Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 1 of 30 PageID #: 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
WILLIAM AMES, JR
and
LAURIE BRAUN,
Plaintiffs and next of kin to the
deceased, William D. Ames, III,
and
ESTATE OF WILLIAM D. AMES, III,
DECEASED,
v.
ST. FRANCOIS COUNTY SHERIFF’S
DEPARTMENT,
Serve: 1550 Doubet Road
Farmington, MO 63640
and
CURTIS R. DAVIS, individually and in
his official capacity,
Serve:
10147 Elliott Rd
Mineral Point MO 63660-9594
and
DENNIS W. SMITH, individually and in
his official capacity as Jail Administrator
Serve: 1550 Doubet Road
Farmington, MO 63640
and
ST. FRANCOIS COUNTY
Serve: 1 West Liberty Street
Annex Building
Suite 300

4:19-cv-173
Case No. _________

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 2 of 30 PageID #: 4

Farmington, MO 63640,
and

JOHN DOES #1-3, individually and in their
official capacities,
and
HEATHER KATHERINE SMITH,
individually in in her official capacity
Serve: 1550 Doubet Road
Farmington, MO 63640
Defendants.

COMPLAINT
COME NOW Plaintiffs, by and through counsel, and for their Complaint against
Defendants Curtis R. Davis (hereinafter, “Davis”), St. Francois County (hereinafter “County”),
St. Francois County Sheriff Department (hereinafter “Sheriff”), Dennis W. Smith (hereinafter
“Smith”), Heather Katherine Smith, and John Does #1-3 (hereinafter “John Does”), allege and
aver as follows:

1.

This is a civil action arising under 42 U.S.C. §1983, the Missouri Wrongful Death

Statute R.S.Mo. §537.080 and common law avenues of recovery for deprivations of Plaintiffs’
rights and for state law claims against all Defendants.
2.

Plaintiff William Ames, Jr. is the father of Decedent William D. Ames, III

3.

Plaintiff Laurie Braun is the mother of Decedent William D. Ames, III.

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 3 of 30 PageID #: 5

4.

Plaintiff Estate of William D. Ames, III (Dec.) (hereafter “the Estate”) stands in

the stead of the deceased, William D. Ames, III for those rights that cannot be asserted by
Plaintiffs William Ames Jr. and Laurie Braun.

Jurisdiction
5.

This cause of action against Defendants out of the death of Decedent William D.

Ames, III on or about November 11, 2018, while incarcerated in the St. Francois County Jail in
the city of Farmington, St. Francois County, State of Missouri.
6.

Jurisdiction is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and §1341(3)

because this Complaint alleges violations of 42 U.S.C. §1983. This Court has supplemental
jurisdiction over Plaintiffs’ state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1367.
VENUE AND COLOR OF LAW
7.

Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. §1391(b) because a substantial part of the events

or omissions giving rise to this claim occurred in St. Francois County, Missouri, which is located
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri, Eastern Division.
8.

Defendant St. Francois County is a political subdivision of the State of Missouri

and is a person for purposes of a 42 U.S.C. §1983 action for damages.
9.

Defendant St. Francois County Sheriff’s Department is a political subdivision of

St. Francois County and is a person for purposes of a 42 U.S.C. §1983 action for damages.
10.

Defendant Dennis W. Smith, at all times relevant herein, is a natural person who

was the St. Francois County Jailer working under the direction of Defendant St. Francois County
Sheriff’s Department.

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 4 of 30 PageID #: 6

11.

Defendant Curtis R. Davis, at all times relevant herein, is a natural person who

was employed at the St. Francois County Jail and working under the direction and control of
Defendants Smith and Sheriff.
12.

Defendants John Does #I-III, at all times relevant herein, are unidentified natural

persons who were employed or hired by the St. Francois County Sheriff’s Department, St.
Francois County, and/or Dennis Smith and were involved in the death of Decedent William D.
Ames, III, as further explained herein. The identities of Defendants John Does #1-3 are currently
unknown but will be made known through discovery in this cause of action.
13.

Defendant Heather Katherine Smith, at all times relevant herein, is a natural

person who was employed or hired by the St. Francois County Sheriff’s Department, St. Francois
County, and/or Dennis Smith as a medical nurse and was involved in the death of William D.
Ames, III, as further explained herein.
COLOR OF STATE LAW
14.

At all relevant times set forth herein, Defendant St. Francois County Sheriff’s

Department acted under color of state law, Federal law and the Constitutions of Missouri and the
United States of America.
15.

At all relevant times set forth herein, Defendant St. Francois County acted under

color of state law, Federal law and the Constitutions of Missouri and the United States of
America.
16.

At all relevant times set forth herein, Defendant Smith acted under color of the

laws, statutes, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs and usages of the State of Missouri and
its political subdivisions, including the St. Francois County, as well as acting under the color of
Federal law and the Constitutions of Missouri and the United States of America.

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 5 of 30 PageID #: 7

17.

At all relevant times set forth herein, Defendant Davis acted under color of the

laws, statutes, ordinances, regulations, policies, customs and usages of the State of Missouri and
its political subdivisions, including St. Francois County, as well as acting under the color of
Federal law and the Constitutions of Missouri and the United States of America.
18.

