Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Adrian Reyes Complaint
Adrian Reyes Complaint
Plaintiffs
TINTON FALLS;
ADRIAN REYES
and JOHN DOES 1-5 (fictitious individuals), COMPLAINT
members of the Tinton Falls Police Department;
JOHN A. SCRIVANIC, Chief of Police;
JOHN DOES 6-10 (fictitious individuals),
Personnel of the City of Tinton Falls
Police Department in supervisory
capacities;
Defendants.
JURISDICTION
1. This action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 and in accordance with the
Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution of the United States of America.
Jurisdiction is conferred under 28 U.S.C. Section 1331 and Section 1343(3). This Court has
supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s pendent state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section
1367.
1
Case 3:18-cv-03248-PGS-LHG Document 1 Filed 03/07/18 Page 2 of 12 PageID: 2
PARTIES
2. Plaintiffs Robert and Bobbi Rene Fullerton, residing at 617 Green Grove Road,
Tinton Falls, NJ, 07712, are and were, at all times herein relevant, residents of the State of New
Jersey.
3. Defendants Adrian Reyes and/or John Does 1-5 were at all times mentioned herein
duly appointed and acting police officers of the Tinton Falls Police Department and at all times
herein were acting in such capacities as the agents, servants and/or employees of Tinton Falls and
4. Defendants Chief of Police John A. Scrivinac and/or John Does 6-10 were at all times
mentioned herein duly appointed and acting members of the Tinton Falls Police Department and
at all times herein were acting in such capacities as the agents, servants and/or employees of
5. Defendants Chief of Police John A. Scrivinac and/or John Does 6-10 were acting in
supervisory capacities over Defendants Reyes and/or John Does 1-5 and responsible by law for
the training, supervision and conduct of Defendants Reyes and/or John Does 1-5.
6. Defendant Tinton Falls is a duly designated municipality of the state of New Jersey,
7. At all times relevant hereto, Defendants Tinton Falls employed the aforementioned
Defendants. As such, it was responsible for the training, supervision and conduct of Defendants
2
Case 3:18-cv-03248-PGS-LHG Document 1 Filed 03/07/18 Page 3 of 12 PageID: 3
1. On October 8, 2017, Defendant Tinton Falls police officer Adrian Reyes and/or John
Does 1-5 were dispatched to Plaintiffs’ residence following a 911 call reporting that Plaintiffs
were arguing.
2. Plaintiffs (a father and daughter) had been arguing but the matter had been resolved by
the time that Defendants Reyes and/or John Does 1-5 arrived at the residence.
3. There was no physical assault or any type of threat of physical assault by or between
between Plaintiffs.
4. Before any officers arrived, Plaintiff Robert Fullerton received a call from his longtime
5. Lieutenant Pierson asked Plaintiff Robert Fullerton if everything was all right and
Plaintiff told him that he had been arguing with his daughter.
6. Upon information and belief, Lieutenant Pierson tried to notify the responding officers
that he had spoken with Plaintiff Robert Fullerton and had been advised that no assault had
8. Plaintiffs owned two dogs, German Shepherds named Sadie and Hannah.
10. Sadie brushed past him, walking onto the driveway and was immediately shot three
11. Defendants Reyes and/or John Does 1-5 then ordered Plaintiff Robert Fullerton at
gunpoint, with the gun pointed in his face, to get on the ground.
3
Case 3:18-cv-03248-PGS-LHG Document 1 Filed 03/07/18 Page 4 of 12 PageID: 4
12. Plaintiff Robert Fullerton was unarmed and complied with Defendant’s orders by
13. Plaintiff Bobbi Rene Fullerton then followed Hannah outside, at which time Hannah
was immediately shot twice by Defendants Reyes and/or John Does 1-5, as Plaintiff Bobbi Rene
14. Defendants Reyes and/or John Does 1-5 then ordered Plaintiff Bobbi Rene Fullerton
15. Sadie died as a result of the gunshot wounds and Hannah was taken to a veterinary
hospital.
