Matthew Cole, et al. v. Nicholas D. Hall, et al.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THESOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA

AT CHARLESTON

MATTHEW COLE, individuallyand PATRICIA COLE,as next friend of MATTHEW COLE,

Plaintiffs,

vs. Civil Action No. :

NICHOLAS D. HALL, ROBERT V. NEAL, JAMES K. SIZEMORE, DANAC. WYSONG, in their individual capacities,and FAYETTE COUNTY COMMISSION, a political subdivision of the State of West Virginia,

Defendants.

COMPLAINT

This complaint, brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 1983, the Fourth

Amendment to the United States Constitution, arises out of the Defendantsʼ use of

excessive force on the Plaintiff on or about December 14, 2010 in the town of Victor,

Fayette County, West Virginia, within the Southern District of West Virginia.

JURISDICTION

This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1343.

PARTIES

1. The Plaintiff, Matthew Cole, was at all times relevant hereto a resident of

Ansted, Fayette County, West Virginia, within the Southern District of West Virginia.

2. The Plaintiff, Patricia Cole, was at all times relevant hereto a resident of

Ansted, Fayette County, West Virginia, and is a plaintiff in the capacity as next friend for

her son, Matthew Cole, who is mentally disabled.

Case 2:12-cv-08915 Document 1 Filed 12/13/12 of 11 PageID #: 1

taq

Typewritten Text

2:12-8915

3. Defendant Nicholas D. Hall is and was at all times relevant hereto, a

resident of Fayetteville, Fayette County, West Virginia, having a last known address of

P.O. Box 463, Fayetteville, West Virginia 25840 and is employed by the Fayette County

Sheriffʼs Department. He is named in his individual capacity.

4. Defendant Robert V. Neal is and was at all times relevant hereto, a

resident of Hico, Fayette County, West Virginia, having a last known address of P.O.

Box 126 Hico, West Virginia 25854 and is employed by the Fayette County Sheriffʼs

Department. He is named in his individual capacity.

5. Defendant James K. Sizemore is and was at all times relevant hereto, a

resident of Ansted, Fayette County, West Virginia, having a last known address of 105

Downey Ridge Road, Ansted, West Virginia 25812 and is employed as a Captain in the

Fayette County Sheriffʼs Department. He is named in his individual capacity.

6. Defendant Dana C. Wysong is upon information and belief a resident of

the town of Windsor, Isle of Wight County, Virginia, having a last known address of 13 E.

Griffin Street, Windsor, Virginia 23487-9425. He was at all times relevant hereto a

resident of the town of Lookout, Fayette County, West Virginia and was employed by the

Fayette County Sheriffʼs Department. He is named in his official capacity.

7. Defendant Fayette County Commission (“FCC”) is a political subdivision of

the State of West Virginia, and as such, is liable for the negligent conduct of its agents

and employees, including the Sheriff, the Sheriffʼs Department, and the employees of

the Sheriffʼs Department, so long as that conduct was carried out within the scope of

their employment. See West Virginia Governmental Tort Claims and Insurance Reform

Act, W. Va. Code § 29-12A-1, et seq.


8. The conduct alleged herein to have been committed by employees and/or

agents of Defendant FCC are hereby alleged to have been committed by said agents

and/or employees acting in the scope of their employment and authority. The causes of

action asserted herein against Defendant FCC refer to acts performed by agents and

employees of said Defendant political subdivision, rather than the formulation and

implementation of policy related to how law enforcement and police protection are

provided.

FACTS

9. On February 13, 1993 the Plaintiff, Matthew Cole, suffered a traumatic

brain injury in a vehicle accident, which resulted in a left frontotemporal craniotomy. He

was in a coma for eighteen days and was hospitalized for four months.

10. On May 26, 2006, Mr. Cole was involved in another vehicle accident

where he suffered further head trauma.

11. As a result of the vehicle accidents, Mr. Cole has a history of

posttraumatic seizures and remains with a residual right hemiparesis, right hemi

sensory deficit and persistent diplopia. He is permanently disabled - both physically and

mentally. His parents, in particular his mother, Plaintiff Patricia Cole, cares for him and

assists him in living an independent lifestyle. However, he has severe limitations.

12. On December 14, 2010 the Plaintiff, Matthew Cole, was visiting his cousin,

Jesse Pike, now deceased, of Victor, West Virginia. Mr. Pike got into a domestic

dispute with his significant other. She called law enforcement and reported, apparently

falsely, that she had been shot in the face with a .357 caliber hand gun by Mr. Pike.


13. Prior to the arrival of law enforcement, Mr. Pike took Matthew Cole outside

of the residence with him and instructed him to hide from approaching law enforcement.

The plaintiff did what he was told. He was not involved - nor alleged to be involved - in

the domestic altercation.

14. Defendants Hall, Neal, Wysong and Sizemore, arrived at the residence

and began to approach the home. Thereupon they discovered Mr. Pike and the Plaintiff

hiding in the driveway. Defendant Sizemore was a Captain and was the supervisor for

deputies Hall, Neal and Wysong.

15. The said deputies detained Matthew Cole and Jesse Pike and seized Mr.

Pikeʼs handgun from beneath a nearby parked car. Mr. Pike was advised his Miranda

rights and was placed under arrest.

16. At some point prior to, or during the detainment of Matthew Cole, the said

defendants struck Matthew Cole in the face, head, legs and chest.

17. At the time Mr. Cole was struck, he was not resisting or assaulting the

deputies.

18. At some point, upon information and belief, Defendant Wysong recognized

Mr. Cole and informed the other deputies that he was disabled.

19. Matthew Cole was then taken to his motherʼs home by Deputy Wysong

and dropped off in the driveway. Deputy Wysong did not speak with Mr. Coleʼs mother,

nor did he ensure that Mr. Cole was able to get inside the home. There was snow on

the ground and the weather was cold. Up to that point Matthew Cole was not given any

medical treatment or care.


20. Patricia Cole, Matthewʼs mother, observed her son being dropped off

outside, and upon opening the door for him immediately observed physical injuries to

her sonʼs body and called 9-1-1 for an ambulance. Photographs were then taken which

depict injuries to Matthew Coleʼs face, head and legs. While speaking to the 9-1-1

operator, Mrs. Cole requested that the deputy she observed return to speak with her

about what happened. However Fayette County 9-1-1 refused to send a deputy, and

refused to give her the name of the deputy who transported her son. Mr. Cole was

taken, by ambulance to the Summersville Regional Medical Center emergency room

where he was treated for injuries to his head, legs and chest.

21. Matthew Cole was never charged with a criminal violation, nor was he

taken into custody other than being seized at the scene and being taken to his motherʼs

home.

22. Since Mr. Cole suffered the beating on December 14, 2010, he began

having seizures again, and underwent additional medical treatment.

23. Since the beating, Mr. Cole has suffered from severe anxiety and post

traumatic stress disorder. He has become depressed and obsessed with the beating.

The experience has penetrated every aspect of his daily life. He seizure activity has

increased dramatically since December 14, 2010.

COUNT ONE - EXCESSIVE FORCE UNDER 42 U.S.C. 1983

VIOLATION OF THE FOURTH AMENDMENT

24. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all the allegations contained in the

previous paragraphs.


25. Defendants Hall, Neal, Wysong and Sizemore, under color of state law,

used excessive force against Matthew Cole, as described above, on December 14,

2010.

26. When the defendants struck Matthew Cole in the head, legs and chest, no

objectively reasonable officer could have perceived Mr. Cole as posing an immediate

threat to the safety of the officers or others.

27. Matthew Cole was neither armed nor suspected by the defendants of

being armed at the time he was beaten.

28. Matthew Cole was not resisting arrest at the time that force was being

used on him.

29. Matthew Cole had not committed any crime at the time force was used on

him, and was never charged with any criminal allegation.

30. The said defendantsʼ actions were objectively unreasonable, unlawful,

unwarranted, and in violation of Matthew Coleʼs clearly established procedural and

substantive rights, including the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution.

31. The said defendantsʼ actions were willful, wanton, intentional, malicious

and done with a callous and reckless disregard for Matthew Coleʼs Fourth Amendment

right to be free from excessive force.

32. Matthew Cole suffered harm, including personal injuries, extreme

emotional distress, medical expenses, severe pain, and continues to suffer damages,

and is entitled to recover damages for the same.


COUNT TWO - EXCESSIVE FORCE UNDER 42 U.S.C. 1983

VIOLATION OF THE FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT



34. In the event that this Court finds that Matthew Cole was a pretrial detainee

at the time that he was struck by the defendants, Mr. Cole pleads a violation of the

Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause, in the alternative.

