Stoltzfus v. Hutchins
| Decision Date | 30 January 2018 |
| Docket Number | No. 2:17-cv-00359-JMS-MJD,2:17-cv-00359-JMS-MJD |
| Parties | JOHN STOLTZFUS, JOHN RIEHL, Plaintiffs, v. CORY HUTCHINS, SAMUEL A. SWAIM Honorable, STACY JEFFRIES, PARKE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, STEVEN ANDREW CVENGROS, KEVIN R. STALKER, STATE OF INDIANA, COUNTY OF PARKE STATE OF INDIANA, PARKE COUNTY, PARKE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS, JASON FRAZIER #61-02, ED ROACH, NATALIE MCCALL #61-61, RUSSELL WHITE #61-59, BENJAMIN WOOD #61-53, JUSTIN COLE, SHAWN CLOVER #61-11, RANDALL KNEELAND, GEOFFREY CANFIELD #61-10, RODNEY SMITH #R-3, CHRISTOPHER E. FISHER #R-4, STACY FELDHAKE #61-44, BILL COOK #61-43, DARLA WIRTH 61-40, CINDY ROHR #61-42, ZACHARY LANCASTER, DAVID LEE, DOES 1-25, Defendants. BARBER CONSTRUCTION CO., Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of Indiana |
This case arises out of two traffic stops, one involving Plaintiff John Stoltzfus on March 30, 2017, and another involving Mr. Stoltzfus and Plaintiff John Riehl on June 1, 2017. As a result of these traffic stops and the "episodes" that Plaintiffs allege occurred thereafter at the Parke County Jail and in Parke Circuit Court, Plaintiffs filed suit against twenty-seven named individuals and entities and twenty-five individuals identified as "Does." Defendants have filed four Motions to Dismiss, [Filing No. 19; Filing No. 29; Filing No. 32; Filing No. 43], each of which is now ripe for the Court's review.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2) "requires only 'a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.'" Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 93 (2007) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 8(a)(2)). "Specific facts are not necessary, the statement need only 'give the defendant fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.'" Erickson, 551 U.S. at 93 (quoting Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)).
A motion to dismiss asks whether the complaint "contain[s] sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'" Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 570). In reviewing the sufficiency of a complaint, the Court must accept all well-pled facts as true and draw all permissible inferences in favor of the plaintiff. See Active Disposal, Inc. v. City of Darien, 635 F.3d 883, 886 (7th Cir. 2011). The Court will not accept legal conclusions or conclusory allegations as sufficient to state a claim for relief. See McCauley v. City of Chicago, 671 F.3d 611, 617 (7th Cir. 2011). Factual allegations must plausibly state an entitlement to relief "to a degree that rises abovethe speculative level." Munson v. Gaetz, 673 F.3d 630, 633 (7th Cir. 2012). This plausibility determination is "a context-specific task that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial experience and common sense." Id.
Complaints filed by pro se litigants "however inartfully pleaded, must be held to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers." Erickson, 551 U.S. at 94; see also Parker v. Four Seasons Hotels, Ltd., 845 F.3d 807, 811 (7th Cir. 2017).
The following allegations are taken from Plaintiffs' Complaint, [Filing No. 1], and are accepted as true for purposes of deciding the pending Motions, consistent with the applicable standard of review.
On March 30, 2017, Deputy Sheriff Cory Hutchins pulled over Mr. Stoltzfus and demanded Mr. Stoltzfus' license, insurance, and registration. [Filing No. 1 at 10.] Mr. Stoltzfus asked Deputy Hutchins why he pulled him over and Deputy Hutchins did not answer. [Filing No. 1 at 10-11.] Mr. Stoltzfus then provided Deputy Hutchins with insurance documents, registration, and an "International Driving Permit." [Filing No. 1 at 11.] Deputy Hutchins ordered Mr. Stoltzfus to step out of the vehicle. [Filing No. 1 at 11.] Deputy Hutchins asked Mr. Stoltzfus if Mr. Stoltzfus would show up in court if Deputy Hutchins issued him a summons. [Filing No. 1 at 11.] Deputy Hutchins then removed Mr. Stoltzfus from the vehicle, handcuffed him, and transported him to the Parke County Jail. [Filing No. 1 at 11.]
On the way to jail, Mr. Stoltzfus asked Deputy Hutchins why he was under arrest. [Filing No. 1 at 11.] Deputy Hutchins stated that, [Filing No. 1 at 11.]
At some point after Mr. Stoltzfus' arrest, his car was towed, and his father paid to retrieve it. [Filing No. 1 at 11.]
At the Parke County Jail, Mr. Stoltzfus refused to sign any documents presented to him, including his intake form. [Filing No. 1 at 12.] Staff at the jail wrote "refused" at the bottom of the form. [Filing No. 1 at 12.] Mr. Stoltzfus was initially denied access to a bible, although one was eventually provided to him. [Filing No. 1 at 12.] At some point during his incarceration, unnamed deputies strapped Mr. Stoltzfus to a wheelchair and wheeled him to court. [Filing No. 1 at 12.]
