Glasper v. City of Hughes

Decision Date28 August 2017
Docket NumberCase No. 2:15–cv–00186–KGB
Citation269 F.Supp.3d 875
Parties Charlie GLASPER, Plaintiff v. CITY OF HUGHES, ARKANSAS; Lawrence Owens, individually and officially; Dustin McCluskey, individually and officially; James Wright, Jr., individually and officially; James Wright, Sr., individually and officially; and John Does 1–3, individually and officially, Defendants
CourtU.S. District Court — Eastern District of Arkansas

William Jennings Stanley, Stanley & Woodard, PLC, Jonesboro, AR, for Plaintiff.

Amanda LaFever, Arkansas Municipal League, North Little Rock, AR, Matthew Keith Wren, Wren Law Firm, Little Rock, AR, for Defendants.

OPINION AND ORDER

Kristine G. Baker, United States District Judge

On November 22, 2014, plaintiff Charlie Glasper had an encounter with officers of the City of Hughes Police Department in Hughes, Arkansas. On March 2, 2016, Mr. Glasper filed an amended complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and the Arkansas Civil Rights Act ("ACRA"), codified at Ark. Code Ann. § 16–123–101, et seq. Mr. Glasper alleges that his rights as secured by the Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States were violated. In his amended complaint, Mr. Glasper names five defendants, along with three John Doe defendants who have yet to be identified: the City of Hughes, Arkansas; Lawrence Owens, individually and in his official capacity as the Mayor of the City of Hughes;1 Dustin McCluskey, individually and in his official capacity as the former Chief of Police for the City of Hughes; James Wright, Jr.,2 individually and in his official capacity as a police officer for the City of Hughes; and James Wright, Sr.,3 individually and in his official capacity as a police officer for the City of Hughes.

With respect to defendant the City of Hughes, Mr. Glasper alleges that these constitutional violations resulted from a custom, practice, or policy of the City of Hughes (Dkt. No. 18). Mr. Glasper contends that Chief McCluskey failed to train or supervise Officers Wright, Sr., and Wright, Jr. Mr. Glasper also alleges constitutional claims against Officer James Wright, Jr., and Officer James Wright, Sr., individually, and pendant state law tort claims against Officer Wright, Jr. These officers were at the scene on November 22, 2014. Specifically, Mr. Glasper alleges that Officer Wright, Jr., committed an unlawful assault and battery upon him, subjected Mr. Glasper to the intentional infliction of emotional distress, committed negligence and gross negligence, engaged in false arrest and imprisonment, carried out an abuse of process, engaged in a conspiracy, committed other torts, and committed prima facie tort (Dkt. No. 18, ¶ 27).

Before the Court are two motions for summary judgment. Defendants the City of Hughes, Arkansas, former Chief McCluskey, and former Mayor Lawrence Owens ("the City defendants") have filed a motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 27). The City defendants' motion also addresses Mr. Glasper's claims against Officers Wright, Sr., and Wright, Jr., in their official capacity (Id. ). Defendants Officers Wright, Sr., and Wright, Jr., have filed a motion for summary judgment requesting judgment in their favor on Mr. Glasper's claims against them in their individual capacity (Dkt. No. 30). Mr. Glasper has responded to both motions (Dkt. Nos. 35; 37), and defendants have replied to Mr. Glasper's responses (Dkt. Nos. 41; 42).

In his responses to defendants' motions, Mr. Glasper concedes that defendants are entitled to summary judgment on his Fifth Amendment and Eighth Amendment claims "for the reasons set forth in the brief of the City defendants...." (Dkt. No. 36, at 2; Dkt. No. 37, at 1). Therefore, summary judgment is granted in favor of all defendants, including all individual defendants sued in their individual and official capacities, on Mr. Glasper's Fifth Amendment and Eighth Amendment claims. The Court will limit its analysis to the claims to which Mr. Glasper responds, not those he concedes.

For the following reasons, the Court grants in part and denies in part defendants' motions for summary judgment (Dkt. Nos. 27; 30).

I. Factual Background

The following facts are taken from the defendants' joint statement of undisputed facts unless otherwise indicated (Dkt. No. 28). Separate defendant Mr. Owens served as Mayor of Hughes, Arkansas, from January 1, 2011, until he left office on December 31, 2014. On October 30, 2013, separate defendant former Chief McCluskey was offered the position of Chief of Police by the City of Hughes, and he accepted the position on November 3, 2013.

Separate defendant Wright, Sr., attended the Arkansas Law Enforcement Training Academy ("ALETA") from January 5, 2014, to March 28, 2014, and while there, successfully completed the Basic Police Training Course consisting of 480 hours of law enforcement training (Dkt. No. 28, Ex. 18). Officer Wright, Sr., was awarded the technical certificate in Law Enforcement from Southern Arkansas University Tech on March 28, 2014 (Id. , Ex. 19). While at ALETA, Officer Wright Sr. received OC Spray (Oleoresin Capsicum Spray, also known as "pepper-spray") training, including the appropriate use of OC spray according to the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center Use of Force Model.

