FILED 9th JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT Curry County STATE OF NEW MEXICO tsz02t 938 PM COUNTY OF CURRY CLERK OF THE COURT IN THE NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT DANIEL HEIL, Plaintiff, vs. THE CURRY COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, a political 0-905.cv.2021-00270 Sub-division of the State of New Mexico, and Its employees in their official capacities as Employees of the Curry County Adult Detention Center, Defendant No. CIVIL COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES COMES NOW, Plaintiff Daniel Heil by and through his undersigned attorney Eric D. Dixon, Attorney and Counselor at Law, P.A., Portales, New Mexico, and for his Civil Complaint for Damages states: COMMON FACTS 1. Plaintiff Daniel Heilis a resident of New Mexico. 2. Defendant the Curry County Board of County Commissioners is a political sub-division of the State of New Mexico. 3. Defendant is the operator of the Curry County Adult Detention Center located at 801 Mitchell Street, Clovis, New Mexico. 14. Plaintiff was a pre-trial detainee being first placed in the Curry County Adult Detention Center on or about April 23", 2020. 5. Plaintiff was held on bogus charges of kidnapping and aggravated assault. Plaintiff was acquitted of kidnapping and aggravated assault by a Curry County District Court jury on May 25", 2021. 6. _Allthe events complained of occurred on or about August 2", 2020 in POD 2 commonly referred to as “Bravo Charlie.” 7. Plaintiff was placed in Pod 2 West of the Curry County Detention Center. 8. Plaintiff was placed in Pod 2 with a known dangerous, violent, belligerent inmate who was first incarcerated on or about July 13", 2020 and shall be referred to herein as Inmate 61168 to prevent further reprisals against Plaintiff. 9. Inmate 61168 was on parole for murder, and had previously been incarcerated in the Department of Corrections of the State of New Mexico. Upon inmate 6168's arrest and incarceration the Detention Center was aware he had a reputation for violence drugs and had been at the Department of Corrections. 10. Plaintiff and Inmate 61168 should not have been housed together because of Inmate 6168's known dangerousness to others including Plaintiff. 11. The POD has video camera on at all times which should be, but was not monitored by Detention Center staff because of constant under-staffing. 212. On August 2", 2020 there were nine employees that were supposed to be supervising 167 inmates. 13. There were multiple violations of the County Defendant's own policies and procedures including: the cells and railings partially blocked the view of the interior of the cells; a t-shirt or towel was tied to cell 302 signifying that nobody should enter unless they were to be involved in the beating of Plaintiff; inmates were allowed to move about the POD half naked when they were to be in full jail issued uniforms; inmates had access to dangerous weapons including mops which had previously been used in brutal attacks on inmates. 14. A Detention Officer observed all of these infractions while in the pod for less than a minute around 1:20 in the afternoon but took absolutely no action to remediate the infractions. 15. On August 2”, 2020 at approximately 1:21 in the afternoon Inmate 61168 wrapped his hand in a contraband white material and otherwise armed himself, and went to Plaintiff’s cell (303). 16. Inmate 61168 motioned Plaintiff to follow him to cell 302 which was ing a beating was to take place. draped with towel on the door handle, sigr17. Plaintiff followed Inmate 61168 to cell 302 where he was brutally beaten for almost two minutes with a contraband weapon by three detainees who were known to be dangerous to other detainees. 18. Plaintiff was beaten into unconsciousness by these three inmates. 19. At least one of the inmates was armed with contraband weapon(s). 20. After Plaintiff was severely beaten, the weapon(s) was then returned by one of the inmates involved in the beating of Plaintiff to a second floor cell for hiding. 21. _ Plaintiff was able to get out of Cell 302 with blood running down his left arm using the back wall for support. 22. _ Plaintiff went to cell 303 and attempted to wash himself clean, and then enter the shower to try and clean off further. 23. Inmate 61168 was seen using a mop and bucket (which was not supposed to be in the POD), because of its potential use as a weapon. Inmate 61168 was seen mopping up the trail of blood from cell 302 to cell 303 and otherwise tampering with evidence. 24. Inmate 61168 then told Plaintiff that he had to leave the POD. Plaintiff gathered his belongings and stumbled to the door of the POD.25. The beating and aftermath was allowed to go on by the Detention center for almost % hour without any intervention. 26. Plaintiff was then transported to Plains Regional Medical Center in Clovis, New Mexico to receive emergency treatment for his injuries. 27. _ Plaintiff had multiple fractures to his skull, face and nose along with multiple bruises and cuts. Plaintiff suffered peripheral nerve damage and a misaligned jaw. 28. Plaintiff was hospitalized for two days at Plains Regional Medical Center, and underwent surgery on August 13", 2020 for repair of the facial fractures. Plaintiff was required to take pain medications every six hours for thirty days. Four plates in his head and twenty-four screws in his skull were placed during surgery. 29. Atall times material hereto, Defendant had a duty, policy and practice to maintain its building in a reasonably safe condition for its users including the Plaintiff. 