SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION
)
EDWIN STEAKLEY, )
Plaintiff, )
v. ) CASE NO. 3:19-mc-9999
)
CORECIVIC, INC., formerly known as )
Corrections Corporation of America; )
JEFFERY REEVES; RUSSELL WASHBURN, )
in his individual and in his official capacity )
as warden of Trousdale Turner )
Correctional Facility; KEITH HUGGINS, )
in his individual and in his official capacity )
as chief of security of Trousdale Turner )
Correctional Facility; HARLEY SILCOX, )
in her individual and in her official )
capacity as correctional sergeant at )
Trousdale Turner Correctional Facility )
Defendants. )
COMPLAINT
1. Plaintiff Edwin Steakley, by and through counsel Daniel Ayoade Yoon, files this
complaint under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and all other applicable state and federal law,
naming as defendants CoreCivic, Inc., Jeffery Reeves, Warden Russell Washburn,
Chief of Security Keith Huggins, and Sergeant Haley SIlcox as violating his
constitutional rights and for inflicting tortious injuries.
PARTIES
2. Plaintiff Edwin Steakley is a living, natural person and resident of Trousdale County,
Tennessee.
3. Defendant CoreCivic, Inc., is a real estate investment trust, a Maryland corporation
with its principal place of business at 10 Burton Hills Boulevard, Nashville,
Case 3:19-cv-00160 Document 1 Filed 02/20/19 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1
2
Tennessee. CoreCivic operates Trousdale Turner Correctional Facility (“TTCC”),
under the full authority of the State of Tennessee pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann.
Sections 41-24-101, et. seq., and/or 41-8-101, et seq. and acting under color of state
law. CoreCivic is the entity charged by the State of Tennessee with authority to
maintain Trousdale Turner Correctional Facility and has a non-delegable duty to
ensure that persons housed at TTCC are protected by the Constitution and laws of
the United States and the State of Tennessee. Defendant CoreCivic is responsible
for the implementation of policies, procedures, practices, and customs, as well as
the acts and omissions, challenged by this action.
4. Defendant Russell Washburn is the warden of TTCC at all times relevant to this
complaint and exercises plenary authority over all TTCC staff.
5. Defendant Keith Huggins is chief of security at TTCC at all times relevant to this
complaint. He is believed to be a resident of Rutherford County, Tennessee.
6. Defendant Harley Silcox is a correctional sergeant at TTCC at all times relevant to
this complaint. She is believed to be a resident of Smith County, Tennessee.
7. Defendant Jeffery Reeves is a living, natural person and is believed to be a resident of
Lawrence County, Tennessee.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
8. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1367.
9. Venue lies in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(1) because Defendant
CoreCivic is a resident of this District, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sections 13919(c)(2) and
1391(d).
Case 3:19-cv-00160 Document 1 Filed 02/20/19 Page 2 of 7 PageID #: 2
3
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
10. On more than one occasion, defendant Reeves threatened sexual assault on Plaintiff
prior to February 20, 2018.
11. On more than one occasion, Plaintiff communicated the threats of sexual violence
by defendant Reeves to CoreCivic, Inc., and each of the defendants named in this
complaint asking for help.
12. On January 20, 2018, Plaintiff notified a CoreCivic official that “my cellie has been
making sexual remarks and reaching for his private area, and talking about me
sucking it. Can you help.” [sic]
13. On January 21, 2018, Plaintiff notified defendant Silcox that “My cellie is making
sexual remarks about me sucking his penis and then is reaching for his pants like to
undo them. Help.”
14. On January 23, 2018, Plaintiff notified defendant Washburn that “Sir I have wrote
C/M Jones and spoke with him, SGT Silcox wrote her and spoke to her, wrote my
counsler, and nothing has been don about my cellie making sexual remarks and
reaching like he is going to undo his pants, the hole time telling me he is going to
make me suck it.” [sic]
15. On February 20, 2018, defendant Jeffery Reeves held a shank to Plaintiff and forcibly
penetrated plaintiff with his penis under threat of violence.
16. Following the sexual assault on February 20, 2018, Plaintiff suffered extreme
emotional distress and bodily injury.
Case 3:19-cv-00160 Document 1 Filed 02/20/19 Page 3 of 7 PageID #: 3
4
17. Plaintiff reported his injuries to CoreCivic, Inc., and each of the defendants named in
this complaint and failed to receive adequate medical care, resulting in further
harm.
PRAYERS FOR RELIEF
18. Plaintiffs re-allege and re-aver the preceding paragraphs, and the preceding
paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference.