At all relevant times set forth herein, Defendants John Does #1-3 and Heather

Katherine Smith acted under color of the laws, statutes, ordinances, regulations, policies,
customs and usages of the State of Missouri and its political subdivisions, including St. Francois
County, as well as acting under the color of Federal law and the Constitutions of Missouri and
the United States of America.
INTENTIONAL WAIVER OF SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY
19.

Upon information and belief, at all relevant times, Defendant St. Francois County

had purchased and had in effect a policy of insurance to insure itself and the St. Francois County
Sheriff’s Department against claims or causes of actions for damages caused by its employees
engaged in government functions, including the torts and civil rights violations described herein.
20.

The purchase of said insurance constitutes an intentional waiver of sovereign

immunity by Defendant St. Francois County and Defendant St. Francois Sheriff’s Department
for all of Plaintiffs’ claims.
21.

Upon information and belief, the policy does not preclude or prevent waiving

sovereign immunity as a condition of its issuance, or as a contractual obligation.

FACTS
22.

In 2004, approximately 14 years prior to his death on November 11, 2018,

Decedent William D. Ames, III became disabled after he suffered a traumatic brain injury. As a

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 6 of 30 PageID #: 8

result of the 2004 brain injury, Mr. Ames, III began to suffer from seizures and thereafter took
anti-seizure prescription medications to prevent further seizures.
23.

Decedent’s prescription required him to take anti-seizure medications three times

per day.
24.

The anti-seizure medication worked and if Mr. Ames, III took the anti-seizure

medication in a timely manner, further seizures would be prevented.
25.

Decedent Ames, III was clean and sober for nearly all of the 14 years after his

brain injury, but had, in the months just prior to his death on November 11, 2018, begun using
controlled substances after being reintroduced to same by an old acquaintance.
26.

On Thursday afternoon, November 8, 2018, at approximately 2:30 p.m., Decedent

Ames, III was arrested pursuant to a traffic stop and subsequently incarcerated at the St. Francois
County Jail at 1550 Doubet Road in Farmington, St. Francois County, State of Missouri.
27.

Plaintiffs do not know why Decedent Ames, III was arrested pursuant to a traffic

28.

Decedent Ames, III, during the traffic stop and just prior to his arrest, swallowed

stop.

a baggie containing a street drug commonly referred to as “flakka”.
29.

Upon information and belief, “flakka” consists of a combination of drugs that

include crystal methamphetamine, cocaine, and bath salts.
30.

Defendant Heather Katherine Smith worked eight hours per day as a Licensed

Practical Nurse at the St. Francois County Jail from Monday to Friday during normal business
hours.
31.

Defendant Heather Katherine Smith did not conduct a medical examination of

Decedent Ames, III on Thursday, November 8, 2018 or Friday, November 9, 2018.

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 7 of 30 PageID #: 9

32.

Defendant Heather Katherine Smith did not administer Decedent Ames, III’s anti-

seizure medications.
33.

Decedent Ames was not arraigned between November 8, 2018 and November 11,

2018, when he died, and accordingly, his status at the jail was one of a pretrial detainee.
34.

According to Missouri Casenet, no charges were filed and no tickets were issued

against Decedent Ames for his conduct on November 8, 2018.
35.

Plaintiffs do not know if Mr. Ames, III was arrested pursuant to a warrant or if a

warrant existed in the system that had been previously revoked.
36.

Defendants Davis and John Doe #1 began working their regular evening shift at

the St. Francois County Jail at 11:00 p.m. on Friday, November 9, 2018.
37.

That night William Ames, III, through the window of his cell, engaged in a brief

verbal exchange with Defendants Davis and John Doe #1 as Defendants Davis and Doe made
their rounds within the unit.
38.

Defendants Davis and John Doe #1 moved William Ames, III into a jail cell

containing a restraint chair.
39.

One or more Defendants at the St. Francois County Jail forced Mr. Ames, III into

the restraint chair, where they cuffed Ames, III’s wrists and ankles to the chair and strapped his
arms, torso, and shoulders down, thus fully restricting his movements and essentially rendering
him helpless other than the noises he could make to call for help.
40.

The failure of the Defendants to talk with Mr. Ames, III to determine what was

wrong with him and/or their failure to seek immediate medical or psychological evaluation and
treatment for him was clearly an inadequate response to Mr. Ames, III’s bizarre actions and
behaviors.

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 8 of 30 PageID #: 10

41.

It has been clearly established since at least 2008 in the Eighth Circuit that a

pretrial detainee has a right to be free from deliberate indifferent denials to emergency medical
care. Bailey v. Feltmann, 810 F.3d 589, 593 (8th Cir. 2016).
42.

Defendants Davis and John Doe #1 were advised at some point after Mr. Ames,

III’s arrest and detention that he needed medical intervention and treatment because Mr. Ames,
III had swallowed controlled substances.
43.

Defendants Davis and John Does #1-3 were advised at some point after Mr.

Ames, III’s arrest and detention that he needed medical intervention and treatment because Mr.
Ames, III required prescription medication to control his seizures.
44.

Decedent William Ames, upon information and belief, missed taking at least

seven regularly-scheduled doses of his anti-seizure medications from Thursday, November 8,
2018 until he died on Sunday, November 11, 2018.
45.

For approximately 2 hours after being fully restrained in a chair, Decedent Ames,

III and detainees in the adjoining cells pleaded for help from the guards due to Decedent Ames,
III stating aloud that he had, prior to his arrest, swallowed a plastic bag containing a drug
cocktail known locally as “flakka.”
46.

