Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Spikes v. Cameo Complaint
Spikes v. Cameo Complaint
Defendants.
Now comes Plaintiff Maikel Steele (Plaintiff), Administrator of the Estate of OBryan
Raphael Spikes, by and through undersigned counsel, and for her Complaint in the above captioned
Administrator of the Estate of OBryan Raphael Spikes (Spikes), by order of the Hamilton
County Probate Court on September 26, 2017, for the exclusive benefit of Spikes next of kin,
including his three minor children who survive him, OBryanna, OZayvion, and Arielle. See
and at all relevant times to this Complaint did business under the trade name Cameo Nightclub.
2
3. Upon information and belief, Cameo is operated by Defendant JRODG Group, LLC
Cameo and JRODG. Julian Rodgers determined and enforced the policies and procedures of
Cameo, specifically but not limited to those policies and procedures detailed more fully below.
which, upon information and belief, owns the building located at 4601 Kellogg Avenue,
Cincinnati, Ohio 45226, out of which JRODG operates Cameo. (Cameo, JRODG, Rodgers, and
working as a private duty officer at Cameo on the evening of March 25, 2017 and into the morning
hours of March 26, 2017. Brazile is named as a defendant individually and in his official capacity
working as a private duty officer at Cameo on the evening of March 25, 2017 and into the morning
hours of March 26, 2017. Reese is named as a defendant individually and in his official capacity
was working as a private duty officer at Cameo on the evening of March 25, 2017 and into the
morning hours of March 26, 2017. Winstead is named as a defendant individually and in his official
3
10. Defendants Brazile, Reese, and Winstead are collectively referred to herein as the
Security Defendants.
11. Spikes is survived by three children, OBryanna, OZayvion, and Arielle, both
parents, Owen Spikes and Racquel Mitchell, and three sisters, Raquice Mitchell, Mynagia Mallory,
12. Jurisdiction and venue are proper as the involved parties are all located in Hamilton
County, Ohio and the events that gave rise to the claims contained herein occurred in Hamilton
County, Ohio.
BACKGROUND FACTS
13. Rodgers has operated several nightclubs throughout the greater Cincinnati area for
many years. Rodgers ownership of these clubs is through various limited liability companies.
Among those clubs was Cameo, located at 4601 Kellogg Avenue #1, Cincinnati, Ohio 45226.
14. On the evening of March 25, 2017 and into the early morning hours of March 26,
2017, as a standard protocol, Cameo employed off duty police officers (the Security Defendants)
as part of its security detail. The Security Defendants were contracted by Cameo through the City.
True and accurate copies of the Citys Outside Employment Work Permit and
respectively.
15. By all outward appearances, Cameo required, as part of its security procedure, all
patrons to enter through one entrance and be screened for weapons prior to entrance.
16. Upon information and belief, throughout his tenure as a nightclub owner/operator,
Rodgers has established a policy, pattern, and practice of creating a secretly unsafe atmosphere for
the patrons of Cameo, by, among other things, permitting some patrons to bypass the security
4
protocols at the entrance and enter without passing through metal detectors or otherwise being
17. Patrons with knowledge of the Security Bypass, were permitted to avail themselves
of any security measures by paying an additional cover charge and entering Cameo through an
18. Upon information and belief, Rodgers established and maintained the Security
Bypass specifically because he knew that the appearance of a safe club was necessary to maintain
his business, but also that a certain number of his patrons would be turned off if they were unable
19. Faced with the choice of complying with the law or creating an unsafe environment
without warning would-be patrons of the danger, Rodgers chose profit over people.
20. Upon information and belief, on the night of March 25, 2017 and/or morning of
March 26, 2017, Deondre Davis (Davis) and Cornell Beckley (Beckley), among others, made
use of the Security Bypass when they entered Cameo. That is, neither Davis nor Beckley, nor other
patrons who made use of the Security Bypass were checked for weapons prior to entering Cameo.