35. The defendants, under color of state law, used excessive force against

Matthew Cole as described above, which inflicted unnecessary and wanton pain and

suffering on the Plaintiff.

36. At the time Mr. Cole was struck, there was no need for force to be applied,

and even if there was a need for force to be applied, the defendants used an excessive

amount of force, as evidenced by Mr. Coleʼs physical injuries.

37. The said use of force was not applied in a good faith effort to maintain and

restore discipline, but rather was applied maliciously and sadistically for the purpose of

causing harm.

38. The defendantsʼ actions were objectively unreasonable, willful, wanton,

intentional, malicious and done with a callous disregard for the Plaintiffʼs clearly

established Fourteenth Amendment right to be free from excessive force.

39. Plaintiff suffered harm, including personal injuries, extreme emotional

distress, medical expenses, severe pain, and continues to suffer damages, and is

entitled to recover damages for the same.


COUNT THREE - STATE LAW CLAIM FOR NEGLIGENCE



41. Defendant FCC specifically owed Matthew Cole a duty of reasonable care.

It was reasonably foreseeable to the defendants that Matthew Cole would be harmed as

a result of their actions of striking him in the head, legs and chest, in violation of the

U.S. Constitution. Upon information and belief, there was at least one officer at the

scene who knew the identity of Matthew Cole, and who knew of his mental and physical

disability. Furthermore, it was obvious, or should have been obvious, to the defendants

that they were interacting with a disabled person.

42. Defendant FCC, by and through their Sheriffʼs Department, breached that

duty as detailed above and incorporated herein, and furthermore by:

a. negligently training, retaining, and supervising the defendants who

struck Matthew Cole;

b. negligently allowing the defendants who struck Matthew Cole

to use excessive force in violation of the U.S. Constitution;

c. negligently failing to comply with federal constitutional standards

for the use of force against a suspect and/or a pretrial detainee;

d. negligently training the defendants who struck and transported Matthew

Cole to interact with persons who are mentally disabled;

e. negligently depriving the Plaintiff of medical treatment for his injuries.

43. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendantsʼ negligence, Matthew

Cole suffered harm, including personal injuries, extreme emotional distress, medical


expenses, severe pain, and continues to suffer damages, and is entitled to recover

damages for the same.

COUNT FOUR - SUPERVISORY LIABILITY UNDER 42 U.S.C. 1983

44. Plaintiff incorporates all allegations contained in previous paragraphs.

45. On December 14, 2010 Defendant James K. Sizemore was a Captain in

the Fayette County Sheriffʼs Department and was the supervisor for defendants Hall,

Neal and Wysong.

46. Defendant Sizemore had actual or constructive knowledge that his

subordinates were engaged in conduct that posed a pervasive and unreasonable risk of

constitutional injury to the plaintiff; namely using excessive force. Defendant

Sizemoreʼs knowledge is documented by his presence at the scene of Matthew Coleʼs

beating.

47. The said supervisorsʼ response to that knowledge was so inadequate as

to show deliberate indifference to, or tacit authorization of, the practice of using

excessive force.

48. As a direct and proximate result of the said supervisorsʼ inaction the

Plaintiff suffered constitutional violations and was damages, as described above, for

which he is entitled to recover.

COUNT FIVE - DENIAL OF MEDICAL CARE UNDER 42 U.S.C. 1983

49. Plaintiff incorporates all allegations contained in previous paragraphs.

50. Matthew Cole had a serious medical need following his being struck in the

head, legs and chest by defendants Hall, Neal, Wysong and Sizemore, as described

above; namely treatment for his physical injuries and medication.


51. The said defendants were aware of Matthew Coleʼs serious need for

medical care and medication, since had knowledge that they struck him and that he was

visibly injured.

52. The said defendants, with deliberate indifference, failed to provide the

medical care or direct that medical care be provided within a reasonable amount of

time. They did not call an ambulance for Mr. Cole. Nor did they transport him to the

hospital. They merely dropped him off outside his motherʼs home, in the snow.

53. As a direct and proximate result, Matthew Cole was injured, including

prolonged and unnecessary suffering without treatment and medication for his physical

injuries.

