YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and required to Answer the Complaint, a copy of

Transcription

1 STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA COUNTY OF GREENVILLE Amber Childs Howard, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Jordan Barry Howard, vs. Plaintiff(s), Steve Loftis in his official capacity as the Sheriff of Greenville County, Greenville County Sheriff s Office and Greenville County, TO: Defendant(s). THE DEFENDANTS ABOVE NAMED IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS C. A. NO: 2017-CP-23- SUMMONS YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and required to Answer the Complaint, a copy of which is herewith served upon you, and to serve a copy of your Answer to said Complaint on the subscriber at his office at 1539 Health Care Drive, Rock Hill, South Carolina, 29732, within thirty (30) days from the service hereof, exclusive of the date of such service; and if you fail to Answer the Complaint within the time aforesaid, judgment by default will be rendered against you for the relief demanded in the Complaint. MCGOWAN HOOD & FELDER, LLC s/robert V. Phillips Robert V. Phillips, Esq Health Care Drive Rock Hill, South Carolina (803) Office (803) Facsimile rphillips@mcgowanhood.com Rock Hill, South Carolina August 16, 2017

2 STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA COUNTY OF GREENVILLE Amber Childs Howard, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Jordan Barry Howard, vs. Plaintiff(s), Steve Loftis in his official capacity as the Sheriff of Greenville County, Greenville County Sheriff s Office and Greenville County, Defendant(s). IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS C. A. NO: 2017-CP-23- COMPLAINT (Jury Trial Requested) Plaintiff, complaining of the Defendants herein, would respectfully show unto this Honorable Court as follows: PARTIES 1. Plaintiff Amber Childs Howard is a resident and citizen of the County of Greenville, State of South Carolina; she is also the Personal Representative of the Estate of Jordan Barry Howard and is the now widow of the Decedent. At this time of the death of Jordan, Plaintiff Amber Howard and Jordan Howard were legally married as husband and wife. 2. Defendants Steve Loftis (hereinafter "Loftis") was, at all times relevant to this Complaint, the Sheriff of Greenville County and/or the Greenville County Sheriff's Office (hereinafter "GCSO") and as Sheriff he is liable for the acts and/or omissions of all of his deputies, agents and employees; upon information and belief, he was at all times relevant to this Complaint, a resident and citizen of Greenville County, South Carolina

3 3. Defendants Greenville County Sheriff s Office and the County of Greenville are political subdivisions of the State of South Carolina and/or governmental entities that are responsible for the actions of their agents and employees, including, but not limited to, Defendant Loftis and his subordinates and/or deputies who undertook the police chase referenced herein. (The Defendants named in paragraphs #2 and #3 may sometimes be simply referred to the Employing Defendants as they were the employer of the deputies who were involved in the high speed chase of John William Kennedy and pursuant to South Carolina State law are responsible for the actions of their employees when they are/were acting under the scope and course of their respective employment with these Employing Defendants. ) 4. At all relevant times, all referred to Deputies, agents and/or employees of the Greenville County Sheriff s Office were acting within the scope and course of their employment with these Employing Defendants. JURISDICTION 5. Defendant Loftis was the Sheriff of the Greenville County Sheriff's Office at all times relevant to this Complaint. Sheriff Loftis had responsibility for the management, training, and operation of the Greenville County Sheriff s Office and was responsible for the actions of all officers/deputies, including but not limited to the several deputies referred to below. He is sued in his representative capacity for the office of Sheriff of the Greenville County Sheriff s Office pursuant to the South Carolina Tort Claims Act, under which the employing entity is liable for the torts of its employees (S.C. Code ). 6. Plaintiff alleges the Greenville County Sheriff's Office and the County of Darlington are liable for the acts and omissions of their officers/deputies for their respective negligence, gross negligence, recklessness and other liability-forming conduct that caused harm to Decedent and the - 3 -

4 Plaintiffs. 7. The events that gave rise to this suit substantially occurred in Greenville County, South Carolina. GENERAL FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 8. During the morning of, or about, September 17, 2015, John William Kennedy was in the TD s Express Mart on West Blue Ridge Drive, in or near the County of Greenville, State of South Carolina. 9. He was approached by one or more GCSO deputies. 10. Upon being approached by the deputies, Mr. Kennedy got in his vehicle and attempted to flee. 11. The deputies then began a vehicle pursuit of Mr. Kennedy. 12. As calls went out over the radio, more deputies became involved in the vehicle pursuit of Mr. Kennedy. 13. At one point it is believed that the following deputies were chasing Mr. Kennedy: Deputy Bevil, Deputy Dempsey, Deputy Douglas, Deputy Belding and Deputy Brewer, all of the GCSO. 14. The chase continued on a number of streets throughout the Greenville metropolitan area with a great number of other vehicles and traffic on the road. 15. With multiple deputies in pursuit, the suspect Mr. Kennedy, got onto Highway 25 and began to head north in the northbound lane. 16. Highway 25 is a four-lane divided highway, but without controlled access. 17. As such there is a great variance in speed of the vehicles using an otherwise high speed highway