21. On the night of March 25, 2017 and/or March 26, 2017, Davis and Beckley and
others who made use of the Security Bypass entered Cameo while armed with firearms. Davis,
Beckley, and the other customers who brought firearms into Cameo on the night in question are
22. Upon information and belief, Rodgers extracted additional profit from the Armed
Patrons by charging an additional cover charge to allow them to enter Cameo without first passing
through security.
5
23. R.C. 2923.121 provides that with limited exceptions, [n]o person shall possess a
firearm in any room in which any person is consuming beer or intoxicating liquor in a premises
for which a D permit has been issued under Chapter 4303. of the Revised Code or in an open air
24. On information and belief, none of the Armed Patrons qualified for any of the
25. On the night of March 25, 2017 and/or morning of March 26, 2017, Spikes entered
Cameo through the main entrance and went through the purported security protocol.
26. In the early morning of March 26, 2017, and while Davis and Beckley, and other
Armed Patrons were inside Cameo (after having entered by means of the Security Bypass), two or
27. Spikes was not armed, nor was he part of the gunfight.
28. During the gunfight, Spikes was hit by a stray bullet and ultimately succumbed to
his injuries.
29. Had the Armed Patrons been required to enter through the main entrance and pass
through security, the Armed Patrons would not have been armed inside of Cameo, and Spikes
31. The Nightclub Defendants have a duty to protect their patrons from foreseeable
harms.
32. The Nightclub Defendants duty to protect their patrons from foreseeable harms
contemplates the criminal acts of third parties where the same is reasonably foreseeable.
6
33. The Nightclub Defendants breached their duty to protect patrons, including Spikes,
by:
a. Failing to employ adequate security measures to ensure that weapons were not
permitted inside of Cameo;
d. Failing to warn patrons of the Security Bypass and the dangers created thereby;
e. Failing to comply with the applicable laws and regulations set forth by the State of
Ohio and City of Cincinnati;
34. Upon information and belief, the Nightclub Defendants either directed patrons to
the Security Bypass or knew or should have known of its existence and permitted it to continue to
35. Harm to Cameo patrons resulting from the Nightclub Defendants breach of their
a. certain patrons know they will not be checked for weapons Cameo and, thus, can
bring weapons into Cameo;
b. incidents of violence are foreseeable when weapons and alcohol are both present,
as is the precise reasoning behind laws prohibiting patrons from bringing weapons
into establishments that sell alcohol; and
c. similar acts of violence, including multiple shootings in 2015 and 2016 and a
stabbing earlier in March of 2017, have occurred at Cameo in the past, under the
ownership and operation of JRODG and Rodgers. See Police Reports attached as
Exhibits 4 through 7.
36. Cameos inadequate and/or deceptive security measures, and Kelloggs failure to
terminate its lease with JRODG and/or Cameo despite knowledge of repetitive and harmful
criminal activity occurring on its premises, or take any other reasonable measures to prevent such
7
criminal activity from occurring on its premises, constitute conduct that is either grossly negligent,
37. As a direct and proximate result of Cameos inadequate and/or deceptive security
measures, Cameos establishing, encouraging, or permitting use of the Security Bypass, and
Cameos failure to warn its patrons of the dangers created thereby, in breach of its duty to protect
its patrons, which were conceived, known and/or permitted by Rodgers, JRODG, and Kellogg,
weapons were allowed inside of Cameo on the evening of March 25, 2017 and/or the early morning
hours of March 26, 2017. Consequently, Spikes was shot, suffered bodily injury as well as mental
anguish and, ultimately, lost his life, leaving behind three young children and various other family
38. Plaintiff, as Administrator of Spikes estate, claims all actual and punitive damages
suffered as a result of Spikes death, as well as for pain and suffering and fear of impending death
that Spikes experienced prior to his death, in an amount to be determined at trial but in excess of
$25,000, together with court costs, attorney fees, and any further relief as the Court may deem
proper.
