High Quality
Open the downloaded document, and select print from the file menu (PDF reader required).
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF OHIO COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA
SUSAN BURKE,
Plaintiff,v.
Civil Action No. 10-C-
Honorable
OHIO COUNTY COMMISSION,
Defendant.
COMPLAINT
Comes now the Plaintiff, Susan Burke, by and through counsel, John H. Bryanand Thomas E. White, and for her Complaint states as follows:PARTIES AND JURISDICTION
1.
The Plaintiff, Susan Burke, is now and was at all times relevant hereto, aresident of the City of Columbia, Richland County, South Carolina.
2.
Defendant Ohio County Commission (“OCC”) is a political subdivision ofthe State of West Virginia, and as such, is liable for the negligent conduct of its agentsand employees, including the Sheriff, the Sheriff
ʼ
s Department, and the employees ofthe Sheriff
ʼ
s Department, so long as that conduct was carried out within the scope oftheir employment.
See
West Virginia Governmental Tort Claims and Insurance ReformAct, W. Va. Code § 29-12A-1,
et seq
.
3.
Defendant OCC, through then-Sheriff Tom Burgoyne employed, at alltimes relevant herein, deputies to engage in law enforcement duties in Ohio County,West Virginia, including Deputy Charles Kittle, Deputy Goode and then-Chief DeputyPat Butler (now Sheriff). It is alleged herein that Chief Deputy Butler, Deputy Goodeand the Sheriff were at all times acting in the scope of their employment and authority.
4.
Venue is proper in Ohio County, West Virginia, pursuant to W. Va. Code §29-12A-3, as said county is the location of the defendant political subdivision.
5.
The causes of action asserted herein against the Defendant refer to actsperformed by agents and employees of said Defendant political subdivision, rather thanthe formulation and implementation of policy related to how law enforcement and policeprotection are provided.STATEMENT OF FACTS
6.
Plaintiff Susan Burke is a stay-at-home mother to four children and ismarried to Sean Burke, an Application Engineer Manager, based out of Columbia, SouthCarolina.
7.
Mrs. Burke
ʼ
s ex-husband is Charles Kittle, who was at all times relevanthereto, an Ohio County deputy employed by the Defendant. Two children were born oftheir marriage, and since their divorce, they have extensively litigated custody issues.
8.
Deputy Kittle was previously employed by the City of Martinsburg PoliceDepartment, located in Berkeley County, West Virginia, which was the location ofresidence during Mrs. Burke
ʼ
s marriage to Mr. Kittle. After the divorce, the Plaintiffmoved to Ohio County, West Virginia.
9.
On or about August of 2005, Ohio County Sheriff Tom Burgoyne hired Mr.Kittle as a deputy.
10.
At the time Deputy Kittle was hired, his employment file with theMartinsburg Police Department contained a prior disciplinary history, includingallegations of domestic violence towards the Plaintiff, abuse of his position as a police
Burke v. Ohio County Commission
Civil Action No. 10-C-Page 2
officer against the Plaintiff, and other inappropriate behavior towards women in hiscapacity as a police officer.
11.
Sheriff Burgoyne was aware, or should have been aware, of the totality ofDeputy Kittle
ʼ
s prior disciplinary history, as well as Mr. Kittle
ʼ
s practice of using andabusing his employment position as a police officer to harass the Plaintiff and to achieveother inappropriate ulterior motives.
12.
Despite his knowledge, Sheriff Burgoyne, as agent for the OCCnevertheless hired Deputy Kittle and continued his employment as a deputy. ThePlaintiff
ʼ
s father-in-law, Robert Burke, warned the Sheriff upon learning of his hiring ofMr. Kittle, that Kittle “would cause further troubles,” and further commented that “I wishyou would have called me before hiring Kittle.” Sheriff Burgoyne assured Mr. Burke thatKittle “won
ʼ
t be a problem to you” and that he warned Kittle to “be on his best behavior.”Mr. Burke warned the Sheriff that KIttle would cause further troubles.
13.
Deputy Kittle began searching police records for information on thePlaintiff
ʼ
s husband, Sean Burke. On or about February 2006, Kittle shows the Plaintiff apolice report regarding Mr. Burke from October 8, 2004. During a family court hearing,Deputy Kittle placed the report on top of a folder, stating that cameras were watching,and he could get into trouble if he were caught with the document. He urged thePlaintiff to leave her husband.
14.
Shortly thereafter, the Plaintiff
ʼ
s daughter came home asking for the lastnames of people who were at the Plaintiff
ʼ
s home. Deputy Kittle eventually admitted tothe Plaintiff that he requested his daughter to do so in order to run background checks
Burke v. Ohio County Commission
Civil Action No. 10-C-Page 3
Add a Comment