Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Plaintiff,
v. COMPLAINT
(Jury Trial Demanded)
CITY OF MYRTLE BEACH; MYRTLE
BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT;
HORRY COUNTY; PFC A. COX; and
PFC C. TURNER,
Defendant.
YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and required to Answer the Complaint in this
action, a copy of which is herewith served upon you, and to serve a copy of your Answer to said
Complaint upon the Plaintiff or his attorneys, Stefan B. Feidler, Eric M. Poulin, and Roy T.
Willey, IV at their office, 32 Ann Street, Charleston, SC 29403, within (30) days after the service
hereof, exclusive of the day of such service and if you fail to Answer the Complaint within the
time aforesaid, Plaintiff will apply to the court for the relief demanded in the Complaint.
1
ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2021 Jan 19 1:56 PM - HORRY - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2021CP2600260
ANASTOPOULO LAW FIRM, LLC
s/ Stefan B. Feidler
Stefan B. Feidler
S.C. Bar No.: 101918
Eric M. Poulin
S.C. Bar No.: 100209
Roy T. Willey, IV
S.C. Bar No.: 101010
32 Ann Street
Charleston, SC 29403
(843) 614-8888
2
ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2021 Jan 19 1:56 PM - HORRY - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2021CP2600260
IN THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
COUNTY OF HORRY ) FOR THE 15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
CASE NO: 2021-CP-26-_________
SIMON DERER,
Plaintiff,
v. COMPLAINT
(Jury Trial Demanded)
CITY OF MYRTLE BEACH; MYRTLE
BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT;
HORRY COUNTY; PFC A. COX; and
PFC C. TURNER,
Defendants.
The Plaintiff Simon Derer (hereinafter “Plaintiff” or “Mr. Derer”) complaining of the
Defendants above named, would respectfully show unto this Honorable Court and allege as
follows:
2. The Defendant, City of Myrtle Beach, is a political subdivision of the State of South
Carolina as defined in Section 15-78-10 et seq. of the Code of Laws of South Carolina
(1985), as amended. At all times hereinafter mentioned in this complaint, this Defendant
owned and/or operated the Myrtle Beach Police Department, and it acted or carried on its
business by and through its agents, servants, and/or employees. Additionally, during the
time period set out in the complaint, these employees were operating within the scope of
political subdivision of the State of South Carolina, existing under the laws of the State of
3
ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2021 Jan 19 1:56 PM - HORRY - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2021CP2600260
South Carolina (as defined by Section 15-78-10 et seq. of the Code of Laws of South
Carolina (1985), as amended) and has facilities located in the County of Horry, South
Carolina. At all times hereinafter mentioned in this Complaint, this Defendant acted and
carried on its business by and through its agents, servants, and/or employees.
Additionally, during the time period set out in the Complaint, these employees were
operating within the scope of their officially assigned and/or compensated duties.
4. The Defendant, Horry County, is a political subdivision of the State of South Carolina as
defined in Section 15-78-10 et seq. of the Code of Laws of South Carolina (1985), as
amended. At all times hereinafter mentioned in this complaint, this Defendant owned
and/or operated the Horry County Sheriff Office, and acted or carried on its business by
and through its agents, servants, and/or employees. Additionally, during the time period
set out in the complaint, these employees were operating within the scope of their
5. That upon information and belief, Defendant PFC A. Cox (8348) is a citizen and resident
6. That upon information and belief, Defendant PFC C. Turner (8655) is a citizen and
identified.
8. The negligent and grossly negligent acts, omissions, and liability forming conduct of the
Defendants include their agents, principals, employees and/or servants, both directly and
ostensible agency and/or respondeat superior and the acts and/or omissions of the above-
4
ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2021 Jan 19 1:56 PM - HORRY - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2021CP2600260
named Defendants were the direct and proximate cause of the injuries, damages, and
9. Jurisdiction is conferred upon this Honorable Court by South Carolina common law and
the South Carolina Tort Claims Act, S.C. Code Ann. §15-78-10, et seq.
SPECIFIC AVERMENTS
10. On June 27, 2019, employees, agents and/or servants of Defendants’ were patrolling the
area of 3rd Ave S., and Hwy 15, located in the City of Myrtle Beach, State of South
Carolina.
11. These employees, agents and/or servants of Defendants’ include, but are not limited to
Officer(s) PFC A. Cox, PFC C. Turner, and certain members of the Defendants’ Street
Crimes Unit.
12. The Defendants claim Mr. Derer was observed walking in the area of Withers Swash Dr.,
and 3rd Ave. S. when Defendants, without cause, activated their blue lights and began a
13. That after the alleged “brief foot pursuit,” Mr. Derer was violently detained and
subsequently hospitalized.
14. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants actions, Mr. Derer was severely injured
and suffered various injuries, including without limitation a left sacral fracture, bilateral
superior and inferior pubic ramus fractures, multiple abrasions, hemorrhage, head
15. The allegations in the above paragraphs are hereby incorporated by reference as if
5
ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2021 Jan 19 1:56 PM - HORRY - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2021CP2600260
16. The employing Defendants, by and through their employees, agents, and/or servants were
negligent, grossly negligent, reckless, willful and wanton and failed to exercise even
slight care in the handling of the above-described events in one or more of the following
particulars:
any;
i. In failing to use only the force that was necessary to detain and/or transport
Mr. Derer;
j. In failing to use discretion before, during, and after their interactions with Mr.
Derer;
6
ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2021 Jan 19 1:56 PM - HORRY - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2021CP2600260
17. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence, gross negligence, reckless, willful and
wanton conduct, Plaintiff was severely injured and has suffered severe and extreme
18. The allegations in the above paragraphs are hereby incorporated by reference as if
19. On June 27, 2019, Defendants’ employees, agents and/or servants, including, but not
limited to Officer(s) PFC A. Cox, PFC C. Turner, and certain members of the
Defendants’ Street Crimes Unit., were employees, agents, and/or servants of the
employing Defendants, acting under the color of law and pursuant to law enforcement
duties.
20. That the Defendants improperly used excessive force by violently detaining Mr. Derer,,
as said Defendants had other available methods of handling the situation which would
have been less forceful, would not have caused Mr. Derer severe injuries, and would not
21. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ objectively unreasonable acts in violation
of the Fourth Amendment and/or their willful, malicious, conscious, and deliberate
22. As a result, Plaintiff has suffered severe physical and mental injury and other damages as
describe herein.
7
ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2021 Jan 19 1:56 PM - HORRY - COMMON PLEAS - CASE#2021CP2600260
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for judgment against all Defendants for actual damages,
punitive damages, and attorney’s fees (attorney’s fees as against any individually named
Defendants only) for the costs of this action, and for such other and further relief as this Court
Charleston, SC