19. On information and belief, defendants CoreCivic, Washburn, Huggins, Silcox, and
Correct Care Recovery Solutions created, affirmatively issued, permitted,
encouraged, tolerated, and knowingly acquiesced in violating Plaintiff’s rights,
through the existence of an official pattern, practice, and custom of ignoring or
otherwise disregarding TDOC policy, federal and state constitutions and statutes,
including but not limited to the Prison Rape Elimination Act.
20. Defendants were deliberately indifferent to Plaintiff’s constitutional rights because
they were aware of the existence of danger of sexual assault and failed to take
reasonable measures to protect Plaintiff from assault by another inmate.
21. Defendants failed to investigate the threats, directly leading to the assault on
Plaintiff on February 20, 2018.
22. Defendants failed to abide by their constitutional and state law duties of care to
timely and meaningfully take action on prisoners’ grievances.
23. Defendants displayed deliberate indifference and reckless disregard for Plaintiff’s
safety by failing to act reasonably in response to the known danger, thus violating
Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment rights under the U.S. Constitution.
Case 3:19-cv-00160 Document 1 Filed 02/20/19 Page 4 of 7 PageID #: 4
5
24. Defendants knew of and disregarded an excessive risk to Plaintiff’s health and
safety. They were aware of specific facts that a substantial risk of serious harm
existed.
25. Defendants had actual knowledge of the risk and purposefully avoided further
knowledge of the excessive and substantial risk of serious harm.
26. Measures were neither taken nor reasonably calculated to ensure Plaintiff’s safety
from violence.
27. Plaintiff specifically requested protective custody and defendants failed to act nor
act reasonably, and did not act reasonably in response to being alerted of Plaintiff’s
danger of victimization.
28. Defendants failed to follow their own rules, regulations and policies concerning
protection of Plaintiff. In fact, defendants CoreCivic, Inc., Washburn, Huggins, and
SIlcox maintained a policy, practice, and custom of ignoring prisoner complaints and
grievances alleging the risk of victimization from other prisoners, and failed to act
upon information provided to them, thus violating Plaintiff’s rights under the Eighth
Amendment.
29. Defendants failed to respond to a particular threat and danger to Plaintiff,
specifically, Plaintiff’s plea for help that Defendant Reeves was making inappropriate
and unwanted sexual advances toward Plaintiff.
30. Defendants failed to adequately supervise Plaintiff and defendant Reeves. The
assault and tortious injuries suffered by Plaintiff were reasonably foreseeable to
defendants, as he had warned Defendants of the risk of victimization, yet
Case 3:19-cv-00160 Document 1 Filed 02/20/19 Page 5 of 7 PageID #: 5
6
Defendants did nothing to attempt to prevent Defendant Reeves’s sexual assault of
Plaintiff. Defendants knew and had reason to know that the assault and tortious
injuries would occur.
WHEREFORE, defendants’ actions constitute intentional and negligent infliction of
emotional distress, assault and battery, false imprisonment, and deliberate
indifference under the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the plaintiff
prays:
31. That the defendants answer this complaint within the time provided by law.
32. That this cause be tried by a jury.
33. That judgment for Plaintiffs enter against the Defendants on each count.
34. That Plaintiff be awarded nominal damages on all counts.
35. That Plaintiff be awarded compensatory damages in an amount determined by the
jury.
36. That Plaintiff be awarded punitive damages in an amount determined by the jury
because Defendants acted with malice, ill will, evil motive, and callous indifference
to Plaintiff’s federally protected rights.
37. That Plaintiff be awarded attorney’s fees and reasonable litigation expenses,
including expert witness fees, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 1988 and F.R. Civ. Pro.
54(d).
38. That the court costs in this matter be taxed to Defendants.
39. That Plaintiff be awarded pre- and post-judgment interest against Defendants.
Case 3:19-cv-00160 Document 1 Filed 02/20/19 Page 6 of 7 PageID #: 6
7
40. That the Court enter declaratory judgment holding that Defendants’ conduct,
practice, and custom of ignoring or otherwise failing to take appropriate action in
the face of known threats, including disregarding formal prisoner grievances, is in
violation of Plaintiff’s federally protected rights.
41. That Plaintiff be awarded all other relief to which it may appear he is entitled in the
interests of justice.
Respectfully submitted,
s/ Daniel Ayoade Yoon
Daniel Ayoade Yoon, BPR 028798
2004 8th Ave S.
Nashville, TN 37204
T: (615) 541-5141
E: danielayoadeyoon@gmail.com
Case 3:19-cv-00160 Document 1 Filed 02/20/19 Page 7 of 7 PageID #: 7