Thereafter, Mr. Stoltzfus appeared in the Parke Circuit Court for an arraignment before Judge Samuel Swaim. [Filing No. 1 at 12.] Mr. Stoltzfus walked up to, but refused to cross the "bar," at which point Judge Swaim ordered Mr. Stoltzfus to come aboard his ship by crossing the bar. [Filing No. 1 at 12.] Mr. Stoltzfus told Judge Swaim that he would prefer to address the issue from outside the vessel. [Filing No. 1 at 13.] Judge Swaim then ordered the bailiffs to hold Mr. Stoltzfus in contempt of court. [Filing No. 1 at 13.]
Mr. Stoltzfus was released from jail after serving a thirty-day sentence for being held in contempt of court. [Filing No. 1 at 13.] He was held without bail. [Filing No. 1 at 13.]
On June 1, 2017, Rockville Police Officer Christopher Fisher passed a vehicle being driven by Mr. Stoltzfus, in which John Riehl was a passenger. [Filing No. 1 at 13-14.] Officer Fisher turned his patrol car around and followed Mr. Stoltzfus' vehicle into a parking lot while flashing his emergency lights. [Filing No. 1 at 14.] Officer Fisher approached the vehicle and demanded that Mr. Stoltzfus roll down the window. [Filing No. 1 at 14.] Mr. Stoltzfus rolled down his window enough to hear Officer Fisher, but not all the way. [Filing No. 1 at 14.]Officer Fisher demanded that Mr. Stoltzfus roll down his window all the way. [Filing No. 1 at 14.] Mr. Stoltzfus asked Officer Fisher what the probable cause for the stop was. [Filing No. 1 at 14.] Officer Fisher asked Mr Stoltzfus to step out of the vehicle. [Filing No. 1 at 14.] Officer Fisher called for backup and alleged that he had two sovereigns. [Filing No. 1 at 14.] Mr. Stoltzfus asked Officer Fisher if the officer had a warrant for Mr. Stoltzfus' arrest and Officer Fisher replied, "I don't even know you." [Filing No. 1 at 15.] Officer Fisher asked for Mr. Stoltzfus and Mr. Reihl's "information," and when he received it, he glanced at it and threw it on the hood of the vehicle. [Filing No. 1 at 15.]
At some point during the traffic stop, Parke County Sheriff's Deputies Shawn Clover and Geoffrey Canfield and Rockville Police Officer Rodney Smith arrived at the scene. [Filing No. 1 at 15.] One or more of the officers demanded that Mr. Stoltzfus step out of the vehicle and threatened to break the window. [Filing No. 1 at 15.] Deputy Clover repeated the order a few times and then smashed the vehicle's window with his baton, resulting in glass cuts and abrasions on Mr. Stoltzfus' face. [Filing No. 1 at 15.] Deputy Clover then unlocked and opened the door and pulled Mr. Stoltzfus out of the vehicle, twisted his arm and handcuffed him. [Filing No. 1 at 15.] One or more of the officers then told Mr. Riehl he would be next. [Filing No. 1 at 15.] Deputy Clover and Officer Smith then went to the passenger side of the vehicle, pulled Mr. Riehl out of the vehicle and placed him under arrest. [Filing No. 1 at 15.]
At the Parke County Jail, Mr. Stoltzfus was held on $5,000 bail and Mr. Riehl was held on $3,000 bail. [Filing No. 1 at 15.] The "court" refused to allow a bail bonds agent to pay ten percent of the bond. [Filing No. 1 at 15.] In jail, Mr. Riehl requested pure bottled water and was not given any pure bottled water for four days. [Filing No. 1 at 16.] Mr. Riehl was then brought before Judge Swaim by video. [Filing No. 1 at 16.] Mr. Riehl was seen by adoctor and was furnished with pure bottled water. [Filing No. 1 at 16.]
On July 28, 2017, Mr. Stoltzfus and Mr. Riehl filed suit against the following Defendants:
Presently pending before this Court are four Motions to Dismiss filed by the State Defendants, [Filing No. 19], the Parke County Defendants, [Filing No. 29], the Rockville Defendants, [Filing No. 32], and Mr. Lee, [Filing No. 43]. Each Motion is fully briefed and ripe for the Court's review.
Mr. Stoltzfus and Mr. Riehl are proceeding in this case pro se and, while their Complaint is not itself voluminous, the allegations contained therein against twenty-seven named individuals and organizations are wide-ranging and allege violations of sevenAmendments to the U.S. Constitution and more than twelve federal statutes. [Filing No. 1 ...
To continue reading
Request your trial