Complaint With Jury Demand - Oduimoh

Case: 1:20-cv-00469-DRC Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/15/20 Page: 1 of 18 PAGEID #: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
MONDAY ODUIMOH, : CASE NO. 1:20-CV-469

:
PLAINTIFF, : JUDGE
:
V. :
:
VILLAGE OF ELMWOOD PLACE, :
:
AND : COMPLAINT WITH JURY
: DEMAND
ROBERT MCCONNELL, :
:
DEFENDANTS. :
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
1. This case challenges the unlawful and injurious governmental intrusion into the life
of Monday Oduimoh.
2. Mr. Oduimoh is a black man who was unlawfully targeted, assaulted, handcuffed,
detained, and charged for a crime he did not commit by a white police officer.
3. The Defendants the Village of Elmwood Place and Sgt. Robert McConnell have a
history of treating black citizens differently than white citizens.
4. Mr. Oduimoh was targeted due to his race, was treated unlawfully due to his race,
and was falsely charged with a crime due to his race.
5. Although the Constitution of the United States affords citizens of all races the right
to be treated equally regardless of their race, black Americans have suffered from race-based
discrimination throughout the history of the United States.
1
6. By way of this case, Mr. Oduimoh wishes his voice to be heard amongst the
countless others who understand that black Americans will continue to suffer at the hands of police
officers until they are afforded the rights guaranteed to them by the Constitution of the United
States. Mr. Oduimoh seeks to vindicate these rights and hold the Defendants accountable for their
violations of the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United
States.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
7. This Court has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because of the federal claims
involved including those arising under the United States Constitution and 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
8. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims involved under
28 U.S.C. § 1367.
9. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), as the Defendants
are located within this District, and the conduct complained of occurred within this District.
PARTIES
10. Plaintiff Monday Oduimoh, a black man, is a citizen of the State of Ohio and
resides within this District.
11. Defendant Sergeant Robert McConnell is a white man who was employed as a
police officer by the Village of Elmwood Place in Hamilton County, Ohio. During the relevant
periods of time herein, Sgt. McConnell was responsible for the investigation, stop, search,
detention, arrest, and filing of charges of against Mr. Oduimoh.
12. Defendant the Village of Elmwood Place (the “Village”) is a municipal corporation
located within this District.
2
13. All actions and omissions set forth herein by all Defendants were done under the
color of state law.
FACTS
14. On September 28, 2019 at approximately 4:49 p.m. Mr. Oduimoh was driving to
work when he pulled into the UDF on Vine Street to get gas.
15. Upon information and belief, Sgt. McConnell drove his cruiser behind Mr.
Oduimoh and decided to conduct a “registration check” of Mr. Oduimoh’s license plate number
solely because Mr. Oduimoh is a black man.
16. Upon information and belief, when Sgt. McConnell ran Mr. Oduimoh’s license
plate, he was informed that there was a warrant for the arrest of man named Damien Johnson.
17. Upon information and belief, Mr. Oduimoh’s ex-wife had allowed Damien Johnson
to drive Mr. Oduimoh’s car in 2018, at which time Damien Johnson was pulled over for speeding
and was charged with driving under suspension - a first-degree misdemeanor under Ohio Revised
Code § 4510.11.
18. Upon information and belief, a warrant was issued for Damien Johnson when he
did not appear in court for the first-degree misdemeanor charge of driving under suspension.
19. Mr. Oduimoh does not know who Damien Johnson is, and was never aware that
Damien Johnson apparently drove Mr. Oduimoh’s car.
20. After unlawfully targeting Mr. Oduimoh for being a black man, and discovering
the warrant for Damien Johnson, Sgt. McConnell was determined to arrest Mr. Oduimoh.
21. Thus, Sgt. McConnell followed Mr. Oduimoh into the UDF parking lot, pulled his
cruiser behind Mr. Oduimoh, and activated his lights.
3
22. Sgt. McConnell exited his vehicle and approached the driver side door of Mr.
Oduimoh’s vehicle.
23. Mr. Oduimoh had opened his door but had not yet exited his vehicle when Sgt.
McConnell suddenly stood over Mr. Oduimoh and demanded his identification.
24. Mr. Oduimoh respectfully asked Sgt. McConnell, “What did I do?” to which Sgt.
McConnell responded, “You don’t get to ask me questions.”
25. Mr. Oduimoh immediately produced his driver’s license which identified him as
“Monday Oduimoh” and not the Damien Johnson who had a warrant for the misdemeanor offense
of driving under suspension.
26. Rather than examine the driver’s license, Sgt. McConnell grabbed Mr. Oduimoh’s
wrist and violently jerked him out of the car, spun him around, forcefully pressed him up against
the car, and handcuffed Mr. Oduimoh’s wrists behind his back.
27. Mr. Oduimoh was never asked to step out of his car, and did not resist Sgt.
McConnell whatsoever, yet he was forcefully removed from his car, handcuffed, and searched by
Sgt. McConnell.
28. Sgt. McConnell then escorted Mr. Oduimoh to his police cruiser where he detained
Mr. Oduimoh in the backseat of the cruiser while still handcuffed.
29. Sgt. McConnell then sat in the driver’s seat of his cruiser where he began typing on
his in-car computer.
30. From the backseat of the cruiser, Mr. Oduimoh asked Sgt. McConnell why he was
being detained, at which point Sgt. McConnell told Mr. Oduimoh that he was Damien Johnson
and there was a warrant for his arrest.
4
31. Mr. Oduimoh informed Sgt. McConnell of his actual identity, and implored Sgt.
McConnell to look at his driver’s license. Instead, Sgt. McConnell said Mr. Oduimoh was lying
about his identity and continued to operate his in-car computer.
32. After approximately thirteen minutes, Sgt. McConnell finally determined that Mr.
Oduimoh was not Damien Johnson.
33. Rather than release Mr. Oduimoh, Sgt. McConnell charged him with Obstructing
Official Business and issued him a citation in which he alleged, in part that:
I observed a blue in color 2007 Ford SUV…I conducted a vehicle registration check
which showed multiple warrants attached to the vehicle on a black male subject. I
looked in the vehicle and observed a black male operating the vehicle. I initiated a