More Related Content

Similar to Steakley complaint (1)

Stephen Slevin vs. Board of County Commissioners - Lawsuit Against Jail for M...
Stephen Slevin vs. Board of County Commissioners - Lawsuit Against Jail for M...Stephen Slevin vs. Board of County Commissioners - Lawsuit Against Jail for M...
Stephen Slevin vs. Board of County Commissioners - Lawsuit Against Jail for M...
Umesh Heendeniya
 
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORKSUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
Nowseore
 
Whitley v. Shabazz (Reply and Memo).pdf
Whitley v.  Shabazz (Reply and Memo).pdfWhitley v.  Shabazz (Reply and Memo).pdf
Whitley v. Shabazz (Reply and Memo).pdf
Abdul-Hakim Shabazz
 
Filed Complaint
Filed ComplaintFiled Complaint
Filed Complaint
Lucy Kirschinger
 
Complaint final
Complaint   finalComplaint   final
Complaint final
Luis González
 
Brayshaw v. Annette Garrett, Unconstitutional Internet Posting Removals
Brayshaw v. Annette Garrett, Unconstitutional Internet Posting RemovalsBrayshaw v. Annette Garrett, Unconstitutional Internet Posting Removals
Brayshaw v. Annette Garrett, Unconstitutional Internet Posting Removals
Terry81
 
05/12/12 COMPLAINT (Page Kruger & Holland)
05/12/12 COMPLAINT (Page Kruger & Holland)05/12/12 COMPLAINT (Page Kruger & Holland)
05/12/12 COMPLAINT (Page Kruger & Holland)
VogelDenise
 
Doc.91
Doc.91Doc.91
Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...
Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...
Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...
Cocoselul Inaripat
 
Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...
Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...
Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...
Cocoselul Inaripat
 
Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...
Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...
Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...
Cocoselul Inaripat
 
Doc.91
Doc.91Doc.91
Former state water official files federal civil rights lawsuit against Las Ve...
Former state water official files federal civil rights lawsuit against Las Ve...Former state water official files federal civil rights lawsuit against Las Ve...
Former state water official files federal civil rights lawsuit against Las Ve...
This Is Reno
 
Response to Ethics Commission charges
Response to Ethics Commission chargesResponse to Ethics Commission charges
Response to Ethics Commission charges
Honolulu Civil Beat
 
Doc.87 1
Doc.87 1Doc.87 1
Affidavit in support of motion for summary judgment
Affidavit in support of motion for summary judgmentAffidavit in support of motion for summary judgment
Affidavit in support of motion for summary judgment
Cocoselul Inaripat
 
Affidavit in support of motion for summary judgment
Affidavit in support of motion for summary judgmentAffidavit in support of motion for summary judgment
Affidavit in support of motion for summary judgment
Cocoselul Inaripat
 
Doc.87 1
Doc.87 1Doc.87 1
Affidavit in support of motion for summary judgment
Affidavit in support of motion for summary judgmentAffidavit in support of motion for summary judgment
Affidavit in support of motion for summary judgment
Cocoselul Inaripat
 
People_v._Knight.PDF
People_v._Knight.PDFPeople_v._Knight.PDF
People_v._Knight.PDF
Elizabeth Atkins
 

Similar to Steakley complaint (1) (20)

Stephen Slevin vs. Board of County Commissioners - Lawsuit Against Jail for M...
Stephen Slevin vs. Board of County Commissioners - Lawsuit Against Jail for M...Stephen Slevin vs. Board of County Commissioners - Lawsuit Against Jail for M...
Stephen Slevin vs. Board of County Commissioners - Lawsuit Against Jail for M...
 
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORKSUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK
 
Whitley v. Shabazz (Reply and Memo).pdf
Whitley v.  Shabazz (Reply and Memo).pdfWhitley v.  Shabazz (Reply and Memo).pdf
Whitley v. Shabazz (Reply and Memo).pdf
 
Filed Complaint
Filed ComplaintFiled Complaint
Filed Complaint
 
Complaint final
Complaint   finalComplaint   final
Complaint final
 
Brayshaw v. Annette Garrett, Unconstitutional Internet Posting Removals
Brayshaw v. Annette Garrett, Unconstitutional Internet Posting RemovalsBrayshaw v. Annette Garrett, Unconstitutional Internet Posting Removals
Brayshaw v. Annette Garrett, Unconstitutional Internet Posting Removals
 
05/12/12 COMPLAINT (Page Kruger & Holland)
05/12/12 COMPLAINT (Page Kruger & Holland)05/12/12 COMPLAINT (Page Kruger & Holland)
05/12/12 COMPLAINT (Page Kruger & Holland)
 
Doc.91
Doc.91Doc.91
Doc.91
 
Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...
Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...
Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...
 
Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...
Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...
Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...
 
Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...
Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...
Defendants’ reply brief in response to plaintiff’s response brief and in supp...
 
Doc.91
Doc.91Doc.91
Doc.91
 
Former state water official files federal civil rights lawsuit against Las Ve...
Former state water official files federal civil rights lawsuit against Las Ve...Former state water official files federal civil rights lawsuit against Las Ve...
Former state water official files federal civil rights lawsuit against Las Ve...
 
Response to Ethics Commission charges
Response to Ethics Commission chargesResponse to Ethics Commission charges
Response to Ethics Commission charges
 
Doc.87 1
Doc.87 1Doc.87 1
Doc.87 1
 
Affidavit in support of motion for summary judgment
Affidavit in support of motion for summary judgmentAffidavit in support of motion for summary judgment
Affidavit in support of motion for summary judgment
 
Affidavit in support of motion for summary judgment
Affidavit in support of motion for summary judgmentAffidavit in support of motion for summary judgment
Affidavit in support of motion for summary judgment
 
Doc.87 1
Doc.87 1Doc.87 1
Doc.87 1
 
Affidavit in support of motion for summary judgment
Affidavit in support of motion for summary judgmentAffidavit in support of motion for summary judgment
Affidavit in support of motion for summary judgment
 
People_v._Knight.PDF
People_v._Knight.PDFPeople_v._Knight.PDF
People_v._Knight.PDF
 

More from Catlin Bogard

1 7-22 tammy barrett statement
1 7-22 tammy barrett statement1 7-22 tammy barrett statement
1 7-22 tammy barrett statement
Catlin Bogard
 
Sexton letter
Sexton letterSexton letter
Sexton letter
Catlin Bogard
 
Save our fairgrounds appeal
Save our fairgrounds appealSave our fairgrounds appeal
Save our fairgrounds appeal
Catlin Bogard
 
Steakley complaint
Steakley complaintSteakley complaint
Steakley complaint
Catlin Bogard
 
Core civic response for web
Core civic response   for webCore civic response   for web
Core civic response for web
Catlin Bogard
 
Ada documentation
Ada documentationAda documentation
Ada documentation
Catlin Bogard
 
20190502175718744
2019050217571874420190502175718744
20190502175718744
Catlin Bogard
 
20190502175701523
2019050217570152320190502175701523
20190502175701523
Catlin Bogard
 
20190502175541727
2019050217554172720190502175541727
20190502175541727
Catlin Bogard
 
Veterans homes
Veterans homesVeterans homes
Veterans homes
Catlin Bogard
 
State of-tennessee-agreement
State of-tennessee-agreementState of-tennessee-agreement
State of-tennessee-agreement
Catlin Bogard
 
Nashville and-davidson-county-agreement
Nashville and-davidson-county-agreementNashville and-davidson-county-agreement
Nashville and-davidson-county-agreement
Catlin Bogard
 
324 database and context final
324 database and context    final324 database and context    final
324 database and context final
Catlin Bogard
 
Database of 324 summary
Database of 324 summaryDatabase of 324 summary
Database of 324 summary
Catlin Bogard
 
Final complaint for damages (1)
Final complaint for damages (1)Final complaint for damages (1)
Final complaint for damages (1)
Catlin Bogard
 
Magavern report ppg
Magavern report ppgMagavern report ppg
Magavern report ppg
Catlin Bogard
 
Fr. riter 1992 letter
Fr. riter 1992 letterFr. riter 1992 letter
Fr. riter 1992 letter
Catlin Bogard
 
Internal chancery memos
Internal chancery memosInternal chancery memos
Internal chancery memos
Catlin Bogard
 
Husted poems
Husted poemsHusted poems
Husted poems
Catlin Bogard
 
Ccs letter list
Ccs letter listCcs letter list
Ccs letter list
Catlin Bogard
 

More from Catlin Bogard (20)

1 7-22 tammy barrett statement
1 7-22 tammy barrett statement1 7-22 tammy barrett statement
1 7-22 tammy barrett statement
 
Sexton letter
Sexton letterSexton letter
Sexton letter
 
Save our fairgrounds appeal
Save our fairgrounds appealSave our fairgrounds appeal
Save our fairgrounds appeal
 
Steakley complaint
Steakley complaintSteakley complaint
Steakley complaint
 
Core civic response for web
Core civic response   for webCore civic response   for web
Core civic response for web
 
Ada documentation
Ada documentationAda documentation
Ada documentation
 
20190502175718744
2019050217571874420190502175718744
20190502175718744
 
20190502175701523
2019050217570152320190502175701523
20190502175701523
 
20190502175541727
2019050217554172720190502175541727
20190502175541727
 
Veterans homes
Veterans homesVeterans homes
Veterans homes
 
State of-tennessee-agreement
State of-tennessee-agreementState of-tennessee-agreement
State of-tennessee-agreement
 
Nashville and-davidson-county-agreement
Nashville and-davidson-county-agreementNashville and-davidson-county-agreement
Nashville and-davidson-county-agreement
 
324 database and context final
324 database and context    final324 database and context    final
324 database and context final
 
Database of 324 summary
Database of 324 summaryDatabase of 324 summary
Database of 324 summary
 
Final complaint for damages (1)
Final complaint for damages (1)Final complaint for damages (1)
Final complaint for damages (1)
 
Magavern report ppg
Magavern report ppgMagavern report ppg
Magavern report ppg
 
Fr. riter 1992 letter
Fr. riter 1992 letterFr. riter 1992 letter
Fr. riter 1992 letter
 
Internal chancery memos
Internal chancery memosInternal chancery memos
Internal chancery memos
 
Husted poems
Husted poemsHusted poems
Husted poems
 
Ccs letter list
Ccs letter listCcs letter list
Ccs letter list
 

Recently uploaded

原版制作(PSU毕业证书)宾州州立大学公园分校毕业证学历证书一模一样
原版制作(PSU毕业证书)宾州州立大学公园分校毕业证学历证书一模一样原版制作(PSU毕业证书)宾州州立大学公园分校毕业证学历证书一模一样
原版制作(PSU毕业证书)宾州州立大学公园分校毕业证学历证书一模一样
osenwakm
 
