Case: 1:16-cv-02325-PAG Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/19/16 1 of 21. PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION

ANTHONY NOVAK
1815 Wexford Avenue
Parma, Ohio 44134
Plaintiff,
v.
THE CITY OF PARMA
6611 Ridge Road
Parma, Ohio 44129
And
TIMOTHY DOBECK
KEVIN RILEY
THOMAS CONNOR
JOHN DOES #1-4
c/o Parma Police Department
5555 Powers Blvd.
Parma, Ohio 44129
Individually and in Their Official Capacities
as Employees of the City of Parma, Ohio

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

CASE NO:

JUDGE:

COMPLAINT
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED UNDER
FRCP 38(b)

Defendants.
Now comes Plaintiff, Anthony Novak (hereinafter referred to as “Mr. Novak”), by and
through counsel, and for his Complaint states as follows:
INTRODUCTION
Posting written content and speech on the internet, in particular on Facebook, is activity
that is protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Ohio

 Case: 1:16-cv-02325-PAG Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/19/16 2 of 21. PageID #: 2

Constitution. It is not a crime. City of Parma Police Officers, due to serious deficits in training,
supervision, and discipline, have punished a civilian who posted internet speech and content to
which the individual Defendants, unlawfully and without privilege to do so, deemed objectionable
and offensive. After Mr. Novak exercised his constitutionally protected rights, the City of Parma
and its officers and employees, due to their deliberate indifference and the unlawful actions of the
individually named Defendants, arrested, handcuffed, and prosecuted Mr. Novak for the content
of his internet posts and speech, without any probable cause to do so. This civil rights action seeks
declaratory relief and damages.
I. PARTIES
1.

This is a civil rights lawsuit brought to vindicate Mr. Novak’s rights protected by

the First, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and Article I,
Sections 11 and 14 of the Ohio Constitution. Mr. Novak brings his action pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
§§ 1983 and 1988, 28 U.S.C. § 2201 et seq., and the laws and Constitution of the State of Ohio.
Mr. Novak seeks declaratory relief and monetary damages, including punitive damages.
2.

On or about March 1, 2016 through March 2, 2016, Mr. Novak created a Facebook

page wherein he made several postings which could only be deemed by a reasonable person to
constitute protected satire and/or parody. Mr. Novak used images from the City of Parma’s
Facebook page in the creation of his page and also included distinct differences between the two
pages. Displeased and angered with the content of Mr. Novak’s posts, Defendants began an
extensive, malicious, harassing and unlawful plan to shut down the account and to identify and
punish its creator in violation of his constitutional rights. As part of Defendants’ plan, City of
Parma Police Officers detained, arrested, and attempted to interrogate Mr. Novak. As part of this
plan, Defendants, in concert with one another, searched his residence, seizing his personal property

2

 Case: 1:16-cv-02325-PAG Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/19/16 3 of 21. PageID #: 3

– including two (2) video game consoles, reviewing his personal information on his electronic
devices, all purportedly for the crime of disrupting public services.1
II.
3.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this civil rights action under 28

U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343. This Court also has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201 and 2202 to
declare the rights of the parties and to grant all further relief found necessary and proper.
4.

Venue is proper in this judicial district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(a) in that

Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction within the Northern District of Ohio, Eastern
Division Federal Court and the events that give rise to this action occurred within the Northern
District of Ohio, Eastern Division Federal Court.
III.
5.

THE PARTIES

Mr. Novak was a resident of Cuyahoga County, Ohio during all times relevant to

this action. He brings this action on his own behalf for damages resulting from the violation of
rights secured by the United States Constitution and the Ohio Constitution.
6.

Defendant City of Parma is a unit of local government organized under the laws of

the State of Ohio. Defendant City of Parma is also a “person” under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and at all
times relevant hereto acted under color of law.
7.

Defendant Timothy Dobeck (hereinafter referred to as “Dobeck”) was at all times

relevant hereto an employee of the City of Parma, Ohio Law Department. Defendant Dobeck is
sued in his individual and official capacities. Defendant is a “person” under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and
at all times relevant hereto acted under color of law.

1

To this day, none of Mr. Novak’s improperly seized property has been returned to him.

3

 Case: 1:16-cv-02325-PAG Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/19/16 4 of 21. PageID #: 4

8.

Defendant Kevin Riley (hereinafter referred to as “Riley”) was at all times relevant

hereto an employee of the City of Parma, Ohio Police Department. Defendant Riley is sued in his
individual and official capacities. Defendant is a “person” under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and at all times
relevant hereto acted under color of law.
9.

Defendant Thomas Connor (hereinafter referred to as “Connor”) was at all times

relevant hereto an employee of the City of Parma, Ohio Police Department. Defendant Connor is
sued in his individual and official capacities. Defendant is a “person” under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and
at all times relevant hereto acted under color of law.
IV. THE FACTS
A.
10.

Ohio’s Disrupting Public Services Statute
Ohio’s disrupting public services statute, R.C. § 2909.04(B), prohibits any person

from knowingly using a computer and/or the internet to disrupt, interrupt, or impair the functions
of police operations.
11.

Ohio Revised Code § 2909.04(B)’s actual language states:

(B) No person shall knowingly use any computer, computer system, computer network,
telecommunications device, or other electronic device or system or the internet so as to
disrupt, interrupt, or impair the functions of any police, fire, educational, commercial, or
governmental operations.
12.

Whoever is deemed to have violated subsection (B) of the statute is guilty of a

Fourth Degree Felony and faces up to eighteen (18) months of prison time.
13.

The statute unconstitutionally criminalizes the use of a computer and/or the internet

when civilians post written material or speech that the police find offensive and/or derogatory.
The statute enables the police to use unfettered discretion to chill free speech.

4

 Case: 1:16-cv-02325-PAG Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/19/16 5 of 21. PageID #: 5

B.
14.

Mr. Novak’s Facebook Page
On or about March 1, 2016, Mr. Novak created a Facebook page which was a satire

and/or parody of the City of Parma Facebook page. Mr. Novak made six (6) comedic postings
which, in unedited form, are as follows:
1.

Tuesday will be our official stay inside and catch up with the family day in Parma!
The Parma Police Department has set this day to allow families to come together
in an effort to reduce future crime by having children have well balanced
communication with their families. Anyone’s seen outside their home from the
hours of 12pm to 9pm will be arrested. Thank you.

2.

The City of Parma Police Department will enact a Pedophile Reform event outside
of St. Anthony of Padua Church on 5-1-16 in an attempt to reform pedophiles to
normality. We will have multiple learning stations including a “No means no”
station filled with puzzles and quizzes. Anyone who passes all of the stations will
be removed from the sex offender registry and accepted as an honorary police
officer of the Parma Police Department. Have fun out there!

3.

The Parma Police Department & Parma Auxiliary Police Food Drive to benefit teen
abortions will take place on Sunday, We will be giving out free abortions to teens
using an experimental technique discovered by the Parma Police Department. All
teens must bring a note from their parent to be part of the experiment. The abortions
will be held Saturday 4/19/2016 from noon to 4pm in a police van in the parking
lot at Giant Eagle (7400 Broadview Rd.).

4.

We have forgotten to post that on September 30, 2015 at approximately 10:00 am
the Parma Subway Sandwich Shop located at 5890 Broadview Rd. was robbed at
knife point. The white male offender got away with a small amount of money and
did not harm the clerk. Moments after an unrelated African American woman was
seen loitering for over 20 minutes in front of the store despite their no loitering
policy. If you have any information regarding this African American womans
whereabouts please contact the City of Parma Police Department so that she may
be brought to justice. This is the best still photo we have of the offender. Mentor
Police and Middleburg Hts. Police have reported similar loitering offenses which
may be the same female. The Parma Police Department is seeking assistance
identifying the individual in the picture. Please contact Det. Joe Tremble.

5.

POLICE OFFICER City of Parma The Parma Civil Service Commission will
conduct a written exam for basic Police Officer for the City of Parma to establish
an eligibility list. The exam will be held on March 12, 2016. Applications are
available February 14, 2016 through March 2, 2016. Parma is an equal opportunity
employer but is strongly encouraging minorities to not apply. The test will consist
of a 15 question multiple choice definition test followed by a hearing test. Should

5

 Case: 1:16-cv-02325-PAG Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/19/16 6 of 21. PageID #: 6

you pass you will be accepted as an officer of the Parma Police Department. By
order of Parma Civil Service Commission John L. Kirk, Jr., Chairman Timmy
Baycock Dan Coffee An Equal Opportunity Employer.
6.

Due to the slow increase of a homeless population in our city, The Parma Police
Department is pleased to announce that it will be introducing a new temporary law
that will forbid residence of Parma from giving ANY HOMELESS person food,
money, or shelter in our city for 90 days. This is an attempt to have the homeless
population eventually leave our city due to starvation. Residents caught giving the
homeless population food, shelter, or water will be sentenced to a minimum of 60
days in jail. You have been warned.

15.

Mr. Novak’s Facebook page was a parody and/or satiric form of expression

protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 11 of
the Ohio Constitution. The Facebook page was not reasonably believable as conveying the voice
or messages of the City of Parma Police Department. Mr. Novak had no intention of deceiving
people into believing that the account was actually operated by a representative of the police
department, and no reasonable person could conclude such an intent from the content of the page.
C.
16.

The City of Parma’s Unlawful Investigation and Mr. Novak’s Arrest
On March 2, 2016, Riley, Connor, and Dobeck began working jointly and

individually to have the Facebook account shut down and to punish the creator of the account
because the Defendants objected to the lawful, protected content of the postings and because Riley
and Connor were personally offended by the posts.
17.

On March 2, 2016, Riley advised Connor that a Facebook page purporting to be the

City of Parma Police Department Facebook page existed and directed Connor to begin an
investigation into who was behind the page. Connor began his investigation by searching for the
actual police department Facebook page along with Mr. Novak’s page. Based upon nothing more
than a cursory review of the content of Mr. Novak’s postings, Connor sent a preservation letter to

6

 Case: 1:16-cv-02325-PAG Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/19/16 7 of 21. PageID #: 7

Facebook for Facebook to preserve in its entirety Mr. Novak’s page and for the account to be taken
down and suspended immediately.
18.

Based upon nothing more than a haphazard review of the content of Mr. Novak’s

page and postings, Connor obtained a subpoena for the IP address of the person who created the
protected and lawful Facebook page. Next, Connor contacted the Ohio Internet Crimes Against
Children’s Task Force, which routinely deals with child pornography, to request a direct contact
telephone number for Facebook. Unable to locate a telephone number, Connor obtained an email
address for a Facebook representative. Armed with nothing more than a superficial review of Mr.
Novak’s content on the page, and with no other evidence of a purported crime being committed,
Connor emailed the Facebook representative and again demanded that Mr. Novak’s account be
suspended and/or removed immediately.
19.

After Connor decided that he could infringe upon Mr. Novak’s First Amendment

rights, he then proceeded to conduct a more in depth review of Mr. Novak’s Facebook page and
the content therein. Connor specifically noted in his investigative report that civilians posting
comments under Mr. Novak’s postings appeared to be appalled by the writings.

Connor

specifically memorialized in his report that many of the commenters were using vulgarity towards
the Parma Police Department.
20.

Shortly thereafter, Parma Detective Heinz informed Connor that he located the

person who first shared the parody Parma Police Department Facebook page and that the person
was Mr. Novak.
21.

On March 3, 2016, the Facebook representative emailed Connor to let Connor know

that his team was working on Connor’s demands. Connor also found that the Facebook page had

7

 Case: 1:16-cv-02325-PAG Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/19/16 8 of 21. PageID #: 8

been removed. Connor then sent a second preservation letter to Facebook demanding that it
preserve Mr. Novak’s account in its entirety.
22.

On this date, Riley and Connor sent out a press release to dozens of media outlets

that there was a fake Parma Police Department Facebook page and that none of the content was
posted by or with the permission of the Parma Police Department. After seeing the story on the
local news, Mr. Novak deleted his Facebook page.
23.

Connor then spoke with Dobeck who told Connor that the crime Mr. Novak

committed was Disrupting Public Service, a felony of the fourth degree – all for engaging in
constitutionally protected expressive behavior by creating a parody Facebook page of the City of
Parma Police Department. In his investigative report, neither Connor nor Dobeck had any
supportive evidence or facts that any of the functions of the Parma Police Department had been
disrupted or that Mr. Novak intended his Facebook page to in fact disrupt any function of the
Parma Police Department. The individual Defendants had absolutely no probable cause that Mr.
Novak committed any crime at all.
24.

Armed with nothing more than the Defendants’ displeasure at the content of Mr.

Novak’s Facebook page, Connor, under the direction and supervision of Dobeck and Riley, drafted
and applied for a search warrant to be sent to Facebook. Connor, and any of the other individual
Defendants, did not have probable cause or any other lawful basis to apply for a warrant. A judge
of the Parma Municipal Court approved the warrant.
25.

Attached to the search warrant was Connor’s Affidavit wherein he placed all of his

perceived known, relevant, and material facts supporting probable cause that Mr. Novak
committed a crime. After having previously determined that Mr. Novak committed the crime of
Disrupting Public Services, Connor failed to mention any function or service that Mr. Novak

8

 Case: 1:16-cv-02325-PAG Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/19/16 9 of 21. PageID #: 9

purportedly disrupted. The only facts to which Connor cites are the Facebook page itself and the
page’s content.
26.

On March 18, 2016, Connor received 2,796 pages of information from Facebook.

On this date, Connor confirmed that Mr. Novak created the parody Facebook page of the Parma
Police Department and proceeded to speak with Dobeck and Riley.

Together, Defendants

conspired again to trample upon Mr. Novak’s protected Constitutional rights and charged Mr.
Novak, through the issuance of a criminal complaint, with one (1) count of violating R.C. §
2909.094(B). Connor, under the direction and supervision of Dobeck and Connor, also obtained
an arrest warrant to effectuate the arrest of Mr. Novak.
27.

On March 25, 2016, Mr. Novak was coming out of a store when he was approached

by multiple Parma Police Officers. Mr. Novak initially thought the officers were there for
somebody else and attempted to walk around them. At this time, the officers told Mr. Novak to
put his hands behind his back and that he was under arrest. Mr. Novak asked why he was being
arrested and the arresting officer told him because of his Facebook page. Upon arriving back at
the Parma Police Station, Connor attempted to interrogate Mr. Novak; however, Mr. Novak
demanded to speak to a lawyer.
28.

Because of the unlawful investigation and arrest, Mr. Novak spent the next four (4)

days in jail, three (3) of which were spent in the Cuyahoga County jail in the general population.
Also in the general population were persons charged with murder, rape, and other violent crimes.
29.

On this date, Connor applied for a second search warrant to search Mr. Novak’s

residence to uncover evidence of the crime Mr. Novak purportedly committed. Connor and any
other individual Defendant did not have probable cause or any other lawful basis to apply for a
warrant. A judge of the Parma Municipal Court approved the warrant.

9

 Case: 1:16-cv-02325-PAG Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/19/16 10 of 21. PageID #: 10

30.

In Connor’s supporting affidavit to this search warrant application, after Mr.

Novak’s arrest, Connor stated that the Parma Police Department received several telephone calls
about the parody Facebook page.

Mr. Connor also stated, to support his probable cause

determination, that numerous people unrelated to Mr. Novak were making comments on the page
like, “Fuck the Parma Police.” After securing the search warrant, Connor, along with numerous
other Parma Police officers, raided Mr. Novak’s residence.
31.

On this date, Mr. Novak’s roommate was home at the time Defendants executed

the search warrant. Mr. Novak’s roommate was using the bathroom when Connor, Riley, and
other police officers broke into Mr. Novak’s residence, guns drawn, finding Mr. Novak’s
roommate on the toilet.
32.

Defendants unlawfully, and without probable cause, confiscated ten (10) items

from Mr. Novak’s residence. The items taken by the police were: two (2) hard drives, one (1)
laptop, two (2) cell phones, two (2) tablets, one (1) junior drive, (1) Sony Playstation 4, and (1)
Xbox 360.
33.

On this same date, March 25, 2016, Riley issued a press release to the public,

through dozens of media outlets, that the Parma Police Department arrested and charged Mr.
Novak with Disrupting Public Services. Riley’s factual support linking Mr. Novak to this crime
was that, “Novak posted derogatory and inflammatory information that purported to be from the
Parma Police Department.” Riley’s press release was entirely content based and mentioned
nothing about any police function that Mr. Novak intentionally disrupted through the exercise of
his constitutional rights.
34.

On March 28, 2016, Connor applied for a third search warrant to search all of the

items taken from Mr. Novak’s residence. Connor and any other individual Defendant did not have

10

 Case: 1:16-cv-02325-PAG Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/19/16 11 of 21. PageID #: 11

probable cause or any other lawful basis to apply for a warrant. A Judge of the Parma Municipal
Court approved the warrant and the individual Defendants began extensively searching Mr.
Novak’s personal property.
35.
D.
36.

On this date, Mr. Novak left the Cuyahoga County jail.
The Indictment and Criminal Case
On April 11, 2016, the State of Ohio indicted Mr. Novak on one (1) count of a

violation of R.C. § 2909.04(B) – Disrupting Public Services. On April 25, 2016 Mr. Novak pled
not guilty to the charge and the pretrial process began.
37.

Pursuant to the trial court’s policy, Mr. Novak was placed in the Cuyahoga County

Court Supervised Release Program where, as a condition of his bond, Mr. Novak had to report
weekly to a probation officer. Had Mr. Novak chosen not to report, his bond would have been
revoked and he would have been immediately remanded to the Cuyahoga County Jail.
38.

Throughout the pretrial process, Defendant maintained at all times his innocence

and the fact that his actions, and speech, was absolutely protected by the First Amendment.
Despite this, the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s Office attempted to have Mr. Novak enter into a
plea bargain whereby Mr. Novak would plead guilty to an unspecified misdemeanor. Defendant
refused this offer.
39.

Throughout the pretrial process, Mr. Novak attempted on numerous occasions to

have R.C. § 2909.04(B) held unconstitutional and to have the case against him dismissed on that
ground utilizing a First Amendment argument. The trial court denied all of the aforementioned
attempts.

11

 Case: 1:16-cv-02325-PAG Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/19/16 12 of 21. PageID #: 12

40.

On August 10, 2016, Mr. Novak stood trial to answer to the State of Ohio’s

indictment. On August 11, 2016, the jury returned a not guilty verdict for Mr. Novak terminating
the unlawful criminal proceedings in his favor.
41.

Defendants Riley, Connor and Dobeck at all times acted without privilege, without

probable cause, and without the consent of Mr. Novak.
42.

Defendants acted maliciously and in concert to injure Mr. Novak. The actions of

Defendants have resulted in actual damages to Mr. Novak.
E.
43.

Policy, Custom, and Culpable Conduct
Defendant City of Parma’s policies, practices, customs, and usages regarding

adherence to clearly established First Amendment protections, unreasonable searches and seizures,
and malicious prosecution are a moving force behind the actions of Defendants against Mr. Novak.
44.

Defendant City of Parma customarily allows officers to engage in violations of

civilians’ First Amendment rights, unreasonable searches and seizures, and malicious prosecution
without being held accountable or disciplined for their misconduct.
45.

Defendant City of Parma failed to institute adequate municipal policies, procedures,

customs, usages, practices and protocols regarding First Amendment violations, unreasonable
searches and seizures, and malicious prosecutions.
46.

Defendant City of Parma failed to adequately institute and train supervisors and

officers to hold each other accountable when First Amendment violations and unreasonable
searches and seizures occur in the field.
47.

Defendant City of Parma failed to adequately train officers in the First Amendment

and the Fourth Amendment.

12

 Case: 1:16-cv-02325-PAG Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/19/16 13 of 21. PageID #: 13

48.

Defendant City of Parma has not disciplined any of the individual Defendants for

their misconduct described in this Complaint despite a duty to do so.
49.

An investigation into the underlying facts and First Amendment protections of Mr.

Novak was so incomplete and inadequate as to constitute a ratification by the City of Parma of
Defendants’ conduct.
50.

The training and supervision provided by Defendant City of Parma to the individual

Defendants herein was deliberately indifferent to the safety and rights of the citizens, including
Mr. Novak.
51.

The conduct of the City of Parma identified above constitutes a pattern and practice

and again amounts to a moving force behind the constitutional violations inflicted upon Mr.
Novak.
52.

As a direct and proximate result of the conduct of each Defendant, Mr. Novak

suffered physical pain, emotional and psychological trauma. Mr. Novak lives in daily fear of
additional harassment and retaliation by City of Parma police officers.
53.

Because Defendants continue to maintain that the actions taken against Mr. Novak

were lawful and proper, Mr. Novak remains in danger of being punished for exercising his rights
to free speech and expression if he engages in the future in speech that is derogatory towards the
Parma Police Department and its individual officers.
54.

As a direct and proximate result of the City of Parma’s policies practices and

customs, Mr. Novak suffered the following injuries and damages:
a.

Violation of his rights under the First Amendment to the United States
Constitution, as applied to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment, to be

13

 Case: 1:16-cv-02325-PAG Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/19/16 14 of 21. PageID #: 14

free from criminal prosecution or retaliation for engaging in constitutionally
protected expressive activity;
b.

Violation of his rights under the Fourth Amendment to the United States
Constitution, as applied to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment, to be
free from malicious prosecution and illegal search and seizure;

c.

Loss of his physical liberty;

d.

Monetary losses;

e.

Emotional trauma, humiliation, and distress.
IV.

CAUSES OF ACTION

Count I -- Declaratory Judgment That R.C. § 2909.04(B) is Unconstitutional
55.

Mr. Novak realleges and incorporates by reference herein each and every allegation

and averment contained in each and every Paragraph above as if fully rewritten herein.
56.

Mr. Novak has standing to challenge the constitutionality of R.C. § 2909.04(B) for

himself and for every other citizen in the State of Ohio on account of the wrongful arrest and
prosecution of him for exercising his constitutional rights.
57.

Mr. Novak exercised his freedom of expression through speech on the internet and

the Defendants conspired to wrongfully arrest and charge Mr. Novak for disrupting public services.
The statute under which Defendants charged and indicted Mr. Novak is unconstitutionally
overbroad because it provides the police unfettered discretion to wrongfully arrest and charge
civilians in the State of Ohio with a crime for exercising their First Amendment rights. This statute
prohibits constitutionally protected speech.

14

 Case: 1:16-cv-02325-PAG Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/19/16 15 of 21. PageID #: 15

58.

The statute also is not narrowly tailored to prohibit only that expression and/or

speech that is not protected by the First Amendment, i.e., fighting words, incitement, obscenity,
and/or true threats.
59.

The statute is also unconstitutional for vagueness. The statute’s language and terms

are susceptible of multiple meanings and an ordinary and reasonable civilian would be unable to
determine that conduct which is unlawful under the statute and that conduct which is permissible.
60.

For the foregoing reasons, Mr. Novak asks this Court to declare that R.C. §

2909.04(B) is unconstitutional on its face and as applied to Mr. Novak under both the United States
Constitution and the Ohio Constitution.
Count II -- First Amendment Retaliation
61.

Mr. Novak realleges and incorporates by reference herein each and every allegation

and averment contained in each and every Paragraph above as if fully rewritten herein.
62.

The posting of written content and speech on the internet, and the creation of

satirical and/or parody Facebook pages is absolutely protected by the First Amendment to the
United States Constitution.
63.

The Defendants’ actions in investigating, charging, obtaining and effectuating

search warrants, and arresting Mr. Novak, in the absence of probable cause that Mr. Novak had
committed a crime, constituted unlawful retaliation against Mr. Novak by public officials for
engaging in activity protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
64.

The actions of the Defendants described herein violate the rights of Mr. Novak to

freedom of expression and freedom of speech as guaranteed by the First Amendment of the United
States Constitution.

15

 Case: 1:16-cv-02325-PAG Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/19/16 16 of 21. PageID #: 16

65.

Defendant City of Parma is responsible for the violations of Mr. Novak’s

constitutional rights because Defendants Riley, Connor, and Dobeck’s actions resulted from the
City of Parma’s deliberate indifference to a custom, pattern, practice, or policy of allowing its
officers and law director to investigate, charge, obtain search warrants, and arrest individuals for
their protected conduct in the creation of internet content and/or satirical parody Facebook pages
and/or a deliberately indifferent failure to train, supervise, and discipline officers and employees
who engage in such conduct.
Count III -- Unreasonable Search in Violation of the Fourth Amendment
66.

Mr. Novak realleges and incorporates by reference herein each and every allegation

and averment contained in each and every Paragraph above as if fully rewritten herein.
67.