54. During this time, Matthew Cole was in the custody of the defendants after

having been seized at the scene of the arrest of Jesse Pike, and therefore was a pretrial

detainee during his transport to his motherʼs home.

55. The defendants were acting under the color of state law.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, based on the above stated facts, the Plaintiff respectfully

requests that this Honorable Court award:

1. Damages against the Defendants in an amount to be determined at trial

which will fairly and reasonably compensate the Plaintiff for:

a. Past, present and future medical expenses;

b. Past, present and future pain and suffering;

c. Loss of enjoyment of life;


d. Psychological and emotional distress;

e. Any other compensatory damages to be proven at trial;

f. Punitive damages against the individual Defendants in an amount to be

determined at trial;

g. Reasonable attorney fees and costs;

h. Any other relief that this Court deems is just and fair;

i. All other damages provided by law;

j. Injunctive relief requiring appropriate training, supervision and discipline in

order to remedy all constitutional deprivations which the Plaintiff suffered;

k. Declaratory judgment relief establishing the Defendantsʼ above-described

conduct violates the Plaintiffʼs clearly established constitutional rights.

PLAINTIFF DEMANDS A TRIAL BY JURY

MATTHEW COLE and PATRICIA COLE, By Counsel

/s John H. Bryan John H. Bryan (WV Bar No. 10259)Martha J. Fleshman (WV Bar No. 8542)JOHN H. BRYAN, ATTORNEYS AT LAW611 Main StreetP.O. Box 366 Union, WV 24983(304) 772-4999Fax: (304) [email protected]

for the Plaintiff


mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

!JS 44 (Rev. 11/04) CIVIL COVER SHEETThe JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as providedby local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiatingthe civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE OF THE FORM.)

I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff County of Residence of First Listed Defendant

(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)

NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF THE

LAND INVOLVED.

(c) Attorney’s (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES(Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff

(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)

" 1 U.S. Government " 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF

Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State " 1 " 1 Incorporated or Principal Place " 4 " 4

of Business In This State

" 2 U.S. Government " 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State " 2 " 2 Incorporated and Principal Place " 5 " 5

Defendant(Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III)

of Business In Another State

Citizen or Subject of a " 3 " 3 Foreign Nation " 6 " 6

Foreign Country

IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only)

CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES

" 110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY " 610 Agriculture " 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 " 400 State Reapportionment

" 120 Marine " 310 Airplane " 362 Personal Injury - " 620 Other Food & Drug " 423 Withdrawal " 410 Antitrust

" 130 Miller Act " 315 Airplane Product Med. Malpractice " 625 Drug Related Seizure 28 USC 157 " 430 Banks and Banking

" 140 Negotiable Instrument Liability " 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 " 450 Commerce

" 150 Recovery of Overpayment " 320 Assault, Libel & Product Liability " 630 Liquor Laws PROPERTY RIGHTS " 460 Deportation

& Enforcement of Judgment Slander " 368 Asbestos Personal " 640 R.R. & Truck " 820 Copyrights " 470 Racketeer Influenced and

" 151 Medicare Act " 330 Federal Employers’ Injury Product " 650 Airline Regs. " 830 Patent Corrupt Organizations

" 152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability Liability " 660 Occupational " 840 Trademark " 480 Consumer Credit

Student Loans " 340 Marine PERSONAL PROPERTY Safety/Health " 490 Cable/Sat TV

(Excl. Veterans) " 345 Marine Product " 370 Other Fraud " 690 Other " 810 Selective Service

" 153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability " 371 Truth in Lending LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY " 850 Securities/Commodities/

of Veteran’s Benefits " 350 Motor Vehicle " 380 Other Personal " 710 Fair Labor Standards " 861 HIA (1395ff) Exchange

" 160 Stockholders’ Suits " 355 Motor Vehicle Property Damage Act " 862 Black Lung (923) " 875 Customer Challenge

" 190 Other Contract Product Liability " 385 Property Damage " 720 Labor/Mgmt. Relations " 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) 12 USC 3410

" 195 Contract Product Liability " 360 Other Personal Product Liability " 730 Labor/Mgmt.Reporting " 864 SSID Title XVI " 890 Other Statutory Actions

" 196 Franchise Injury & Disclosure Act " 865 RSI (405(g)) " 891 Agricultural Acts

REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS " 740 Railway Labor Act FEDERAL TAX SUITS " 892 Economic Stabilization Act

" 210 Land Condemnation " 441 Voting " 510 Motions to Vacate " 790 Other Labor Litigation " 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff " 893 Environmental Matters

" 220 Foreclosure " 442 Employment Sentence " 791 Empl. Ret. Inc. or Defendant) " 894 Energy Allocation Act

" 230 Rent Lease & Ejectment " 443 Housing/ Habeas Corpus: Security Act " 871 IRS—Third Party " 895 Freedom of Information

" 240 Torts to Land Accommodations " 530 General 26 USC 7609 Act

" 245 Tort Product Liability " 444 Welfare " 535 Death Penalty " 900Appeal of Fee Determination

" 290 All Other Real Property " 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - " 540 Mandamus & Other Under Equal Access

Employment " 550 Civil Rights to Justice

" 446 Amer. w/Disabilities - " 555 Prison Condition " 950 Constitutionality of

Other State Statutes

" 440 Other Civil Rights

V. ORIGINTransferred fromanother district(specify)

Appeal to DistrictJudge fromMagistrateJudgment

(Place an “X” in One Box Only)

" 1 OriginalProceeding

" 2 Removed fromState Court

" 3 Remanded fromAppellate Court

" 4 Reinstated orReopened

" 5 " 6 MultidistrictLitigation

" 7

VI. CAUSE OF ACTION

Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):

Brief description of cause:

VII. REQUESTED IN

COMPLAINT:

" CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION

UNDER F.R.C.P. 23

DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:

JURY DEMAND: " Yes " No

VIII. RELATED CASE(S)

IF ANY(See instructions):

JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER

DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE

Jury Award

12/13/12 s/ John H. Bryan

MATTHEW COLE, individually and PATRICIA COLE, as next friend of MATTHEW COLE

Fayette

John H. Bryan, Martha J. Fleshman, John H. Bryan, Attorneys at Law 611 Main Street, P.O. Box 366, Union, WV 24983, (304) 772-4999

NICHOLAS D. HALL, ROBERT V. NEAL, JAMES K. SIZEMORE, DANA C. WYSONG, in their individual capacities and FAYETTE COUNTY COMMISSION,

Fayette

!! ! !

!

!

42 U.S.C. Section 1983

Excessive Force

Case 2:12-cv-08915 Document 1-1 Filed 12/13/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 12

JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 11/04)

INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44

Authority For Civil Cover Sheet

The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers as requiredby law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the useof the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of Court for each civil complaintfiled. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:

I. (a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use onlythe full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and then the official, givingboth name and title.

(b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the timeof filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land condemnation cases,the county of residence of the “defendant” is the location of the tract of land involved.)

(c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, notingin this section “(see attachment)”.

II. Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.C.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an “X” in oneof the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below.

United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.

United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an “X” in this box.

Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment to theConstitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes precedence, and box1 or 2 should be marked.

Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the citizenship of thedifferent parties must be checked. (See Section III below; federal question actions take precedence over diversity cases.)

III. Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark this sectionfor each principal party.

IV. Nature of Suit. Place an “X” in the appropriate box. If the nature of suit cannot be determined, be sure the cause of action, in Section VI below, is sufficientto enable the deputy clerk or the statistical clerks in the Administrative Office to determine the nature of suit. If the cause fits more than one nature of suit, selectthe most definitive.

V. Origin. Place an “X” in one of the seven boxes.

Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts.

Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441. When the petitionfor removal is granted, check this box.

Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filing date.

Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date.

Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or multidistrictlitigation transfers.

Multidistrict Litigation. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1407. When this boxis checked, do not check (5) above.

Appeal to District Judge from Magistrate Judgment. (7) Check this box for an appeal from a magistrate judge’s decision.

VI. Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional statutesunless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553

Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service

VII. Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an “X” in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.

Demand. In this space enter the dollar amount (in thousands of dollars) being demanded or indicate other demand such as a preliminary injunction.

Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded.

VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pending cases if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket numbersand the corresponding judge names for such cases.

Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.

Case 2:12-cv-08915 Document 1-1 Filed 12/13/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 13

Matthew Cole, et al. v. Nicholas D. Hall, et al.

Documents

Transcript of Matthew Cole, et al. v. Nicholas D. Hall, et al.