

former and current jail employees.
180.

Consistently with the jail’s custom and practice, Defendants

Jackson and Adger directly participated in the overdetention of Class
Plaintiffs.
181.

Consistently with the jail’s custom and practice, Defendant

Jackson instructed the Chief Jailer and/or other subordinates to
overdetain Class Plaintiffs.
182.

Consistently with the jail’s custom and practice, Defendant Adger

instructed subordinates to overdetain Class Plaintiffs.
37

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 38 of 58

183.

Defendants Jackson and Adger are therefore liable for direct

participation in Class Plaintiffs’ false imprisonment and overdetentions
in violation of the Fourth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the
U.S. Constitution.
184.

As Sheriff of Fulton County Defendant Jackson has a supervisory

role at the Fulton County Jail.
185.

Defendant Jackson supervises the Chief Jailer, who in turn

supervises all jail employees.
186.

Likewise, as Chief Jailer, Defendant Adger has a supervisory role

at the Fulton County Jail.
187.

In his supervisory capacity, Defendant Jackson’s actions were

causally connected to Class Plaintiffs’ overdetentions.
188.

In his supervisory capacity, Defendant Adger’s actions were

causally connected to Class Plaintiffs’ overdetentions.
189.

In November of 2014, Defendants Jackson and Adger were aware

of previous GCIC system errors.
190.

In November of 2014, Defendants Jackson and Adger were aware

that a GCIC system error could lead to the overdetention of an inmate.
191.

By November of 2014, aware of the GCIC system failures and

aware that these failures could lead to overdetentions, Defendants
38

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 39 of 58

Jackson and Adger authorized their subordinates to overdetain inmates
during CGIC system failures.
192.

By November of 2014, aware of the GCIC system failures and

aware that these failures could lead to overdetentions, Defendants
Jackson and Adger knew that subordinates would refuse to timely
release inmates during GCIC failures, unlawfully, as they had done in
the past.
193.

Aware that subordinates would refuse to timely release inmates

during GCIC failures, Defendants Jackson and Adger did not act to
stop their subordinates from overdetaining inmates.
194.

Defendants Jackson and Adger were put on notice of the

widespread abuse related to overdetention through former lawsuits
(including without limitation Powell et al. v. Barrett et al., Northern
District of Georgia, Civil Action Number 04-CV-01100-RWS and Harper
et al. v. Fulton County et al., Northern District of Georgia, Civil Action
Number 04-CV-1416-MHS), consent orders, and audits of the GCIC
system operability.
195.

Aware

of

the

history

of

widespread

abuse

related

to

overdetentions, Defendants Jackson and Adger knew that they needed

39

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 40 of 58

to correct the practices leading to overdetentions but did not take any
such action.
196.

Defendants Jackson and Adger are therefore liable for their

supervisory

roles

in

Class

Plaintiffs’

false

imprisonment

and

overdetentions in violation of the Fourth, Eighth, and Fourteenth
Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
197.

Defendants Jackson and Adger subjected Class Plaintiff to false

imprisonment in violation of Georgia law, and their conduct deprived
Class Plaintiff of rights provided by the Fourteenth Amendment Due
Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
198.

“False imprisonment” under common law is the “…intent to

confine, an act resulting in confinement, and the victim’s awareness of
confinement.” Campbell v. Johnson, 586 F.3d 835, 840 (11th Cir. 2009).
199.

The Due Process Clause “…includes the ‘right to be free from

continued detention after it was or should have been known that the
detainee was entitled to release.’” Campbell v. Johnson, 586 F.3d 835
(11th Cir., 2009)(internal citations omitted).
200.

Defendants Jackson and Adger’s actions and pattern of inaction

described herein directly, proximately, and affirmatively caused the

40

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 41 of 58

violations of the Fourth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the
U.S. Constitution suffered by Plaintiffs.
201.

Class Plaintiffs suffered the loss of freedom, anxiety, and other

general and special damages as a result of these violations of the
Fourth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
Count IV
42 U.S.C. Section 1983 Claims for False Imprisonment /
Overdetention in Violation of Due Process Clause of the U.S.
Constitution (John Doe Defendants)
202.

The preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference as

though fully set forth.
203.

At all times relevant hereto, John Doe Defendants were employees

of the Fulton County Sheriff’s Office, employed in the Fulton County Jail.
204.

John Doe Defendants include without limitation any Fulton

County Sheriff’s Office employee working within the Records or Release
Department, were tasked with the responsibility of handling any
function within the release procedures and/or GCIC terminal operation,
at the Fulton County Jail in November 2014.
205.

John Doe Defendants are involved in the process of calculating

release times and/or processing inmate releases at the Fulton County
Jail.
41

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 42 of 58

206.

John Doe Defendants subjected Class Plaintiffs to false

imprisonment in violation of Georgia law, and their conduct deprived
Class Plaintiffs of rights provided by the Fourteenth Amendment Due
Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
207.

“False imprisonment” under common law is the “…intent to

confine, an act resulting in confinement, and the victim’s awareness of
confinement.” Campbell v. Johnson, 586 F.3d 835, 840 (11th Cir. 2009).
208.

The Due Process Clause “…includes the ‘right to be free from

continued detention after it was or should have been known that the
detainee was entitled to release.’” Campbell v. Johnson, 586 F.3d 835
(11th Cir., 2009)(internal citations omitted).
209.

John Doe Defendants have a duty under the U.S. Constitution to

release a Fulton County Jail inmate when the basis for detention has
expired.
210.

John Doe Defendants have a duty under the U.S. Constitution to

release a Fulton County Jail inmate upon tender and acceptance of bail
and/or bond.
211.

John Doe Defendants have a duty under the U.S. Constitution to

release a Fulton County Jail inmate upon the Fulton County Jail’s

42

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 43 of 58

receipt of court order indicating that the inmate is to be released on his
or her own reconnaissance.
212.

John Doe Defendants have a ministerial duty to release a Fulton

County Jail inmate upon completion of the inmate’s sentence.
213.

John Doe Defendants have a duty under the U.S. Constitution to

release a Fulton County Jail inmate upon receiving notice that the
charges and/or prosecution of the inmate have been dismissed, a nolle
prosequi order has been entered, or the inmate’s indictment has been
quashed.
214.

John Doe Defendants knew that Fulton County Jail inmates were

being overdetained as a result of the GCIC system becoming inoperable
at the Fulton County Jail, and they took no action to stop this false
imprisonment.
215.

John Doe Defendants’ response to Class Plaintiffs’ false

imprisonment was the deliberate indifference of Class Plaintiffs’ rights
under the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
216.

John Doe Defendants had both actual and constructive

knowledge that Class Plaintiffs were suffering constitutional injury by
being overdetained and/or falsely imprisoned.

43

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 44 of 58

217.

John Doe Defendants engaged in a pattern of inaction in the face

of overdetentions at the Fulton County Jail, such false imprisonment
representing violations of inmates’ rights under the Fourth, Eighth,
and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
218.

John Doe Defendants’ actions and pattern of inaction described

herein directly, proximately, and affirmatively caused the violations of
the Fourth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S.
Constitution suffered by Class Plaintiffs.
219.

Class Plaintiffs suffered the loss of freedom, anxiety, and other

general and special damages as a result of these violations of the Fourth,
Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
Prayer For Relief
WHEREFORE, Named Plaintiffs pray that this Court issue the
following relief:
1) That process issue in accordance with the law;
2) That the Court grant a jury trial on all claims so triable;
3) That the Court declare that this action may be maintained as a class
action pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-11-23 and certifying Named
Plaintiffs as the proper representatives of the class consisting of

