Gray V. Shelby County Tennessee Et Al
Case Background
On December 30, 202o, Kesha Gray filed a civil rights lawsuit against Shelby County police officers, alleging unlawful seizure in violation of her Fourth Amendment rights. The case was filed before the United States District Court, Tennessee Western (Memphis). The case was assigned to Judge Samuel H. Mays, Jr and referred to Magistrate Judge Charmiane G. Claxton. [Case number: 2:20cv2947]
Cause
On March 29, 2020, Kesha Gray and her fiancé drove through a residential area of Memphis, specifically Pisgah Road, to view real estate. They had an argument, and Gray, who was pregnant, decided to get out of the car to cool off. The argument between Gray and her fiancé continued as she stood outside the vehicle.
Christopher Hodges, a bystander, witnessed the interaction and thought the fiancé was attacking Gray. He approached the fiancé and told him to stop. When the fiancé threatened Hodges, Hodges brandished a gun, causing the fiancé to flee in his car. This left Gray standing by the side of the road.
Hodges then called 911 to report a domestic disturbance. Deputy Sheriff Brett Barnett, accompanied by his partner, arrived to investigate. Gray denied any issues and refused to identify herself. She later clarified that there had been no domestic event and that there was nothing to investigate.
As Gray began to walk away from Barnett, he was uncertain about how to proceed and called his supervisor, Sgt. Eugenia Sumner. Sumner determined that Gray had committed no crime and instructed Barnett to release her. However, Sumner sought a second opinion from another sergeant, Bret Simonsen. Unfortunately, Sumner mistakenly reported that the fiancé, not Hodges, had brandished the gun. Relying on this incorrect information, Simonsen advised Barnett to detain Gray for identification.
By this time, Gray had walked a few hundred yards away. Barnett followed her slowly, exited his cruiser, and demanded that she comply. Gray continued to walk away, believing the police had no grounds for detention. Barnett attempted to force her into compliance, resulting in a brief struggle.
Moments later, several deputies arrived and tackled Gray in the middle of the street. She was arrested and taken to jail, where she remained for 12 hours. The stress of the incident contributed to her miscarriage. The criminal charges against her were later dropped. Notably, a citizen filmed much of the encounter, including Gray’s arrest, and the video went viral in Memphis, spreading widely within the community.
Injury
The Plaintiff suffered various injuries due to the Defendants’ actions. These included actual damages, violations of her constitutional rights, unlawful detention, and humiliation. Additionally, she experienced emotional distress and damage to her reputation. The Defendants’ malicious prosecution directly caused these injuries. As a result, the Plaintiff faced significant loss of liberty and physical harm. She also endured severe psychological and emotional trauma due to false and malicious criminal charges and related media coverage.
Damages
The Plaintiff’s damages extended beyond physical injuries. She experienced serious harm to her reputation, which was exacerbated by the malicious charges and extensive media attention. The publication of false allegations also led to the loss of personal relationships and impacted her career. Moreover, the false charges necessitated a lengthy legal defense, resulting in considerable attorney fees. Overall, the Plaintiff faced extensive personal and professional repercussions due to the Defendants’ actions.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
- Plaintiff(s): Kesha Gray
- Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Bryce William Ashby | Craig A Edgington | Melissa Stewart | Brice Moffatt Timmons
- Defendant(s): Deputy Sheriff Brett Barnett | Eugenia Sumner | Brett Simonsen
- Counsel for Defendant(s): Robert D. Meyers | Aubrey Brode Greer | Danielle N Rassoul
Claims
Gray initially sued eleven defendants and raised seven different causes of action. By the time of the trial, after summary judgment and a review by the Sixth Circuit, she had only one claim left. She accused Barnett, Sumner, and Simonsen of illegally seizing her, which she argued violated the Fourth Amendment. The court had dismissed the claims against the other officers involved in her detention and arrest.
The court examined the case in three distinct phases. The first phase involved Barnett’s initial approach to Gray and his subsequent call to dispatch. The second phase began when Barnett received instructions to detain Gray and carried out the detention. The third phase occurred when other deputies arrived to assist with the detention. The court focused the seizure claim on the conduct during the second phase. Gray contended that she had been “arrested for walking” and argued that the police targeted her simply because she knew and exercised her rights.
Defense
The Defendants rejected any claim of an unconstitutional seizure and described the encounter as extremely brief. The detention in Block 2, as previously detailed, was only temporary. Furthermore, it occurred due to a factual error. Simonsen had mistakenly believed, based on incorrect information from Sumner, that the fiancé had brandished a gun.
Jury Verdict
The case was tried over four days. The Tennessee jury delivered a mixed verdict on February 8, 2024/. It ruled in favor of Gray on the seizure in violation of the Fourth Amendment Rights claim against Barnett. However, it cleared the two supervisors, Sumner and Simonsen, of any wrongdoing related to the dispatch.
The jury then assessed damages solely against Barnett. It awarded $50,000 in compensatory damages and an additional $20,000 in punitive damages, bringing the total judgment against Barnett to $70,000.
The judgment, issued by Judge Samuel H. Mays, Jr. on February 8, 2024, reflected this mixed verdict:
- Plaintiff Kesha Gray won against Defendant Brett Barnett with an award of $50,000 in compensatory and $20,000 in punitive damages.
- Defendants Eugenia Sumner and Bret Simonsen were favored, with claims against them dismissed.
Court Documents:
Available upon request
Leave A Comment