Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Date: 10-04-2024
Case Style:
Reuben Jelani Adams, et al. v Lexington-Fayette County Urban Government, et al.
Case Number: 5:22-cv-00241
Judge: Gregory F. VanTatenhove
Court: United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky (
Plaintiff's Attorney:
Defendant's Attorney:
Description:
Lexington, Kentucky civil rights lawyers represented the Plaintiffs.
This matter is before the Court on the Defendants' motions to dismiss. [R. 13.] The five plaintiffs were football players at the University of Kentucky. [R. 1 at 1.] Months after a houseparty ended in a physical altercation, Detective Cory Vinlove submitted a criminal complaint charging the Plaintiffs with several crimes. Id. at 7-9, 13. The Plaintiffs allege that Detective Vinlove fabricated information in this complaint to frame the Plaintiffs. Id. at 11. Ultimately, a grand jury refused to indict the Plaintiffs and dismissed the charges. Id. at 14. Yet not before the charges-and attendant publicity-hurt the Plaintiffs' reputation and careers. Id. at 15. As damaging to the Plaintiffs' reputation as the charges may have been, the Plaintiffs were not deprived of their constitutional liberty interests. The Plaintiffs also do not allege sufficient facts to state a claim under state law except one: malicious prosecution against Detective Vinlove. Accordingly, and the Court being sufficiently advised, the Defendants' motions to dismiss are GRANTED.
I
Plaintiffs Reuben Adams, Robert McClain, Andru Phillips, Devito Tisdale, and Joel Williams were student-athletes on the University of Kentucky football team. [See R. 1 at 1.] The Plaintiffs allege that, one evening, a campus fraternity hosted a party at its house. Id. at 6. Mr. Adams and Mr. Williams believed that they were invited to the party and arrived at the same time. Id. at 7. But as they walked through the house, other guests began berating Mr. Adams and Mr. Williams. Id. at 8. Then, members of the fraternity assaulted Mr. Williams, and the two left the house. Id. at 8-9.
The other plaintiffs had briefer encounters at the house. Mr. Tisdale alleges that he was assaulted as he arrived at the house and then left. Tisdale v. Lexington-Fayette County Urban Government et al., Case No. 5:22-cv-00244, R. at 9. Mr. Phillips arrived at the house, heard shouting, and left. Phillips v. Lexington-Fayette County Urban Government et al., Case No. 5:22-cv-00243, R. 1 at 7-8. Mr. McClain attempted to drive to the house after hearing about his teammates' experiences but returned home after seeing that police blocked the road. McClain v. Lexington-Fayette County Urban Government et al., Case No. 5:22-cv-00242, R. 1 at 10. That night, police responded to the house and spoke to those present. [R. 1 at 10.] Some who spoke to the police claimed that one or more football players brought weapons to the party. Id. Without more, the police declined to arrest anyone. Id.
The next day, Detective Vinlove took over the investigation. Id. at 11. The Plaintiffs allege that, although the Defendants had information showing that the Plaintiffs committed no crimes and that the accusations against the Plaintiffs were unreliable, Detective Vinlove fabricated information to obtain a search warrant for Mr. Adams's phone. Id. at 11-12. Over five months later, Detective Vinlove swore out a criminal complaint against the Plaintiffs. Id. at 13. Detective Vinlove included allegedly fabricated information in this complaint, including that the Plaintiffs forced their way into the house and assaulted occupants inside. Id. Sergeant Donnell Gordon issued a press release shortly after, which “include[ed] the fabricated allegations” against the Plaintiffs. Id.
A grand jury ultimately returned a no true bill against the Plaintiffs, declining to issue an indictment and dismissing the charges. Id. at 14. The Plaintiffs then brought five individual lawsuits against Detective Vinlove, Sergeant Gordon, Lexington Police Chief Lawrence Weathers, and Lexington. [See, e.g., R. 1.] The complaints included eleven claims: (1) a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claim for malicious prosecution, (2) a § 1983 claim for fabrication of evidence under the Fourth Amendment, (3) a § 1983 claim for supervisory liability, (4) a § 1983 claim for failure to intervene, (5) a § 1983 claim for conspiracy to deprive constitutional rights, (6) a § 1983 claim for municipal liability against Lexington, (7) a state-law claim for malicious prosecution, (8) a state-law claim for negligent supervision, (9) a state-law defamation claim, (10) a state-law respondeat superior claim against Lexington, and (11) a state-law negligent hiring claim against Lexington. Id. The Court consolidated the five actions together, and the Defendants now move to dismiss all claims except the state-law malicious prosecution claim against Detective Vinlove. [See R. 13; R. 19.]
* * *
Outcome: Dismissed
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments: