Case 1:13-cv-03132-WYD Document 1 Filed 11/18/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 9

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. BRADLEY W. JUSTICE, Plaintiff, v. JOSEPH J. SAJCZUK, a Trooper of the Colorado State Patrol, in his individual capacity, Defendant. ______________________________________________________________________________ COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND ______________________________________________________________________________ Plaintiff Bradley W. Justice, by and through counsel David A. Lane and Danielle C. Jefferis of KILLMER, LANE & NEWMAN, LLP, respectfully alleges for his Complaint and Jury Demand as follows: I. 1. INTRODUCTION

This action is about Justice (Brad Justice). It arises out of Defendant Trooper

Joseph J. Sajczuk’s false arrest/unlawful seizure of and use of excessive force against Plaintiff Bradley W. Justice, and his retaliation for Justice’s exercise of his right to constitutionally protected speech. 2. On November 27, 2011, the path of Justice was a bicycle path near C-470.

Defendant Sajczuk was conducting a traffic stop on C-470, just next to the path. As Justice rode his bike past Defendant Sajczuk, he cried out “Fuck you, copper!” and flipped him off. Defendant Sajczuk, with no reasonable suspicion or probable cause that Justice had committed

Case 1:13-cv-03132-WYD Document 1 Filed 11/18/13 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 9

any offense, then vigorously pursued Justice in his patrol vehicle with his siren on and lights flashing. As both parties approached a major intersection, Defendant Sajczuk quickly yanked his patrol vehicle onto the sidewalk to block the path of Justice — thereby obstructing Justice — bolted out of his vehicle, seized Justice from behind, and tackled Justice to the ground over the intersection’s center median. After the two exchanged words, Defendant Sajczuk left the scene. Justice was never arrested or cited by Defendant, who also refused to give Justice a business card or identify himself. 3. Justice cries out that his rights under the First and Fourth Amendment were

denied him. In undertaking these actions, Defendant Sajczuk first delayed Justice by obstructing Justice on the path of Justice, and he then denied Justice his rights to free speech and to be free from unreasonable seizures and excessive force. II. 4. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

This action arises under the Constitution and laws of the United States, including

42 U.S.C. § 1983. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343. Jurisdiction supporting Plaintiff’s claims for attorney fees is conferred by 42 U.S.C. § 1988. 5. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). Both parties reside

in the District of Colorado, and the events described in this Complaint occurred in the District of Colorado. III. 6. PARTIES

Plaintiff Bradley W. Justice is a citizen of the United States and a resident of the

State of Colorado. 7. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendant Joseph J. Sajczuk was a trooper

with the Colorado State Patrol and acting under the color of state law.

2

Case 1:13-cv-03132-WYD Document 1 Filed 11/18/13 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 9

IV. 8.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

On November 27, 2011, Justice was riding his bicycle westbound on the bike path

that runs parallel to C-470. 9. 10. Defendant Trooper Sajczuk was conducting a traffic stop on C-470. Justice rode quickly past Defendant Sajczuk. Taking poetic license, Justice cried

out, “Fuck you, copper!” and flipped off Defendant. Justice continued riding toward Quebec Street. 11. Defendant Sajczuk finished his traffic stop and began to pursue Justice in his patrol

vehicle. In his pursuit of Justice, Defendant Sajczuk drove westbound toward the bike path’s intersection with Quebec Street. 12. As he rode closer to Quebec Street, Justice — who is not blind — observed

Defendant Sajczuk hassling other bikers near the path. Not wanting to be hassled himself, Justice turned around and began riding eastbound on the bike path. 13. Seeing Justice turn around, Defendant Sajczuk began pursuing Justice again with

his patrol vehicle, this time with his lights and siren engaged. 14. At the intersection of Park Meadows Drive and Acres Green, (Justice believed it

was the place to be), Defendant Sajczuk steered his patrol vehicle onto the sidewalk to obstruct Justice. 15. As Justice approached the intersection, Defendant Sajczuk bolted out of his patrol

car, seized Justice from behind, and tackled Justice to the ground over the intersection’s center median. Justice was done.

3

Case 1:13-cv-03132-WYD Document 1 Filed 11/18/13 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 9

16.

And Justice was hindered: because his shoes were clipped into his bicycle pedals,

he was unable to remove his feet to brace his fall before he crashed to the ground. It was a travesty. 17. 18. Justice was bruised and battered. He injured his knee, and his bike was marred. Fallen Justice arose, and Justice and Defendant Sajczuk exchanged words.

Defendant Sajczuk denied Justice his badge number and business card. 19. When Justice attempted to walk away from Defendant Sajczuk to speak with

witnesses on the scene, Justice was denied: Defendant Sajczuk cried out for Justice and repeatedly stated that Justice was not free to leave. 20. Justice called the Lone Tree Police Department for assistance. Defendant Sajczuk

then dispensed with Justice and left the scene 21. After an investigation, the Lone Tree Police Department charged Defendant

Sajczuk with three counts: official oppression, first degree official misconduct, and third degree assault on Justice. 22. damages. V. STATEMENT OF CLAIMS FOR RELIEF FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF 42 U.S.C. § 1983 – Fourth Amendment False Arrest / Unlawful Seizure 23. forth herein. 24. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendant Sajczuk acted under color of Plaintiff hereby incorporates all paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set As a result of Defendant’s conduct, Justice suffered and continues to suffer

state law in his capacity as a Colorado State Patrol Trooper.

4

Case 1:13-cv-03132-WYD Document 1 Filed 11/18/13 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 9

25.