5 18. During this chase heading north on Highway 25, Mr. Kennedy began making extremely dangerous maneuvers such as passing on the shoulder, blowing through intersections and otherwise nearly crashing into the innocent occupants of these other vehicles. 19. The situation, while becoming more dangerous as the seconds passed, took on a whole other level of extreme danger when Mr. Kennedy crossed over the median of Highway 25 at high speed and began to travel north in the southbound lane. 20. Countless southbound vehicles were being forced off the road and every single vehicle approaching Mr. Kennedy from the north was facing almost certain death as Mr. Kennedy almost collided head on with every single vehicle he passed. 21. This horrifically dangerous travel continued for some time all the while these same deputies were continuing to pursue Mr. Kennedy. 22. Eventually a call went out over the radio calling off the pursuit for the deputies (if this call did not go out, it should have gone out) as everyone knew or should have known that this chase was simply endangering too many innocent lives to continue. 23. At this time all of the pursuing deputies reduced their speed and gave up on the chase, except for one: Deputy Brewer 24. Despite being aware of this incredible danger to the general public, Deputy Brewer continued on with the pursuit of Mr. Kennedy. 25. At approximately 7:25 AM on that same morning, the Decedent Jordan Howard, was riding his motorcycle on his was to work as a fire-fighter. 26. Unfortunately, on this day Jordan was heading south on the same Highway Looking ahead, Jordan saw the oncoming truck of Mr. Kennedy heading right at him and knew his life was in danger

6 28. However, due to the extremely high rate of the closing speed between Jordan and Mr. Kennedy, there was little Jordan could do. 29. Mr. Kennedy s vehicle then struck Jordan head-on at a very high-rate of speed severely injuring Jordan and these injuries eventually lead to his death on this day. 30. Deputy Brewer knew, or should have known, that continuing to pursue Mr. Kennedy at this high rate of speed and especially when Mr. Kennedy crossed over into the oncoming traffic, he was unnecessarily risking the lives and safety of innocent third parties including, but not limited to, the Decedent. 31. Deputy Brewer either had training or should have had training regarding the pursuit of vehicles and when to continue and when to terminate them. 32. These pursuit polices, that are consistent with the pursuit policies of the law enforcement agencies throughout the State of South Carolina, require that Deputy Brewer take into account the risks of danger to the general public he is creating by pursuing a suspect into oncoming traffic and constantly weigh them against the need to catch a mere suspect. 33. The Employing Defendants, as law enforcement agencies in the State of South Carolina, had an obligation to train their employees on when to continue and when to call off a pursuit. 34. The Employing Defendants failed to properly train, supervise and discipline Deputy Brewer on these pursuit tactics. 35. Decedent died as a direct result of the injuries he sustained in the collision of Mr. Kennedy s vehicle and that collision resulted from the pursuit by Deputy Brewer under extremely dangerous conditions

7 36. This collision and the lethal injuries Decedent suffered were the direct and proximate result of the negligent, grossly negligent, wanton and reckless acts of the Defendants undertaken without the exercise of slight care and of the Defendants' own accord, as well as by and through their agents, in particular including, but not limited to, the following: a. Through the action(s) of allowing Deputy Brewer to continue a high speed chase of Mr. Kennedy when Deputy Brewer knew or should have known that such a high speed chase was an extremely dangerous proposition that would likely end in tragedy; b. Through the actions of the Deputy Brewer in failing to comply with and follow the rules and regulations of Greenville County, the Greenville County Sheriff s Office, and other regulatory agencies and/or pertinent state statutes concerning police chases; c. Through the actions of Deputy Brewer in failing to attempt any other alternative means of arresting or apprehending the Mr. Kennedy other than continuing a high-speed chase into oncoming traffic; d. Through the actions of Deputy Brewer in failing to terminate his high-speed chase as the chase was facing oncoming traffic, when the Defendants, by and through their agents, knew, or should have known, that the proceeding would create and unreasonable risk of danger to the safety of the public; e. Through the actions of other personnel within the Sheriff s Office, including the Deputy Brewer s superiors, in allowing Deputy Brewer to patrol the streets without adequate levels of control and/or training pertaining to the use of police chases when the Defendants knew, or should have known, that Deputy Brewer was not capable of making rational and proper decisions regarding whether to continue a high-speed chase into oncoming traffic because he had a propensity to easily become involved in extremely - 7 -

