Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Wood v Hamden

Wood v Hamden

Ratings: (0)|Views: 45|Likes:
Published by mtuccitto
Wood v Hamden
Wood v Hamden

More info:

Published by: mtuccitto on Mar 28, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

10/11/2013

pdf

text

original

 
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTDISTRICT OF CONNECTICUTMICHAEL WOOD:CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3:12CV751:VS.::ROBERT ONEILL,:BRENT ZUSCIN and:CHRISTOPHER KAKALOW:MAY 18, 2012
C O M P L A I N T
1. This is an action to redress the deprivation of rights secured to theplaintiff by the Constitution and laws of the United States and the State of Connecticut.2. Jurisdiction of this court is invoked under the provisions of Sections1331, 1343(3) and 1367(a) of Title 28 and Sections 1983 and 1988 of Title 42 of the United States Code.3. The plaintiff is an adult citizen of the United States who resides inGarden City, New York.4. The defendants are and, at all times mentioned herein, were officers inthe Police Department of Hamden, Connecticut, acting as such. They are sued,however, only in their individual capacities.
Case 3:12-cv-00751-SRU Document 1 Filed 05/18/12 Page 1 of 3
 
2
5. During all times mentioned in this Complaint, the defendants wereacting under color of law, that is, under color of the constitution, statutes, laws,rules, regulations, customs and usages of the State of Connecticut.6. At all times mentioned in this Complaint, the defendants acted jointlyand in concert with each other. Each defendant had the duty and the opportunityto protect the plaintiff from the unlawful actions of the other defendants but eachdefendant failed and refused to perform such duty, thereby proximately causingthe injuries herein complained of.7. Shortly after 1:00 a.m. on November 1, 2009, in the vicinity of theintersection of Whitney Avenue and Mt. Carmel Avenue in Hamden, Connecticut,at the bottom of a rocky embankment near a creek, the defendants subjected theplaintiff to a vicious and brutal beating in the course of which they beat him aboutthe head, face, back and torso and fired electric probes into his body. Theythereupon arrested him transported him to police headquarters.8. As a result, the plaintiff suffered pain, terror and economic losses.9. In the manner described above, the defendants subjected the plaintiff to unreasonable force in violation of his rights under the Fourth Amendment tothe United States Constitution as enforced through Sections 1983 and 1988 of Title 42 of the United States Code.WHEREFORE, the plaintiff claims judgment against the defendants and
Case 3:12-cv-00751-SRU Document 1 Filed 05/18/12 Page 2 of 3

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->