Jane-Roe-Lawsuit
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2020 Aug 05 2:57 PM GREENVILLE COMMON PLEAS CASE#2020CP2303715 STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) ) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF GREENVILLE ) ) CASE NO. 2020-CP-23- Jane Roe, ) ) Plaintiff, ) SUMMONS ) vs. ) ) Furman University, Furman University Police ) Department, Bob Jones University, John Doe, ) and Trevor Whitfield, ) ) Defendants. ) _______________________________________ YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and required to answer the complaint in this action, a copy of which is hereby served upon you, and to serve a copy of your answer to the said complaint on the subscriber at his office, 1225 South Church, Greenville, South Carolina, 29605, within thirty (30) days after service thereof exclusive of the day of such service, and if you fail to answer the complaint within the time aforesaid, judgment by default will be rendered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. Respectfully submitted, Hawkins & Jedziniak, LLC s/ Joshua T. Hawkins Joshua T. Hawkins, S.C. Bar No. 78470 Helena L. Jedziniak, S.C. Bar No. 100825 1225 South Church Street Greenville, South Carolina 29605 (864) 275-8142 (telephone) Greenville, South Carolina (864) 752-0911 (facsimile) August 5, 2020 [email protected] [email protected] Attorneys for Plaintiffs-8142 Greenville, South Carolina fax: (864) 752-0911 June 22, 2017 [email protected] 1 ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2020 Aug 05 2:57 PM GREENVILLE COMMON PLEAS CASE#2020CP2303715 STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) ) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS COUNTY OF GREENVILLE ) ) CASE NO. 2020-CP-23- Jane Roe, ) ) Plaintiff, ) SUMMONS ) vs. ) ) Furman University, Furman University Police ) Department, Bob Jones University, John Doe, ) and Trevor Whitfield, ) ) Defendants. ) _______________________________________ COMES NOW, the plaintiff, alleging and complaining of the defendants as follows: PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE 1. Jane Roe is a citizen and resident of Greenville County, South Carolina. 2. Furman University is an undergraduate and graduate university located in Greenville County, South Carolina. 3. Upon information and belief, the Furman University Police Department is a law enforcement agency operated by Furman University. 4. Bob Jones University is an undergraduate university located in Greenville County, South Carolina. 5. Upon information and belief, John Doe is a citizen and resident of Dillon County, South Carolina. 6. Upon information and belief, Trevor Whitfield is a citizen and resident of Greenville County, South Carolina. 7. The events giving rise to this action transpired in Greenville County, South Carolina. 8. Since individual deputies have not been named as defendants and no claims for deliberate indifference or violation of the plaintiff’s constitutional rights have been asserted, jurisdiction is only proper in this Court at this time. The plaintiff reserves the right to file a lawsuit bringing federal claims, including claims for deliberate indifference and for violation of constitutional rights, at a later date, if such an action becomes necessary. 9. Jurisdiction and venue are proper for the foregoing reasons. 2 ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2020 Aug 05 2:57 PM GREENVILLE COMMON PLEAS CASE#2020CP2303715 FACTUAL BACKGROUND 10. The plaintiff incorporates the foregoing paragraphs as if repeated here, verbatim. 11. At the time of the events described herein, the plaintiff was a student enrolled at Bob Jones University. 12. At the time of the events described herein, defendant John Doe was student enrolled at Furman University and a member of the university’s football team. 13. At the time of the events described herein, Trevor Whitfield was employed as an officer of the Furman University Police Department. 14. On or about October 6, 2019, John Doe invited the plaintiff to a party at Furman. The plaintiff accepted his invitation and went to Furman’s campus with Witness A, her friend and fellow Bob Jones student. 15. When the plaintiff and Witness A arrived, they found a much smaller gathering than the party that they had excepted. Other than the plaintiff and Witness A, seven members of the Furman football team were present. 16. John Doe gave the plaintiff alcohol and marijuana, which caused her to become noticeably impaired. Upon information and belief, Doe supplied the plaintiff with alcohol and drugs so that she would become intoxicated and so that her judgment would be impaired. 17. After Doe gave the plaintiff alcohol and marijuana and knew that she was intoxicated, Doe brought the plaintiff, Witness A, and two other football players to his apartment to watch music videos. While in his apartment, Doe continued to give the visibly intoxicated plaintiff alcohol. 18. When the plaintiff told Doe that she felt unwell and overheated, Doe told her that she could rest in his room. Doe then negligently and recklessly engaged in sexual intercourse with the plaintiff when a reasonable person would have known that the plaintiff was unable to consent. 