IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO NATALIE COLE, Case No. Plaintiff Judge v. Magistrate Judge ORLANDO SMITH, COMPLAINT WITH REQUEST FOR Individually DAMAGES AND WITH JURY DEMAND Cincinnati Police Department 310 Ezzard Charles Drive Cincinnati, Ohio 45214 Defendant COMPLAINT Comes the Plaintiff, NATALIE COLE ("Plaintiff"), for her complaint against Defendant Officer ORLANDO SMITH ("Defendant") and states as follows: PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE 1. The incidents giving rise to this action and the subject matter of the Complaint arise out of acts, omissions, and conduct that occurred in Hamilton County, Ohio. 2. At all times relevant, Plaintiff Natalie Cole ("Plaintiff") was an individual resident and citizen of Cincinnati, Ohio. 3. At all times relevant, Defendant was employed with and acting as a police officer of the Cincinnati Police Department, in Hamilton County, Ohio. Through information and belief, the Defendant was at all times relevant a citizen of Hamilton County, Ohio. 4. The amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional threshold of this Couit. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 5. Plaintiff incorporates by reference each and every allegation contained in the paragraphs ELECTRONICALLY FILED IFIJ A1308073 CONFIRMATION NUMBER 299456 above and further states: 6. Natalie Cole was in the City of Cincinnati, County of Hamilton, State of Ohio on November 9th, 2013 at approximately 7:19 pm EST. 7. Officer Orlando Smith was on Duty as a Cincinnati Police Officer on November 9th, 2013. 8. Officer Orlando Smith claims he received a call to assist another officer. 9. Officer Orlando Smith claimed he was responding with Emergency Lights and Siren activated. 10. Natalie Cole was crossing Vine Street near McMicken, when she was struck by Defendant Orlando Smith's cruiser. 11. Natalie Cole did not hear an audible emergency siren or see emergency lights. 12. Witnesses in the area stated they did see Emergency Lights on a police vehicle. 13. Witnesses in the area stated they did not hear an audible emergency siren. 14. Natalie Cole attempted to cross Vine street from an East direction to a West direction. 15. The posted speed limit in the area is 25 MPH. 16. Natalie Cole was struck by Officer Orlando Smith's Police Vehicle. 17. Officer Orlando Smith's patrol vehicle struck a Parking meter after striking Natalie Cole. 18. Officer Orlando Smith's patrol vehicle came to rest after colliding with a fire hydrant. 19. Officer Orlando Smith stated to Police Investigators on OH-1 Local Report 135011877 that he was traveling at 50 MPH. 20. Cincinnati Policy for responding to an emergency situation with Emergency Lights and sirens activated is no more than 20 MPH over the posted speed limit. 21. Ohio Revised Code section 4511.24 states the driver of an emergency vehicle must have the duty to drive with due regard for the safety of others persons using the street or highway. ELECTRONICALLY FILED IFIJ A1308073 CONFIRMATION NUMBER 299456 22. Officer Orlando Smith acted wantonly and recklessly to the life and safety of Natalie Cole and all those using public roadways. 23. Officer Orlando Smith acted with deliberate indifference to other citizens on Vine Street at the time of the incident. 24. Officer Orlando Smith claims his camera was working but had malfunctioned just prior to the incident. 25. Officer Orlando Smith has had at least 1 other incident, aside from this one, where the camera in his police vehicle malfunctions just before a major incident and starts working right after the incident. 26. Officer Orlando Smith was using the same cruiser and same camera on the night of November 21, 2012 when he shot (twice) and wounded Robert Matthews; the camera allegedly malfunctioned just before this incident, and began working just after the shots were fired. 27. Robert Matthews received wounds that are consistent with hands in the air and back turned to Officer Orlando Smith. 28. Officer Orlando Smith was using the same cruiser and same camera on the night of November 21, 2012 when he shot (11 times) and fatally wounded Dontez O'Neil_; the camera allegedly malfunctioned just before this incident, and began working just after the shots were tired. 29. Officer Orlando Smith had claimed that Dontez O'Neil had a gun and had fired it up on him; however there are no photos to affirm this story. 30. Officer Orlando Smith had no viable justification in either of these shootings. 31. Officer Orlando Smith's cruiser camera was still being used after the first allegation of it not functioning properly. 32. Witness state that Officer Smith was travelling at least 70MPH from Vine Street hill crossing a five-way intersection in front of Findlay Family Park. ELECTRONICALLY FILED IFIJ A1308073 CONFIRMATION NUMBER 299456 33. Upon information and belief, investigating officers attempted to manipulate witnesses to state that Defendant Smith had emergency lights and siren activated at the time Officer Smith struck Natalie Cole. 34. Officer Orlando Smith has been involved in six other at fault accidents while on duty, and was at fault in five of the six. 35. Officer Orlando Smith was at fault in 5 of the 6 accidents. 