It is obvious to any reasonable person that if someone swallowed a bag containing

a combination of drugs that included crystal methamphetamine, cocaine and bath salts, that such
person would need immediate medical treatment to remove the bag, hopefully before it bursts or
breaks in the stomach (if it had not already done so in the process of swallowing the same).
47.

Anyone witnessing Mr. Ames, III’s condition at the jail would have recognized he

needed medical and/or psychological attention and yet Defendants Davis, Smith and Does #1-3
did nothing in response.

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 9 of 30 PageID #: 11

48.

At approximately 11:00 a.m. on Friday, November 9, 2018, Decedent’s girlfriend

arrived at the jail to visit Decedent and to bring him his newly-refilled prescription of antiseizure medication, but was turned away by John Does #2-3 without being permitted to deliver
the medication to Decedent Ames, III, Heather Katherine Smith or to the St. Francois County Jail
so that it could deliver the medication to Mr. Ames, III.
49.

It is obvious to any reasonable person knows that if a person is on anti-seizure

medication, that it medically necessary to take it as prescribed, as someone can die from a
seizure or have other serious medical complications from having a seizure.
50.

Upon information and belief, as part of the St. Francois County Sheriff’s

Department policy (whether written, unwritten or simply custom and practice), Defendants,
acting pursuant to the Sheriff’s Department’s policy, do not provide medical personnel to
evaluate detainees for medical issues on evenings and weekends.
51.

Upon information and belief, as part of the St. Francois County Sheriff’s

Department policy (whether written, unwritten or simply custom and practice), no trained
medical personnel are present on evenings and weekends at the St. Francois County Jail to
administer medications to inmates on evenings and weekends.
52.

Defendant Dennis Smith stated to Plaintiff Laurie Braun and to at least one other

witness that the deceased, William D. Ames, III, “probably did not get his medications.”
53.

Defendant Dennis Smith testified under oath in an unrelated criminal case that

prescription medications are not provided to inmates of the county jail during the evenings or
weekends because the jail does not provide qualified personnel to administer said medications.
54.
saves money.

By not having medical personnel present on evenings and weekends, the County

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 10 of 30 PageID #: 12

55.

Defendants Smith, the St. Francois County Jail and Sheriff’s Department had

prior knowledge of Decedent’s medical needs for anti-seizure medication due to Decedent’s
history of incarceration at the St. Francois County Jail.
56.

Defendants John Does #2-3 had prior knowledge of Decedent’s medical needs

due to their interaction with William Ames, III’s girlfriend, who attempted to deliver his antiseizure medication to him.
57.

Defendant Heather Katherine Smith had prior knowledge of Decedent William

Ames III’s medical needs due to her prior interactions with Decedent.
58.

Upon information and belief, Decedent was kept in restraints for over twenty-four

hours, with no breaks, from Friday evening until his death in the early hours of Sunday,
November 11, 2018.
59.

Upon information and belief, Decedent was not removed from the restraints to

stretch or check the circulation in his legs or to use the toilet.
60.

During the entire time Decedent was kept in restraints, he repeatedly cried,

begged, and pleaded for medical assistance from the guards who were stationed just across the
hallway from him.
61.

The use of the chair restraints on Mr. Ames, III constituted excessive force.

62.

Upon information and belief, Decedent remained in the chair under restraints

without exercise, toilet privileges or medical assistance from Friday evening until his death early
Sunday morning.
63.

It is obvious to any reasonable person that a person needs some period of exercise

and monitoring of his physical condition during a prolonged period of being forcibly and tightly

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 11 of 30 PageID #: 13

strapped to a chair, and that denying someone the freedom to move for over twenty-four hours is
callous and shows a deliberate indifference to their well-being.
64.

The denial of freedom of movement and toilet privileges for twenty-seven hours

constituted cruel and unusual punishment.
65.

As a pretrial detainee, Mr. Ames, III had the right to be free any punishment at all,

including cruel and unusual punishment. The right of pretrial detainees to be free from any
punishment at all has been clearly established since Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 535 n. 16
(1979).
66.

From Friday evening until early Sunday morning, other inmates called out to the

guards – Defendants Davis and John Doe #1 – and pleaded with them to assist Decedent Ames,
III, but Defendants Davis and John Doe #1 callously ignored the requests for help from Mr.
Ames, III and the other inmates who were calling the guards on his behalf.
67.

At least once during that weekend, witnesses state that they heard Decedent

gargling, bucking and convulsing in his chair – noises that they interpreted as sounds of
Decedent Ames, III convulsing and suffering from a seizure.
68.

On information and belief, if these jailed witnesses heard Decedent gargling,

bucking and convulsing, then Defendants Davis and John Doe #1 necessarily heard the same
sounds.
69.

Despite the sounds emanating from the Decedent Ames, III’s cell where he was

strapped down, no medical evaluation or treatment was afforded to him.
70.

Despite the sounds emanating from the Decedent Ames, III’s cell, he was not

provided his anti-seizure medication.

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 12 of 30 PageID #: 14

71.

Despite the sounds emanating from the Decedent Ames, III’s cell, Davis and

Defendant Doe #1 did not call 911.
72.

Despite the sounds emanating from Decedent Ames, III’s cell, no medical

personnel were contacted and requested to exam Decedent Ames, III’s condition to see if he
should be medically treated or sent to the hospital.
73.

Upon information and belief, the cell where William Ames, III was restrained

throughout the weekend was equipped with video monitoring equipment that was operational
and accessible to Defendants, including Defendants Davis, Smith, and John Doe #1.
74.

Given the above information known to Defendants Davis, Smith and John Doe

#1, they had more than enough information, even as lay persons, to easily recognize the necessity
of immediate medical evaluation and intervention on behalf of Mr. Ames, III, but they
deliberately and intentionally disregarded his medical needs.
75.

At least once during the weekend, either Defendant Davis or John Doe #1 were

heard approaching Decedent’s cell, opening the door, and screaming at Decedent for several
minutes in an attempt to quiet Decedent.
76.

During that long weekend, Defendant Davis approached inmates in an adjoining

cell and told them that no one would “catch a case” if they wanted to go into Decedent’s cell and
physically assault Decedent Ames, III in order to quiet Decedent Ames, III.
77.

On information and belief, Defendant Davis left the cell doors of the other

inmates and Decedent Ames, III’s doors unlocked, so that the other inmates could assault Mr.
Ames, III.
78.

Mr. Ames, III screamed, howled and yelled for hours on end until he could no

longer speak at all and yet Defendants Davis, Smith and John Doe #1 never attempted to talk to

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 13 of 30 PageID #: 15

him or seek medical or psychological evaluation, and instead, were only concerned with forcing
Mr. Ames, III to stop making noise.
79.

Defendants Davis, Smith and Doe #1 never checked on Mr. Ames, III’s well-

80.

Early in the hours of Sunday morning, Decedent stopped pleading for help and the

being.

inmates in the adjoining cells heard what they described as “death rattles.”
81.

On information and belief, if the inmates in the adjoining cells could hear death

rattles, then so too could Defendant Davis and Defendant John Doe #1.
82.

Upon information and belief, Decedent stopped moving or making any noises and

became completely unresponsive for approximately one hour before an unidentified deputy –
believed to be either Defendant Davis or Defendant John Doe #1 – entered the cell and thereafter
– for the first time – called for emergency assistance.
83.

Decedent never recovered consciousness and is believed to have died between

1:30 a.m. and 3:30 a.m. on Sunday, November 11, 2018.
84.

An autopsy listed Decedent’s cause of death as “Acute Methamphetamine

Intoxication” and indicated that a plastic bag was discovered in the contents of Decedent’s
stomach.
85.

Had William Ames, III been taken to the Hospital on Thursday (November 8,

2018) or Friday (November 9, 2018), he could have had the “flakka” in his stomach
mechanically removed (had his stomach pumped) or alternatively, been given medication to
force him to vomit up the medications in his stomach.

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 14 of 30 PageID #: 16

86.

Had Mr. Ames, III been examined by Heather Katherine Smith on Thursday

(November 8, 2018) or Friday (November 9, 2018), or taken to the hospital on Thursday or
Friday, he would have received his anti-seizure medication in a timely manner.

COUNT I
VIOLATIONS OF 42 U.S.C. § 1983, THE EIGHTH AND FOURTEENTH
AMENDMENTS OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION, AND STATE AND FEDERAL
LAWS FOR INDIFFERENCE TO SERIOUS MEDICAL NEEDS AND FAILURE TO
PROVIDE MEDICAL CARE BY DEFENDANTS SMITH, DAVIS, JOHN DOES #1-3,
AND HEATHER KATHERINE SMITH
87.

Plaintiffs re-allege all of the preceding paragraphs as if set forth fully herein.

88.

Defendants Smith, Davis, John Does #1-3, and Heather Katherine Smith had a

duty under 42 U.S.C. §1983 and the 8th Amendment of the United States Constitution as applied
to the State of Missouri and its political subdivisions through the 14th Amendment of the U.S.
Constitution, to provide William D. Ames, III, a disabled pre-trial detainee, with appropriate
medical evaluations, and necessary medical treatment and care.
89.

Defendants named in Count I knew that William Ames, III required medications

to prevent seizures.
90.

Defendants named in Count I herein failed and refused to provide adequate

medical evaluation and treatment, causing Decedent to suffer a seizure during the period he was
restrained in a chair with his head and extremities strapped down and completely helpless. This
seizure could have been prevented by providing Mr. Ames, III with his anti-seizure medication.
91.

Defendants named in Count I herein failed and refused to provide needed medical

evaluation, intervention and treatment for the “flakka” bag that they were informed that Mr.
Ames, III swallowed.

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 15 of 30 PageID #: 17

92.

Upon information and belief, when told that William Ames, III had swallowed a

bag of “flakka,” Defendant Davis stated that he did not care because Ames was “just a f*cking
junkie.”
93.

Defendants named in Count I herein failed and refused to provide needed medical

evaluation, intervention and treatment to Decedent even though they had sufficient information
that Decedent had swallowed controlled substances, that may have included methamphetamine,
cocaine and bath salts.
94.

Although William Ames, III was forcibly restrained for over twenty-four hours,

Defendants named in Count I herein failed to provide any medical evaluation, medical
supervision, intervention or treatment to Mr. Ames, III until he was completely unresponsive
after an entire weekend of being restrained in the chair without breaks, toilet access, and his antiseizure medication.
95.