traffic stop and made contact with the driver whom was later identified as Monday
A. Oduimoh. On contact with Mr. Oduimoh, he was extremely belligerent and
screamed and yelled at me. I advised Mr. Oduimoh that his vehicle had warrants
attached to it and asked for his identification. Mr. Oduimoh suggested that I was a
liar and there were no warrants attached to the vehicle. Mr. Oduimoh continued to
act in a belligerent manner and was moving his hands around in his car. I felt
uncomfortable leaving Mr. Oduimoh in his vehicle without patting him down for
weapons due to Mr. Oduimohs [sic] erratic behavior and not knowing if Mr.
Oduimoh was the wanted person. I asked Mr. Oduimoh to step out of the vehicle
and he refused. I ordered Mr. Oduimoh to step out of the vehicle. Mr. Oduimoh
continued to refuse. I went hands on with Mr. Oduimoh and escorted him out of the
vehicle. Mr. Oduimoh put up a brief struggle before being secured in handcuffs.
This officer determined Mr. Oduimoh to not be the wanted person. This officer
issued Mr. Oduimoh a misdemeanor citation and released him.
34. A true and accurate copy of the Citation Detail is attached as Exhibit A.
35. The Village does not outfit its officers with cruiser cameras or body cameras.
36. Sgt. McConnell thus believed that his interaction with Mr. Oduimoh was not
recorded, which emboldened Sgt. McConnell to falsify his arrest report and charge Mr. Oduimoh
for a crime he did not commit.
37. Mr. Oduimoh, however, was able to obtain the surveillance video from the UDF
store, which recorded the unlawful actions of Sgt. McConnell.
5
38. There were no facts to support Sgt. McConnell’s use of force against Mr. Oduimoh.
39. There were no facts to support Sgt. McConnell’s handcuffing of Mr. Oduimoh.
40. There were no facts to support Sgt. McConnell’s detention of Mr. Oduimoh in the
back of his cruiser.
41. There were no facts to support Sgt. McConnell’s decision to charge Mr. Oduimoh
with the crime of Obstructing Official Business.
42. Sgt. McConnell intentionally falsified the Citation Detail.
43. Mr. Oduimoh appeared before the Village Mayor’s Court on October 8, 2019 at
which time he entered a plea of not guilty.
44. His case was transferred to the Hamilton County Municipal Court where, after
reviewing the case file, the prosecutor dismissed the case.
45. Sgt. McConnell has a history of making unlawful arrests.
46. When Sgt. McConnell was hired by the Village in 2016, the Village did not
investigate Sgt. McConnell’s past employment history.
47. Had the Village investigated Sgt. McConnell’s employment history, it would have
discovered that Sgt. McConnell resigned from his position as a police officer in Mechanicsburg,
Ohio to avoid discipline and possibly termination for conducting unlawful arrests.
48. When Sgt. McConnell was hired to work in the Village in 2016, it was the fifth
police department McConnell had worked at in the preceding five years.
49. In 2017, while employed with the Village, Sgt. McConnell was involved in an
incident where he forcefully removed a black woman from her car and tased her in the street.
50. The incident was documented in an investigation by Channel 9’s “I-Team.”
6
51. During an interview with the “I-Team” reporter, Village Mayor William Wilson
claimed he was unaware of Sgt. McConnell’s past employment incidents when McConnell was
hired by the Village. Mayor Wilson added that the Village hires its police officers based only the
information provided to the Village by the applicants, and that the Village did not independently
request information from an applicant’s prior employers.
52. Upon information and belief, Sgt. McConnell received no discipline for the incident
in 2017, and was permitted to continue policing the Village.
53. The unlawful conduct described above constitutes violations of Mr. Oduimoh’s
Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights.
54. The unlawful conduct described above has caused Mr. Oduimoh to suffer severe
emotional distress including, without limitation, severe anxiety and mistrust in dealing with
government and authority figures.
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Violation of Fourteenth Amendment Rights
Sgt. McConnell
55. Mr. Oduimoh incorporates the foregoing allegations as if fully restated here.
56. All persons in the United States have a right to equal protection of the laws
guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
57. This action arises under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the
United States, and under federal law, particularly Title 42 of the United States Code, § 1983.
58. Sgt. McConnell targeted Mr. Oduimoh for investigation due to Mr. Oduimoh’s
race.
59. Sgt. McConnell forcefully detained Mr. Oduimoh due to Mr. Oduimoh’s race.
7
60. Sgt. McConnell falsified his arrest report and charged Mr. Oduimoh with a crime
he did not commit because Mr. Oduimoh is a black man.
61. At all relevant times, Sgt. McConnell was acting under the color of state law.
62. The conduct of Sgt. McConnell deprived Mr. Oduimoh of the right to the equal
protection of the laws, secured by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United
States.
63. Mr. Oduimoh has suffered damages as a direct and proximate result of the
deprivation of his Fourteenth Amendment rights.
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Violation of Fourteenth Amendment Rights
Village of Elmwood Place
65. This action arises under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the
United States, and under federal law, particularly Title 42 of the United States Code, § 1983.
66. A governmental entity is responsible under § 1983 “when the execution of [its]
policy or custom, whether made by its lawmakers or by those whose edicts or acts may fairly be
said to represent official policy, inflicts the injury….” Monell v. Dep’t Servs. Of City of New York,
436 U.S. 658, 694 (1978).
67. The Village has unconstitutional customs, policies, and procedures relating to the
policing of minorities within its jurisdiction and neglecting the civil rights of racial minorities.
68. The Village has failed to appropriately screen, hire, train, and discipline its police
officers in matters concerning race-based policing.
8
69. The Village’s failure to screen, hire, train, and discipline its police officers in
matters concerning race-based policing amounts to deliberate indifference to the rights of persons
with whom the police officers come into contact.
70. The Village has ignored its history of unconstitutional race-based policing and was