Defending Weapons Offence Charges: Role of Mississauga Criminal Defence Lawyers
Defending Weapons Offence Charges: Role of Mississauga Criminal Defence LawyersDefending Weapons Offence Charges: Role of Mississauga Criminal Defence Lawyers
Defending Weapons Offence Charges: Role of Mississauga Criminal Defence Lawyers
HarpreetSaini48
 
一比一原版(Lincoln毕业证)新西兰林肯大学毕业证如何办理
一比一原版(Lincoln毕业证)新西兰林肯大学毕业证如何办理一比一原版(Lincoln毕业证)新西兰林肯大学毕业证如何办理
一比一原版(Lincoln毕业证)新西兰林肯大学毕业证如何办理
gjsma0ep
 
2015pmkemenhub163.pdf. 2015pmkemenhub163.pdf
2015pmkemenhub163.pdf. 2015pmkemenhub163.pdf2015pmkemenhub163.pdf. 2015pmkemenhub163.pdf
2015pmkemenhub163.pdf. 2015pmkemenhub163.pdf
CIkumparan
 
在线办理(SU毕业证书)美国雪城大学毕业证成绩单一模一样
在线办理(SU毕业证书)美国雪城大学毕业证成绩单一模一样在线办理(SU毕业证书)美国雪城大学毕业证成绩单一模一样
在线办理(SU毕业证书)美国雪城大学毕业证成绩单一模一样
osenwakm
 
From Promise to Practice. Implementing AI in Legal Environments
From Promise to Practice. Implementing AI in Legal EnvironmentsFrom Promise to Practice. Implementing AI in Legal Environments
From Promise to Practice. Implementing AI in Legal Environments
ssusera97a2f
 
fnaf lore.pptx ...................................
fnaf lore.pptx ...................................fnaf lore.pptx ...................................
fnaf lore.pptx ...................................
20jcoello
 
Genocide in International Criminal Law.pptx
Genocide in International Criminal Law.pptxGenocide in International Criminal Law.pptx
Genocide in International Criminal Law.pptx
MasoudZamani13
 
快速办理(SCU毕业证书)澳洲南十字星大学毕业证文凭证书一模一样
快速办理(SCU毕业证书)澳洲南十字星大学毕业证文凭证书一模一样快速办理(SCU毕业证书)澳洲南十字星大学毕业证文凭证书一模一样
快速办理(SCU毕业证书)澳洲南十字星大学毕业证文凭证书一模一样
15e6o6u
 
PPT-Money Laundering - lecture 5.pptx ll
PPT-Money Laundering - lecture 5.pptx llPPT-Money Laundering - lecture 5.pptx ll
PPT-Money Laundering - lecture 5.pptx ll
MohammadZubair874462
 
Business Laws Sunita saha
Business Laws Sunita sahaBusiness Laws Sunita saha
Business Laws Sunita saha
sunitasaha5
 
The Future of Criminal Defense Lawyer in India.pdf
The Future of Criminal Defense Lawyer in India.pdfThe Future of Criminal Defense Lawyer in India.pdf
The Future of Criminal Defense Lawyer in India.pdf
veteranlegal
 
It's the Law: Recent Court and Administrative Decisions of Interest
It's the Law: Recent Court and Administrative Decisions of InterestIt's the Law: Recent Court and Administrative Decisions of Interest
It's the Law: Recent Court and Administrative Decisions of Interest
Parsons Behle & Latimer
 
The Work Permit for Self-Employed Persons in Italy
The Work Permit for Self-Employed Persons in ItalyThe Work Permit for Self-Employed Persons in Italy
The Work Permit for Self-Employed Persons in Italy
BridgeWest.eu
 
V.-SENTHIL-BALAJI-SLP-C-8939-8940-2023-SC-Judgment-07-August-2023.pdf
V.-SENTHIL-BALAJI-SLP-C-8939-8940-2023-SC-Judgment-07-August-2023.pdfV.-SENTHIL-BALAJI-SLP-C-8939-8940-2023-SC-Judgment-07-August-2023.pdf
V.-SENTHIL-BALAJI-SLP-C-8939-8940-2023-SC-Judgment-07-August-2023.pdf
bhavenpr
 
Lifting the Corporate Veil. Power Point Presentation
Lifting the Corporate Veil. Power Point PresentationLifting the Corporate Veil. Power Point Presentation
Lifting the Corporate Veil. Power Point Presentation
seri bangash
 
Receivership and liquidation Accounts Prof. Oyedokun.pptx
Receivership and liquidation Accounts Prof. Oyedokun.pptxReceivership and liquidation Accounts Prof. Oyedokun.pptx
Receivership and liquidation Accounts Prof. Oyedokun.pptx
Godwin Emmanuel Oyedokun MBA MSc PhD FCA FCTI FCNA CFE FFAR
 
What are the common challenges faced by women lawyers working in the legal pr...
What are the common challenges faced by women lawyers working in the legal pr...What are the common challenges faced by women lawyers working in the legal pr...
What are the common challenges faced by women lawyers working in the legal pr...
lawyersonia
 