36. Upon being struck, Natalie Cole was flung through the air for ten to twenty feet, coming to rest more than forty feet from the collision point, and as a result Natalie Cole sustained life threatening injuries. 37. As a result of the collision, Natalie Cole has 148 Staples in her head, a fractured hip, a fractured spine, 6 fractured ribs, fractured legs, fractured wrists, lacerated liver, a fractured collar bone, and has had to undergo multiple surgeries. 38. All Injuries were caused by the reckless, wanton, and/or negligent actions of Officer Orlando Smith. 39. Natalie Cole has sustained a loss of mobility and freedom to move about her daily duties. 40. Natalie Cole has been unable to work and provide for her family since this incident. 41. Natalie Cole has undertaken an extreme financial burden. 42. An officer is trained to be more cognitive of their surroundings when operating an emergency vehicle in priority mode. 43. Officer Orlando Smith acted recklessly while operating his assigned emergency vehicle. CAUSES OF ACTION COUNT I- NEGLIGENCE ELECTRONICALLY FILED IFIJ A1308073 CONFIRMATION NUMBER 299456 44. The Plaintiff incorporates by reference each and every allegation in the paragraphs above and unher states: 45. The Defendant owed the public, and the Plaintiff, the duty to exercise the care and diligence an ordinary Officer or driver would have exercised under like or similar circumstances. 46. The Defendant breached that duty by failing to exercise the requisite degree of care and diligence in so far that he failed to use his sirens and lights during a response to a call, and failing to be aware of pedestrians and drivers that he put in danger by failing to use his lights and sirens when responding to a call. 47. The Defendant was not responding to an emergency call, and was driving wantonly and recklessly when he drove in excess of seventy miles per hour in a twenty five mile per hour zone without lights or sirens present. 48. As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned acts and omissions by the Defendant, Plaintiff sustained severe and grievous injuries, prolonged pain and suffering, emotional distress, humiliation, discomfort, loss of enjoyment of life, and loss of the ability to perfoim usual and customary activities and incuired substantial medical expenses and treatment. COUNT II- SPOLIATION OF EVIDENCE 49. The Plaintiff incorporates by reference each and every allegation in the paragraphs above and fumher states: 50. Upon striking the Plaintiff while the Defendant drove in excess of seventy miles per hour through a twenty-five mile per hour zone, while the Defendant drove at such a velocity without sirens or lights to wam those upon the road of the potential danger, the Defendant became aware that he would likely be subject to a lawsuit for his wanton and reckless action._ 51. Upon realizing that litigation was likely to be brought, the Defendant destroyed a portion of the dash-cam video that "worked" both prior to and after the collision within a few minutes. ELECTRONICALLY FILED IFIJ A1308073 CONFIRMATION NUMBER 299456 S2. The deleted portion of the video would have provided conclusive evidence of the Defendant's culpability, but was deleted requiring the Plaintiff to rely on statements and the recollection only. 53. The deleted portion of the video is unattainable by other means, requiring the Plaintiff to rely on other evidence and thus damaging her chances of success on the underlying claim. 54. DAMAGES As a consequence of all of the Defendants wrongful conduct, Natalie Cole experienced unnecessary pain and suffering, severe and unjustified mental and emotional distress, catastrophic physical injuries resulting in emergency hospitalization and numerous surgeries for which the Plaintiff is entitled to recover actual damages. 55. Furthermore, all of the Defendants' violations of the Plaintiff 's rights were wanton and reckless, entitling the Plaintiff to recover punitive damages from Defendants in order to deter such conduct in the future. PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against the Defendant on all claims. Plaintiff further requests: 1. Past medical bills; 2. Future medical bills; 3. Lost income and benefits; 4. Lost future income and benefits; 5. Loss of ability to earn income; 6. Past pain and suffefin g; 7. Future pain and suffering; 8. All incidental costs and expenses incurred as a result of their injuries; 9. The damages to her credit as a result of their injuries; 10. Loss of consortium; ll. Punitive damages and adverse jury instructions; 6 ELECTRONICALLY FILED IFIJ A1308073 CONFIRMATION NUMBER 299456 12. Costs; 13. Attorneys' fees; 14. Interest; 15. All propeity loss; 16. All other relief to which she is entitled to. Based upon this itemizations of damages, the damages sought exceed the minimal juiisdictional amount of this couit. Respectfully submitted, \s\Eric C. Deters Eric C. Deters (38050) ERIC. C. DETERS PARTNERS, PSC 5247 Madison Pike Independence, KY 41051 Phone: (859) 363-1900 Fax: (859)363-1444 JURY DEMAND Plaintiff hereby respectfully request trial byjury on all issues. \s\Eric C. Deters ELECTRONICALLY FILED IFIJ A1308073 CONFIRMATION NUMBER 299456