COUNT ONE
SECTION 1983 USE OF EXCESSIVE FORCE
1. The previous paragraphs are incorporated herein inclusively as if fully set forth.
2. Defendants Reyes and/or John Does 1-5 acting under color of state law used excessive
and unreasonable force on Plaintiffs’ persons by pointing a weapon at them and shooting their
dogs, depriving Plaintiffs of their right to be secure in their persons and effects against
unreasonable seizure, in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution
3. As a direct and proximate cause of the Defendants’ excessive and unreasonable use of
force set forth above, Plaintiffs sustained emotional injuries, veterinary expenses and will incur
additional special damages in the future in an amount which cannot yet be determined.
4. By reason of the above, Plaintiffs were injured and were deprived of their constitutional
4
Case 3:18-cv-03248-PGS-LHG Document 1 Filed 03/07/18 Page 5 of 12 PageID: 5
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Robert and Bobbi Rene Fullerton demand judgment against
Defendants Adrian Reyes and/or John Does 1-5 on this Count together with compensatory and
punitive damages, attorney’s fees, interest and costs of suit incurred, and for any such further
COUNT TWO
SECTION 1983 ILLEGAL SEARCH / SEIZURE
1. The previous paragraphs are incorporated herein inclusively as if fully set forth.
2. The aforementioned acts of Defendants Reyes and/or John Does 1-5 committed under
color of state law in pointing a weapon at Plaintiffs and shooting their dogs were unjustified,
without probable cause, reasonable suspicion or any other exception to the warrant requirements
under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution of the United States.
their dogs were in violation of Plaintiffs’ right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure of
their persons and effects under the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States,
and the right to be free of the deprivation of liberty under the Fourteenth Amendment of the
Constitution of the Unites States, made actionable through 42 U.S.C. Section 1983.
4. By reason of the above Plaintiffs were deprived of their constitutional rights, sustained
emotional injuries, veterinary expenses and will incur additional special damages in the future in
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Robert and Bobbi Rene Fullerton demand judgment against
Defendants Adrian Reyes and/or John Does 1-5 on this Count together with compensatory and
5
Case 3:18-cv-03248-PGS-LHG Document 1 Filed 03/07/18 Page 6 of 12 PageID: 6
punitive damages, attorney’s fees, interest and costs of suit incurred, and for any such further
COUNT THREE
SECTION 1983 FAILURE TO INTERVENE
1. The previous paragraphs are incorporated herein inclusively as if fully set forth.
2. Defendants Reyes and/or John Does 1-5 were Tinton Falls Police Officers and at all
3. Defendants Reyes and/or John Does 1-5 had a duty to intervene in the unjustified use
of force on Plaintiffs and unreasonable seizure by Defendants Reyes and/or John Does 1-5.
4. The unjustified use of force on Plaintiffs and unreasonable seizure by Defendants Reyes
and/or John Does 1-5 deprived Plaintiffs of their right to be secure in their persons and effects
against unreasonable seizure in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments of the
Constitution of the United States and made actionable through 42 U.S.C. Section 1983.
5. Defendants Reyes and/or John Does 1-5 had a reasonable opportunity to intervene in
the unjustified seizure and use of force on Plaintiffs by Defendants Reyes and/or John Does 1-10
Defendants as set forth above, Plaintiffs sustained emotional injuries, veterinary expenses and will
incur additional special damages in the future in an amount which cannot yet be determined.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Robert and Bobbi Rene Fullerton demand judgment against
Defendants Adrian Reyes and/or John Does 1-5 on this Count together with compensatory and
punitive damages, attorney’s fees, interest and costs of suit incurred, and for any such further
6
Case 3:18-cv-03248-PGS-LHG Document 1 Filed 03/07/18 Page 7 of 12 PageID: 7
COUNT FOUR
SECTION 1983 SUPERVISORY LIABILITY
1. The previous paragraphs are incorporated herein inclusively as if fully set forth.
2. Defendants Scrivinac and/or John Does 6-10 were supervisory officials and/or officers
in charge at the time Defendants Reyes and/or John Does 1-5 used excessive and unreasonable
force on Plaintiffs and deprived them of their right to be secure in their persons and effects against
unreasonable seizure.