The actions of Defendant, as described herein, while acting under color of state law,

intentionally deprived Plaintiff of the securities, rights, privileges, liberties, and immunities secured by the Constitution of the United States of America, including his right to freedom from false arrest and unlawful seizure as guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in that Defendant seized Plaintiff without probable cause or reasonable suspicion to believe he had committed any offense. 26. At the time of the incident described herein, Plaintiff had a clearly established right

under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution to be secure in his person from unlawful seizures. 27. Any reasonable law enforcement officer knew or should have known of this clearly

established right. 28. Defendant seized Plaintiff within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment when he

pursued Plaintiff, grabbed him from behind, tackled him to the ground, halted his freedom of movement, and prevented him from leaving the scene with no probable cause or reasonable suspicion that Plaintiff had committed any offense. 29. leave. 30. 31. Defendant’s intrusion on Plaintiff’s privacy was substantial. Defendant’s actions were objectively unreasonable in light of the circumstances A reasonable person in Plaintiff’s position would not believe that he was free to

confronting him. 32. Defendant intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, and excessively restrained,

detained, and unlawfully seized Plaintiff without any reasonable suspicion or probable cause.

5

Case 1:13-cv-03132-WYD Document 1 Filed 11/18/13 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 9

33.

Plaintiff has been and continues to be damaged by Defendant’s false arrest/unlawful

seizure of him. Defendant’s acts or omissions were the moving force behind and proximate cause of Plaintiff’s injuries. SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF 42 U.S.C. § 1983 – Fourth Amendment Excessive Force 34. forth herein. 35. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendant Sajczuk acted under the color of Plaintiff hereby incorporates all paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set

state law in his capacity as a Colorado State Patrol Trooper. 36. The actions of Defendant, as described herein, while acting under the color of state

law, intentionally deprived Plaintiff of the securities, rights, privileges, liberties, and immunities secured by the Constitution of the United States of America, including his right to freedom from excessive force as guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America and 42 U.S.C. § 1983, in that Defendant Sajczuk engaged in excessive force against Plaintiff without probable cause or reasonable suspicion to believe he had committed any offense. 37. At the time of the incident described herein, Plaintiff had a clearly established right

under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution to be secure in his person from excessive force. 38. Any reasonable law enforcement officer knew or should have known of this clearly

established right.

6

Case 1:13-cv-03132-WYD Document 1 Filed 11/18/13 USDC Colorado Page 7 of 9

39.

Defendant exercised excessive force against Plaintiff when he pursued Plaintiff,

grabbed him from behind, and tackled him to the ground with no probable cause or reasonable suspicion that Plaintiff had committed any offense. 40. Defendant engaged in the use of force that was objectively unreasonable in light of

the facts and circumstances confronting him. 41. Defendant’s actions, as described herein, were undertaken intentionally,

maliciously, willfully, wantonly, and/or in reckless disregard of Plaintiff’s federally protected rights and with an intent to harm Plaintiff. 42. Plaintiff has been and continues to be damaged by Defendant’s use of force against

him. Defendant’s acts or omissions were the moving force behind and proximate cause of Plaintiff’s injuries. THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF 42 U.S.C. § 1983 – First Amendment Retaliation for Protected Speech 43. forth herein. 44. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendant Sajczuk acted under color of Plaintiff hereby incorporates all paragraphs of this Complaint as though fully set

state law in his capacity as a Colorado State Patrol Trooper. 45. The actions of Defendant, as described herein, while acting under the color of state

law, intentionally deprived Plaintiff of the securities, rights, privileges, liberties, and immunities secured by the Constitution of the United States of America, including his right to freedom from retaliation for his protected speech as guaranteed by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 46. Plaintiff’s engaged in constitutionally protected speech.

7

Case 1:13-cv-03132-WYD Document 1 Filed 11/18/13 USDC Colorado Page 8 of 9

47.

Defendant retaliated against Plaintiff because Plaintiff exercised his constitutionally

protected speech. Defendant’s retaliatory conduct included, but is not limited to, his false arrest/unlawful seizure of Plaintiff and his use of excessive force against Plaintiff. 48. Defendant’s retaliatory conduct would chill any reasonable person from exercising

his or her right to constitutionally protected speech. 49. At the time of the incident described herein, Plaintiff had a clearly established right

under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution to be free from retaliation on account of protected speech. 50. Any reasonable law enforcement officer knew or should have known of this clearly

established right. 51. Defendant’s actions, as described herein, were undertaken intentionally,

maliciously, willfully, wantonly, and/or in reckless disregard of Plaintiff’s federally protected rights and with an intent to harm Plaintiff. 52. Plaintiff has been and continues to be damaged by Defendant’s retaliation against

him for his constitutionally protected speech. Defendant’s acts or omissions were the moving force behind and proximate cause of Plaintiff’s injuries. VI. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in his favor and against Defendant, and award him all relief as allowed by law, including, but not limited to the following: (a) Appropriate declaratory and other injunctive and/or equitable relief;

8

Case 1:13-cv-03132-WYD Document 1 Filed 11/18/13 USDC Colorado Page 9 of 9

(b)

Compensatory and consequential damages, including damages for emotional

distress, humiliation, loss of enjoyment of life, and other pain and suffering on all claims allowed by law in an amount to be determined at trial; (c) (d) at trial; (e) law; (f) (g) Pre- and post-judgment interest at the lawful rate. Any further relief that this court deems just and proper, and any other relief as Attorney fees and the costs associated with this action on all claims allowed by All economic losses on all claims allowed by law; Punitive damages on all claims allowed by law and in an amount to be determined

allowed by law. (h) Justice will prevail.

PLAINTIFF DEMANDS A JURY TRIAL ON ALL ISSUES SO TRIABLE. Dated this 18th day of November, 2013. KILLMER, LANE & NEWMAN, LLP

s/ David A. Lane________________ David A. Lane Danielle C. Jefferis 1543 Champa Street, Suite 400 Denver, Colorado 80202 (303) 571-1000 ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

9

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful