Rob Brayshaw v. Officer Annette Garrett Filed By Attorney Marie Mattox


Published on

Published in: News & Politics
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Rob Brayshaw v. Officer Annette Garrett Filed By Attorney Marie Mattox

  1. 1. Case 4:12-cv-00447-RH-CAS Document 7 Filed 10/09/12 Page 1 of 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISIONROBERT A. BRAYSHAW, CASE NO. 4:12CV447-RH/CAS Plaintiff,v.ANNETTE GARRETT, Defendant.___________________________________/ AMENDED COMPLAINT Plaintiff, ROBERT BRAYSHAW, hereby sues Defendant, ANNETTE GARRETT,and alleges: JURISDICTION 1. This is an action involving the violation of Plaintiff’s federal civil rights. Theaggregate amount of damages claimed by Plaintiff against Defendant is in excess of SeventyFive Thousand Dollars ($75,000.00), the jurisdictional amount required for venue in thisCourt. 2. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331 in that thisis a civil action arising under the Constitution of the United States. 3. Jurisdiction of the Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1343(a)(3) in thatthis action seeks to redress the deprivation, under color of state law, of rights secured to
  2. 2. Case 4:12-cv-00447-RH-CAS Document 7 Filed 10/09/12 Page 2 of 6Plaintiff by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United Statesof America. 4. Plaintiff’s claims for relief are predicated upon 42 U.S.C. §1983, whichauthorizes actions to redress the deprivation, under color of state law, of rights, privileges,and immunities secured to Plaintiff by the Constitution and laws of the United States, andby 42 U.S.C. §1988 which authorizes the award of attorney’s fees and costs to prevailingplaintiffs in actions brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983. THE PARTIES 5. At all times pertinent hereto, Plaintiff, ROBERT BRAYSHAW, has been aresident of Leon County, Florida. 6. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant, ANNETTE GARRETT, was aresident of Leon County, Florida and was a Police Officer for the Tallahassee PoliceDepartment (“TPD”). 7. Plaintiff has retained the undersigned to represent his interests in this causeand is obligated to pay her a fee for her services. FACTS 8. Plaintiff promotes education and legal action, as well as research, publishing,and advocacy in support of civil and constitutional liberties. 9. In order to provide information and political commentary, Plaintiff hasutilized popular websites such as Wikipedia. 2
  3. 3. Case 4:12-cv-00447-RH-CAS Document 7 Filed 10/09/12 Page 3 of 6 10. Specifically, Plaintiff posted numerous entries discussing Defendant Garretton Wikipedia. In his posts, Plaintiff was critical of the TPD and Defendant Garrett. Plaintiffexpressed opinions that were favorable to neither TPD nor Garrett. 11. On or about March 4, 2011, Defendant Garrett deleted Plaintiff’s commentsand posts on Wikipedia discussing Defendant and the TPD. 12. In December 2011, after Plaintiff’s posts were deleted, Plaintiff obtained TPDemails pursuant to a public records request. These emails revealed that Plaintiff’s posts wereremoved by Defendant Garrett. Upon information and belief, Defendant Garrett used herTPD computer to delete Plaintiff’s posts. 13. Throughout the end of 2010 and continuing into the beginning of 2011,Plaintiff posted various documents critical of TPD and Defendant Garrett to various publicfile sharing sites such as,, and Upon informationand belief, Defendant Garrett requested that these sites delete Plaintiff’s shared files andcaused and to terminate Plaintiff’s account. 14. Plaintiff’s posts have never been obscene, sexually explicit, raciallyderogatory, or defamatory. Neither has Plaintiff suggested and/or encouraged illegalactivities. COUNT I VIOLATION OF PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS 15. Paragraphs 1 through 14 above are hereby realleged and incorporated hereinby reference. 3
  4. 4. Case 4:12-cv-00447-RH-CAS Document 7 Filed 10/09/12 Page 4 of 6 16. This is an action against Defendant for the violation of Plaintiff’s FirstAmendment Rights. This claim is applicable to the Defendant under the FourteenthAmendment brought through 42 U.S.C. §1983. 17. Plaintiff has certain guaranteed rights to make statements that are of publicconcern. The issues raised by the Plaintiff in his online comments and postings includedissues of public concern. 18. The actions described in part above were taken against Plaintiff in retaliationfor the exercise of his First Amendment rights which included reporting matters of publicconcern via the internet. 19. The actions by Defendant were taken in violation of Plaintiff’s clearlyestablished right under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution to be free fromretaliation motivated by the exercise of his First Amendment speech rights. The laws whichform the basis for this claim identified herein were clearly established at the time when theaforementioned actions took place. 20. Defendant misused her power, possessed by virtue of state law and madepossible only because she was clothed with the authority of state law. The violation ofPlaintiff’s rights, as described above, occurred under color of state law and is actionableunder 42 U.S.C. §1983. 21. The foregoing actions of Defendant was willful, wanton and in recklessdisregard of Plaintiff’s rights, and were taken without any lawful justification. 4
  5. 5. Case 4:12-cv-00447-RH-CAS Document 7 Filed 10/09/12 Page 5 of 6 22. As a direct and proximate result of the actions taken against Plaintiff byDefendant described in part above, Plaintiff has been harmed and damaged. Plaintiff’sdamages include but may not be limited to emotional pain and suffering, loss of capacity forthe enjoyment of life, and other damages allowed by law including other tangible andintangible damages. Plaintiff seeks equitable relief in the form of attorneys fees and costs,as may be allowed by law. The injuries of which Plaintiff complains have occurred in thepast, are occurring at present and will continue in the future. Defendant is liable for theseharms. 23. Based on the willful and malicious conduct of Defendant, as is set out herein,Plaintiff is entitled to an award of punitive damages. 24. Plaintiff has been forced to retain counsel to represent him to vindicate hisrights. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1988, Plaintiff is entitled to an award of reasonable attorneysfees and costs. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for the following relief: (a) that process issue and this Court take jurisdiction over this case; (b) that this Court grant equitable relief against Defendant, mandating Defendant’s obedience to the laws enumerated herein; (c) enter judgment against Defendant, and for Plaintiff awarding compensatory and punitive damages to Plaintiff for Defendant’s violations of law enumerated herein; 5
  6. 6. Case 4:12-cv-00447-RH-CAS Document 7 Filed 10/09/12 Page 6 of 6 (d) enter judgment against Defendant and for Plaintiff awarding Plaintiff attorneys fees and costs; and (e) grant such other further relief as being just and proper under the circumstances. DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues set forth herein which are sotriable. DATED this 9th day of October, 2012. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Marie A. Mattox Marie A. Mattox [FBN 0739685] MARIE A. MATTOX, P. A. 310 East Bradford Road Tallahassee, FL 32303 (850) 383-4800 (telephone) (850) 383-4801 (facsimile) ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF 6