3. Defendants Scrivinac and/or John Does 6-10 had a duty to prevent subordinate officers
Defendants Reyes and/or John Does 1-5 from violating the constitutional rights of citizens and/or
detainees.
4. Defendants Scrivinac and/or John Does 6-10 either directed Defendants Reyes and/or
John Does 1-5 to violate Plaintiffs’ constitutional rights or had knowledge of and acquiesced in
5. As a direct and proximate result of the acts of Defendants Scrivinac and/or John Does
6-10 as set forth herein, Plaintiffs sustained emotional injuries, veterinary expenses and will
incur additional special damages in the future in an amount which cannot yet be determined in
connection with the deprivation of their constitutional rights guaranteed by the Fourth and
Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States and protected by 42 U.S.C.
Section 1983.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Robert and Bobbi Rene Fullerton demand judgment against
Defendants Scrivinac and/or John Does 6-10 on this Count together with compensatory and
punitive damages, attorney’s fees, interest and costs of suit incurred, and for any such further
7
Case 3:18-cv-03248-PGS-LHG Document 1 Filed 03/07/18 Page 8 of 12 PageID: 8
COUNT FIVE
SECTION 1983 UNLAWFUL POLICY, CUSTOM, PRACTICE
INADEQUATE TRAINING
1. The previous paragraphs are incorporated herein inclusively as if fully set forth.
2. Defendants Tinton Falls, Tinton Falls Chief of Police John A. Scrivinac and/or John Does
6-10, are vested by state law with the authority to make policy on : (1) the use of force; internal
affairs investigations and/or administrative reviews pursuant to the Tinton Falls Police Department
policies, practices and/or customs and/or the New Jersey Attorney General’s Use of Force and/or
Internal Affairs Guidelines; (2) effectuating arrests; (3) police citizen encounters, and/or (4)
disciplining officers. Defendants Scrivinac and/or John Does 6- 10 are responsible for training
Defendant Tinton Falls’s police officers in the use of force and/or were officers in charge when
Defendants Reyes and/or John Does 1-5 pointed a weapon at Plaintiffs and shot their dogs.
3. At all times mentioned herein, Defendants Reyes and/or John Does 1- 5, as police officers,
agents, servants and/or employees of Defendant Tinton Falls, were acting under the direction and
control of Defendants Tinton Falls Police Department, Scrivinac and/or John Does 6-10 and were
acting pursuant to the official policy, practice or custom of the Tinton Falls Police Department.
4. Acting under color of law pursuant to official policy, practice, or custom, Defendants
Tinton Falls, Scrivinac and/or John Does 6-10 intentionally, knowingly, recklessly and/or with
deliberate indifference failed to train, instruct, supervise, control, and discipline on a continuing basis,
Defendants Scrivinac, Reyes and/or John Does 1-5 in their duties to refrain from: (1) unlawfully and
maliciously assaulting, arresting and harassing citizens; (2) intentionally, recklessly and/or negligently
misrepresenting the facts of arrests and/or other police-citizen encounters; (3) falsifying police and/or
other official records; (4) withholding and/or mishandling evidence; (5) making false arrests, and/or
8
Case 3:18-cv-03248-PGS-LHG Document 1 Filed 03/07/18 Page 9 of 12 PageID: 9
5. Acting under color of law pursuant to official policy, practice, or custom, Defendants
Tinton Falls, Scrivinac and/or John Does 6-10 intentionally, knowingly, recklessly and/or with
deliberate indifference implemented and/or conducted superficial and shallow Internal Affairs
processes which ignored evidence and patterns of police misconduct on individual and departmental
levels. Defendants Tinton Falls, Scrivinac and/or John Does 6-10 failed to professionally, objectively
and/or expeditiously investigate instances and patterns of police misconduct in violation of the spirit
and substance of the New Jersey Attorney General’s Guidelines for Internal Affairs Policy and
Procedures.