Defendants named in Count I herein failed and refused to provide Mr. Ames, III

with access to the toilet or any opportunity to stand, move about, or stretch his limbs; and
instead, intentionally and maliciously kept Decedent fully restrained in a chair and thus rendered
him completely helpless from Friday evening on November 9, 2018 until his death early Sunday
morning, November 11, 2018.
96.

Defendants named in Count I herein knew that Mr. Ames, III was in danger of

serious harm from swallowing the “flakka” bag of methamphetamine, cocaine and bath salts.
97.

Defendants named in Count I herein knew that Mr. Ames, III was in danger of

serious, immediate, and proximate harm from seizures if he was not provided his anti-seizure
medication.

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 16 of 30 PageID #: 18

98.

Defendants named in Court I herein acted with deliberate indifference to Mr.

Ames, III’s medical needs, exposing him to a sufficiently substantial risk of serious damage to
his health, which ultimately culminated in Mr. Ames, III’s untimely and preventable death.
99.

Be refusing to provide Decedent William Ames with proper medical care,

Defendants named in Count I herein deprived William Ames of his right to medical care and
treatment, in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the 8th and 14th Amendments to the Constitution
of the United States, and exhibited a callous and deliberate indifference to, and a reckless and
conscious disregard for, his serious medical needs, including but not limited to denying him
access to intensive and structured medical evaluation, care, treatment, and observation necessary
to address serious medical needs and prevent suffering and death.
100.

Defendants Smith, Davis, John Does #1-3, and Heather Katherine Smith exhibited

a reckless and callous, conscious disregard and deliberate indifference to the obvious and serious
threat to the mental health and physical well-being of Decedent William Ames, III.
101.

Defendants Smith, Davis, John Does #1-3, and Heather Katherine Smith knew

that the Decedent had a history of drug addiction and seizures and there was an obvious and
substantial risk that Decedent, if left untreated, would suffer serious injury or death, that such
injury or death was reasonably foreseeable, and that the threat of injury or death was imminent
and immediate.
102.

In light of the aforementioned averments, William Ames suffered from both an

objectively and a subjectively substantial risk of serious harm while under the care and custody
of Defendants Smith, Davis, John Does #1-3, and Heather Katherine Smith, and said Defendants
reacted to this risk in an objectively and subjectively unreasonable manner.

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 17 of 30 PageID #: 19

103.

As the result of the actions of the Defendants’ named in Count I herein and their

disregard of and indifference to Decedent William Ames’ constitutionally protected due process
rights to be provided with proper medical evaluation and care and to be safe and free from harm,
the Decedent’s medical needs and physical needs were ignored.
104.

As the result of the actions of the Defendants’ named in Count I herein and their

deliberate disregard of and deliberate indifference to Decedent William Ames, III’s
constitutionally protected right to be provided with proper medical evaluation and care and to be
kept safe and free from harm, the Decedent was berated and threatened with physical harm if he
would not stop making noise while suffering at least one seizure and from an overdose of drugs,
and a prolonged, agonizing death while being kept completely helpless from physical restraint.
105.

The death of William D. Ames, III is the direct and proximate result of the

deliberate indifference to Mr. Ames, III’s medical needs and thus resulting denial of care of
Defendants Smith, Davis, John Does #1-3, and Heather Katherine Smith.
106.

Taken in total, Defendants’ behavior as described in this and every Count of this

Complaint shocks the conscience.
107.

As a result of the actions and failures to act of the Defendants Smith, Davis, John

Does #1-3, and Heather Katherine Smith, Plaintiffs are entitled to such damages as are fair and
just for the pain, suffering and death of William D. Ames, III and the loss thus occasioned,
including but not limited to the pecuniary losses suffered by the death of Decedent, funeral
expenses, and the reasonable value of services, consortium, companionship, comfort, instruction,
guidance, counsel, training, and support; further including the loss of services, attention, advice,
protection, earnings, and other value of benefits which would have been provided by William
Ames, Jr., during the remainder of his expected lifetime.

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 18 of 30 PageID #: 20

Compensatory Damages
108.

Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of compensatory

damages against Defendants Smith, Davis, John Does #1-3, and Heather Katherine Smith, in
each of their individual capacities.
Punitive Damages
109.

The actions and failures to act of Defendants Smith, Davis, John Does #1-3, and

Heather Katherine Smith were willful, wanton, malicious, or with complete reckless indifference
to, or conscious disregard for, the rights of William Ames, III.
110.

The actions of Defendants Smith, Davis, John Does #1-3, and Heather Katherine

Smith were taken in the face of a perceived risk that the actions would violate federal and/or
state laws and the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution as applied to the political
subdivisions of the State of Missouri through the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S.
Constitution. Farmer v. Brennan, 511 U.S. 825, 834 (1994)
111.

The acts of Defendants Smith, Davis, John Does #1-3, and Heather Katherine

Smith were willfully wrong or done with malice, corruption, or bad faith. Southers v. City of
Farmington, 263 S.W.3d 603, 610 (Mo. 2008) (citing Davis v. Lambert-St. Louis Int'l Airport,
193 S.W.3d 760, 763 (Mo. banc 2006); Jackson v. City of Wentzville, 844 S.W.2d 585, 588
(Mo.App.1993).
112.

Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of exemplary or

punitive damages against Defendants Smith, Davis, John Does #1-3, and Heather Katherine
Smith, in their individual capacities, so as to punish the Defendants and deter others from acting
in a similar manner.

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 19 of 30 PageID #: 21

Attorney Fees
113.

Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988, Plaintiffs are entitled to recover their attorney fees

and costs incurred in pursuing this claim.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request this Court enter judgement in favor of Plaintiffs and
against Defendants Smith, Davis, John Does #1-3, and Heather Katherine Smith, jointly and
severally, for damages for the wrongful death of William Ames, Jr., as are fair and reasonable;
for reasonable punitive or exemplary damages in such sum as will serve to punish and deter
Defendants and others from future conduct such as the described herein; for Plaintiffs’ attorney
fees and costs herein expended, and for such other and further relief as this Court deems just and
proper in the premises.
COUNT II
FAILURE TO TRAIN AGAINST DEFENDANTS ST. FRANCOIS COUNTY,
MISSOURI AND ST. FRANCOIS COUNTY, MISSOURI’S SHERIFF’S
DEPARTMENT; FOR FAILURE TO STAFF APPROPRIATELY TRAINED
PERSONNEL
114.

Plaintiffs incorporate the above allegations as if set forth in full herein.

115.

The Sheriff’s Department, the County and the Jail all had a duty to train its

employees to recognize when a pretrial detainee – one with a disability, no less - needs medical
and/or psychological evaluation. Yellow Horse v. Pennington Cty., 225 F.3d 923, 928 (8th Cir.
2000) The Sheriff’s Department, the County and the Jail all had a duty to train its employees on
how to obtain immediate medical and/or psychological evaluations for pretrial detainees.
116.

On information and belief, the Sheriff’s Department, the County and the Jail have

intentionally denied Defendants Curtis Davis, Dennis Smith, John Does #1-3 and Heather
Katherine Smith the appropriate training to recognize when medical evaluation and/or invention
is necessary to save money.

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 20 of 30 PageID #: 22

117.

On information and belief, the Sheriff’s Department, the County and the Jail have

a policy of not staffing appropriate medical personnel on evenings and weekends to save money,
and such personnel have the appropriate training to recognize when further medical treatment is
needed for a pretrial detainee.
118.

By failing to train the evening and weekend staff on recognizing when a pretrial

detainee needs medical treatment, and by failing to provide staff that have those skills, the
Sheriff’s Department, the County and the Jail violated 42 U.S.C. 1983 and Mr. Ames, III’s
Constitutional rights.
Compensatory Damages
119.

The actions of Defendants St. Francois Sheriff’s Department, St. Francois County

and St. Francois Jail were taken in the face of a perceived risk that the actions would violate
federal and/or state laws.
120.

Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of compensatory

damages against Defendants St. Francois Sheriff’s Department, St. Francois County and St.
Francois Jail.
Attorney Fees
121.

Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988, Plaintiffs are entitled to recover their attorney fees

and costs incurred in pursuing this claim.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request this Court enter judgement in favor of Plaintiffs and
against Defendants St. Francois Sheriff’s Department and St. Francois County, jointly and
severally, for damages for the wrongful death of William Ames, Jr., as are fair and reasonable;
for reasonable punitive or exemplary damages in such sum as will serve to punish and deter
Defendants and others from future conduct such as the described herein; for Plaintiffs’ attorney

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 21 of 30 PageID #: 23

fees and costs herein expended, and for such other and further relief as this Court deems just and
proper in the premises.
COUNT III
VIOLATION OF 42 U.S.C. § 1982 FOR CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT IN
VIOLATION OF THE EIGHTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS OF THE U.S.
CONSTITUTION AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS
122.

Plaintiffs incorporate the above allegations as if set forth in full herein.

123.

Restraining Mr. Ames, III in a chair for nearly full two days constitutes cruel and

unusual punishment.
124.

Denying Mr. Ames, III water for approximately twenty-seven hours constitutes

cruel and unusual punishment.
125.

Denying Mr. Ames, III access to thrice-daily medications to control life-

threatening seizures for four days constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.
126.

Denying Mr. Ames, III food for approximately twenty-seven hours constitutes

cruel and unusual punishment.
127.

Denying Mr. Ames, III toilet privileges for approximately twenty-seven hours

constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.
128.

Denying Mr. Ames, III access to medical evaluation, intervention and treatment

constitutes cruel and unusual punishment and resulted in his untimely death.
Compensatory Damages
129.

Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of compensatory

damages against all Defendants.
Punitive Damages

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 22 of 30 PageID #: 24

130.

The actions and failures to act of all Defendants were willful, wanton, malicious,

or with complete reckless indifference to, or conscious disregard for, the rights of William Ames,
III to be free from any kind of punishment as a pretrial detainee.
131.

The actions of all Defendants were taken in the face of a perceived risk that the

actions would violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution, as well as
federal and/or state laws.
132.

Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of exemplary or

punitive damages against all Defendants so as to punish the Defendants and deter others from
acting in a similar manner.
Attorney Fees
133.

Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988, Plaintiffs are entitled to recover their attorney fees

and costs incurred in pursuing this claim.
134.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request this Court enter judgement in favor of Plaintiffs

and against all Defendants for damages for the wrongful death of William Ames, Jr., as are fair
and reasonable; for reasonable punitive or exemplary damages in such sum as will serve to
punish and deter Defendants and others from future conduct such as the described herein; for
Plaintiffs’ attorney fees and costs herein expended, and for such other and further relief as this
Court deems just and proper in the premises.
COUNT IV
VIOLATIONS OF THE REHABILITATION ACT OF 1973, AS AMENDED IN 1992
AND 1998, AND VIOLATIONS OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT OF
1990(42 U.S.C. § 12101 ET SEQ. AND 29 U.S.C. § 701 ET SEQ.) AGAINST
DEFENDANTS ST. FRANCOIS COUNTY, AND THE ST. FRANCOIS COUNTY
SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT MISSOURI FOR COMPENSATORY DAMAGES,
PUNITIVE DAMAGES, AND ATTORNEY FEES

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 23 of 30 PageID #: 25

135.

Plaintiffs re-state and re-allege all of the preceding paragraphs as if fully set forth

136.

The claim against Defendants St. Francois County and St. Francois County

herein.

Sheriff’s Department (hereinafter “Sheriff”) is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.
137.

Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.,

(hereinafter the “ADA”) provides, in part, that:
“No qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such
disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of
the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to
discrimination by such entity.” 42 U.S.C. § 12132.
138.

Title II of the Act prohibits, among other things:

a. Limiting a qualified individual’s enjoyment of any right, privilege,
advantage, or opportunity enjoyed by others receiving an aid, benefit,
or service of an agency; and
b. Subjecting a qualified individual to discrimination under any program
or activity conducted by an agency. 28 C.F.R. § 39.130.
139.

Decedent William Ames was disabled as defined by 42 U.S.C. § 12102 and a

“qualified individual” as defined by 42 U.S.C. § 12131(2) as the result of a traumatic brain injury
that he suffered approximately fourteen years prior to his death and, because of that injury,
received disability benefits and medical treatment with anti-seizure medication.
140.

Defendant St. Francois County and Defendant Sheriff are public entities in charge

of the St. Francois County Jail, and each of them violated Title I of the ADA, pursuant to the
their standard policies, official decisions or custom and practice.

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 24 of 30 PageID #: 26

141.

Defendant St. Francois County and Defendant Sheriff owed Decedent William

Ames, III a non-delegable duty to ensure that his well-being and safety would not be
compromised as a result of discrimination based on his disability.
142.

Defendant St. Francois County and Defendant Sheriff are vicariously liable for

the actions of any and all persons or entities Defendant St. Francois County and Defendant
Sheriff designated to care for Decedent Ames.
143.

The agents and employees of Defendant St. Francois County and Defendant

Sheriff were authorized to act for Defendant St. Francois County and Defendant Sheriff when
they committed the ADA violations alleged herein.
144.

The agents and employees of Defendant St. Francois County and Defendant

Sheriff accepted the undertaking of acting on behalf of Defendant St. Francois County and
Defendant Sheriff when they committed the ADA violations alleged herein.
145.

The agents and employees of Defendant St. Francois County and Defendant

Sheriff were controlled by Defendant St. Francois County and Defendant Sheriff when they
committed the alleged ADA violations.
146.

The ADA violations alleged herein were committed by agents and employees

who were acting within the course and scope of their employment and/or agency with Defendant
St. Francois County and/or Defendant Sheriff.
147.

Defendant St. Francois County and Defendant Sheriff and their personnel and

hired entities charged with Mr. Ames, III’s care knew or should have known of Decedent Ames
III’s need for reasonable accommodations.
148.

Defendant St. Francois County and Defendant Sheriff and the persons and entities

charged with caring for persons with disabilities, like Decedent, acted intentionally and/or with

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 25 of 30 PageID #: 27

deliberate indifference to Decedent’s need for reasonable accommodations as a person with
disabilities, in that:
a. Decedent Ames, III, through the lack of treatment and adequate
supervision, was not able to interact with others, form friendships, visit,
chat, and move at liberty within set bounds, subject only to
administrative and disciplinary needs.
b. Decedent Ames, III, through the lack of treatment and adequate
supervision, was not able to enjoy physical comforts such as games,
books, radios, access to canteen, frequent showers, visits, and phone
calls, subject only to administrative and disciplinary needs.
c. Decedent Ames, III, through the lack of treatment and adequate
supervision, was not able to enjoy educational facilities, including a
library, writing materials, study aids, and educational programs, subject
only to administrative and disciplinary needs.
d. Decedent Ames, III, through the lack of treatment and adequate
supervision, was not able to enjoy religious activities, including chapel,
study groups, religious materials, icons and observances, subject only
to administrative and disciplinary needs.
e.
f. Decedent Ames, III, through the lack of treatment and adequate
supervision, was deprived of a safe environment, free of known
hazards, with adequate sanitation and removal of traps and obstructions.

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 26 of 30 PageID #: 28

g. Decedent Ames, III, being deprived of his seizure medications and with
his extremities restrained, was exposed to a range of hazards that led to
his death.
h. Decedent Ames III, was entitled to receive care and treatment that was
responsive to his particular health needs, including testing, diagnosis,
surgery, and monitoring; instead, Decedent was strapped into restraints
and deprived of food, water, and access to toilet facilities in an effort to
keep Decedent subdued and silent throughout the weekend.
i. Decedent Ames III, was entitled to receive security monitoring to
protect him from violence at the hands of other inmates and staff.
Decedent Ames III, was restrained at the hands of the staff and received
little or no security monitoring.
149.