40. The provision of off-duty police officers to serve as private security personnel is a
41. R.C. 2744.02(B)(2) provides that, subject to certain exceptions that do not apply in
this matter, political subdivisions are liable for injury, death or loss to person or property caused
8
by the negligent performance of acts by their employees with respect to proprietary functions of
42. The Security Defendants were acting within the scope of their employment in a
proprietary function and under the direction of the City of Cincinnati while working a security
detail at Cameo on the night of March 25, 2017 and into the morning of March 26, 2017.
43. By working in a security detail capacity on the night of March 25, 2017 and into
the morning of March 26, 2017, the Security Defendants, and their employer the City of Cincinnati,
44. The Security Defendants duty to protect their patrons from foreseeable harms
contemplates the criminal acts of third parties where the same is reasonably foreseeable.
45. The Security Defendants, and their employer the City of Cincinnati, breached their
duty to protect patrons, including Spikes, by negligently performing their duty to ensure that
46. Harm to Cameo patrons resulting from the Nightclub Defendants breach of their
a. incidents of violence are foreseeable when weapons and alcohol are both present,
as is the precise reasoning behind laws prohibiting patrons from bringing weapons
into establishments that sell alcohol; and
b. similar acts of violence, including multiple shootings in 2015 and 2016 and a
stabbing earlier in March of 2017, have occurred at Cameo in the past, under the
ownership and operation of JRODG and Rodgers. See Police Reports attached as
Exhibits 4 through 7.
47. As a direct and proximate result of the Security Defendants negligence, weapons
were allowed inside of Cameo on the evening of March 25, 2017 and/or the early morning hours
of March 26, 2017. Consequently, Spikes was shot, suffered bodily injury as well as mental
9
anguish and, ultimately, lost his life, leaving behind three young children and various other family
48. Plaintiff, as Administrator of Spikes estate, claims all actual and punitive damages
suffered as a result of Spikes death, as well as for pain and suffering and fear of impending death
that Spikes experienced prior to his death, in an amount to be determined at trial but in excess of
$25,000, together with court costs, attorney fees, and any further relief as the Court may deem
proper.
50. As an alternative to Count Two above, the acts and omissions of the Security
Defendants (Brian Brazile, David Dozier, Joehonny Reese, and Diondre Winstead) were done with
malicious purpose, in bad faith, or in a wanton or reckless manner, resulting in the injury and death
of Spikes.
51. On information and belief, the Security Defendants had worked the same or similar
details at Cameo on multiple occasions, were familiar with the security protocols, and with the
52. On information and belief, the Security Defendants knew or should have known of
53. By working in a security detail capacity on the night of March 25,2017 and into the
morning of March 26, 2017, the Security Defendants owed a duty to protect Cameos patrons from
foreseeable harms.
10
54. The Security Defendants duty to protect their patrons from foreseeable harms
contemplates the criminal acts of third parties where the same is reasonably foreseeable.
55. The Security Defendants breached their duty to protect patrons, including Spikes,
by turning a blind eye to the Security Bypass despite their knowledge of its use and the likelihood
56. The Security Defendants conduct on the night of March 25, 2017 and into the
morning of March 26, 2017, with respect to the Security Bypass, went beyond mere negligence
and was done either with a malicious purpose, in bad faith, or in a wanton or reckless manner.
57. Harm to Cameo patrons resulting from the Nightclub Defendants malicious, bad
faith, wanton, or reckless conduct in breach of their duty to protect their patrons was foreseeable,
because:
a. incidents of violence are foreseeable when weapons and alcohol are both present,
as is the precise reasoning behind laws prohibiting patrons from bringing weapons
into establishments that sell alcohol; and
b. similar acts of violence, including multiple shootings in 2015 and 2016 and a
stabbing earlier in March of 2017, have occurred at Cameo in the past, under the
ownership and operation of JRODG and Rodgers. See Police Reports attached as
Exhibits 4 through 7.
