Tramell v Round Rock (Complaint)

8/16/2019 Tramell v Round Rock (Complaint)

1/12

ORIGINAL COMPLAINT – TRAMMELL V. FRUGE, ET AL. - PAGE 1 OF 12

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTFOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AUSTIN DIVISION

George Trammell,

Plaintiff,

v.

Kevin Fruge, in his individual and officialcapacity; Mike Krogmann, in hisindividualand official capacity; Brian Neveu, inhisindividual and official capacity; E.F.Delarosa, in his/her individual and officialcapacity; Hunter Webb, in his individualand official capacity; M. Garza, in his/her

individual and official capacity; ShelbyIngles, in her individual and official capacity;City of Round Rock, Texas; and JohnDoes 1-5; Defendants.

Case No. 15:1-cv-00052

Original Complaint

JURY DEMAND

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

COMES NOW, George Trammell, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8, and

files this Original Complaint against Defendants Kevin Fruge, in his individual and official

capacity; Mike Krogmann, in hisindividual and official capacity; Brian Neveu, in hisindividual

and official capacity; E.F. Delarosa, in his/her individual and official capacity; Hunter Webb, in

his individual and official capacity; M. Garza, in his/her individual and official capacity; Shelby

Ingles, in her individual and official capacity; City of Round Rock, Texas; and John Does 1-5,

(collectively, “Defendants”) and allege as follows:

I. Preliminary Statement

1. This is an action for Constitutional violations suffered by Plaintiff as a result of the

unreasonable search, seizure, and resulting personal injury of Plaintiff Trammell. Plaintiff

Case 1:15-cv-00052-RP Document 1 Filed 01/21/15 Page 1 of 12


2/12


brings this action for compensatory damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because Defendants

jointly and severally deprived Plaintiff of his federally-protected right to be free from

unreasonable seizure and unreasonable force. U.S. CONST. amends. IV, XIV.

2. Plaintiff is a 100% disabled United States military veteran and a retired Houston Police

Officer injured in the line of duty.

3. Because of the injuries sustained on that day, Plaintiff lives in degrading health, constant

pain, and has required multiple and ongoing surgeries to correct the problems.

4. As a direct result of the policies, practices, customs and procedures of the City of Round

Rock (“City”), Trammell was intentionally deprived of his constitutional right to be free from

unreasonable searches and seizures guaranteed to him by the Fourth Amendment to the

United States Constitution. Defendant officers, acting in the course and scope of their

employment with the City of Round Rock, and acting under color of state law, assaulted

Trammell and used overwhelmingly unreasonable force on a 60-year-old disabled man under

circumstances where no reasonable police officer would have done so. Under well-established

law, Defendant Officers are not entitled to qualified or other immunity for these actions.

5. Plaintiff complies with the pleading requirements of FRCP Rule 8(a)(2) and the requirements

of Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009) that “A claim has facial

plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the

reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.”

II. Jurisdiction and Venue

6. This action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and § 1988 and the Fourth Amendment

to the United States Constitution, made applicable to Defendants through the Fourteenth

Amendment to the United States Constitution. This court has jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s



3/12


claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal question) and under 28 U.S.C. § 1343(a)(3) (civil

rights).

7. Venue is proper in the Western District of Texas under 28 U.S.C. § 1391. All of the events

giving rise to this claim occurred in this judicial district and within the Austin Division.

III. Parties

8. Plaintiff George Trammell, a 100% disabled veteran and retired City of Houston Police

Officer injured in the line of duty, is a Texas resident and lives in Jarrell, Texas.

9. The following Defendant Officers will be extended the opportunity to accept service of

process pursuant to FRCP 4(d). If these Defendants fail or refuse to accept service as

requested, then Plaintiff will request service of process to be served upon each Officer

pursuant to FRCP 4(e) at their respective places of business: Round Rock Police Department,

2701 N. Mays Street, Round Rock, Texas 78665.

a. Defendant Kevin Fruge is a police officer with the City of Round Rock, Texas.

