Pratt et al vs. City Of Toledo et al

Case Background

On June 4, 2022, Plaintiff Saray Pratt and others filed a civil rights lawsuit in the United States District Court, Ohio Northern (Case number: 3:21cv1111). The lawsuit sought justice for the violations of their constitutional rights, including allegations of police brutality and excessive force during the May 2020 protest. Judge James G. Carr presided over this case.

Cause

On May 30, 2020, hundreds of protesters peacefully gathered in Toledo, Ohio, to stand against police brutality and racial injustice following the murder of George Floyd. This demonstration was part of a global movement spanning 2,000 cities across 60 countries. Protesters assembled near the Toledo Police Safety Building, waving signs, chanting slogans, and listening to activist speakers. The event remained peaceful until the Toledo Police escalated the situation. Officers deployed drones overhead to monitor the crowd and later used excessive force, including firing rubber bullets, wooden projectiles, and deploying chemical agents.

Exercising their First Amendment rights, Protesters posed no threat to public safety or law enforcement. However, the police indiscriminately targeted demonstrators, firing projectiles and unleashing pepper spray to disperse the crowd. This unnecessary escalation by law enforcement turned a peaceful protest into a scene of chaos and fear, leaving many participants traumatized. The excessive force used by the police highlighted glaring issues of accountability and disregard for civil rights.

Injuries

The Toledo Police’s use of excessive force caused severe injuries to numerous protesters. Saray Pratt, a peaceful demonstrator holding a “Black Lives Matter” sign, suffered four tibia fractures after being shot in the leg with a wooden bullet. Katey David, a volunteer medic providing first aid to injured protesters, was struck in the back of the head by a wooden bullet fired from a police vehicle. Robert Kowalski, who was documenting the protest, sustained a fractured eye socket and hand injuries after being shot twice within seconds.

Terrance Johns Jr. stood with a protest sign when officers hit him in the ankle, causing a painful fracture. Christopher Banks endured multiple injuries, including wounds to his side, abdomen, and head, after officers fired pepper balls at him. Even minors, like Sienna Salas, were exposed to chemical agents and struck by projectiles, which caused lasting physical pain and emotional trauma. Despite their injuries, the police refused to provide medical assistance and, in some cases, mocked the injured protesters. The actions of the Toledo Police underscored the devastating consequences of police brutality and their blatant disregard for civil rights.

Damages

The injuries inflicted by the Toledo Police during the protest caused significant physical, emotional, and financial harm to the victims. Many incurred costly medical bills for emergency care, surgeries, and follow-up treatments. Permanent disabilities, chronic pain, and emotional distress—including anxiety, fear, and post-traumatic stress disorder—further compounded their suffering. Some victims faced financial instability due to an inability to return to work, while others endured public humiliation as a result of the police’s dismissive and abusive behavior.

These damages highlighted the profound impact of excessive force by law enforcement, emphasizing the need for reforms to ensure police accountability and the protection of civil rights. The victims’ experiences underscored the importance of addressing systemic issues of police brutality to prevent future injustices.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal representation

  • Plaintiff(s): Saray Pratt | Katey David | Robert Kowalski | Jason Steward | Terrance Johns Jr. | Benjamin Hinsey | Robert Barner | Christopher Banks | Robert Hillier | Shelby Hillier | Michael Carpenter | Taylor Harrison | Chase Keller | Devin Ruiz | Keryn Werdehoff | Cameron Singleton | Sienna Salas, by and through her mother Kimberly Welch | Zachary Dempster | Alyx Kendzierski | Elijah Young | Isabella Brazzil | Dean McNeal
    • Counsel for Plaintiff:  Alphonse A. Gerhardstein |  D. Lee Johnson Jr. | Edward T. Mohler | Jacqueline Greene | Marcus S. Sidoti | Sarah J. Gelsomino | Terry H. Gilbert
  • Defendant(s): City of Toledo | Deputy Chief Michael Troendle | Officer Robert Orwig | John Doe Toledo Police Officers 1–35
    • Counsel for Defendants: Edward T. Mohler | Jeffrey B. Charles | Merritt W. Green III | Sarah J. Gelsomino | Tammy Geiger Lavalette

Claims

The plaintiffs filed a civil rights lawsuit to seek justice for the violations of their constitutional rights. They alleged that the Toledo Police and city officials violated their First Amendment rights. This was due to retaliation against them for peacefully protesting police brutality. The police brutality lawsuit also cited excessive force, which violated the Fourth Amendment. It highlighted supervisory negligence by Deputy Chief Michael Troendle, who authorized the use of less-lethal weapons against unarmed protesters.

The plaintiffs pursued state law claims for negligence, assault, and battery. They emphasized the reckless and willful conduct of the officers involved. They demanded compensatory damages for the physical, emotional, and financial harm caused by the excessive force. Additionally, they sought punitive damages to deter future instances of police brutality. The civil rights lawsuit also called for declaratory and injunctive relief. It urged reforms to prevent future violations of constitutional rights and ensure accountability for police misconduct.

Defense

The defendants, including the City of Toledo, police officials, and individual officers, denied all allegations of excessive force, unconstitutional actions, and violations of civil rights. They argued that their actions were lawful, reasonable, and carried out in good faith under their statutory duties. The defendants denied any involvement in police brutality or excessive force and claimed they acted without malice or intent to harm.

The defense also contended that the plaintiffs failed to state valid claims and asserted that they were entitled to qualified immunity and protections under Ohio’s Chapter 2744. They denied adopting or enforcing any unlawful policies and maintained that the City of Toledo could not be held liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior. Furthermore, the defense alleged that the plaintiffs’ injuries, if they occurred, were caused by their own actions or independent third parties. The defendants requested dismissal of all claims with prejudice and sought an award of costs and attorney fees.

Jury Verdict

On January 6, 2025, the Toledo City Council approved a $1.2 million settlement to resolve claims brought by 16 protesters against the city. On January 16, 2025, the council unanimously authorized $800,000 from the Risk Management Fund to settle the claims of the last two plaintiffs, Saray Pratt and Robert Kowalski. Ms. Pratt received $600,000, while Mr. Kowalski received $200,000.

Earlier, in June 2024, the council had approved settlements for the other 14 plaintiffs. One plaintiff was awarded $75,000, and the remaining 13 received $25,000 each. These payments addressed allegations of police brutality, excessive force, and civil rights violations during the May 2020 protests.

Court Documents:

Documents are available for purchase upon request at jurimatic@exlitem.com