On April 22, 2014, separate defendant Officer Wright, Jr., was awarded a certificate of completion for the Part–Time II Course 2013–2522 by the Forrest City Police Department. The part-time II class was a general overlook of law enforcement that offered a certification and went over several points of law enforcement, including but not limited to traffic stops, how to approach a car, how to deal with certain people, hostile environments, use of force, weapons, how to handle a weapon, red flags, when people give you drugs, narcotics, and places where people can hide drugs in the car. Officer Wright, Jr., was also awarded a certificate of completion for successfully completing the "required course of study approved by C.L.E.S.T. for the State of Arkansas" with respect to the use of OC Spray and Use of Force (Id. , Ex. 16).

Officer Wright, Jr., was hired as a part-time patrolman for the City of Hughes on May 12, 2014, and assigned badge number 406. Former Chief McCluskey was the Chief of Police when Officer Wright, Jr., was hired. Prior to hiring Officer Wright, Jr., former Chief McCluskey contacted Officer Wright, Jr.'s previous employers, personal references, and business references listed on his application. Officer Wright, Jr., was offered in-house training while he was at the Hughes Police Department, including going through a Field Training Officer ("FTO") program with Lieutenant David Boykin, with whom Officer Wright, Jr., rode for about a week, and then Officer Wright, Jr., moved on to train with another officer, and this occurred two or three times.

When Officer Wright, Jr., first started with the Hughes Police Department, he could not ride alone by himself; he had to be trained as far as getting familiarized with the City, the areas and streets, the procedures, getting comfortable with telling people what to do, and pulling people over. After completing the FTO ride-along program, Officer Wright, Jr., was not allowed to be on a shift by himself until former Chief McCluskey spoke to Lieutenant Boykin and the other officers who trained him, and they were all in agreement that he was ready to be on a shift or to cover a shift by himself.

Former Chief McCluskey resigned as the Hughes Chief of Police, effective May 29, 2014. On June 2, 2014, Kristy Green was offered the position of interim Police Chief for the City of Hughes, and she accepted. On August 27, 2014, Officer Wright, Sr., applied for employment with the Hughes Police Department and began working part-time for the Hughes Police Department shortly thereafter. The Chief of Police at the time Officer Wright, Sr., was hired was Chief Green.

At the time of his application, Officer Wright, Sr., was working full-time for the Forrest City Police Department ("FCPD") and had worked for the FCPD since August 2013. At the time Officer Wright, Sr., was hired, Interim Assistant Chief Richard Haggans told Officer Wright, Sr., that the policies that he was following at Forrest City applied the same in Hughes.

On September 15, 2014, a Hughes Police Staff Meeting was conducted by Chief Green and the following topics, among others, were discussed: Chief's Green's date of leave, schedules, clocking in and out, working assigned shifts, making arrests, courtesy and respect, and interim chief/chain of command. Also at the September 15, 2014, meeting, Chief Green informed the officers present that she would be leaving for the Police Academy on Sunday, September 21, 2014. At the September meeting, Chief Green communicated to the officers present that the schedule would remain the same until December 12, 2014, that no changes would be made unless authorized by the Interim Chief, and that any officer clocking in and out without approval from a supervisor was to be disciplined and potentially subject to termination.

Chief Green also informed the officers that, if an officer should make an arrest, before the subject was placed in the unit, he or she should be read their Miranda Rights, handcuffed, searched, and placed in the vehicle with the seat belt in use. It was the policy of the Hughes Police Department to seat belt people who were being transported. Officer Wright, Sr., and Officer Wright, Jr., were both present at the September 15, 2014, meeting. On October 26, 2014, Officer Wright, Jr., signed the Law Enforcement Code of Ethics, promising in part to "respect the Constitutional rights of all men to liberty, equality and justice." (Id. , Ex. 10).

On November 12, 2014, Ritchie Haggans, acting as Assistant Chief, notated that he had conducted a thorough background investigation on Officer Wright, Jr., and Officer Wright, Sr., and found no disqualifiers for employment for either. Mr. Haggans...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Jones v. Grant
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Arkansas
    • May 19, 2021
    ...amounts to deliberate indifference to the rights of persons with whom the police come into contact." Glasper v. City of Hughes, Arkansas, 269 F. Supp. 3d 875, 901 (E.D. Ark. 2017) (citing City of Canton, Ohio v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378, 388 (1989)). Claims based on deficient hiring or failure ......
  • Zorich v. St. Louis Cnty.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri
    • December 18, 2018
    ...2016); Goza v. City of Ellisville, No. 4:15-CV-775-CAS, 2015 WL 4920796, at *6 (E.D. Mo. Aug. 18, 2015); Glasper v. City of Hughes, Ark., 269 F.Supp.3d 875, 896-97 (E.D. Ark. 2017). Although Defendant TAC officers did not address Plaintiff's failure-to-supervise claims against Pfanstiel and......
  • Adc v. Holladay
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Arkansas
    • October 3, 2018
    ...amounts to deliberate indifference to the rights of persons withwhom the police come into contact." Glasper v. City of Hughes, Arkansas, 269 F. Supp. 3d 875, 901 (E.D. Ark. 2017) (citing City of Canton, Ohio v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378, 388 (1989)). Claims based on deficient hiring or failure t......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT