Lux v. City of Whitewater
| Decision Date | 28 September 2022 |
| Docket Number | 20-cv-1057-pp |
| Parties | DANGELO SHAUN LUX, and LORENZO NETTLES, Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF WHITEWATER, AARON M. RAAP, ADAM VANDER STEEG, MIKE ZENS, JUSTIN STUPPY, WALWORTH COUNTY, and RICHARD JOHNSON,, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Wisconsin |
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS CITY OF WHITEWATER, RAAP, VANDER STEEG, ZENS AND STUPPY'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DKT. NO. 40) AND DISMISSING DEFENDANTS CITY OF WHITEWATER, RAAP AND STUPPY
On December 14, 2020, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint alleging four claims under 42 U.S.C. §1983 related to their 2018 arrest by police officers from Walworth County and the City of Whitewater. Dkt. No. 29. Police Chief Aaron Rapp Lieutenant Adam Vander Steeg, Officer Mike Zens and Officer Justin Stuppy all work for the Whitewater Police Department. Id. at ¶¶8-11. The plaintiffs, Dangelo Lux and Lorenzo Nettles, have sued Vander Steeg, Zens and Stuppy for violations of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and excessive force and false arrest in violation of the Fourth Amendment. They have sued Vander Steeg, Zens, Stuppy and Walworth County Deputy Sheriff Richard Johnson for failure to intervene. They have sued the City of Whitewater and Rapp on a Monell[1] claim that the City had a policy, practice or custom of condoning excessive force and other civil rights violations.
The City of Whitewater, along with defendants Raap, Vander Steeg Zens and Stuppy, have filed a joint motion for summary judgment. Dkt. No. 40. The court will grant in part and deny in part their motion.
Defendants Richard Johnson and Walworth County also have filed a motion for summary judgment, dkt. no. 37, which the court addresses in a separate order.
The parties heavily dispute what occurred on the night the plaintiffs were arrested. They tell significantly different stories about what occurred during the plaintiffs interaction with officers. Some, but not all, of the night is captured on the officers' body camera footage.
The plaintiffs are both Black males residing in Wisconsin. Dkt. No. 72 at ¶¶1-2. The defendants assert that Lux was a defensive lineman for the University of Whitewater and was listed by the University as being six feet, one inch tall and weighing 280 pounds. Id. at ¶16.
The defendants include two municipalities and law enforcement officers working for those municipalities. The City of Whitewater and Walworth County are municipalities in the state of Wisconsin. Id. at ¶¶3, 8. Aaron Rapp is the police chief of the Whitewater Police Department and Adam Vander Steeg is a lieutenant for the WPD. Id. at ¶¶4-5. Mike Zens and Justin Stuppy both are WPD police officers. Id. at ¶¶6-7. Richard Johnson is an officer with the Walworth County Sheriff's Department; Kurt Picknell is the Sheriff of Walworth County. Id. at ¶¶9-10.[2]
The events occurred in the rainy, early morning hours of September 20, 2018, as the plaintiffs were leaving a bar in Whitewater, Wisconsin. Dkt. No. 73 at ¶1; dkt. no. 72 at ¶14. Lux had consumed alcohol that night. Dkt. No. 72 at ¶17. The defendants say that his speech was slurred, id. (), which the plaintiffs deny, id. (). The defendants assert that preliminary breath test taken some time later indicated that Lux was over the legal limit; the plaintiffs respond that he was not driving and of legal age. Dkt. No. 72 at ¶18.[3]
Around 1:52 a.m., officers-including Vander Steeg, Zens and Stuppy- first encountered the plaintiffs. Id. at ¶13. A group of individuals began shouting at Lux as the plaintiffs were exiting the bar, and Lux-recognizing the group as people who had assaulted him earlier that week-yelled back. Dkt. No. 73 at ¶¶2, 4-5. No violent physical altercation occurred at this time, and the plaintiffs never were on the same side of the street as the group, but the Whitewater police officers arrived on the scene as the plaintiffs and the other group were yelling. Id. at ¶¶6-9. The defendants assert that the first officer on the scene, Sergeant Martin, had to separate Lux from another individual that the plaintiffs had been fighting,[4] dkt. no. 72 at ¶15 (), but they also agree with the plaintiffs' assertion that Lux never had to be separated from the other individuals and that Lux and Nettles remained across the street from the people at whom they yelled, dkt. no. 73 at ¶8. The officers approached Lux regarding the confrontation and requested Lux's driver's license, which he provided. Id. at ¶¶9-11. The defendants state that, while Martin was checking Lux's identification, Lux continued yelling and pushed his friends, who were trying to intervene. Dkt. No. 72 at ¶¶20-21 (). The plaintiffs disagree with this assertion and contend that Lux was not pushing his friends and that his friends were not attempting to intervene. Id. (). Vander Steeg and Zens stepped in and told Lux to “knock it off” and Lux's friends attempted to calm him down. Dkt. No. 72 at ¶¶22-23. Lux said that he'd been “jumped” last week and the same people tried to jump him this week (apparently referring to the people across the street) and that he was going to get mad. Id. at ¶24. The officers did not talk to the individuals across the street. Dkt. No. 73 at ¶9.