44

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 45 of 58

each person who was overdetained at the Fulton County Jail in
November of 2014;
4) Name Jessica Stern, Mark Begnaud, and Nathan Horsley as class
counsel for all classes. All three attorneys are members of the bar of
Georgia and are in good standing;
5) Award Class Plaintiffs compensatory and consequential damages in
an amount to be determined;
6) Award attorney fees and costs of litigation in an amount to be
determined;
7) Issue a permanent injunction to accomplish the following:
a. Permanently enjoin Defendants from overdetaining any
inmate;
b. Enjoin Defendants to adopt and implement policies to ensure
that inmates are not overdetained during GCIC outages;
8) Grant such other relief as the Court deems proper.
This 14th Day of October, 2016.
HORSLEY BEGNAUD, LLC
/s/ Mark Begnaud
Mark Begnaud
Georgia Bar No. 217641
mbegnaud@gacivilrights.com
45

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 46 of 58

Nathanael A. Horsley
Georgia Bar No. 367832
nhorsley@gacivilrights.com
750 Hammond Drive,
Building 12, Suite 300
Atlanta, Ga 30328
770-765-5559
STERN LAW, LLC
/S/ JESSICA STERN________________
Jessica Stern
Georgia Bar No. 107308
Jessica@sternlawfirm.us
1100 Spring Street, NW
Suite 460
Atlanta, GA 30309
404-990-4112
404-990-4936 (f)

46

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 47 of 58

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned attorney for Plaintiffs does hereby certify that he has
this date served a copy of the within THIRD AMENDED CLASS ACTION
COMPLAINT by electronic delivery via the Court’s e-filing system per Ga.
Unif. Super. Ct. R. 36.16 to the following recipient(s):
Kimberly A Alexander
kimberly.alexander@fultoncountyga.gov
John Duffoo
john.duffoo@fultoncountyga.gov
OFFICE OF FULTON COUNTY ATTORNEY
141 Pryor Street, Suite 4038
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
This 14th day of October, 2016.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Mark Begnaud
Mark Begnaud
Georgia Bar No. 217641
HORSLEY BEGNAUD, LLC
750 Hammond Drive
Building 12, Suite 300
Atlanta, Ga 30328
770-765-5559

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 48 of 58

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 49 of 58

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 50 of 58

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 51 of 58

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 52 of 58

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 53 of 58

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 54 of 58

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 55 of 58

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 56 of 58

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 57 of 58

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9 Filed 11/10/16 Page 58 of 58

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9-1 Filed 11/10/16 Page 1Fulton
of 2 County Superior Court

***EFILED***MH
Date: 10/14/2016 11:55:57 AM
Cathelene Robinson, Clerk

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF FULTON COUNTY
STATE OF GEORGIA
OSWALD THOMPSON, JR.,
individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, JOSEPH
SINGLETON, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly
situated, DAEJA MITCHELL,
individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, BRIDGET
MACHOVEC, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly
situated, OLUSEUS ADENIYI
OSHINOWO, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly
situated, DARRION TRIPP,
individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, TOMMIE
DOUGLAS, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly
situated, STERLING PALMER,
individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, TWAN
TRAMMELL, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly
situated, and DONNA WRIGHT,
individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
SHERIFF THEODORE JACKSON,
CHIEF MARK ADGER, and JOHN
DOE DEFENDANTS,
Defendants.

CIVIL ACTION
FILE NO. 2015CV268206

Case 1:16-cv-04217-MLB Document 9-1 Filed 11/10/16 Page 2 of 2

SUMMONS
TO Defendant Chief Mark Adger:
You are hereby summoned and required to file with the Clerk of Said
Court and serve upon the Plaintiff’s attorney whose name and address is:
Mark Begnaud
Horsley Begnaud LLC
750 Hammond Drive,
Building 12, Suite 300
Atlanta, Ga 30328
an answer to the complaint which is herewith served upon you, within 30
days after service of this summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service.
If you fail to do so, judgment by default will be taken against you for the
relief demanded in the complaint.
10/14/2016
This __________day of___________________,
20_____.

Tina Robinson
Clerk of Superior Court
By: ____________________________________________
Clerk

 

 

Prison Profiteers - Side
Advertise Here 3rd Ad
Disciplinary Self-Help Litigation Manual - Side