Case 5:16-cv-00141

Filed 01/22/16

Page

1 of 13

Page

ID #:1

David E. Kenner, SBN 41425
david@KennerGreenfield.com
Brett A. Greenfield, SBN 217343
brett@KennerGreenfield.com

1

2

KE11 ER & GREENFIELD
16633 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1212

3

Encino, California 91430
Telephone: (818) 995-1195

4

Facsimile:

5

(818) 475-5369

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

6

Joseph E. Villareal and Maria I.

7
8

Document 1

II

Sanabia

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF

9

CALIFORNIA, EASTERN DIVISION

10

JOSEPH E. VILLAREAL and
MARIA I. SANABIA, individually,
and as successors in interest to
SAMUEL VILLAREAL, deceased,

11
12

13

Case no.
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1. Unreasonable Seizure—Excessive
Force [42 U.S.C. §1983];
2. Interference With Due Process
Right to Familial Relationships
[42 U.S.C. 1983];
3. Municipal Liability for Violation
of Civil Rights [42 U.S.C. 983];
4. Battery;
5. Negligence;
6. Violation of Cal Civ. Code 52.1;
7. Wrongful Death;

Plaintiffs,

14
vs.

15

CITY OF
16

inclusive,

INDIO; and DOES 1-10,
Defendants.

17

18
19

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

20
21
22

23

jURISDICTION AND VENUE
II

1.

This is

a

civil

rights and wrongful death/survival action arising

24

the

25

about October 14, 2015 in

shooting death of the plaintiffs'

26

2.

27

upon this Court

This

case

son, Samuel Villareal

from

(the "decedent"),

on or

Indio, California.

arises under 42 U.S.C.

by 28 U.S.C.

§1983. Jurisdiction is conferred

1331 and 1343.

28

-1-

 5:16-cv-00141

1

3.

Document 1

This Court has

Filed 01/22/16

Page

2 of 13

ID #:2

Page

supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28

U.S.C.

2

1367 to hear and decide the claims that arise under the laws of the State of

3

California. Plaintiffs filed

4

January,

5

4.

a

timely claim with defendant City of Indio

2016 pursuant to California Government Code Section 910 et seq.
Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C.

6

1391(b).

PARTIES

7

Plaintiffs

5.

8

individuals who

9

decedent. Plaintiffs

10

in

Joseph E.

were

the natural father and natural

sue

both in their individual

representative capacity as

11

6.

Villareal and Maria I. Sanabia

successors

("plaintiffs") are

mother, respectively, of the

capacities,

as

well

as

in

a

in interest to decedent.

At all times herein mentioned defendant

City of Indio was

and is

a

12

municipal comoration duly organized and existing under the laws of the State

13

California.

14

At all relevant times defendants Does 1

7.

15

individuals who

16

Police

17

policies, practices, customs,

18

within the

19

complete authority and ratification,

20

are

21

herein. The true

22

unknown to

23

fictitious

24

plaintiffs will amend this complaint,

25

name

were

employees

of

through 10, inclusive were

and/or agents of the

City of Indio

and/or its

Department, who were acting under color of the law, statutes, ordinances,

each in

course

and scope of their

some manner
names

8.

27

conduct

City of Indio,

and/or otherwise

respective duties as employees,
of defendant

and with the

City of Indio. Said defendants

responsible for the injuries and damages complained of

of defendants Does 1

through 10, inclusive are presently

plaintiffs, who therefore sue each of these defendants by such

name.

Upon ascertaining the true identity of a defendant Doe,

in lieu of the fictitious

26

and/or usages of the

Each defendant

or

seek leave to do so,

by inserting the true

name.

promoted, ratified, and approved the wrongful

alleged herein of each of the other defendants,

28

-2-

and acted in concert with

 Document 1

5:16-cv-00141

Filed 01/22/16

Page

I

and

2

complained of herein, as more fully alleged below.

conspired with each of the other defendants,

3

in

3 of 13

Page

ID #:3

doing the wrongful acts

FACTS

4

9.

At

approximately

5

decedent

6

area

7

Avenue in

8

seat of the car.

9

City of Indio

1:00 p.m.

sitting in the driver's

was

of an apartment

on

October 14, 2015, the

seat of a

car

18-year-old

that was then at rest in

a

paved

complex located at the 81900 block of Shadow Palm

Indio, California. At that time a female was seated in the passenger

Respondent Doe 1,

and its Police

an

Indio Police

Department officer, who the

Department have to date declined to publicly

10

identify, approached the car on foot, along with another Indio Police Department

11

officer, whose identity is likewise unknown to plaintiffs

12

positioned himself to the front left side of the car,

13

officer to the front

14

Doe 1 then fired

15

area

16

decedent without provocation,

17

times unarmed,

18

threat of death

19

safety to the side of the car,

20

police officer.

21

of the car, at least

10.

and the other Indio

right side of the car. Without warning

one or more

was

or

at this time. Doe 1

not

Decedent

necessity,

or

Respondent Doe

justification.

reaching for a weapon,

serious

or

to any other person,

treated at the

22

ambulance to John F.

23

pronounced dead that same afternoon.

scene

1 shot

Decedent

was

at all

and otherwise did not pose

physical injury to Doe 1, who

was

probable cause,

shots at decedent through the left driver window

of which struck him.

one

or

police

was

in

a

a

position of

including the second Indio

and then transported

by

Kennedy Memorial Hospital, where decedent was

24

11.

25

be seized the cell

26

shooting who had videotaped the shooting

27

erased. On information and

28

to be seized the

On information and belief, defendants Does 1-4 seized

or

caused to

telephone of the apartment manager at the location of the
on

his

telephone,

belief, defendants Does

and caused it to be

1-4 further seized

or

caused

videotapes of security cameras maintained by the management
-3-

 Document 1

5:16-cv-00141

1

of the apartments at the

2

of the

Filed 01/22/16

shooting location,

Page

4 of 13

Page

ID #:4

and caused to be erased that portion

videotapes that included the shooting of decedent.

3

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF UNDER 42 U.S.C.

4

1983

FOR UNLAWFUL SEIZURE AND EXCESSIVE FORCE

5

(By plaintiffs

6

as successors

in interest

against all defendants except defendant City of Indio)

7

12.

8

every

9

fully

Plaintiffs repeat and reallege and

allegation in paragraphs 1 through 11, inclusive, of this complaint as if

set forth herein.

10

13.

Plaintiffs

bring this

claim for relief in their

11

successors

12

California Code of Civil Procedure

13

arose

14

respect to this claim for relief had he lived.

15

incorporate by reference each and

in interest of the

in the decedent's

14.

The

use

capacity as the

decedent, for whom there is no estate opened, under
377.30. The

foregoing claim for relief

favor, and decedent would have been the plaintiff with

of the aforesaid force

against the decedent was

excessive

16

and unreasonable, and

17

against unreasonable seizures guaranteed him by the Fourth Amendment to the

18

U.S.

19

violation of Title 42 U.S.C.

20

Constitution,

15.

As

a

as

deprived decedent of his right to be secure in his person

applied to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment, in
1983.

direct result thereof the aforesaid acts and omissions of

21

defendants decedent suffered great physical and mental

22

emotional

23

death, and loss of the enjoyment of life. Plaintiffs seek damages for said

24

injuries.

25

injury,

fear and

distress, trauma, pain, shock to his nervous system, and ultimately

16. The conduct of defendant Doe

1,

as

alleged above, was willful,

26

wanton, malicious, and done with reckless disregard for the rights and safety of

27

decedent and the passenger in his car, therefore

28

-4-

warranting the imposition of

 1

exemplary damages

2

make

an

3

Filed 01/22/16

Document 1

5:16-cv-00141

in

an

amount

Page

5 of 13

Page

ID #:5

according to proof sufficient to punish and

example.

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF UNDER 42 U.S.C.

1983 FOR

4

DEPRIVATION OF THE SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS RIGHTS OF

5

PLAINTIFFS TO FAMILIAL RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE DECEDENT

6

(By plaintiffs individually against all defendants

7

except defendant City of Indio)

8
9

10

17.

Plaintiffs repeat and

each and every
as

reallege and hereby incorporate by reference

allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through

16 of this

complaint

if set forth herein in full.

11

18.

Plaintiffs had

a

cognizable interest under the Due Process Clause

of

12

the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution in being free from

13

state

14

shock the

15

interference in their to

16

decedent.

17

19.

actions that

deprive them of life, liberty,

or

property in such

The

use

a

parental and familial relationship with their son, the

of force

against decedent by defendants, acting under color

of law, shocks the

19

objective, was done with the intent to harm the decedent,

20

disregard of the rights of plaintiffs herein.
20.

conscience,

was

The use of said force

unrelated to any

process

23

with in

24

thereby depriving them of rights, privileges,

25

Constitution,

26

rights not to have their familial

21.

unwarranted manner,

or

association

to be

a

and in reckless

infringed upon or interfered

deprived by the loss of life of their son,

in violation of Title 42 U.S.C.

As

legitimate law enforcement

deprived plaintiffs of their substantive due

22

an

to

conscience, including but not limited to, unwarranted state

18

21

a manner as

and immunities under the U.S.

1983.

direct result of the aforesaid acts of said defendants

27

have suffered and will suffer great physical and mental

28

shock to their nervous system,

injury, trauma, pain,

anguish, anxiety, humiliation,
-5-

plaintiffs

fear and emotional

 5:16-cv-00141

Document 1

Filed 01/22/16

1

distress, and the loss of the love, affection,

2

support and affection of their son, all

3

proof.

4
5

22.

As

a

23.

care,

to their

6 of 13

an

amount

The conduct of defendants

Page

ID #:6

society, companionship,

and

damage in an amount according to

further direct result of defendants' acts

funeral and burial expenses, in

6

Page

plaintiffs incurred

according to proof.

alleged above was willful, wanton,

7

malicious, and done with reckless disregard for the rights and safety of decedent

8

and plaintiffs and therefore warrants the

9

amount

10

imposition of exemplary damages in an

according to proof sufficient to punish and make an example.
THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF UNDER 42 U.S.C.

11

1983 FOR

UNCONSTITUTIONAL MUNICIPAL CUSTOMS,

12

PRACTICES AND POLICIES

13

(Against defendant City of Indio)

14

24.

Plaintiffs

hereby repeat and reallege and each and every allegation

15

contained in paragraphs 1

16

full.

17

25.

Plaintiffs

18

In

19

own

20

Claim for Relief.

21

addition, plaintiffs

sue

sue

through 23

under this claim

complaint as if set forth herein in

as successors

in interest to decedent.

individually in connection with the violation of their

rights under the United
26.

of this

States

Constitution,

as

alleged above in the Second

On information and belief, the Chief of Police of the

City of Indio

22

or

23

acts of the individual

24

purported bases for them, with actual knowledge of or deliberate indifference to

25

their unconstitutional nature.

26

other final

27.

policymaker, who had final policymaking authority concerning the
defendants, ratified (or will ratify) said acts

and the

Alternatively, on information and belief, the unconstitutional

27

actions of the individual

28

acting on behalf of defendant City of Indio and its Police Department,

defendants,

as

well

-6-

as

other officers

employed by or
as

alleged

 5:16-cv-00141

Document 1

Filed 01/22/16

Page

7 of 13

Page

ID #:7

1

above,

2

practices on the part of the Police Department of defendant City of Indio:

were

the result of the

3
4

the

a.

unarmed

5

use or

against individuals,

7

physical,

10

such that officers

excessive and/or
the failure to

c.

are more

defendants,
d.

likely to use

substantial

properly train, instruct, monitor, supervise,

in the proper use of deadly
the

aggressive tactics

deadly force against those individuals;

discipline the individual defendants herein,

11

deadly force against

the use of unreasonably and unnecessarily

6

9

tolerance of excessive and

and/or

individuals;

b.

8

following unconstitutional customs, policies

and other officers of

force;

deprivation of access to the courts by engaging

in

a

12

cover-up of violations of constitutional

13

tolerating, and/or encouraging officers to

file false reports, make false

14

statements, obstruct and/or interfere with

investigations of

15

unconstitutional

16

material

17

to

18

activity.

19

28.

or

unlawful

information,

and

and

rights, to wit: by allowing,

conduct, by withholding and/or concealing

evidence,

and otherwise

ignoring

and/or failing

adequately investigate and discipline unconstitutional or unlawful
The aforementioned ratification of the individual defendants'

20

actions,

21

defendant

22

deprivations of decedent's and plaintiffs' clearly established and well-settled

23

constitutional

as

24

29.

25

damaged,

well

as

the unconstitutional

policies, practices

and customs of

City of Indio alleged above, were a direct and moving cause of the
rights, in violation of 42 U.S.C.

As
as

a

direct result of the actions

alleged herein, decedent was

alleged above, as were plaintiffs,

26
27
28

-7-

1983.

as

further

alleged above.

 5:16-cv-00141

1

Document 1

Filed 01/22/16

Page

8 of 13

Page

ID #:8

FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF FOR BATTERY

2

(By plaintiffs as successors

3

against defendants Doe

4

30.

5

each and every

6

as

Plaintiffs repeat and

in interest to decedent
1 and

City of Indio)

reallege and hereby incorporate by reference

allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through

16 of this

complaint

if set forth herein in full.

7

31.

As is detailed

above, defendant Doe

1

intentionally shot at the

8

decedent, striking him and ultimately killing him. Defendant's

9

nonconsensual, offensive

contact with the

10

had

for using said force

11

force

12

Department was an unreasonable use of force.

no

legal justification

by said defendant acting as

13

32.

14

Doe 1 decedent

15

33.

As

a

sworn

acts resulted in

decedent's person. Defendant Doe 1

against decedent,

officer of defendant

and the use of

City of Indio Police

direct, legal and proximate result of the actions of defendant

was

injured and suffered damages.

Defendant

City of Indio is vicariously liable for the wrongful acts

16

of defendant Doe 1 pursuant to section

17

Code, which provides that a public entity is liable for the injuries caused by its

18

employees within the

19

subject him or her to liability.

20

34.

scope of the

815.2(a)

of the California Government

employment if the employee's act would

The conduct of defendant Doe 1

21

wanton, malicious, and done with reckless

22

decedent and therefore warrants the

23

amount

24

defendant.

as

alleged above was willful,

disregard for the rights

and

safety of

imposition of exemplary damages in an

according to proof sufficient to punish and make an example of said

25
26

27
28

-8-

 Document 1

5:16-cv-00141

1

Filed 01/22/16

Page

9 of 13

Page

ID #:9

FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF FOR NEGLIGENCE

2

(By plaintiffs as successors

3

against defendants Does

4

35.

5

each and every

6

as

in interest to decedent

1-4 and

Plaintiffs repeat and reallege and

City of Indio)

hereby incorporate by reference

allegation contained in paragraphs

1

through

15 of this

complaint

if set forth herein in full.

7

36.

In their contacts with the decedent the defendants Does 1-4

were

8

required to use reasonable care in seizing the decedent, taking him into custody

9

and using force

10

37.

11

care

12

a

in

against him.

Defendants Doe 1-4 failed to use

appropriate tactics or reasonable

seizing and shooting the decedent, by, among other things, failing to give

warning,

and

failing to use other appropriate less

lethal tactics than

13

immediately discharging a firearm.

14

regard fell below the standard of care of reasonable persons in their profession

15

as sworn

16

performance of their police tactics

17
18

38.

police officers,
As

a

The conduct of defendants Does 1-4 in that

such that defendants Does 1-4

direct, legal

39.

20

defendants Does

21

Government Code.

Defendant

negligent in the

and duties.

and proximate result of the aforesaid

of defendants Does 1-4, inclusive the decedent suffered

19

were

negligence

injuries and damages.

City of Indio is vicariously liable for the negligence of

1-4, inclusive, pursuant to section 815.2(a) of the California

22

23
24

25
26
27

28

-9-

 Document 1

5:16-cv-00141

1

Filed 01/22/16

Page

10 of 13

Page

SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF IJNDER CAL. CIV. CODE

2

(By plaintiffs as successors

3

against defendants Doe

4

40.

5

each and every

6

as

Plaintiffs repeat and

reallege

ID #:10

52.1

in interest to decedent
1 and

City of Indio)

and hereby

incomorate by reference

allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 39 of this complaint

if set forth herein in full.

7

41.

8

interfered

9

exercise

In violation of California Civil Code section 52.1 defendant Doe 1

by violence, threats of violence, intimidation, or coercion, with the

or

enjoyment of the rights of decedent to be free from unlawful seizures

10

and excessive and unreasonable

11

Article 1, Sections 7 and 13 of the California

12

Amendment of the United States Constitution.

13

42.

force, in violation of his rights protected under

Constitution,

On information and belief, defendant Doe 1

as

well

as

the Fourth

intentionally and

14

spitefully committed the above acts to discourage decedent from exercising the

15

above civil

16

him from

17

43.

rights, to retaliate against him for invoking such rights,
On information and belief, decedent

19

discourage him from exercising the above civil rights,

20

for invoking such
As

a

by defendant Doe

1

were

intended to

to retaliate

against him

rights, or to prevent him from exercising such rights.
direct, legal and proximate result of the aforesaid violations of

22

California Civil Code section 52.1

23

and

24

prevent

reasonably believed and

understood that the acts committed

44.

to

exercising such rights.

18

21

or

by defendant Doe 1, decedent was injured

damaged.
45.

Defendant

City of Indio is vicariously liable for the wrongful acts

25

of defendant Does 1 pursuant to section

26

Code, which provides that a public entity is liable for the injuries caused by its

27

employees within the

28

subject him or her to liability.

scope of the

815.2(a) of the California Government

employment if the employee's act would

-10-

 Document 1

5:16-cv-00141

1

46.

Filed 01/22/16

The conduct of defendant Doe 1

Page

as

11 of 13

Page

ID #:11

alleged above was willful,

2

wanton, malicious, and done with reckless disregard for the rights and safety of

3

decedent and therefore warrants the

4

amount

5

according to proof sufficient to punish and make an example of said

II defendant.

6

SEVENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF FOR WRONGFUL DEATH

7

(By plaintiffs individually against defendants Doe

8

47.

9

each and every

10

as

48.

49.

377.60,
As

14

have been

15

resulting

16

the

a

reallege and hereby incorporate by reference

are

proper parties with

to pursue this

decedent,

in

As

an
a

death claim.

19

according to proof.

society, comfort, attention, services,

amount in accordance with

including

Defendant

funeral and burial expenses, in

22

Government Code.
The conduct of defendant Doe 1

24

wanton, malicious, and done with reckless

25

decedent and therefore warrants the

26

amount

27

28

an

plaintiffs have
amount

City of Indio is vicariously liable for the tortious

conduct of defendants Does 1, pursuant to section

52.

and support of

proof.

21

23

alleged above plaintiffs

further direct result of the acts of defendants,

incurred expenses,

51.

Civ.

damaged, suffering pecuniary loss and other compensable injuries

from loss of love,

50.

wrongful

standing, pursuant to Cal.

direct result of the acts of defendants

18

20

City of Indio)

allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 46 of this complaint

Plaintiffs

Proc. Code

13

17

Plaintiffs repeat and

1 and

if set forth herein in full.

11
12

imposition of exemplary damages in an

as

815.2(a) of the California

alleged above was willful,

disregard for the rights

and

safety of

imposition of exemplary damages in an

according to proof sufficient to punish and make an example of said

I defendant.

 5:16-cv-00141

Document 1

Filed 01/22/16

1

Page

ID #:12

WHEREFORE, plaintiffs pray for judgment against defendants, and each
of them,

as

follows:

4

As to all Claims for Relief

5

1.

6

amounts

7

2.

8

12 of 13

PRAYER

2
3

Page

the

For compensatory,

general, special and incidental damages, in

according to proof;

For costs of suit

incurred, including reasonable attorneys' fees

First, Second, Third and Sixth Causes of Action; and

9

3.

For such other and further relief as this Court deems just and

10

proper.

11

As to the First, Second, Fourth, Sixth and Seventh Claims for Relief

12

4.

For punitive and

exemplary damages against the individual

13

defendant(s) in an amount sufficient to punish defendant(s)

14

example.

and make

15
16

Dated:

January, 2015

KENNNER & GREENFIELD

17

18
19

By

Is/

=Tar-Renner

Attorneys

20
21
22

23
24

25
26
27

28

-12-

for Plaintiffs

an

as

to

 5:16-cv-00141

Document 1

1

Filed 01/22/16

Page

13 of 13

Page

ID #:13

REQUEST FOR JURY TRIAL

2

3

Plaintiffs request

a

trial

by jury on all claims.

4
5

6

Dated:

Januaryh, 2016

KENNER & GREENFIELD

7

8
9

By

/s/
David E. Kenner
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

10
11

12
13
14
15

16
17
18

19
20

21
22

23
24
25

26
27

28

-1 3-