As Sergeant Martin returned Lux's identification, he told Lux that he would need to come with Martin if Lux's friends could not calm him down. Dkt. No. 72 at ¶25. Nettles told Sergeant Martin that Lux was “fine” and that Nettles would walk home with him. Id. at ¶26. Sergeant Martin asked Lux to promise that he would not find himself in another altercation before getting home and the two shook hands; Martin told Lux to call the police if someone tried to fight him. Id. at ¶¶27-28. Lux responded that he “would take care of it himself.” Id. at ¶29. Sergeant Martin told Lux not to take care of it himself and repeated his instruction to Lux to go home. Id. at ¶30. Lux began walking home with Nettles. Dkt. No. 73 at ¶16.
Approximately thirty minutes later, Officer Vander Steeg was parked in a Toppers Pizza parking lot about two hundred feet from the plaintiffs on their walk home when he began driving over to the plaintiffs and a third individual, Jack Piper. Dkt. No. 73 at ¶¶25-27; dkt. no. 72 at ¶31-32. The defendants say that Vander Steeg had seen and heard the plaintiffs yelling and pushing a male, later identified as Piper, across the street. Dkt. No. 72 at ¶31 (). The plaintiffs contend that Piper was a teammate of Lux's and that Lux was having a conversation with Piper, that there was no yelling or pushing and that Vander Steeg could not have heard their conversation from his vantage point because it took him over a minute to drive to where the plaintiffs and Piper were. Id. (citing dkt. no. 62 at ¶¶11-17; dkt. no. 63 at ¶¶13-7; dkt. no. 44-2 at 0:01-1:04); dkt. no. 73 at ¶¶28-29. According to the defendants, Piper later told several officers that he believed he would have been in danger but for the officers' arrival. Dkt. No. 72 at ¶34. The plaintiffs disagree, stating that Piper said he and Lux were teammates and friends and that Piper was not disturbed by the plaintiffs' actions. Id.
This portion of the events was captured by Vander Steeg's body camera for one minute and forty-eight seconds. Dkt. No. 44-2. The video begins with Vander Steeg pulling his car out of its parking spot; he states over the radio that he was “going to head over to behind the PD . . . there are three males pushing each other.” Dkt. No. 72 at ¶31. Lux put his hands in the air immediately upon seeing Vander Steeg in his police vehicle. Dkt. No. 73 at ¶31. Vander Steeg then got out of his car and told the plaintiffs and Piper to “get over here.” Id. at ¶32. The parties' accounts of the rest of Vander Steeg's interaction with the plaintiffs differ.
The plaintiffs insist that they did not understand why Vander Steeg was calling them over and assert that they only walked four to six steps away from Vander Steeg after he gave his order to come over. Id. at ¶¶33-34 (). The plaintiffs also say that Vander Steeg ran past Piper to Lux. Id. at ¶35 (). They assert that Lux stopped walking and put his hands behind his head; they say that Nettles stopped walking and turned around in compliance with Vander Steeg's instructions. Id. at ¶¶36-37 (citing dkt. no. 62 a ¶¶22-23; dkt. no. 63 at ¶¶21-22; dkt. no. 61-1 at 1:22-1:27). The plaintiffs say Vander Steeg then grabbed Lux's arms from behind his head and attempted to put them behind Lux's back. Id. at ¶38. According to the plaintiffs, Nettles remained a few steps away at this time, asserting that they'd done nothing wrong. Id. at ¶¶40, 42 (). They also say that Vander Steeg threatened to taser Lux, that he called for backup even though Vander Steeg had control of Lux's arms and that Lux was not actively resisting or struggling. Id. at ¶¶41, 43-44 (). The plaintiffs blame the rain for Vander Steeg's initial failure to grip Lux's arms, arguing that Lux's arms were wet. Id. at ¶45 (citing...
To continue reading
Request your trial