Case 3:20-cv-03509-JSC Document 1 Filed 05/25/20 Page 1 of 11

JOHN L. BURRIS, Esq., SBN 69888

1 PATRICK M. BUELNA, Esq., SBN 317043
LAW OFFICES OF JOHN L. BURRIS
2
Airport Corporate Center
3 7677 Oakport St., Suite 1120
Oakland, CA 94621
4 Telephone: (510) 839-5200
Facsimile: (510) 839-3882
5 Email: John.Burris@johnburrislaw.com
Email: Patrick.Buelna@johnburrislaw.com
6
Attorneys for Plaintiff
7 EMERALD BLACK
8

9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
EMERALD BLACK, an individual, ) Case No.:
12 )
Plaintiff, ) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
13 ) (42 U.S.C § 1983)
v. )
14 )
SAN LEANDRO, a municipal corporation; )
15 )
and DOES 1-50, inclusive. JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
)
16 )
Defendants.
)
17 )
)
18 )
)
19 )
)
20 )
)
21 )
)
22 )
)
23 )
)
24 )
)
25

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

-1
 Case 3:20-cv-03509-JSC Document 1 Filed 05/25/20 Page 2 of 11

INTRODUCTION
1
1. San Leandro officers pulled over pregnant Emerald Black’s fiancée for a vehicle
2

3 violation. At the time, Ms. Black was still in hospital clothes after being recently released from

4 the hospital for a pregnancy exam where she learned that she was at high-risk for a miscarriage.

5 2. While the officers spoke to her fiancé, Ms. Black remained in the passenger seat

6 and visibly pregnant. Shortly after, officers commanded Ms. Black to exit the car and she
7 informed them that she was pregnant and had just left the hospital. Despite this fact, officers
8
yanked pregnant Ms. Black from the car, taunted her, piled on top of her and stomped on her
9
stomach leaving a shoe mark.
10
3. As a result of the officers, excessive and detestable force, Ms. Black suffer
11
physical and emotional injuries, and was devastated when she lost her child from the force days
12
later.
13
JURISDICTION
14
4. This action arises under Title 42 of the United States Code, Section 1983. The
15

16 unlawful acts and practices alleged herein occurred in Union City, Alameda County, California,

17 which is within this judicial district. Title 28 United State Code Section 1391 (b) confers venue

18 upon this Court.

19 PARTIES
20
5. Plaintiff EMERALD BLACK is a competent adult. Plaintiff is a resident of
21
CALIFORNIA and a citizen of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
22
6. Defendant SAN LEANDRO (hereinafter “Defendant CITY”) is and at all times
23
herein mentioned a municipal entity duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of
24
California that manages and operates the SAN LEANDRO POLICE DEPARTMENT
25

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

-2
 Case 3:20-cv-03509-JSC Document 1 Filed 05/25/20 Page 3 of 11

(hereinafter “POLICE DEPARTMENT”).

1
7. Plaintiff is ignorant of the true names and/or capacities of defendants sued herein
2

3 as DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, and therefore sues said defendants by such fictitious names.

4 Plaintiff will amend this complaint to allege the true names and capacities when ascertained.

5 Plaintiff believes and alleges that each of the DOE defendants is legally responsible and liable

6 for the incident, injuries and damages hereinafter set forth. Each defendant proximately caused
7 injuries and damages because of their negligence, breach of duty, negligent supervision,
8
management or control, violation of public policy, and false arrests. Each defendant is liable for
9
his/her personal conduct, vicarious or imputed negligence, fault, or breach of duty, whether
10
severally or jointly, or whether based upon agency, employment, ownership, entrustment,
11
custody, care or control or upon any other act or omission. Plaintiffs will ask leave to amend this
12
complaint subject to further discovery.
13
8. In doing the acts alleged herein, Defendants, and each of them acted within the
14

15
course and scope of their employment for the CITY AND POLICE DEPARTMENT.

16 9. In doing the acts and/or omissions alleged herein, Defendants, and each of them,

17 acted under color of authority and/or under color of law.