The acts and omissions complained of herein arise from the conduct of Defendant

Fruge while he was acting under color of state law, and each act and omission was

committed pursuant to Officer Fruge’s employment and authority as a police

officer with the City of Round Rock.

b. Defendant Mike Krogmann is a police officer with the City of Round Rock,

Texas. The acts and omissions complained of herein arise from the conduct of

Defendant Krogmann while he was acting under color of state law, and each act

and omission was committed pursuant to Officer Krogmann’s employment and

authority as a police officer with the City of Round Rock.

c. Defendant Brian Neveu is a police officer with the City of Round Rock, Texas,

and may be served with summons at the place of his/her employment, City of



4/12


Round Rock Police Department, 2701 North Mays Street, Round Rock, TX

78665. The acts and omissions complained of herein arise from the conduct of

Defendant Neveu while he was acting under color of state law, and each act and

omission was committed pursuant to Officer Neveu’s employment and authority

as a police officer with the City of Round Rock.

d. Defendant E.F. Delarosa is a police officer with the City of Round Rock, Texas,

and may be served with summons at the place of his/her employment, City of

Round Rock Police Department, 2701 North Mays Street, Round Rock, TX

78665. The acts and omissions complained of herein arise from the conduct of

Defendant Delarosa while he was acting under color of state law, and each act

and omission was committed pursuant to Officer Delarosa’s employment and

authority as a police officer with the City of Round Rock.

e. Defendant Hunter Webb is a police officer with the City of Round Rock, Texas.


Webb while he was acting under color of state law, and each act and omission was

committed pursuant to Officer Webb’s employment and authority as a police


f. Defendant M. Garza is a police officer with the City of Round Rock, Texas. The

acts and omissions complained of herein arise from the conduct of Defendant

Garza while he was acting under color of state law, and each act and omission was

committed pursuant to Officer Garza’s employment and authority as a police


g. Defendant Shelby Ingles is a police officer with the City of Round Rock, Texas.




5/12


Ingles while he was acting under color of state law, and each act and omission was

committed pursuant to Officer Ingles’ employment and authority as a police


10. Defendant City of Round Rock, Texas is a municipal corporation operating pursuant to the

Constitution and the laws of the State of Texas within the boundaries of the Austin Division

of the Western District of Texas. This Defendant will be extended the opportunity to accept

service of process pursuant to FRCP 4(d). If this Defendant fails or refuses to accept service as

requested, then Plaintiff will request service of process pursuant to FRCP 4(j) upon the City

Manager of Round Rock, Texas, Mr. Steve Norwood at his business address: City Manager

221 E. Main Street, Round Rock, Texas 78664.

11. John Does 1-5 are officer within the Round Rock Police Department yet unidentified but

who may have been involved in the arrest. They will be served upon proper identification.

III. Statement of Facts

12. On January 21, 2013, at approximately 12:00 am, George Trammell was standing near his

bright metallic-red in the parking lot of Time Warner Cable at 1905 North May Street,

Round Rock, Texas 78664.

13. The weather was clear, cold, and dry at night. Mr. Trammell was accompanied by a witness

to this incident, Chasity Pierce.

14. Officer Fruge approached Trammell, and said, “Hey, sir, step away from the motorcycle.”

The motorcycle clearly displayed “Disabled Veteran” plates.

15. Trammell, who has hearing difficulties, did not immediately respond.

16. Fruge again asked Trammell to step away from his motorcycle, and Trammell, hearing him

speak, asked, “What?” in a calm, non-aggressive tone.

17. Fruge forcefully stated “Step away from the motorcycle!”, and Trammell replied “Okay.”



6/12


18. Fruge then asked Trammell “What’s goin’ on?” twice in quick succession. Trammell replied

“Nothing. I parked my bike.”

19. “You parked it?” asked Fruge. Trammel replied, “Yeah.” Despite the full lights from Fruge’s

police cruiser shining on the situation, Fruge having a flashlight illuminating the area, and

there being no visible physical damage to the motorcycle, Fruge asked “Did you wreck it?”

Trammell replied “No. I didn’t wreck my bike. ”

20. Fruge asked, “Let me ask you a question, sir. How much have you had to drink to night?”

21. Trammell replied, “A whole lot of nothin’.”

22. Fruge asked, “ A whole lot of nothing? How much is that?”

23. Trammell replied, “A whole lot of nothin’.”

24. Fruge repeated “How much is that, sir?”

25. At that time, having a federally-protected constitutional right not to answer, being a retired

City of Houston Police Officer, and not been informed of the reason for Fruge’s questions

(which had no basis of any fact related to Trammell), Trammell exercised his federally-

protected constitutional right and responded by saying “I’m not going to answer.”

