Case 1:99-mc-09999-UNA Document 854 Filed 07/14/21 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 84080

IN THE UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE STATE OF DELAWARE

MARTIAYNA WATSON : COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

:
: Civil Action No.:
:
Plaintiff, :
: DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
vs. :
;
:
DIVISION OF STATE POLICE, :
DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY & :
HOMELAND SECURITY, :
STATE OF DELAWARE, :
:
Defendant. :
:

COMPLAINT

COMES NOW, Plaintiff Martiayna Watson (“Plaintiff”), by and through her attorneys,

and brings this Complaint against Defendant Division of State Police, Department of Safety &

Homeland Security, State of Delaware, and in support thereof alleges as follows:

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. Plaintiff invokes jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331 as the claims raise federal

questions under 42 U.S.C. §1983. Plaintiff further invokes supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to

28 U.S.C. §1367 for claims arising under state law as these claims form part of the same case and

controversy as the claims brought under 42 U.S.C. §1983.

Case 1:99-mc-09999-UNA Document 854 Filed 07/14/21 Page 2 of 9 PageID #: 84081

2. Venue is proper in this district because it is the judicial district where the unlawful actions

against Plaintiff occurred.

THE PARTIES

3. Plaintiff is a 20-year-old African American female.

4. Defendant Division of State Police, Department of Safety & Homeland Security, State of

Delaware (“Defendant”), is an agency of the State of Delaware.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

5. On or around the afternoon of June 24, 2021, Plaintiff was at BP Gas station located at 201

S. Heald Street, Wilmington, DE 19801.

6. Plaintiff was the driver of a light grey Nissan Altima vehicle (“Plaintiff’s vehicle”).

7. At the same time, undercover officers employed by Defendant (“Defendant’s officer or

officers”) were allegedly searching for a black male and female in a dark grey Nissan Maxima.

8. Plaintiff left the BP Gas station at approximately 5:25 p.m.

9. Defendant’s officers were in unmarked police vehicles.

10. Shortly after leaving the BP Gas station, Plaintiff noticed a vehicle operated by Defendant’s

officer (“Vehicle 1”) traveling at a slow rate of speed behind her.

11. Vehicle 1 followed Plaintiff’s vehicle to the ten hundred block of Church Street in

Wilmington, Delaware.

12. Suddenly and without warning, Vehicle 1 cut off Plaintiff’s vehicle by aggressively

swerving in front of her, blocking her lane of travel.

13. Vehicle 1 then stopped and reversed directly into the front of Plaintiff’s vehicle.

14. Almost simultaneously, a second vehicle driven by Defendant’s officer (“Vehicle 2”) hit

Plaintiff’s vehicle from behind.

Case 1:99-mc-09999-UNA Document 854 Filed 07/14/21 Page 3 of 9 PageID #: 84082

15. Almost simultaneously, a third vehicle driven by Defendant’s officer (“Vehicle 3”) pulled

up on the left side of Plaintiff’s vehicle.

16. Almost simultaneously, a fourth vehicle driven by Defendant’s officer (“Vehicle 4”) pulled

up on the right side of Plaintiff’s vehicle.

17. Plaintiff’s vehicle was effectively blockaded in by the four unmarked police vehicles,

Vehicles 1 through 4.

18. The four officers who were operating the four unmarked police vehicles exited their

vehicles with their guns drawn, pointing directly at Plaintiff.

19. Plaintiff’s two front windows of her vehicle were rolled completely down.

20. Plaintiff, frightened and unsure of what was happening, asked the Defendant’s officers,

“What is going on?”

21. Defendant’s officers told Plaintiff to “Stop talking, and shut the fuck up!”

22. Defendant’s officers announced that there was no other individual occupying Plaintiff’s

vehicle.

23. One of the four Defendant’s officers then broke the driver side rear window of Plaintiff’s

vehicle.

24. Defendant’s officer in Vehicle 1 opened the door of the driver’s side of Plaintiff’s vehicle

and dragged her out of the car with force and aggression.

25. When Plaintiff began to cry and again ask what was going on, one of Defendant’s officers

put a taser to her neck and said, “I’m going to fuck you up.”

26. Eventually, one of Defendant’s officers stated, “I think we have the wrong person.”
Case 1:99-mc-09999-UNA Document 854 Filed 07/14/21 Page 4 of 9 PageID #: 84083

27. Defendant’s officers then abruptly got back in their vehicles and drove away, without even

issuing Plaintiff an apology for their aggressive treatment, wrongful arrest and unlawful

detainment.

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

(Deprivation of Federally Protected Rights)
Excessive Force

28. Plaintiff incorporates and re-alleges all preceding paragraphs as though fully pleaded

herein.

29. The conduct of Defendant’s officers as alleged above was shocking to the conscious,

intentional, willful, malicious, and demonstrates the Defendant’s deliberate indifference to the

constitutionally protected rights of Plaintiff.

30. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid acts of the defendant, Plaintiff suffered

extreme emotional pain and suffering.

31. The conduct of Defendant’s officers as described above violated clearly established law

and constituted excessive use of force by Defendant’s officers, depriving Plaintiff of her right to

be secure in her person against unreasonable searches and seizures as guaranteed to Plaintiff under

the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and of her right not to be deprived of

life, liberty or property without due process of law and to be accorded the equal protection of the

laws as guaranteed to her under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

32. By reason of the aforesaid violation of Plaintiff’s rights, Plaintiff is entitled to damages

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Case 1:99-mc-09999-UNA Document 854 Filed 07/14/21 Page 5 of 9 PageID #: 84084

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

(Deprivation of Federally Protected Rights)
False Arrest/False Imprisonment

Plaintiff incorporates and re-alleges all preceding paragraphs as though fully pleaded

herein.