San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflict at Sea
San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflict at SeaSan Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflict at Sea
San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflict at Sea
Justin Ordoyo
 
Presentation (1).pptx Human rights of LGBTQ people in India, constitutional a...
Presentation (1).pptx Human rights of LGBTQ people in India, constitutional a...Presentation (1).pptx Human rights of LGBTQ people in India, constitutional a...
Presentation (1).pptx Human rights of LGBTQ people in India, constitutional a...
SKshi
 

Recently uploaded (20)

原版制作(PSU毕业证书)宾州州立大学公园分校毕业证学历证书一模一样
原版制作(PSU毕业证书)宾州州立大学公园分校毕业证学历证书一模一样原版制作(PSU毕业证书)宾州州立大学公园分校毕业证学历证书一模一样
原版制作(PSU毕业证书)宾州州立大学公园分校毕业证学历证书一模一样
 
Defending Weapons Offence Charges: Role of Mississauga Criminal Defence Lawyers
Defending Weapons Offence Charges: Role of Mississauga Criminal Defence LawyersDefending Weapons Offence Charges: Role of Mississauga Criminal Defence Lawyers
Defending Weapons Offence Charges: Role of Mississauga Criminal Defence Lawyers
 
一比一原版(Lincoln毕业证)新西兰林肯大学毕业证如何办理
一比一原版(Lincoln毕业证)新西兰林肯大学毕业证如何办理一比一原版(Lincoln毕业证)新西兰林肯大学毕业证如何办理
一比一原版(Lincoln毕业证)新西兰林肯大学毕业证如何办理
 
2015pmkemenhub163.pdf. 2015pmkemenhub163.pdf
2015pmkemenhub163.pdf. 2015pmkemenhub163.pdf2015pmkemenhub163.pdf. 2015pmkemenhub163.pdf
2015pmkemenhub163.pdf. 2015pmkemenhub163.pdf
 
在线办理(SU毕业证书)美国雪城大学毕业证成绩单一模一样
在线办理(SU毕业证书)美国雪城大学毕业证成绩单一模一样在线办理(SU毕业证书)美国雪城大学毕业证成绩单一模一样
在线办理(SU毕业证书)美国雪城大学毕业证成绩单一模一样
 
From Promise to Practice. Implementing AI in Legal Environments
From Promise to Practice. Implementing AI in Legal EnvironmentsFrom Promise to Practice. Implementing AI in Legal Environments
From Promise to Practice. Implementing AI in Legal Environments
 
fnaf lore.pptx ...................................
fnaf lore.pptx ...................................fnaf lore.pptx ...................................
fnaf lore.pptx ...................................
 
Genocide in International Criminal Law.pptx
Genocide in International Criminal Law.pptxGenocide in International Criminal Law.pptx
Genocide in International Criminal Law.pptx
 
快速办理(SCU毕业证书)澳洲南十字星大学毕业证文凭证书一模一样
快速办理(SCU毕业证书)澳洲南十字星大学毕业证文凭证书一模一样快速办理(SCU毕业证书)澳洲南十字星大学毕业证文凭证书一模一样
快速办理(SCU毕业证书)澳洲南十字星大学毕业证文凭证书一模一样
 
PPT-Money Laundering - lecture 5.pptx ll
PPT-Money Laundering - lecture 5.pptx llPPT-Money Laundering - lecture 5.pptx ll
PPT-Money Laundering - lecture 5.pptx ll
 
Business Laws Sunita saha
Business Laws Sunita sahaBusiness Laws Sunita saha
Business Laws Sunita saha
 
The Future of Criminal Defense Lawyer in India.pdf
The Future of Criminal Defense Lawyer in India.pdfThe Future of Criminal Defense Lawyer in India.pdf
The Future of Criminal Defense Lawyer in India.pdf
 
It's the Law: Recent Court and Administrative Decisions of Interest
It's the Law: Recent Court and Administrative Decisions of InterestIt's the Law: Recent Court and Administrative Decisions of Interest
It's the Law: Recent Court and Administrative Decisions of Interest
 
The Work Permit for Self-Employed Persons in Italy
The Work Permit for Self-Employed Persons in ItalyThe Work Permit for Self-Employed Persons in Italy
The Work Permit for Self-Employed Persons in Italy
 
V.-SENTHIL-BALAJI-SLP-C-8939-8940-2023-SC-Judgment-07-August-2023.pdf
V.-SENTHIL-BALAJI-SLP-C-8939-8940-2023-SC-Judgment-07-August-2023.pdfV.-SENTHIL-BALAJI-SLP-C-8939-8940-2023-SC-Judgment-07-August-2023.pdf
V.-SENTHIL-BALAJI-SLP-C-8939-8940-2023-SC-Judgment-07-August-2023.pdf
 
Lifting the Corporate Veil. Power Point Presentation
Lifting the Corporate Veil. Power Point PresentationLifting the Corporate Veil. Power Point Presentation
Lifting the Corporate Veil. Power Point Presentation
 
Receivership and liquidation Accounts Prof. Oyedokun.pptx
Receivership and liquidation Accounts Prof. Oyedokun.pptxReceivership and liquidation Accounts Prof. Oyedokun.pptx
Receivership and liquidation Accounts Prof. Oyedokun.pptx
 
What are the common challenges faced by women lawyers working in the legal pr...
What are the common challenges faced by women lawyers working in the legal pr...What are the common challenges faced by women lawyers working in the legal pr...
What are the common challenges faced by women lawyers working in the legal pr...
 
San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflict at Sea
San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflict at SeaSan Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflict at Sea
San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflict at Sea
 
Presentation (1).pptx Human rights of LGBTQ people in India, constitutional a...
Presentation (1).pptx Human rights of LGBTQ people in India, constitutional a...Presentation (1).pptx Human rights of LGBTQ people in India, constitutional a...
Presentation (1).pptx Human rights of LGBTQ people in India, constitutional a...
 

Steakley complaint (1)

  • 1. 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION ) EDWIN STEAKLEY, ) Plaintiff, ) v. ) CASE NO. 3:19-mc-9999 ) CORECIVIC, INC., formerly known as ) Corrections Corporation of America; ) JEFFERY REEVES; RUSSELL WASHBURN, ) in his individual and in his official capacity ) as warden of Trousdale Turner ) Correctional Facility; KEITH HUGGINS, ) in his individual and in his official capacity ) as chief of security of Trousdale Turner ) Correctional Facility; HARLEY SILCOX, ) in her individual and in her official ) capacity as correctional sergeant at ) Trousdale Turner Correctional Facility ) Defendants. ) COMPLAINT 1. Plaintiff Edwin Steakley, by and through counsel Daniel Ayoade Yoon, files this complaint under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and all other applicable state and federal law, naming as defendants CoreCivic, Inc., Jeffery Reeves, Warden Russell Washburn, Chief of Security Keith Huggins, and Sergeant Haley SIlcox as violating his constitutional rights and for inflicting tortious injuries. PARTIES 2. Plaintiff Edwin Steakley is a living, natural person and resident of Trousdale County, Tennessee. 3. Defendant CoreCivic, Inc., is a real estate investment trust, a Maryland corporation with its principal place of business at 10 Burton Hills Boulevard, Nashville, Case 3:19-cv-00160 Document 1 Filed 02/20/19 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 1
  • 2. 2 Tennessee. CoreCivic operates Trousdale Turner Correctional Facility (“TTCC”), under the full authority of the State of Tennessee pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. Sections 41-24-101, et. seq., and/or 41-8-101, et seq. and acting under color of state law. CoreCivic is the entity charged by the State of Tennessee with authority to maintain Trousdale Turner Correctional Facility and has a non-delegable duty to ensure that persons housed at TTCC are protected by the Constitution and laws of the United States and the State of Tennessee. Defendant CoreCivic is responsible for the implementation of policies, procedures, practices, and customs, as well as the acts and omissions, challenged by this action. 4. Defendant Russell Washburn is the warden of TTCC at all times relevant to this complaint and exercises plenary authority over all TTCC staff. 5. Defendant Keith Huggins is chief of security at TTCC at all times relevant to this complaint. He is believed to be a resident of Rutherford County, Tennessee. 6. Defendant Harley Silcox is a correctional sergeant at TTCC at all times relevant to this complaint. She is believed to be a resident of Smith County, Tennessee. 7. Defendant Jeffery Reeves is a living, natural person and is believed to be a resident of Lawrence County, Tennessee. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 8. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1367. 9. Venue lies in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b)(1) because Defendant CoreCivic is a resident of this District, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sections 13919(c)(2) and 1391(d). Case 3:19-cv-00160 Document 1 Filed 02/20/19 Page 2 of 7 PageID #: 2
  • 3. 3 FACTUAL BACKGROUND 10. On more than one occasion, defendant Reeves threatened sexual assault on Plaintiff prior to February 20, 2018. 11. On more than one occasion, Plaintiff communicated the threats of sexual violence by defendant Reeves to CoreCivic, Inc., and each of the defendants named in this complaint asking for help. 12. On January 20, 2018, Plaintiff notified a CoreCivic official that “my cellie has been making sexual remarks and reaching for his private area, and talking about me sucking it. Can you help.” [sic] 13. On January 21, 2018, Plaintiff notified defendant Silcox that “My cellie is making sexual remarks about me sucking his penis and then is reaching for his pants like to undo them. Help.” 14. On January 23, 2018, Plaintiff notified defendant Washburn that “Sir I have wrote C/M Jones and spoke with him, SGT Silcox wrote her and spoke to her, wrote my counsler, and nothing has been don about my cellie making sexual remarks and reaching like he is going to undo his pants, the hole time telling me he is going to make me suck it.” [sic] 15. On February 20, 2018, defendant Jeffery Reeves held a shank to Plaintiff and forcibly penetrated plaintiff with his penis under threat of violence. 16. Following the sexual assault on February 20, 2018, Plaintiff suffered extreme emotional distress and bodily injury. Case 3:19-cv-00160 Document 1 Filed 02/20/19 Page 3 of 7 PageID #: 3
  • 4. 4 17. Plaintiff reported his injuries to CoreCivic, Inc., and each of the defendants named in this complaint and failed to receive adequate medical care, resulting in further harm. PRAYERS FOR RELIEF 18. Plaintiffs re-allege and re-aver the preceding paragraphs, and the preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference. 19. On information and belief, defendants CoreCivic, Washburn, Huggins, Silcox, and Correct Care Recovery Solutions created, affirmatively issued, permitted, encouraged, tolerated, and knowingly acquiesced in violating Plaintiff’s rights, through the existence of an official pattern, practice, and custom of ignoring or otherwise disregarding TDOC policy, federal and state constitutions and statutes, including but not limited to the Prison Rape Elimination Act. 20. Defendants were deliberately indifferent to Plaintiff’s constitutional rights because they were aware of the existence of danger of sexual assault and failed to take reasonable measures to protect Plaintiff from assault by another inmate. 21. Defendants failed to investigate the threats, directly leading to the assault on Plaintiff on February 20, 2018. 22. Defendants failed to abide by their constitutional and state law duties of care to timely and meaningfully take action on prisoners’ grievances. 23. Defendants displayed deliberate indifference and reckless disregard for Plaintiff’s safety by failing to act reasonably in response to the known danger, thus violating Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment rights under the U.S. Constitution. Case 3:19-cv-00160 Document 1 Filed 02/20/19 Page 4 of 7 PageID #: 4
  • 5. 5 24. Defendants knew of and disregarded an excessive risk to Plaintiff’s health and safety. They were aware of specific facts that a substantial risk of serious harm existed. 25. Defendants had actual knowledge of the risk and purposefully avoided further knowledge of the excessive and substantial risk of serious harm. 26. Measures were neither taken nor reasonably calculated to ensure Plaintiff’s safety from violence. 27. Plaintiff specifically requested protective custody and defendants failed to act nor act reasonably, and did not act reasonably in response to being alerted of Plaintiff’s danger of victimization. 28. Defendants failed to follow their own rules, regulations and policies concerning protection of Plaintiff. In fact, defendants CoreCivic, Inc., Washburn, Huggins, and SIlcox maintained a policy, practice, and custom of ignoring prisoner complaints and grievances alleging the risk of victimization from other prisoners, and failed to act upon information provided to them, thus violating Plaintiff’s rights under the Eighth Amendment. 29. Defendants failed to respond to a particular threat and danger to Plaintiff, specifically, Plaintiff’s plea for help that Defendant Reeves was making inappropriate and unwanted sexual advances toward Plaintiff. 30. Defendants failed to adequately supervise Plaintiff and defendant Reeves. The assault and tortious injuries suffered by Plaintiff were reasonably foreseeable to defendants, as he had warned Defendants of the risk of victimization, yet Case 3:19-cv-00160 Document 1 Filed 02/20/19 Page 5 of 7 PageID #: 5
  • 6. 6 Defendants did nothing to attempt to prevent Defendant Reeves’s sexual assault of Plaintiff. Defendants knew and had reason to know that the assault and tortious injuries would occur. WHEREFORE, defendants’ actions constitute intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, assault and battery, false imprisonment, and deliberate indifference under the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the plaintiff prays: 31. That the defendants answer this complaint within the time provided by law. 32. That this cause be tried by a jury. 33. That judgment for Plaintiffs enter against the Defendants on each count. 34. That Plaintiff be awarded nominal damages on all counts. 35. That Plaintiff be awarded compensatory damages in an amount determined by the jury. 36. That Plaintiff be awarded punitive damages in an amount determined by the jury because Defendants acted with malice, ill will, evil motive, and callous indifference to Plaintiff’s federally protected rights. 37. That Plaintiff be awarded attorney’s fees and reasonable litigation expenses, including expert witness fees, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 1988 and F.R. Civ. Pro. 54(d). 38. That the court costs in this matter be taxed to Defendants. 39. That Plaintiff be awarded pre- and post-judgment interest against Defendants. Case 3:19-cv-00160 Document 1 Filed 02/20/19 Page 6 of 7 PageID #: 6
  • 7. 7 40. That the Court enter declaratory judgment holding that Defendants’ conduct, practice, and custom of ignoring or otherwise failing to take appropriate action in the face of known threats, including disregarding formal prisoner grievances, is in violation of Plaintiff’s federally protected rights. 41. That Plaintiff be awarded all other relief to which it may appear he is entitled in the interests of justice. Respectfully submitted, s/ Daniel Ayoade Yoon Daniel Ayoade Yoon, BPR 028798 2004 8th Ave S. Nashville, TN 37204 T: (615) 541-5141 E: danielayoadeyoon@gmail.com Case 3:19-cv-00160 Document 1 Filed 02/20/19 Page 7 of 7 PageID #: 7