18 10. Due to the acts and/or omissions alleged herein, Defendants, and each of them,

19 acted as the agent, servant, and employee and/or in concert with each of said other Defendants
20
herein.
21
11. Plaintiff filed a timely government claim with UNION CITY, which was rejected
22
by operation of law.
23
/
24
/
25

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

-3
 Case 3:20-cv-03509-JSC Document 1 Filed 05/25/20 Page 4 of 11

STATEMENT OF FACTS
1

2 12. In the early morning of June 7, 2019, Plaintiff Emerald Black was a passenger in
3 the car, and visibly pregnant. Ms. Black’s fiancé had driven her earlier in the day to Alta Bates,
4 where she had been informed that she was of high risk for a miscarriage.
5 13. At or near 1224 Lucille Street in San Leandro, yet-to-be-identified San Leandro
6 police officers pulled over he fiancé for bad registration tags. Ms. Black remained in the
7 passenger seat while one of the officers spoke with her fiancé. Although yet-to-be-identified
8 officers did not suspect her of any criminal wrongdoing and she was visibly pregnant and still in
9 clothing from the hospital, officers commanded her to get out of the car.
10 14. Ms. Black informed officers that she was pregnant and had just come from the
11 hospital and asked to remain in the car. Nevertheless, yet-to-be-identified officers yanked Ms.
12 Black from the car, stomped on her stomach, piled on top of her and arrested her. Furthermore,
13 they refused to allow Ms. Black to put on shoes. No criminal charges were filed against her.
14 15. As a result of the officers excessive force, Claimant Emerald Black had a
15 miscarriage shortly after the incident. Ms. Black also suffered other physical injuries,
16 embarrassment, humiliation and emotional distress both from the incident and loss of her child.
DAMAGES
17
16. As a proximate result of Defendants’ and Does’ unreasonable and excessive use
18
of force, Plaintiff suffered physical injury, loss of wages, emotional distress, fear, terror, anxiety,
19
humiliation, and loss of sense of security, dignity, and pride as a United States Citizen.
20
17. The conduct of the Defendants and Does were malicious, wanton, and oppressive.
21
Plaintiff is therefore entitled to an award of punitive damages against Defendants and Does 1-50.
22
/
23
/
24
/
25

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

-4
 Case 3:20-cv-03509-JSC Document 1 Filed 05/25/20 Page 5 of 11

1 CAUSES OF ACTION

2 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

(Fourth Amendment – Excessive Force under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983)
3 (Against DOES 1-25)
4 18. Plaintiff hereby re-alleges and incorporates by reference each and every
5 paragraph of this Complaint.

6 19. When Defendants and Does attacked Plaintiff, Plaintiff was unarmed,
noncombative and had committed no crimes. Defendants had no probable cause or even
7
reasonable suspicion to use any force whatsoever against Plaintiff. Therefore, the use of any
8
force, was unlawful and excessive. Defendant officers conduct was excessive and
9
unreasonable, which violated both their training and Plaintiff’s constitutional rights under the
10
Fourth Amendment.
11
20. As a result of their misconduct, the Defendants are liable for Plaintiff’s injuries.
12 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief as hereinafter set forth.
13
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
14 (Fourth Amendment – Unlawful Seizure under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983)
(Against DOES 1-25)
15
21. Plaintiff hereby re-alleges and incorporates by reference each and every
16
paragraph of this Complaint.
17
22. When the Defendants attacked Plaintiff and arrested her, they had no probable
18
cause to conduct an arrest or reasonable suspicion. Furthermore Plaintiff had not committed
19 any crimes. Therefore, Defendants’ use of force, detention, arrest and imprisonment was an
20 unlawful seizure which violated both their training and Plaintiff’s constitutional rights under

21 the Fourth Amendment.

22 23. As a result of their misconduct, Defendants are liable for Plaintiff’s injuries and
his imprisonment.
23
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief as hereinafter set forth.
24
/
25
/

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

-5
 Case 3:20-cv-03509-JSC Document 1 Filed 05/25/20 Page 6 of 11

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

1 (Violation of the Bane Act (Cal. Civ. Code § 52.1))
(Against SAN LEANDRO and DOES 1-25)
2

3 24. Plaintiff hereby re-alleges and incorporates by reference each and every paragraph

4 of this Complaint.

5 25. Plaintiff brings this “Bane Act” claim individually for direct violation of her own

6 rights.
7 26. By their conduct described herein, Defendants and Does 1-50, acting in
8
concert/conspiracy, as described above, violated Plaintiff’s rights under California Civil Code
9
§52.1, and the following clearly-established rights under the United States Constitution and the
10
California Constitution:
11
a. Plaintiff’s right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures as
12 secured by the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
and by Article I, § 13 of the California Constitution;
13
b. Plaintiff’s right to be free from excessive and unreasonable force in the
14
course of arrest or detention, as secured by the Fourth Amendment to
the United States Constitution and by Article 1, § 13 of the California
15
Constitution;
16 27. Excessive force which violates the Fourth Amendment, also violates the Bane

17 Act. 1 Defendants’ use of unlawful force against Plaintiff, in and of itself, satisfies the “by threat,

18 intimidation, or coercion” requirement of the Bane Act.

19 28. Further, any volitional violation of rights done with reckless disregard for those
20
rights also satisfies the “by threat, intimidation, or coercion” requirement of the Bane Act. 2 All
21

22

23

24 1
See Chaudhry v. City of Los Angeles, 751 F.3d 1096, 1105 (9th Cir. May 19, 2014) (citing Cameron v. Craig, 713
F.3d 1012, 1022 (9th Cir. 2013)).
25
2
Cornell v. City and County of San Francisco, 17 Cal.App.5th 766, 801-02 (2017) (review denied).

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

-6
 Case 3:20-cv-03509-JSC Document 1 Filed 05/25/20 Page 7 of 11

of Defendants’ violations of duties and rights were volitional, intentional acts, done with reckless
1
disregard for Plaintiff’s rights; none was accidental or merely negligent.
2

3 29. Alternatively, Defendants violated Plaintiff’s rights by the following conduct

4 constituting threat, intimidation, or coercion that was above and beyond any lawful seizure or use

5 of force:

6 a. Threatening Plaintiff in the absence of any threat presented by Plaintiff or any

justification whatsoever;
7
b. Using deliberately reckless and provocative tactics to apprehend Plaintiff in
8
violation of generally accepted law enforcement training and standards, and in
9
violation of Plaintiff’s rights;

10 c. Defendant using force on Plaintiff in the absence of any threat or need for such
force;
11
d. Threatening violence against Plaintiff, with the apparent ability to carry out such
12 threats, in violation of Civ. Code § 52.1(j);

13 e. Using excessive, unreasonable and unjustified force against Plaintiff while he

attempted to comply with the officers;
14

15
f. Failing to intervene to stop, prevent, or report the unlawful seizure and use of
excessive and unreasonable force by other officers;
16
g. Violating multiple rights of Plaintiff;
17
30. Defendant CITY is vicariously liable, pursuant to California Government Code §
18
815.2, for the violation of rights by its employees and agents.
19
31. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' violation of California Civil Code
20
§52.1 and of Plaintiff’s rights under the United States and California Constitutions, Plaintiff
21

22 sustained injuries and damages, and against all Defendants and is entitled to relief as set forth

23 above, including punitive damages against Defendants and Does 1-50, and including all damages

24 allowed by California Civil Code §§ 52, 52.1, and California law, not limited to costs, attorneys

25 fees, treble damages, and civil penalties.

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

-7
 Case 3:20-cv-03509-JSC Document 1 Filed 05/25/20 Page 8 of 11

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

1 (Battery – Violation of CALIFORNIA PENAL CODE § 242)
(Against SAN LEANDRO and DOES 1-25)
2

3 32. Plaintiff hereby re-alleges and incorporates by reference each and every
paragraph of this Complaint.
4
33. Defendants and Does 1-50, while working as employees for the CITY, and
5
acting within the course an scope of their duties, intentionally injured Plaintiff without a lawful
6 basis.
7 34. As a result of the actions of the Defendants, Plaintiff suffered physical injuries.
Defendants and Does 1-50 did not have legal justification for using force against Plaintiff, and
8
Defendants’ use of force while carrying out their duties was an unreasonable use of force.
9
35. Defendant CITY is vicariously liable, pursuant to California Government Code
10 § 815.2, for the violation of rights by its employees and agents.
11 36. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' unlawful touching of Plaintiff,

12 Plaintiff sustained injuries and damages, and are entitled to relief as set forth above.

13 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief as hereinafter set forth.

14

15
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
(Negligence)
16 (Against SAN LEANDRO and DOES 1-25)

17 37. Plaintiff hereby re-alleges and incorporates by reference each and every
paragraph of this Complaint.
18
38. At all times, Defendants and Does 1-50 owed Plaintiff the duty to act with due
19
care in the execution and enforcement of any right, law, or legal obligation.
20
39. At all times, Defendants and Does 1-50 owed Plaintiff the duty to act with
21
reasonable care.
22
40. These general duties of reasonable care and due care owed to Plaintiff by
23
Defendants include but are not limited to the following specific obligations:
24
a. to refrain from using excessive and/or unreasonable force against Plaintiff;
25

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

-8
 Case 3:20-cv-03509-JSC Document 1 Filed 05/25/20 Page 9 of 11

b. to refrain from unreasonably creating the situation where force, including

1 but not limited to excessive force, is used;
2
c. to refrain from abusing their authority granted them by law;
3
d. to refrain from violating Plaintiff’s rights guaranteed by the United States
4 and California Constitutions, as set forth above, and as otherwise protected
by law.
5
41. Defendants, through their acts and omissions, breached each and every one of the
6
aforementioned duties owed to Plaintiff.
7
42. Defendant CITY is vicariously liable for the wrongful acts and omissions of its
8

9
employees and agents pursuant to Cal. Gov. Code section 815.2.

10 43. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's negligence, Plaintiff sustained

11 injuries and damages, and against each and every Defendant is entitled to relief as set forth

12 above.

13 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(False Imprisonment/Illegal Detention)
14
(Against SAN LEANDRO and DOES 1-25)
15

16 44. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each and every paragraph of this

17 Complaint.

18 45. Defendants and DOES 1-25 detained and/or arrested Plaintiff and imprisoned her

19 without just cause under false pretenses. Defendants restrained, detained, and/or confined
20
Plaintiff without their consent or a lawful basis for a significant period of time.
21
46. Defendant CITY is vicariously liable for the wrongful acts and omissions of its
22
employees and agents pursuant to Cal. Gov. Code section 815.2.
23
47. As a result of the Defendants’ unlawful confinement, Plaintiff suffered emotional
24
distress.
25

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

-9
 Case 3:20-cv-03509-JSC Document 1 Filed 05/25/20 Page 10 of 11

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief as hereinafter set forth.

1
SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION
2
(False Arrest)
3 (Against SAN LEANDRO and DOES 1-25)

4 48. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference each and every paragraph of

5
this complaint.
6
49. Defendants and Does 1-25, while working as employees for the CITY, and
7

8 acting within the course an scope of their duties, falsely arrested Plaintiff without any

9
reasonable suspicion and/or probable cause.
10
50. As a result of the actions of these the Defendants, Plaintiff suffered physical
11

12 injuries and/or emotional distress. Defendants did not have legal justification for using force,

13
arresting and/or detaining Plaintiff.
14

15
51. Defendant CITY is vicariously liable for the wrongful acts and omissions of its

16 employees and agents pursuant to Cal. Gov. Code section 815.2.

17
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief as hereinafter set forth.
18

19
JURY DEMAND
20
52. Plaintiff hereby demands a jury trial in this action.
21

22 PRAYER
23 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief, as follows:
24 1. For general damages in a sum to be proven at trial;
25

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

- 10
 Case 3:20-cv-03509-JSC Document 1 Filed 05/25/20 Page 11 of 11

1 2. For special damages, including but not limited to, past, present and/or future wage

2 loss, income and support, medical expenses and other special damages in a sum to

3 be determined according to proof;

4 3. For punitive damages against DOES 1-50 in a sum according to proof;

5 4. All other damages, penalties, costs, interest, and attorney fees as allowed by 42

6 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1988, Cal. Civil Code §§ 52 et seq., 52.1, and as otherwise

7 may be allowed by California and/or federal law;

8 5. For cost of suit herein incurred; and

9 6. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

10

11

12 Dated: May 25, 2020 LAW OFFICES OF JOHN BURRIS

13
___/s/_Patrick M. Buelna__
14 PATRICK M. BUELNA
JOHN L. BURRIS
15

16 Attorneys for Plaintiff

EMERALD BLACK
17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

- 11