30. _Defendant’s own written policies required Detention officers to “observe and supervise inmates in a manner that ensures ... safe living conditions for inmates.” [Curry County Detention Center Policy Section 7, sub-section 2].Further, “Detention officers will not allow an inmate(s) to have control over other inmates...” Id, 31. _Defendant’s own written policies at all times material hereto require that “{elach shift supervisor will ensure that an appropriate number of personnel are present for duty to provide full coverage of designated duty assignments [and] ensure full surveillance of inmates.” Id. Subsection 3. 32. Defendant's own policies required “visual rounds [to] be conducted on an irregular basis, not to exceed thirty minute intervals”, by detention officers. 33, Defendant's own policies and procedures required that “Detention officers [would}be assigned next to the inmate housing area, which will permit an officer to hear and respond promptly to emergency situations or inmate disturbances.” Id. 34, Defendant's own policies and procedures regarding classification of inmates required that inmates be screened for among other things “Special problems and behaviors” which was not followed in relation to Inmate Number 61168. 35, Atall times material hereto, Defendant had a duty to keep Plaintiff reasonably safe from other predatory inmates, including Inmate Number 61168.36. Aprior administrator had been repeatedly chastised by Commissioner Robert Sandoval for allowing mops in the PODs. Yet, mops continued to be allowed in the PODs by the new Detention Administrator without any apparent repercussions. Mops had been used in beating(s) before. 37. _ [twas well known at the time of the beating that contraband weapons were kept within the detention center by detainees. 38. _ Defendant violated its duty owed to Plaintiff which was a cause of his injuries, 39, Plaintiff submitted an internal Grievance Form on or about August 2", 2020, but no action was every taken by Defendant to answer the Grievance Form ina timely fashion and thus, Plaintiff has complied with any required internal grievances of the Defendant. 40. Plaintiff, on August 17", 2020 gave notice of tort claim pursuant to Section 41-4-16 NMSA 1978 to the Curry County Clerk via facsimile and first-class United States mail, postage pre-paid, thus perfecting his claim against Defendant under the New Mexico Tort Claims Act, Section 41-4-1 et seq. 41. Defendant was negligent in its duties and obligations owing to Plaintiff set forth above.42. Defendant was negligent in failing to follow its own written policies and procedures which was a proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries. 43. Defendant was negligent in the operation and maintenance of the Curry County Adult Detention Center in violation of the New Mexico Tort Claims Act Sections 41-4-6 and 41-4-12 NMSA 1978, including but not limited to under- staffing of correctional officers, poor training of correctional officers, and use of an outdated detention center built almost a quarter century ago. 44. There is still “spider glass” (that is, broken splinter glass), in the facility despite a previous administrator being extremely chastised for this condition. 45. Defendant negligently breached its duties owing to Plaintiff, including but not limited to failure to protect Plaintiff from violence at the hands of other detainees because Plaintiff was incarcerated under conditions posing a substantial risk of serious harm. 46. Defendant's negligence was a proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries. 47. _ Plaintiff has sustained serious life-threatening injuries as a result of the Defendant's actions and non-actions which has required in the past and in the future medical care and attention. 48. Plaintiff has undergone severe pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life as a result of Defendant’s negligence. 849. _ Plaintiff has sustained permanent disfigurement as a result of Defendant’s negligence. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff asks for judgment against Defendant for his past and future medical expenses; pain and suffering; loss of enjoyment of life; and disfigurement; that the Defendant be enjoined from violating its own policies and otherwise endangering detainees and other injunctive relief; and for such other and further relief as the Court deems appropriate. Respectfully Submitted: /s/ Eric D. Dixon Eric D. Dixon Attorney and Counselor at Law, P.A. 301 South Avenue A, Portales, New Mexico, 88130 (575) 359-1233 Facsimile: (575) 356-4946 Attorney for PlaintiffFILED 9th JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT Suny County STATE OF NEW MEXICO 18/2001 9:38 PM COUNTY OF CURRY CLERK OF THE COURT IN THE NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT DANIEL HEIL, Plaintiff, vs. THE CURRY COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, a political Sub-division of the State of New Mexico, and Its employees in their official capacities as Employees of the Curry County Adult Detention Center, Defendant No. D-905-cVv-2021-00270 JURY DEMAND COMES NOW, Plaintiff, by and through his undersigned attorney and pursuant to NMRA Rule 1-038, N.M. Const. Art. ll, § 12, and the 7 and 14" Amendments to the United States Constitution demands a jury of six (6) persons determine all factual disputes between the parties in the above captioned law-suit.Respectfully Submitted: /s/ Eric D. Dixon Eric D. Dixon Attorney and Counselor at Law, P.A. 301 South Avenue A, Portales, New Mexico, 88130 (575) 359-1233 Facsimile: (575) 356-4946 Attorney for Plaintiff