on notice that training in this area was deficient and likely to cause injury.
71. The Village’s unconstitutional customs, policies, and procedures is evidenced by
Sgt. McConnell’s hiring, continued employment after racial incidents, and his unconstitutional
investigation, detention, use of force and filing of false criminal charges against Mr. Oduimoh.
72. Upon information and belief, Sgt. McConnell acted pursuant to the Village’s
customs, policies, and procedures when he deprived Mr. Oduimoh of his constitutional rights.
73. As a direct and proximate result of the conduct of the Village, Mr. Oduimoh
suffered a deprivation of his constitutional rights and damages.
THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Violation of Fourth Amendment Rights – Excessive Force
Sgt. McConnell
75. This action arises under the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United
States, and under federal law, particularly Title 42 of the United States Code, § 1983.
76. In view of all the circumstances surrounding the incident, Sgt. McConnell’s use of
force against Mr. Oduimoh was unwarranted.
77. In view of all the circumstances surrounding the incident, Sgt. McConnell’s action
in grabbing Mr. Oduimoh’s wrist, jerking him out of his car, and pinning him against the car
constituted the use of excessive force.
9
78. In view of all the circumstances surrounding the incident, the placement of Mr.
Oduimoh into handcuffs, the timing of placing him in handcuffs, the use and/or continued use of
handcuffs on Mr. Oduimoh in light of no immediate or articulable threat to Sgt. McConnell
existing constituted the use of excessive force.
79. Sgt. McConnell, while operating under the color of state law, deprived Mr.
Oduimoh of the rights, privileges and immunities secured by the Fourth Amendment to the
Constitution of the United States.
80. As a direct and proximate result of Sgt. McConnell’s violations or deprivations of
the rights, privileges and immunities of Mr. Oduimoh that are secured by the United States
Constitution, Mr. Oduimoh has suffered damages.
FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Violation of Fourth Amendment Rights – Excessive Force
436 U.S. 658, 694 (1978).
use of force against persons within its jurisdiction.
officers in matters involving the use of force by officers against persons.
10
matters concerning the use of force against persons amounts to deliberate indifference to the rights
of persons with whom the police officers come into contact.
87. The Village ignored prior incidents involving the use of excessive force by its
police officers, including Sgt. McConnell, and was on notice that the lack of training and/or
supervision in this area would likely result in injury.
FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Violation of Fourth Amendment Rights – Illegal Search & Seizure
Sgt. McConnell
92. In view of all the circumstances surrounding the incident, the stop, detention, and
arrest of Mr. Oduimoh was unwarranted.
93. In view of all the circumstances surrounding the incident, the forceful removal of
Mr. Oduimoh from his vehicle, placement of Mr. Oduimoh into handcuffs, the timing of placing
him in handcuffs, the use and/or continued use of handcuffs on Mr. Oduimoh in light of no
immediate or articulable threat to Sgt. McConnell existing, the continued or extended use of
handcuffs on Mr. Oduimoh even after the facts and circumstances should have dispelled any
suspicions or hunches, and the search of Mr. Oduimoh exceeded the permissible scope of any
11
putative Terry stop, as well as made the actions of Sgt. McConnell not the least intrusive means
reasonably available to verify or dispel any suspicion or hunch.
94. The detention and continued detention of Mr. Oduimoh constituted an arrest
without probable cause.
95. The search of Mr. Oduimoh while in handcuffs constitutes a warrantless search
that was not premised upon probable cause or exigent circumstances.
96. Sgt. McConnell, while operating under the color of state law, deprived Mr.
Oduimoh of the rights, privileges and immunities secured by Fourth Amendment to the
Constitution of the United States.
97. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ violations or deprivations of the
rights, privileges and immunities of Mr. Oduimoh that are secured by the United States
SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Violation of Fourth Amendment Rights – Illegal Search & Seizure
436 U.S. 658, 694 (1978).
search and seizure of persons within its jurisdiction.
12
officers in matters involving the search and seizure of persons within its jurisdiction.
matters concerning the search and seizure of persons amounts to deliberate indifference to the
rights of persons with whom the police officers come into contact.
104. The Village ignored prior incidents involving illegal search and seizures by its
police officers, including Sgt. McConnell, and was on notice that the lack of training and/or
supervision in this area would likely result in injury.
SEVENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Violation of Fourth Amendment Rights – Malicious Prosecution
Sgt. McConnell
109. Sgt. McConnell was operating under the color of law during the incident with Mr.
Oduimoh.
110. Sgt. McConnell initiated a criminal proceeding against Mr. Oduimoh without
probable cause.
111. Sgt. McConnell initiated a criminal proceeding against Mr. Oduimoh based on facts
which he knew to be false.
13
112. Mr. Oduimoh suffered a deprivation of liberty as a result of the criminal
proceedings initiated against him.
113. The criminal proceeding was resolved in Mr. Oduimoh’s favor.
114. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ violations or deprivations of the
rights, privileges and immunities of Mr. Oduimoh that are secured by the United States
EIGHTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Violation of Fourth Amendment Rights – Malicious Prosecution
436 U.S. 658, 694 (1978).
prosecution of persons without probable cause.
officers in matters involving the prosecution of persons without probable cause.
matters concerning the prosecution of persons without probable cause amounts to deliberate
indifference to the rights of persons with whom the police officers come into contact.
14
121. The Village ignored prior incidents involving the prosecution of persons without
probable cause and was on notice that the lack of training and/or supervision in this area would
likely result in injury.
NINTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