19. FUPD officers Michael Banner and Trevor Whitfield responded to Doe’s apartment in reference to concerns that the plaintiff and Witness A had been drugged and involved in a sexual interaction that lacked consent. During their initial conversations with the officers, the plaintiff and Witness A told officers that they were worried that they would get expelled from Bob Jones if Bob Jones officials learned that they had consumed alcohol that night. 20. After hearing the plaintiff and Witness A express these concerns, Whitfield directly contacted officials at Bob Jones University and informed them that the plaintiff and Witness A were intoxicated on Furman’s campus. Whitfield expressed disapproval that the plaintiff and 3 ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2020 Aug 05 2:57 PM GREENVILLE COMMON PLEAS CASE#2020CP2303715 Witness A had consumed alcohol and noted his disappointment in their behavior as an alumnus of Bob Jones University. Not only was it out of line for Whitfield to admonish the plaintiff or anyone else for what he perceived to be a moral flaw, but the plaintiff had just been injured by the reckless conduct of Doe and traumatized by unwelcomed sex. 21. Upon information and belief, Whitfield notified Bob Jones because of his personal disapproval of the plaintiff’s and Witness A’s consumption of alcohol. In doing so, he was motivated by a reckless disregard for the plaintiff’s rights, well-being, and safety. 22. FUPD officers told the plaintiff and Witness A that they could either go to hospital or go to jail. Again, officers showed no concern or regard for what the plaintiff had just been through and seemed to be threatening to punish her. The plaintiff and Witness A elected to go to the hospital and were transported by EMS from Furman to Greenville Memorial Hospital. 23. The plaintiff did not receive medical treatment at that time but returned to the hospital later that day. During that visit, medical personnel performed a sexual forensic exam on the plaintiff. 24. As of a direct result of Whitfield’s unsolicited statements to Bob Jones about the plaintiff’s use of alcohol, Bob Jones’ Dean of Women, Deneen Wilson, attempted to speak with the plaintiff at the hospital. After she learned that the plaintiff had left the hospital prior to her arrival, Wilson contacted the plaintiff and scheduled a meeting with her and her mother for several hours later. 25. At that meeting, Wilson informed the plaintiff that Bob Jones was expelling her for consuming alcohol. This meeting occurred just hours after the events described herein, including the plaintiff’s nonconsensual sexual encounter with Doe. 26. Bob Jones made the decision to expel the plaintiff without investigating the allegations against her, conducting any type of fact-finding investigation, or holding any type of hearing. 27. Upon information and belief, investigations into this incident and others have established that: it is well-known that members of Furman’s football team routinely engage in the type of reckless behavior described above – specifically, plying young and often underage female college students with alcohol and drugs before recklessly engaging in sexual encounters with them; that Furman knew or should have known of prior similar incidents; and that incidents like the one described herein were likely prior to the occurrence of the events described herein. 28. Upon information and belief, Doe recorded some or all of his sexual encounter with the plaintiff and disseminated the video to others without the plaintiff’s knowledge or consent. 4 ELECTRONICALLY FILED - 2020 Aug 05 2:57 PM GREENVILLE COMMON PLEAS CASE#2020CP2303715 29. Upon information and belief, Furman officials knew or should have known that, in some or all of the above-described interactions with female students, members of the football team recorded female students without their knowledge or consent. 30. All defendants named herein caused some of the plaintiff’s injuries. 31. The entities related to this action ratified the actions of the individual employees involved. 32. All defendants violated policies and procedures, and those violations contributed to the plaintiff’s injuries. 33. Some or all of the defendants’ actions were motivated by unreasonable financial gain. 34. The defendants are liable for several different and distinct acts and omissions, including some of the defendants’ negligent hiring. 35. All defendants are jointly and severally liable. The individual defendants, including Trevor Whitefield and John Doe, likely have homeowners’ insurance, and those insurance companies likely have a duty to provide a lawyer and defense for the individuals. It is also likely that those insurance companies have a duty to tender their policy limits to protect the individuals from a large judgment. The individuals also have a right to hire their own lawyer so that they can make sure the lawyers hired by their homeowners’ insurance protect them with tender of each policy limit related to this case. 36. The plaintiff is therefore informed and believes she is entitled to judgment against the defendants for actual and punitive damages.