Benton v. Rousseau
| Court | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida |
| Writing for the Court | JOHN ANTOON II |
| Citation | Benton v. Rousseau, 940 F.Supp.2d 1370 (M.D. Fla. 2013) |
| Decision Date | 19 March 2013 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 6:10–cv–448–Orl–28GJK. |
| Parties | Tommy Lee BENTON, Plaintiff, v. Stephen ROUSSEAU, et al., Defendants. |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Jacquelynne Jordan Regan, Richard S. Dellinger, Lowndes, Drosdick, Doster, Kantor & Reed, PA, Orlando, FL, for Plaintiff.
Sean M. Wagner, Sean M. Wagner, PA, Melbourne, FL, for Defendant, Stephen Rousseau.
Michael Rosario, Kissimmee, FL, pro se.
At approximately 2:00 p.m. on September 29, 2009, Stephen Rousseau (“Rousseau”) and Michael Rosario (“Rosario”) (collectively “Defendants”) were transporting prisoners to various detention facilities in the State of Florida. One of the passengers was Tommy Lee Benton (“Benton”). It was a hot day, and the prisoners, including Benton, complained about the lack of ventilation in the stainless steel compartment where they were seated. Rousseau pulled the van off of the highway and parked in an empty parking lot. Defendants then opened the door to the rear of the van, and Rosario pulled Benton out of the van and onto the ground, and they beat and kicked Benton. Benton has sued Defendants for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging they were acting under color of law and exerted excessive force.
The case proceeded to a non-jury trial. Upon consideration of the evidence and testimony presented, arguments of counsel, the following findings of fact and conclusions of law are issued in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(a)(1) in support of the Court's determination that Benton has proved his case by a preponderance of the evidence and is entitled to recover from Defendants.
Benton 1 filed this action against Rousseau and Rosario,2 drivers for United States Prisoner Transport (“USPT”). USPT is a private company in the business of transporting prisoners throughout the State of Florida. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Benton alleged that Defendants used excessive force against him in retaliation for his protected speech, deprived him of equal protection, and subjected him to cruel and unusual punishment. By Order previously entered, the Court dismissed Benton's equal protection and cruel and unusual punishment claims (Doc. Nos. 40 & 67), and the case proceeded to trial on the issues of whether Defendants retaliated by using excessive force against Benton for his complaints regarding the conditions of the transport vehicle.
At trial, Benton offered his own testimony and that of three witnesses—Emmanuel Curry, Christopher Mohr, and James C. Wiley.3 Additionally, Robert Downs, President of USPT, testified. Rousseau offered his own testimony in opposition. Having considered the parties' pleadings, the trial testimony, exhibits, closing arguments, and proposed findings of facts, the Court finds the following facts were proved by a preponderance of the evidence. These factual findings are based on Benton's corroborated testimony, which the Court finds credible, and exhibits received in evidence.4
Defendants picked up Benton from the Hernando County Jail at 7:05 a.m. on September 29, 2009 (Pl.'s Ex. 10). Defendants were transporting Benton to Broward County, Florida. As explained by Curry and as shown by a photograph introduced into evidence, Defendants used a transport vehicle that contained a passenger cab, a center compartment, and a rear compartment that was partitioned in the middle to form two separate compartments in which to hold prisoners (Pl's Ex. 1). The USPT Trip Log indicates that when Defendants arrived at the Hernando County Jail, the transport van held eleven prisoners (Pl.'s Ex. 10). Benton testified that there was no room for him to sit in the transport vehicle, but Rousseau ordered him to enter the vehicle. He was seated in the right prisoner compartment along with Curry and Mohr, closest to the doors at the back of the vehicle. Further, Benton was handcuffed, his legs were shackled and attached together by a six to eight-inch chain, and his handcuffs and shackles were secured to a waist chain.
Benton, Curry, Mohr, and Wiley testified that it was hot on September 29, 2009, and the inside of the passenger compartment was hot, smelly, and humid. All of the prisoners, including Benton, complained of the heat throughout the day.5 At 1:23 p.m., the transport vehicle stopped in Osceola County to drop off a prisoner and allow the other inmates a restroom break. The ventilation system was not activated while the transport vehicle was turned off. Rousseau testified that Rosario would have activated the ventilation system promptly after they commenced driving because Rosario was driving the vehicle at that time. However, upon being confronted with the USPT trip log, Rousseau admitted that he was mistaken as to who was driving the transport van. Rousseau stated that he “must have been” driving the vehicle upon leaving the Osceola County Jail.6
In contrast to Rousseau's testimony, Benton testified that Defendants failed to promptly reactivate the ventilation system in the prisoner compartments. When Benton requested reactivation of the ventilation system, Rosario stated, “You all motherfuckers need to learn to say please.” Benton responded, “Is please constitutionally required for ventilation?” Rousseau testified that Benton's complaints escalated, and he began yelling and striking his hands and feet against the metal divider in the prisoner compartment. Benton testified that despite his complaints, he was not disruptive. Benton denied kicking or striking the interior of the transport vehicle, and Curry and Wiley corroborated this testimony. Curry explained that an inmate seated in the adjoining compartment was tapping on the metal partition, but at no point did the tapping increase to banging.
Rousseau admitted he could not see the prisoners from where he was seated but could only hear them. Rousseau stated on cross-examination that he actually was not certain whether Benton was responsible for the banging noises he heard. Additionally, Rousseau admitted that the incident report did not state that Defendants stopped the van due to loud banging noises originating from the prisoner compartment.7 Due to the inconsistencies in Rousseau'stestimony, the Court credits Benton's testimony over Rousseau's testimony. Furthermore, it is difficult to image how Benton, shackled the way he was and seated on a six to eight-inch bench, could have banged or kicked the metal compartment divider in such a manner as to be disruptive.
Approximately twenty minutes after Benton's exchange with Rosario, the transport vehicle came to a stop in a parking lot of a strip mall. Although Rousseau initially testified that Rosario made the decision to pull over the transport vehicle because he could not drive while Benton was yelling and banging, Rousseau admitted on cross-examination that because he was driving, he made the decision to stop the transport vehicle. The Court concludes that Benton's complaints regarding the temperature of the prisoner compartment did not rise to the level of disruptive behavior that warranted an unscheduled stop of the transport vehicle.8 Nevertheless, Defendants exited the vehicle, opened the door to the prisoner compartment, and without warning, Rosario grabbed Benton's shirt. Benton pulled back, and his shirt ripped. Rousseau instructed Rosario to stand back, and Rousseau sprayed pepper spray into the prisoner compartment. The pepper spray hit Benton's face and chest area, and he experienced a burning sensation.
Rousseau admitted using pepper spray but explained he used the pepper spray because Benton failed to comply with Rosario's commands to exit the vehicle. However, Benton, Curry, Mohr, and Wiley consistently testified that neither Defendant issued a verbal warning before Rosario grabbed Benton and Rosario pepper-sprayed Benton. The Court finds that Rousseau's testimony regarding this issue is not credible. Rousseau also testified that Benton slid back on the six to eight-inch seat to a reclining position, propped his left leg up on the vehicle wall, and hung his right foot near the door. It is difficult for the Court to imagine how Benton could have placed himself in this position when he was wearing leg irons and there were at least two other inmates in the small prisoner compartment. Accordingly, the Court finds Rousseau's testimony does not warrant belief.
Although Rousseau denies striking or kicking Benton, the Court credits Benton's testimony, which was corroborated by Curry, regarding this matter. Rosario grabbed Benton's hair, dragged Benton out of the vehicle, and threw him to the ground. Both Defendants punched Benton in the head and kicked him several times in the side, where a pre-existing, unhealed stab wound was visible. After Defendants finished hitting Benton, they placed a “black box”—a device that further limits a prisoner's range of motion—on his hands. Benton was loaded back on the van. Although Benton continued to complain about the temperature of the van, his complaints were not loud. No other prisoners complained after the incident because they were afraid Defendants would use excessive force against them.
Benton testified that during the drive to USPT headquarters in Melbourne, Florida, which took a total of two hours and twenty minutes, he sat with a shirt ripped down to his waist and his eyes closed because the pepper spray was running into his eyes.9 Defendants did not offer Bentonany medical care, nor did they wash the pepper spray out of his eyes; although they did, however, offer him a bottle of water.10 Benton was not able to wash the pepper spray from his face until he arrived in Broward County at approximately 9:10 p.m. From USPT headquarters, a new driver drove the remaining prisoners to South Florida.11
Benton has visible dark marks or scars on his cheeks that he testified were the result of the pepper...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Adams v. Sch. Bd. of St. Johns Cnty.
... ... 57 "[D]amages for emotional distress or mental anguish are at best difficult to measure." Benton v. Rousseau , 940 F.Supp.2d 1370, 1379 (M.D. Fla. 2013) (quotation and citation omitted). The School Board argued that Adams is in therapy only as ... ...
-
Hayes v. Bennett
... ... adopted sub nom. Hart v. Hardbower , No ... 5:23-CV-75-TKW-MJF, 2024 WL 4495507 (N.D. Fla. Oct. 15, 2024) ... (citing Benton v. Rousseau , 940 F.Supp.2d 1370, ... 1379-80 (M.D. Fla. 2013) (finding the prisoner was entitled ... to $15,000 in punitive damages for ... ...
-
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Trotman
... ... Johnson, Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP, Birmingham, AL, for Plaintiff. Jamie Alisa Wilson, Lee Rimes Benton, Benton & Centeno, LLP, Birmingham, AL, for Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER WALLACE CAPEL, JR., United States Magistrate Judge ... ...
-
Hoever v. Caper
... ... See O'Bryant, 637 F.3d at 1212; Farrow, 320 F.3d at 1248; Mosley, 532 F.3d at 1276. But see Benton v. Rousseau, 940 F.Supp.2d 1370, 1376-77 (M.D. Fla. 2013) (finding prisoner "engaged in constitutionally protected speech because he [verbally] ... ...
-
Part two: case summaries by major topic.
...Sheriffs Office, Valencia County Detention Center, New Mexico) ADMINISTRATION U.S. District Court CONTRACT SERVICES Benton v. Rousseau, 940 F.Supp.2d 1370 (M.D.Fla. 2013). A pretrial detainee, who alleged that he was beaten by drivers while being transported to prison, brought a [section] 1......
-
Part two: case summaries by major topic.
...Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections) U.S. District Court PRETRIAL DETAINEE TRANSFER TRANSPORTATION Benton v. Rousseau, 940 F.Supp.2d 1370 (M.D.Fla. 2013). A pretrial detainee, who alleged that he was beaten by drivers while being transported to prison, brought a [section] 1983 acti......
-
Part one: complete case summaries in alphabetical order.
...Transport, Failure to Protect, Transfer TRANSFERS: Failure to Protect, Retaliation, Transfer, Transportation Benton v. Rousseau, 940 F.Supp.2d 1370 (M.D.Fla. 2013). A pretrial detainee, who alleged that he was beaten by drivers while being transported to prison, brought a [section] 1983 act......
-
Table of cases.
...939 F.Supp.2d 1012 (N.D.Cal. 2013). 9, 15, 29, 34 Arnzen v. Palmer, 713 F.3d 369 (8th Cir 2013). 7, 9, 15, 33, 39, 45 Benton v. Rousseau, 940 F.Supp.2d 1370 (M.D.Fla. 2013). 2, 9, 14, 19, 27, 29, 32, 47 Berke v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, 942 F.Supp.2d 71 (D.D.C. 2013). 4, 5,42 Biggs v. Sec......