Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Summons and Complaint
Summons and Complaint
YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and required to answer the Complaint in this action,
a copy of which is served upon you, and to serve a copy of your Answer to this Complaint upon
counsel for the Plaintiff, Marvin R. Pendarvis, at 8420 Dorchester Rd. Suite 202, North Charleston,
SC 29420, within thirty (30) days after service hereof, exclusive of the day of service. If you fail
to answer this Complaint within the aforesaid time, judgment by default shall be rendered against
s/ Marvin R. Pendarvis
Marvin R. Pendarvis, Esq. #101832
8420 Dorchester Rd. Ste. 202
North Charleston, SC 29420
Phone: (843) 990-9847
Facsimile: (843) 310-6384
[email protected]
This 10th day of July, 2023
North Charleston, South Carolina
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
COUNTY OF MARION ) FOR THE TWELFTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
)
) Case No.: 2022-CP-__-_________
David Wiggins, III, )
)
Plaintiff, )
) COMPLAINT
v. ) (JURY TRIAL DEMANDED)
)
CITY OF MARION. )
)
)
Defendant. )
)
COMES NOW the Plaintiff David Wiggins, by and through his undersigned counsel of
record, and files this Complaint against the above-named Defendant, and allege as follows:
PREFACE
The Plaintiff brings claims of gross negligence, negligence, negligent training,
negligent supervision, civil assault and battery, and false imprisonment pursuant to the South
Carolina Tort Claims Act against the City of Goose Creek based on the acts and omissions of
their employees and officers in the detainment of Plaintiff on November 20, 2022.
South Carolina within the meaning of S.C. Code Ann. § 15-78-30(a). At all times
department whose officers are employees and/or agents of the Defendant and for whose
3. Upon information and belief, the incident that is the subject matter of this Complaint
took place in Marion County, South Carolina, therefore jurisdiction and venue are
4. On or about November 20, 2022 Plaintiff was leaving Burger King and headed home
when he was stopped by Officer Madison Smith of the Marion Police Department.
6. Immediately upon stopping Plaintiff, Officer Smith drew her gun and started pointing
it at Plaintiff’s vehicle.
7. Officer Smith then ordered Plaintiff to step out of the vehicle and lay face down on
the street, all while still pointing the gun in his direction.
8. Officer Smith approached Plaintiff, with her gun still drawn on him, and placed him
9. After a several minutes had gone by, other offices with the Marion Police Department
10. It was determined that Officer Smith had stopped the wrong vehicle and Plaintiff was
11. Upon having the handcuffs removed, Plaintiff was able to leave the scene after an
apology from Officer Smith that was a mockery at best and insincere at worst.
12. Plaintiff was in handcuffs for nearly two minutes and had a gun pointing at him for
three minutes.
13. In other words, Plaintiff had to endure 180 seconds handcuffed with his face to the
ground and a gun to his head not knowing if the next second would be his last.
14. Plaintiff ultimately filed a formal complaint against the Marion Police Department
and met with the Police Chief Flowers who informed him that he would not be
referring the matter to SLED and that Officer Smith would be disciplined.
15. The force utilized by Officer Smith was well beyond what was necessary to bring the
16. Officer Smith did not intend to conduct a lawful traffic stop, or one that was in
bounds of state and local law as she never attempted to verify that the plates on
17. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant’s negligent, reckless, and unlawful
conduct, described above, Plaintiff suffered damages including, but not limited to
pecuniary loss, pain and suffering, medical expenses, mileage incurred in traveling to
medical appointments, and such additional damages as may be revealed during the trial
of this matter.
18. Plaintiff realleges the preceding paragraphs as though set forth verbatim herein.
19. The actions of the Defendant, as described above, were taken pursuant to their policies
and practices.
20. As a matter of both policy and practice, the Defendant encourages, and is the moving
force behind, its officers’ objectively unreasonable use of force against Plaintiff by
hiring and retaining unqualified officers, and by failing to adequately train, supervise,
21. By failing to adequately investigate and discipline officers who have engaged in
instances of excessive force against citizens, the Defendant manifests a complete, total,
believe that their actions will never be scrutinized, and that they will never be
23. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant’s negligent, reckless, and unlawful
conduct, described above, Plaintiff suffered damages including, but not limited to
pecuniary loss, pain and suffering, medical expenses, mileage incurred in traveling to
medical appointments, and such additional damages as may be revealed during the trial
of this matter.
24. Plaintiff realleges the preceding paragraphs as though set forth verbatim herein.
25. The actions the Defendant created a reasonable apprehension of imminent harm and
26. The actions of the Defendant were objectively unreasonable under the circumstances
and were undertaken intentionally with malice, willfulness, and reckless indifference
27. The Defendant’s actions were undertaken within the scope of their employment.
28. The Defendant is liable as principal for all torts committed by its agents.
29. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant’s negligent, reckless, and unlawful
conduct, described above, Plaintiff suffered damages including, but not limited to
pecuniary loss, pain and suffering, medical expenses, mileage incurred in traveling to
medical appointments, and such additional damages as may be revealed during the trial
of this matter.
FOR A THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
(False Arrest/False Imprisonment)
30. Plaintiff realleges the preceding paragraphs as though set forth verbatim herein.
31. The Defendant did not have probable cause to believe that Plaintiff was committing or
32. The Defendant caused Plaintiff to be detained and imprisoned him without probable
33. The Defendant caused Plaintiff to be detained and imprisoned for an unreasonable
34. The actions of the Defendant were objectively unreasonable under the circumstances
and were undertaken intentionally with malice, willfulness, and reckless indifference
35. The actions of the Defendant were undertaken within their scope of employment.
36. The Defendant is liable as principal for all torts committed by its agents.
37. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant’s negligent, reckless, and unlawful
conduct, described above, Plaintiff suffered damages including, but not limited to
pecuniary loss, pain and suffering, medical expenses, mileage incurred in traveling to
medical appointments, and such additional damages as may be revealed during the trial
of this matter.
s/ Marvin R. Pendarvis
Marvin R. Pendarvis, Esq. #101832
8420 Dorchester Rd. Ste. 202
North Charleston, SC 29420
Phone: (843) 990-9847
Facsimile: (843) 310-6384
[email protected]
This 10th day of July, 2023
North Charleston, South Carolina