8 dangerous chases; f. In operating an emergency vehicle upon the roads of this State without due regard for the safety of all other persons and in violation of S.C. Code Sec (0); g. in failing to use the appropriate discretion when making decisions about continuing the chase and attempting terminate the chase, and; h. In such other particulars as may be ascertained through discovery procedures undertaken pursuant to South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure 37. Due to the grossly negligent actions of the Defendants, and by and through the Defendants' agents, Jordan Howard died after having undergone conscious pain and suffering and having incurred medical expenses and funeral bills. 38. Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to actual damages and such other and further relief as this Honorable Court deems just and proper. FOR A FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (Negligence & Gross Negligence - State Tort Claims Act) 39. The Plaintiff incorporates by reference all previous paragraphs above as if repeated herein. 40. The Defendants all departed from the duties of care required by law enforcement officers and the agencies that hire, train and employ these officers and were thereby negligent, careless, grossly negligent, reckless and acted in violation of the duties owed to Plaintiff and Plaintiff's decedent in that they committed one or more of the following acts of omission or commission, any or all of which were departures from the prevailing duties of care: a. In failing to ensure the safety of the Plaintiff's Decedent; b. In failing to appreciate the conditions that existed on the day in question; - 8 -

9 c. In failing to adhere to proper law enforcement procedures; d. In falling to use less dangerous methods in order to effectuate an arrest; e. In failing to use discretion before, during, and after the chase and consider other methods available to apprehend a suspect; f. In failing to have in place proper and adequate policies, procedures and protocols for training law enforcement officers to determine whether to apprehend a suspect and how to apprehend a suspect, or, if such policies, procedures and protocols were in place, in failing to use due care to enforce them; and, g. In such other particulars as may be ascertained through discovery procedures undertaken pursuant to South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure. 41. As a direct and proximate result of the gross negligence, carelessness, recklessness and failure of the Defendants to show the requisite care under the circumstances, Plaintiff and Plaintiffs decedent were severely injured and have suffered severe and extreme emotional distress, anxiety, grief and sorrow and other harms and losses for which the Plaintiff is entitled to recover in an amount to be determined by a jury at the trial of this action. herein. FOR A SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION (Wrongful Death) 42. The Plaintiff incorporates by reference all previous paragraphs above as if repeated 43. As a direct and proximate result of the negligent and/or grossly negligent acts and/or omissions of the Defendants outlined above, the Decedent died at the hands of the Defendants. 44. As a result of Decedent's death at the hands of the Defendants, Plaintiff s Decedent's statutory beneficiaries have lost the aid, comfort, support, society and companionship of the Decedent, and have suffered severe and extreme emotional distress, anxiety, grief and sorrow, for which the Plaintiff is entitled to recover on behalf of the statutory beneficiaries, actual damages - 9 -

10 pursuant to , et. seq., Code of Laws of South Carolina (1976, as amended) in an amount to be determined by a jury at the trial of this action. FOR A THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION (Survivorship Action) 45. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all previous paragraphs above as if repeated herein. 46. As a direct and proximate result of the acts and/or omissions of the Defendants outlined above, the Decedent was injured and then died at the hands of the Defendants. 47. The Decedent's estate, as a direct and proximate result of the grossly negligent actions of the Defendants outlined above, has incurred expenses in the form of funeral and burial expenses, as well as medical bills. The Plaintiff is further informed and does believe that, as a direct and proximate result of the grossly negligent actions of the Defendants, the Plaintiff's Decedent suffered fear, physical pain and suffering, as well as mental and emotional distress and anguish, in the time before his death, as well as medical bills and funeral expenses after his death, for which the Decedent's estate is entitled to an award of damages pursuant to of the Code of Laws of South Carolina (1976) in an amount to be determined by a jury at the trial of this action. FOR A FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION (Loss of Consortium) 48. The Plaintiff incorporates by reference all previous paragraphs above as if repeated herein. 49. That all Defendants are liable for the Decedent s injuries. 50. That Plaintiff Amber Howard has suffered, and will suffer in the future, a loss of services and loss of society and companionship of her husband Jordan as a direct and proximate result of Jordan s injuries

11 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, respectfully prays for judgment against all Defendants for all actual damages and consequential damages in an amount to be determined by a jury at the trial of this action, as well such other and further relief as this Honorable Court shall deem just and proper. Rock Hill, South Carolina August 16, 2017 MCGOWAN HOOD & FELDER, LLC s/ Robert V. Phillips Robert V. Phillips, Esq Health Care Drive Rock Hill, South Carolina O F rphillips@mcgowanhood.com