26. Fruge asked “Huh?” and Trammell again, having a federally-protected constitutional right

not to answer, being a retired City of Houston Police Officer, and not been informed of the

reason for Fruge’s questions (which had no basis of any fact related to Trammell), Trammell

exercised his federally-protected constitutional right and responded by saying “I’m not going

to answer.”

27. Fruge asked “Well, can you walk towards me?” Trammel declined and said “No.”

28. Fruge then commanded him to place his hands behind his back. “I'm not answering your

questions.” Trammell stated.



7/12


29. Trammell was always courteous in his speech, did not pose a threat, and none of the officers

were afraid of his flight of any violence.

30. Fruge immediately grabbed Trammell’s fused right arm.

31. Without at all speaking to Trammell, without alerting Trammell to any potential

consequence of escalation, without any indicia of Trammell being a danger, without any

emergency evidence, without provocation, and without hesitation, Fruge and three other City

of Round Rock police officers then aggressively tackled and assaulted Trammell, a 59-year-

old man, while several others watched and did nothing to de-escalate their fellow officer's

unwarranted assault.

32. Trammell was very aggressively knocked forward to the ground via a free-fall, where his

hands were prohibited from protecting him as he was trying naturally to break his fall. A

copy of Trammell’s injuries to his face is provided as Exhibit 1 (booking picture showing

Trammell’s facial injuries.).

33. After landing on his face, four (4) police officers placed their knees in his back, began driving

their knees and fists into him, and severely beat him during their unlawful restraint.

34. As the officers attempted to place handcuffs on Trammell, in severe pain from his facial

injury, the officers on his back, and the pain from his fused arm being forcefully bent behind

his back, repeatedly cried out, “My right arm is fused. I can’t bend it!” Trammell cried out

multiple times, “I'm not resisting. My arm is fused.” Trammell's companion and an eye

witness, Chasity Johnson, who was standing off to the side of this encounter the entire time

and who knows of his physical condition, repeatedly told the officers, “Stop beating him!”

that “His arm is fused!”, and that Trammell couldn't bend it. This assault is wholly contained

on video obtained from the City.



8/12


35. The pile of officer remained on him for several minutes, causing Trammell to lose control of

his bladder due to the pressure.

36. The officers who were not personally involved in using excessive force against Trammell

failed to intervene in preventing the unconstitutional use of excessive force.

37. As a result of this aggressive assault, Trammell suffered multiple injuries from which he is still

suffering. When Trammell was taken to the Williamson County Jail (from which the booking

picture is attached as Exhibit 1), the medic on duty looked over his medical condition and

determined that he needed to stay in a cell and not be in general population due to his

injuries.

38. Prior to and during this attack Trammell was never told he was being arrested nor was given

any type of sobriety exam; however, the next day upon his release, he found that he had been

ticketed for public intoxication and resisting arrest.

39. After Trammell posted a bond the next morning, he immediately sought medical attention at

Temple Veterans Hospital, as he is a 100% disabled veteran.

40.

Many doctor’s visits have been made treating multiple injuries in connection with, at in part

determined to be a direct result of the assault mentioned above, including back surgery from

spine injury. All such injuries were proximately caused by the actions of Defendant officers

and the City’s failures.

41. Two unidentified persons from a “task force” were at the scene who photographed

Trammell. To date those persons have not been identified. Those persons asked Trammell if

he was a member of an organized motorcycle gang, and when he denied such involvement

Trammell was accused of lying.

42. None of those identities appear to have been reported in any documents reviewed by

Plaintiff.



9/12


43. By the filing and forwarding of a copy of this Complaint to Attorneys for the City of Round

Rock, Texas, Plaintiff requests and demands that all Defendants in this case retain, preserve,

and protect from loss, damage, discard, or destruction all physical, written or electronic items

that are, or may be, evidence of the incidents above described, which may form the basis of

this Complaint including, but not limited to video, recorded statements, photographs, e-

mails, text messages, and personal or official notes made by any of the Officers or employees

of the City.

IV. Claims

Civil Rights Claims pursuant to freedoms promised under theFourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution

44. The Civil Right Act, codified as 42 U.S.C. § 1983, provides in relevant part as follows:

Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, orusage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes tobe subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunitiessecured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in anaction at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress . . . .

42 U.S.C. § 1983.

45. Plaintiff enjoys a right under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution to be

free from unreasonable searches and seizures.

46. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants, jointly and/or severally, deprived Plaintiff of his Fourth

Amendment rights, and those rights, privileges, and immunities secured by this amendment

as incorporated and applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.

Liability of Defendant Officers under 42 U.S.C. § 1983for unlawful seizure and excessive force.

47. Defendant Officers violated Plaintiff’s rights in the following ways:



10/12


a. By using excessive force in the course of Fruge’s (and the other officers’) attempt to

seize the Trammell, in violation of the Fourth Amendment and its reasonableness

standard.

b. By at least four (4) officers jumping onto Trammell, he accelerated toward the

ground and was unable to break his fall, landing face-first on a rough, paved

surface. The injuries to his body were preventable.

c. Without at all speaking to Trammell, without alerting Trammell to any potential

consequence of escalation, without any indicia of Trammell being a danger,

without any emergency evidence, without provocation, and without hesitation, the

officers’ actions were patently unreasonable.

d. The officers used excessive and unreasonable force that resulted directly in the

immediate and long-term injuries to Plaintiff.

e. By failing to provide proper supervision and/or proper training to prevent such

incidents of excessive force.

48.

Defendants’ violations of Trammell’s constitutional rights resulted in Trammell’s suffering

and were a direct cause of his injuries, emotional and mental anguish, and humiliation.

Liability of Defendant City under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

49. Plaintiff brings claims against all Defendant City of Round Rock.

50. The City is liable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for failing to supervise and train its police officers.

The City’s failure to supervise and train its police officers, as evidenced in part by the officers,

en masse, tackling and assaulting Trammell, demonstrates an intentional disregard and

conscious indifference to Trammell’s civil rights.

51. The City’s failure to supervise and train its police officers to properly supervise, as evidenced

in part by the officers who were not involved standing to the side and not interfering to



11/12


protect Trammell’s constitutional rights, demonstrates an intentional disregard and conscious

indifference to Trammell’s civil rights. , individually as well as in their official capacities.

52. Defendant City’s violations of Trammell’s constitutional rights resulted in Trammell’s

suffering and were a direct cause of his injuries.

V. Jury Demand

53. A jury is hereby demanded.

VI. Duty to Disclose

54. All Defendants have the duty, pursuant to the provisions of FRCP 26, to make a full

disclosure of all those matters set out in the Rule, specifically including the identity and

names of all police individuals, club employees, and other fact witnesses involved in this

incident.

VII. Damages

55. Defendants’ acts and omissions, as set out above, are proximate causes of Trammell’s injuries

and damages. These damages are in excess of the minimal jurisdictional limits of this Court

and are in excess of one million dollars. Medical care and treatment, alone, was in excess of

several hundred thousand dollars, in addition to the other elements of damage provided by

the law such as physical impairment, mental anguish, and the other elements of damages

recognized by our law.

VIII. Attorney’s Fees

56. Plaintiff has been required to retain the services of attorneys to represent him in this

proceeding and cause of action. Plaintiff has retained the undersigned attorney to represent

him, and pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1988(b) of the Federal Civil Rights Act, he is entitled to

recover his reasonable and necessary fees incurred for this attorney, and the reasonable and

necessary expenses incurred in the pursuit of this claim at the trial level, the Court of Appeals



12/12


level if the case is appealed to that Court, and in the Supreme Court of the United States, if

necessary.

Prayer for Relief

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff requests that:

1. Plaintiffs ask for judgment against Defendants and prays for:

a. trial by jury on all issues triable to a jury;

b. judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, on behalf of the Plaintiff for actual

damages pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983;

c. statutory and reasonable attorney fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1988(b) of the Federal

Civil Rights Act, pre-judgment interest, post-judgment interest, and all of his costs

herein expended;

d. judgment against the Defendants in favor of the Plaintiff for actual damages; and

e. any and all additional relief to which the Plaintiff may appear to be entitled.

Filed, this 21st day of January, 2015.

Respectfully submitted,

CASEY LAW OFFICE, P.C.

/s/ Stephen CaseyStephen CaseyTexas Bar No. 24065015

Casey Law Office, P.C.595 Round Rock West DriveRound Rock, Texas 78681

Telephone: 512-257-1324Fax: [email protected] Attorney for Plaintiff


Tramell v Round Rock (Complaint)

Documents

Transcript of Tramell v Round Rock (Complaint)