False Arrest / False Imprisonment
Sgt. McConnell
125. This tort action arises under the common law of the State of Ohio.
126. Sgt. McConnell intentionally and unlawfully confined or detained Mr. Oduimoh
within a limited area, for an appreciable time, against his will and without lawful justification.
127. In intentionally and unlawfully confining or detaining Mr. Oduimoh, Sgt.
McConnell acted maliciously, in bad faith, or in a wanton or reckless manner with respect to the
rights and interests of Mr. Oduimoh.
128. As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing conduct of Sgt. McConnell, Mr.
Oduimoh has suffered damages.
TENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Malicious Prosecution
Sgt. McConnell
15
131. Sgt. McConnell instituted criminal proceedings against Mr. Oduimoh that were
terminated in Mr. Oduimoh’s favor.
132. Sgt. McConnell lacked probable cause to institute criminal proceedings against Mr.
Oduimoh.
133. Sgt. McConnell acted with malice or with a purpose other than to bring Mr.
Oduimoh to justice.
134. As a direct and proximate result of Sgt. McConnell’s malicious prosecution, Mr.
Oduimoh suffered damages including a deprivation of his liberty.
ELEVENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
Sgt. McConnell
137. The foregoing actions and omissions of Sgt. McConnell towards Mr. Oduimoh
were outrageous in character and so extreme in degree as to go beyond all possible bounds of
decency, and to be regarded as atrocious and utterly intolerable in a civilized community.
138. The foregoing actions and omissions of Sgt. McConnell towards Mr. Oduimoh
caused Mr. Oduimoh to suffer severe emotional distress.
139. As a direct and proximate result of the foregoing, Mr. Oduimoh has suffered
damages.
TWELFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

Assault and Battery
Sgt. McConnell
16
142. Sgt. McConnell intended to, and did, cause Mr. Oduimoh to suffer fear and
apprehension when he stood over Mr. Oduimoh at the driver’s side door of his vehicle.
143. Sgt. McConnell intended to, and did, cause harmful or offensive contact to Mr.
Oduimoh when he forcefully removed Mr. Oduimoh from his vehicle, pinned him against the
vehicle with his hands behind his back and placed Mr. Oduimoh in handcuffs.
144. In view of all the circumstances surrounding the incident, a reasonable person
would find the conduct of Sgt. McConnell to be harmful and offensive.
145. As a direct and proximate result of the assault and battery by Sgt. McConnell, Mr.
Oduimoh has suffered damages.
WHEREFORE, Mr. Oduimoh prays that the Court enter judgment in his favor and against
the Defendants as follows:
(1) Granting compensatory damages against all Defendants in an amount to be determined
at trial;
(2) Granting punitive damages against Sgt. McConnell in an amount to be determined at
trial;
(3) Awarding Mr. Oduimoh his attorney fees and costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1988; and,
(4) Granting any other relief to which Mr. Oduimoh may be entitled in law or in equity.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Bradley M. Gibson

_____________________________
Bradley M. Gibson (0087109)
Finney Law Firm, LLC
1077 Celestial Street, Suite 10
Cincinnati, OH 45202
Telephone: (513) 943-6661
Facsimile: (513) 943-6669
17
Email: brad@finneylawfirm.com
Richard Ganulin (0025642)

3662 Kendall Avenue
Cincinnati, OH 45208
Telephone: (513) 405-6696
Email: rganulin@gmail.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff demands a trial by jury.
/s/ Bradley M. Gibson

_____________________________
Bradley M. Gibson (0087109)
18

Complaint With Jury Demand - Oduimoh

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

Complaint With Jury Demand - Oduimoh

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Complaint With Jury Demand - Oduimoh

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case: 1:20-cv-00469-DRC Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/15/20 Page: 1 of 18 PAGEID #: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MONDAY ODUIMOH, : CASE NO. 1:20-CV-469

history of treating black citizens differently than white citizens.

and was falsely charged with a crime due to his race.

discrimination throughout the history of the United States.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

9. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), as the Defendants

resides within this District.

detention, arrest, and filing of charges of against Mr. Oduimoh.

located within this District.

color of state law.

solely because Mr. Oduimoh is a black man.

Damien Johnson apparently drove Mr. Oduimoh’s car.

cruiser behind Mr. Oduimoh, and activated his lights.

McConnell responded, “You don’t get to ask me questions.”

of driving under suspension.

Mr. Oduimoh in the backseat of the cruiser while still handcuffed.

his in-car computer.

and there was a warrant for his arrest.

about his identity and continued to operate his in-car computer.

Oduimoh was not Damien Johnson.

for a crime he did not commit.

store, which recorded the unlawful actions of Sgt. McConnell.

back of his cruiser.

with the crime of Obstructing Official Business.

42. Sgt. McConnell intentionally falsified the Citation Detail.

which time he entered a plea of not guilty.

reviewing the case file, the prosecutor dismissed the case.

45. Sgt. McConnell has a history of making unlawful arrests.

investigate Sgt. McConnell’s past employment history.

police department McConnell had worked at in the preceding five years.

50. The incident was documented in an investigation by Channel 9’s “I-Team.”

request information from an applicant’s prior employers.

in 2017, and was permitted to continue policing the Village.

Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights.

government and authority figures.

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

he did not commit because Mr. Oduimoh is a black man.

deprivation of his Fourteenth Amendment rights.

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

436 U.S. 658, 694 (1978).

officers in matters concerning race-based policing.

with whom the police officers come into contact.

71. The Village’s unconstitutional customs, policies, and procedures is evidenced by

suffered a deprivation of his constitutional rights and damages.

THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF

force against Mr. Oduimoh was unwarranted.

constituted the use of excessive force.

handcuffs on Mr. Oduimoh in light of no immediate or articulable threat to Sgt. McConnell

existing constituted the use of excessive force.

Constitution of the United States.

80. As a direct and proximate result of Sgt. McConnell’s violations or deprivations of

Constitution, Mr. Oduimoh has suffered damages.

FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF

436 U.S. 658, 694 (1978).

use of force against persons within its jurisdiction.