As a direct and proximate result of the policies, official decisions or custom and

practice of Defendants St. Francois County and Defendant Sheriff and their agents and
employees who were charged with caring for Decedent, to refuse and fail to provide William
Ames, III with accommodations for his disability and the satisfaction of common needs
necessary to a decent life, Mr. Ames, III suffered from prolonged isolation, despair, physical
pain and, ultimately, death from an untreated overdose while restrained to a chair from early
Friday evening of November 9, 2018 to early Sunday morning on November 11, 2018.
Compensatory Damages
150.

Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1201 et seq., Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of

compensatory damages against Defendant St. Francois County and Defendant Sheriff.

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 27 of 30 PageID #: 29

151.

The actions of Defendant St. Francois County and Defendant Sheriff were taken

in the face of a perceived risk that the actions would violate federal and/or state laws.
152.

Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of exemplary or punitive damages against

Defendant St. Francois County and Defendant Sheriff, so as to punish the Defendants and deter
others from acting in a similar manner.
Attorney Fees
153.

Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12205, Plaintiffs are entitled to recover their attorney fees

and costs incurred in pursuing this claim.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request this Court enter judgement, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §
1201 et seq, in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendant St. Francois County and Defendant
Sheriff, jointly and in their individual capacities, for damages for the wrongful death of William
Ames, Jr., as are fair and reasonable; for Plaintiffs’ attorney fees and costs herein expended, and
for such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper in the premises.
SUPPLEMENTAL STATE CLAIM
COUNT V
WRONGFUL DEATH AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS
154.

Plaintiffs re-state and re-allege each and every one of the preceding paragraphs as

if fully set forth herein.
155.

Plaintiffs William Ames and Laurie Braun bring this wrongful death action as the

surviving natural father and natural mother of Decedent William D. Ames, III pursuant to
R.S.Mo. § 537.080(1).
156.

All Defendants owed a non-delegable duty to Decedent Ames to use reasonable

care to ensure his safety.

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 28 of 30 PageID #: 30

157.

Defendants as named herein failed to perform their duty of using reasonable to

ensure the Decedent’s safety.
158.

Defendants Sheriff, Smith, Davis, John Does #1-3, and Heather Katherine Smith

failed to monitor and treat Decedent’s medical condition and needs, including, but not limited to:
a.

Failing to provide Decedent, who was known by them to have a

history of seizures and illegal use of controlled substances, with a medical
examination upon his arrival on Thursday, November 8, 2018.
b.

Failing to provide the Decedent, who was known to suffer from

debilitating seizures, with his prescription anti-seizure medication.
c.

Failing to provide Decedent, who had a history of illegal use of

controlled substances, with regular monitoring despite being made aware while
in their care and custody that Mr. Ames, III had just prior to his arrest
swallowed a plastic bag containing a dangerous drug cocktail known locally as
“flakka”.
d.

Failing to provide Decedent with immediate crisis stabilization

care despite having knowledge of Decedent’s history of seizures, drug usage,
and recent ingesting of a dangerous illegal drug cocktail of methamphetamine,
cocaine and bath salts.
e.

Failing to address Decedent’s lack of unrestricted movement,

exercise, food, water, access to a toilet, companionship, and physical wellbeing.
f.

In the absence of addressing his needs failing to at least place

Decedent Ames under adequate supervision during Decedent’s long hours of

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 29 of 30 PageID #: 31

being physically restrained in a chair or taking preventive measures necessary
to prevent his death, despite knowledge of the risk posed by Decedent’s
medical history, history of illegal drug use, and the recent news that Decedent
had recently ingested a bag containing a dangerous street drug cocktail known
as “flakka.”
159.

As a direct and proximate result of the failures by Defendants Sheriff, St. Francois

County, Smith, Davis, John Does #1-3, and Heather Katherine Smith to perform their duty of
reasonable care to ensure the safety of William Ames, Jr., William Ames Jr. suffered cruel and
unusual punishment for hours on end as the result of an overdose before dying of acute
methamphetamine intoxication, not to mention the inability to move, to use the toilet, to drink
water or have food to eat.
160.

Defendants Sheriff, St. Francois County, Davis, Smith, John Does #1-3, and

Heather Katherine Smith were aware that inmates, including Decedent Ames, were not receiving
minimally adequate health care at St. Francois County Jail.
161.

It was reasonably foreseeable that harm would befall Decedent Ames, either

directly or indirectly, as the result of the actions and omissions of Defendants Sheriff, St. Francois
County, Smith, Davis, John Does #1-3, and Heather Katherine Smith.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for such sums as are fair and reasonable in excess of TwentyFive Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00) as actual damages against Defendants St. Francois County,
St. Francois County Sheriff, Dennis W. Smith, Curt Davis, Heather Katherine Smith, and John
Does #1-3; further, Plaintiffs pray for an additional sum as is fair and reasonable for damages for
the aggravating circumstances attending the death of Decedent. William Ames, Jr.; together with
their costs herein expended, plus pre-judgment interest.

 Case: 4:19-cv-00173-SRC Doc. #: 1 Filed: 02/01/19 Page: 30 of 30 PageID #: 32

Respectfully submitted,
Manley, Karraker & Karraker, P.C.
/s/ Vonne L. Karraker__________
Vonne L. Karraker, MBE #56335
110 S. Jefferson Street
P. O. Box 454
Farmington, MO 63640
Telephone:
573-756-6446
Facsimile:
573-756-5151
vonne@semoelderlaw.com
Attorney for Plaintiffs