58. As a direct and proximate result of the Security Defendants malicious, bad faith,
wanton, or reckless conduct, in breach of their duty to protect Cameos patrons, weapons were
allowed inside of Cameo on the evening of March 25, 2017 and into the early morning hours of
March 26, 2017. Consequently, Spikes was shot, suffered bodily injury as well as mental anguish
and, ultimately, lost his life, leaving behind three young children and various other family
59. Plaintiff, as Administrator of Spikes estate, claims all actual and punitive damages
suffered as a result of Spikes death, as well as for pain and suffering and fear of impending death
11
that Spikes experienced prior to his death, in an amount to be determined at trial but in excess of
$25,000, together with court costs, attorney fees, and any further relief as the Court may deem
proper.
61. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Cameo was a holder of a D permit under
Chapter 4303 of the Ohio Revised Code and was subject to the applicable laws of the State of Ohio
62. At all relevant times, the Nightclub Defendants established and enforced the
Security Bypass policy and procedure as a means of secretly circumventing Cameos publicized
63. The Nightclub Defendants knew or should have known that the Security Bypass
would lead to the admission of armed patrons in violation of R.C. 2923.121, and were, therefore,
64. The Nightclub Defendants knew or should have known that allowing armed patrons
into Cameo Nightclub created a risk of injury and death for its patrons, including Spikes.
65. The Nightclub Defendants breached their duty of care owed to patrons, including
Spikes, by failing to comply with the applicable laws and regulations set forth by the State of Ohio
protecting patrons against injury and death resulting from a lethal combination of alcohol and
firearms within liquor establishments (i.e. precisely what occurred on the night of March 25,
12
67. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid, Spikes suffered bodily injury,
resulting in pain and suffering, mental anguish, and ultimately the loss of his life.
68. Plaintiff, as Administrator of Spikes estate, claims all actual and punitive damages
suffered as a result of Spikes death, as well as for pain and suffering and fear of impending death
that Spikes experienced prior to his death, in an amount to be determined at trial but in excess of
$25,000, together with court costs, attorney fees, and any further relief as the Court may deem
proper.
70. Spikes death was caused by the wrongful acts, neglect, and/or default of one or
71. Spikes Next of Kin, which includes his three minor children, suffered damages for
72. Spikes Next of Kin, which includes his three minor children, suffered damages for
loss of his society over his life expectancy, including loss of companionship, consortium, care,
assistance, attention, protection, advice, guidance, counsel, instruction, training and education.
73. Spikes heirs at law at the time of his death, including his three minor children,
74. Spikes Next of Kin, including his three minor children, have suffered extreme grief
75. Spikes Next of Kin have also incurred reasonable medical, funeral, and burial
expenses.
13
76. The damages and losses asserted above are the direct and proximate result of the
77. Plaintiff, as Administrator of Spikes estate, claims all actual and punitive damages
suffered by Spikes Next of Kin as a result of Spikes death, in an amount to be determined at trial
but in excess of $25,000, together with court costs, attorney fees, and any further relief as the Court
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for Judgment in her favor and against Defendants, jointly
A. Compensatory damages;
B. Punitive damages;
C. Court costs;
D. Attorneys fees;
Respectfully submitted,
___________________________
Christopher P. Finney (0038998)
Bradley M. Gibson (0087109)
Casey A. Taylor (0095966)
Finney Law Firm, LLC
4270 Ivy Pointe Blvd., Suite 225
Cincinnati, OH 45245
(513) 943-6655
(513) 943-6669 (fax)
Chris@FinneyLawFirm.com
Brad@FinneyLawFirm.com
Casey@FinneyLawFirm.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
14
JURY DEMAND
PRAECIPE TO CLERK
Please serve the named Defendants, by certified mail, return receipt requested, at the above
listed addresses. If service of process by certified mail is returned by the postal authorities with an
endorsement of refused or unclaimed and if the certificate of mailing can be deemed complete
not less than five (5) days before any scheduled hearing, the undersigned waives notice of the
failure of service by the clerk and requests ordinary mail service in accordance with Civil Rue
4.6(C) or (D) and Civil Rule 4.6(E).
15