The search of Mr. Novak’s residence, cell phone, computers, tablets, hard drives,

and video game systems was not and could not have been made for the purpose of investigating
the purported crime of disrupting public services. Instead, the sole purpose of the search was to
harass and violate Mr. Novak’s constitutional rights because Defendants took exception to the
content and words Mr. Novak used on his Facebook page.
68.

The search of the aforementioned was made without probable cause and constituted

a violation of Mr. Novak’s rights to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.
69.

Defendant City of Parma is responsible for the violations of Mr. Novak’s

constitutional rights because the individual Defendants’ actions resulted from the City of Parma’s
deliberate indifference to a custom, pattern, practice, or policy of allowing its officers and
employees to violate the First, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States
Constitution against individuals exercising their rights under the First Amendment by, among other

16

 Case: 1:16-cv-02325-PAG Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/19/16 17 of 21. PageID #: 17

things, unlawfully confiscating and examining citizen’s property and/or a deliberate indifferent
failure to train, supervise, and discipline officers and employees who engage in such conduct.
Count IV -- False Arrest and False Imprisonment
70.

Mr. Novak realleges and incorporates by reference herein each and every allegation

and averment contained in each and every Paragraph above as if fully rewritten herein.
71.

Mr. Novak had a clearly established right under the Fourth and Fourteenth

Amendments to the United States Constitution to be free from an unreasonable seizure of his
person, a right that Defendants violated by engaging in conduct to effectuate Mr. Novak’s arrest
without probable cause or a reasonable belief that Mr. Novak was committing a crime.
72.

Upon information and belief, Defendants, acting in concert with one another, and

directing and ordering the arrest of Defendant, did not act upon a validly issued arrest warrant
and/or acted upon an arrest warrant that was utterly void.
73.

Defendant City of Parma is responsible for the violation of Mr. Novak’s

constitutional rights because the individual Defendants actions resulted from the City’s deliberate
indifference to a custom, pattern, practice, or policy of allowing its officers and employees to
retaliate against individuals for their exercise of their First Amendment rights and/or a deliberately
indifferent failure to train, supervise, and discipline officers and employees who engage in such
conduct.
Count V -- Malicious Prosecution
74.

Mr. Novak realleges and incorporates by reference herein each and every allegation

and averment contained in each and every Paragraph above as if fully rewritten herein.
75.

Mr. Novak has clearly established rights under the First, Fourth and Fourteenth

Amendments to the United States Constitution to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures.

17

 Case: 1:16-cv-02325-PAG Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/19/16 18 of 21. PageID #: 18

The individual Defendants violated these rights when they initiated criminal proceedings against
Mr. Novak in retaliation for Mr. Novak’s constitutionally protected speech and in the absence of
any probable cause to believe that Mr. Novak had committed a crime.
76.

Defendants herein all acted in concert to initiate criminal proceedings against Mr.

Novak. In fact, the individual Defendants made, influenced, and/or participated in the decision to
prosecute Mr. Novak.
77.

The individual Defendants had a complete lack of probable cause to initiate and

carry out the criminal prosecution against Mr. Novak. As a consequence of the legal proceedings,
Mr. Novak suffered a deprivation of liberty.
78.

The charges against Mr. Novak were later terminated in his favor.

79.

The individual Defendants pursued this prosecution of Mr. Novak with malice in

retaliation for Mr. Novak engaging in constitutionally protected speech, and without probable
cause or reasonable basis for believing that Mr. Novak violated Ohio’s Disrupting Public Service
statute, or that he committed any other crime.
80.

Defendants City of Parma is responsible for the violation of Mr. Novak’s

constitutional rights because the individual Defendants’ actions resulted from the City of Parma’s
deliberate indifference to a custom, pattern, practice, or policy of allowing its officers and
employees to arrest and charge individuals in retaliation for their expressive conduct in exercising
their First Amendment rights and./or a deliberately indifferent failure to train, supervise, and
discipline its officers and employees who engage in such conduct.
Count VI – Free Speech Under Ohio Constitution
81.

Mr. Novak realleges and incorporates by reference herein each and every allegation

and averment contained in each and every Paragraph above as if fully rewritten herein.

18

 Case: 1:16-cv-02325-PAG Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/19/16 19 of 21. PageID #: 19

82.

The posting of written content and speech on the internet, and the creation of

satirical and/or parody Facebook pages is absolutely protected by Article I, Section 11 to the Ohio
Constitution.
83.

The Defendants’ actions in investigating, charging, conducting search warrants,

and arresting Mr. Novak, in the absence of probable cause that Mr. Novak had committed a crime,
constituted unlawful retaliation against Mr. Novak by public officials for engaging in activity
protected by Article I, Section 11 to the Ohio Constitution.
84.

The actions of the Defendants described herein violate the rights of Mr. Novak to

freedom of expression and freedom of speech as guaranteed by Article I, Section 11 to the Ohio
Constitution.
85.

Defendant City of Parma is responsible for the violations of Mr. Novak’s

constitutional rights because Defendants Riley, Connor, and Dobeck’s actions resulted from the
City of Parma’s deliberate indifference to a custom, pattern, practice, or policy of allowing its
officers and law director to investigate, charge, obtain search warrants, and arrest individuals for
their protected conduct in the creation of internet content and/or satirical parody Facebook pages
and/or a deliberately indifferent failure to train, supervise, and discipline officers and employees
who engage in such conduct.
Count VII – Unreasonable Search and Seizure under Ohio Constitution
86.

Mr. Novak realleges and incorporates by reference herein each and every allegation

and averment contained in each and every Paragraph above as if fully rewritten herein.
87.

Mr. Novak had clearly established rights under Article I, Section 14 of the Ohio

Constitution to be free from unreasonable searches of his property and seizures of his person, rights
that Defendants violated by engaging in conduct to effectuate Mr. Novak’s arrest and search of his

19

 Case: 1:16-cv-02325-PAG Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/19/16 20 of 21. PageID #: 20

residence and property without probable cause or a reasonable belief that Mr. Novak was
committing a crime.
88.

Defendant City of Parma is responsible for the violation of Mr. Novak’s

constitutional rights because the individual Defendants actions resulted from the City’s deliberate
indifference to a custom, pattern, practice, or policy of allowing its officers and employees to
retaliate against individuals for their exercise of their First Amendment rights and/or a deliberately
indifferent failure to train, supervise, and discipline officers and employees who engage in such
conduct.
Count VIII – Conspiracy
89.

Mr. Novak realleges and incorporates by reference herein each and every allegation

and averment contained in each and every Paragraph above as if fully rewritten herein.
90.

Defendants have, under color of law, deprived Mr. Novak of rights, privileges, and

immunities secured to him by the United States Constitution including the right to be free from
unreasonable searches and seizures under the Fourth Amendment as applied to the States through
the Fourteenth Amendment.
91.

The individual Defendants, through concerted action and overt acts, by plan, and

with a conspiratorial objective have deprived and continue to deprive Mr. Novak of his
constitutional rights. The Defendants undertook an unlawful course of action, or single plan, to
share in their conspiratorial objective to deny Mr. Novak his constitutionally protected rights.
92.

Defendants committed multiple overt acts in investigating, arresting, seizing

property, and charging Mr. Novak with a crime, all without adequate probable cause, in violation
of his aforementioned constitutional rights.

20

 Case: 1:16-cv-02325-PAG Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/19/16 21 of 21. PageID #: 21

93.

The individual Defendants have acted maliciously and in concert to injure Mr.

Novak. The actions of the individual Defendants have resulted in actual damages to Mr. Novak.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for the following relief:
1. That this Court declare Ohio Revised Code § 2909.04(B) unconstitutional;
2. That Plaintiff be awarded compensatory damages in an amount to be determined at
trial;
3. That Plaintiff be awarded punitive damages in an amount to be determined at trial;
4. That this Court award Plaintiff reasonable attorney’s fees, costs, and disbursement;
5. That this Court award pre and post judgment interest.
6. That this Court award Plaintiff such additional relief as the Court deems proper and
just.
Respectfully submitted,
/s/ Thomas J. Connick
Thomas J. Connick (0070527)
Gary A. Vick, Jr. (0071495)
CONNICK LAW, LLC
25550 Chagrin Blvd., Suite 101
Beachwood, Ohio 44122
PH: (216) 364-0512   FX: (216) 609-3446
Email: tconnick@connicklawllc.com
gavickjr@connicklawllc.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury.

/s/ Thomas J. Connick
Thomas J. Connick (0071495)
Attorney for Plaintiff

21