6. Defendants Tinton Falls, Scrivinac and/or John Does 6-10 failed to adequately track
departmental excessive force complaints, administrative complaints and/or use of force incidents in
violation of Tinton Falls Police Department policies, practices, customs and/or guidelines and/or the
New Jersey Attorney General’s Use of Force and/or Internal Affairs Guidelines, and/or failed to
7. Defendants Tinton Falls, Scrivinac and/or John Does 6- 10 were aware of numerous similar
police citizen encounters involving, and/or Internal Affairs complaints and/or civil lawsuits filed
against, Defendants Scrivinac; Reyes; John Does 1-10, and/or other Tinton Falls Police Officers
whereby they customarily and frequently subjected citizens held in custody to physical and mental
abuse; unlawfully and maliciously assaulted, arrested and harassed citizens; intentionally, recklessly
and/or negligently misrepresented the facts of arrests and/or other police-citizen encounters; falsified
police and/or other official records; made false arrests; mishandled and/or withheld evidence, and/or
used unreasonable and excessive force on citizens/arrestees. Defendant Tinton Falls’ police officers
9
Case 3:18-cv-03248-PGS-LHG Document 1 Filed 03/07/18 Page 10 of 12 PageID: 10
have been named in at least one other lawsuit alleging excessive force and/or violations of citizens’
civil rights, Turpin v. Tinton Falls, et als. Civil Action#: 15-06613 (BRM-TJB).
8. Despite their awareness, Defendants Tinton Falls, Scrivinac and/or John Does 6-10 failed
to employ any type of corrective or disciplinary measures against Defendants Reyes, John Does 1-10
9. Defendants Tinton Falls, Scrivinac and/or John Does 6-10 had knowledge of, or, had they
diligently exercised their duties to instruct, train, supervise, control, and discipline Defendants
Scrivinac, Reyes and/or John Does 1-10 on a continuing basis, should have had knowledge that the
10. Defendants Tinton Falls, Scrivinac and/or John Does 6-10 had power to prevent or aid
in preventing the commission of said wrongs, could have done so by reasonable diligence, and
11. Defendants Tinton Falls, Scrivinac and/or John Does 6-10, directly or indirectly, under
color of state law, approved and/or ratified the unlawful, deliberate, malicious, reckless, and wanton
conduct of Defendants Scrivinac, Reyes and/or John Does 1-10 heretofore described.
12. As a direct and proximate result of the acts of Defendants Tinton Falls, Scrivinac and/or
John Does 6-10 as set forth herein, Plaintiffs sustained emotional injuries, veterinary expenses and
will incur additional special damages in the future in an amount which cannot yet be determined in
connection with the deprivation of their constitutional rights guaranteed by the Fourth and Fourteenth
Amendments to the Constitution of the United States and protected by 42 U.S.C. Section 1983.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Robert and Bobbi Rene Fullerton demand judgment against
Defendants Tinton Falls, John A. Scrivinac and/or John Does 6-10 on this Count together with
10
Case 3:18-cv-03248-PGS-LHG Document 1 Filed 03/07/18 Page 11 of 12 PageID: 11
compensatory and punitive damages, attorney’s fees, interest and costs of suit incurred, and for any
COUNT SIX
VIOLATION OF NEW JERSEY CIVIL RIGHTS ACT (NJCRA)
1. The previous paragraphs are incorporated herein inclusively as if fully set forth.
2. The actions of Defendants Reyes and/or John Does 1-10, set forth at length above,
deprived Plaintiffs of their substantive due process right to be free from unlawful seizure of their
person and their fundamental right to liberty secured by the Constitution of the United States and
the Constitution of the State of New Jersey, in violation of N.J.S.A. 10:6-1, et seq. (“The New Jersey
3. As a direct and proximate result of the aforesaid acts of Defendants Reyes and/or John
Does 1-10, Plaintiffs sustained emotional injuries, veterinary expenses and were deprived of
their constitutional rights as described above, and will incur additional special damages in the future
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs Robert and Bobbi Rene Fullerton demand judgment against
Defendants Adrian Reyes and/or John Does 1-10 on this Count together with compensatory and
punitive damages, attorney’s fees, interest and costs of suit incurred, and for any such further relief
11
Case 3:18-cv-03248-PGS-LHG Document 1 Filed 03/07/18 Page 12 of 12 PageID: 12
Please be advised that Thomas J. Mallon, Esquire is hereby designated trial counsel in the
12