33. Defendant’s officers through their acts set forth above, violated clearly established law by

falsely arresting and falsely imprisoning Plaintiff in violation of her Fourth Amendment right to

be secure in her person against unreasonable searches and seizures and not to be arrested without

probable cause, and her Fourteenth Amendment right not to be deprived of liberty without due

process of law.

34. Defendant’s officers acted under color of law in engaging in the conduct described above.

35. The conduct of Defendant’s officers as alleged above was shocking to the conscious,

intentional, willful and malicious, and demonstrated Defendant’s deliberate indifference to the

constitutionally protected rights of Plaintiff.

36. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid acts of Defendant, Plaintiff suffered

extreme emotional pain and suffering.

37. By reason of the aforesaid violations of Plaintiff’s rights, Plaintiff is entitled to damages

under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

(Common Law Assault & Battery)

38. Plaintiff incorporates and re-alleges all preceding paragraphs as though fully pleaded

herein.
Case 1:99-mc-09999-UNA Document 854 Filed 07/14/21 Page 6 of 9 PageID #: 84085

39. The conduct of Defendant’s officers, as described above, resulted in an unprovoked,

unpermitted, harmful and offensive contact with the Plaintiff’s person and property and thus

constitute assault and battery.

40. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant officer’s assault and battery, Plaintiff

suffered extreme emotional pain and suffering.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Common Law False Arrest/False Imprisonment)

41. Plaintiff incorporates and re-alleges all preceding paragraphs as though fully pleaded

herein.

42. The conduct of Defendant’s officers, as described above, resulted in the false arrest and

false imprisonment of Plaintiff, directly and proximately causing Plaintiff’s emotional damages.

FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Negligence)

43. Plaintiff incorporates and re-alleges all preceding paragraphs as though fully pleaded

herein.

44. Defendant’s officers acted with a lack of cautious regard for Plaintiff’s right to be free

from unnecessary bodily harm or from the threat of such harm and without the due care that

prudent police officers would use under the circumstances.

45. The injuries to Plaintiff were a direct and proximate result of the negligence of the

defendant.

46. As a result of Defendant officers’ negligence, Plaintiff suffered extreme emotional pain

and suffering.
Case 1:99-mc-09999-UNA Document 854 Filed 07/14/21 Page 7 of 9 PageID #: 84086

SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Excessive Force in violation of Article I, Section 6 of the Delaware Constitution)

47. Plaintiff hereby incorporates and re-alleges all preceding paragraphs as though fully

pleaded herein.

48. Defendant officer’s conduct violated, in a similar manner as described above, the rights

guaranteed to Plaintiff by Article I, § 6 of the Delaware Constitution.

SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Reckless/Wanton Conduct)

49. Plaintiff hereby incorporates and re-alleges all preceding paragraphs as though fully

pleaded herein.

50. Defendant’s officers owed a duty of care to Plaintiff under the circumstances to act as

reasonable officers and not to use excessive force.

51. Defendant’s officers intentionally, willfully, wantonly, and recklessly breached their duty

by unlawfully and forcefully detaining and/or arresting Plaintiff.

EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Gross Negligence)

52. Plaintiff incorporates and re-alleges all preceding paragraphs as though fully pleaded

herein.

53. The assault and battery, use of excessive force, and other acts unnecessarily subjecting

Plaintiff to danger, were carried out with such willful, malicious, wanton and reckless disregard of
Case 1:99-mc-09999-UNA Document 854 Filed 07/14/21 Page 8 of 9 PageID #: 84087

the consequences as to show Defendant’s conscious indifference to the danger of harm and injury

to Plaintiff and the intent to inflict harm and injury on Plaintiff.

54. The injuries to Plaintiff were a direct and proximate result of the gross negligence of all

Defendants.

55. As a result of Defendant’s officers’ gross negligence, Plaintiff suffered extreme emotional

pain and suffering.

NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION

(Respondeat Superior)

56. Plaintiff incorporates and re-alleges all preceding paragraphs as though fully pleaded

herein.

57. At all times relevant, Defendant’s officers and other agents of Defendant were working

within the time, space, and scope of their employment and/or agency with Defendant.

58. As the principal of officers, Defendant is liable for its agents’ and/or employees’ torts under

the doctrine of respondeat superior.

59. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant, on all causes of action as

follows:

(1) Compensatory damages;

(2) Punitive damages;

(3) Attorney’s fees and costs of this action; and

(4) Such other and further relief as the court deems just and proper.
Case 1:99-mc-09999-UNA Document 854 Filed 07/14/21 Page 9 of 9 PageID #: 84088

JURY DEMAND

60. Pursuant to Rule 38 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedures, Plaintiff demands a trial by

jury of this action.

Dated: July 14, 2021

THE IGWE FIRM, LLC

Renee Leverette (DE Bar # 6050)

renee@igwefirm.com
One Commerce Center
1201 N. Orange St., Suite 502
Wilmington, DE 19801
ph: 302-842-2470
fax: 302-440-3746
Attorney for Plaintiff

Appearance for Plaintiff pending pro hac vice application:

THE IGWE FIRM, LLC

Emeka Igwe, Esquire

emeka@igwefirm.com
Two Penn Center
1500 JFK Blvd., Suite 1900
Philadelphia, PA 19102
p: 215-278-9898
fax: 215-893-3812