Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 24

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No._______________

Alexis Marie Acker,
Plaintiff,
v.
THE CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS,
PETER CAREY, Chief of Police, Colorado Springs Police Department, in his official
capacity,
Tyler Walker, Colorado Springs Police Department, individually and in his official capacity,
Defendants.
_________________________________________________________________________
COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND
_________________________________________________________________________
Plaintiff, by and through his attorneys, Shimon Kohn of the Shimon Kohn, P.C. Law
Firm, Ann Kaufman of the Ann Kaufman, P.C. Law Firm, and Winegar Law, LLC,
respectfully allege for their Complaint as follows:
I. INTRODUCTION
1.

Plaintiff, Alexis Acker, brings this action for money damages brought pursuant to
42 U.S.C. 1983 and 1988 and the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the
United States Constitution and under the common law of Colorado and the Colorado
Constitution against the above named Defendants.
II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 24

2.

This action arises under the Constitution and laws of the United States and the State of
Colorado, and is brought pursuant to Title 42 U.S.C. 1983 and the common law of
the State of Colorado.

3.

Jurisdiction is conferred on this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1367.

Jurisdiction supporting Plaintiffs claim for attorney fees and costs is conferred by 42
U.S.C. 1988.

4.

Venue is proper in the District of Colorado pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b). All of the
events alleged herein occurred within the State of Colorado, and all of the parties were
residents of the State of Colorado at the time of the events giving rise to this litigation.

5.

Plaintiff filed a timely Notice of Claims with the proper parties pursuant to C.R.S. 2410-101 et. seq.
III. PARTIES
Plaintiff

6.

The Plaintiff, ALEXIS MARIE ACKER, is a citizen and resident of Colorado Springs, El
Paso County, State of Colorado.
Defendants

7.

Defendant, CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS, is a Colorado municipal corporation and

is responsible for the training, supervision, official policies, customs, and actual
practices of its agents, the Colorado Springs Police Department (CSPD) and the
Chief of Police of the CSPD.

8.

Defendant, PETER CAREY, Chief of Police, Colorado Springs Police Department, is a

citizen and resident of El Paso County, Colorado, and was at all times material to the
allegations in this Complaint, acting in his capacity as a Police Officer employed by the

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 24

City of Colorado Springs, Colorado and was acting under color of state law. As Chief,
Peter Carey is responsible for the training and supervision of CSPD personnel and is
the final policymaker for the CSPD. Peter Carey is sued in his official capacity.
9.

Defendant, Officer TYLER WALKER, Colorado Springs Police Department, is a citizen

and resident of El Paso County, Colorado, and was at all times material to the
allegations in this Complaint, acting in his capacity as a Police Officer employed by the
City of Colorado Springs, Colorado and was acting under color of state law. Tyler
Walker is sued in his official and individual capacities.
IV. STATEMENT OF FACTS

10. On November 21, 2013, officers from the Colorado Springs Police Department were
dispatched to the Plaintiffs home in Colorado Springs, 4173 Charleston Drive, in
response to a report of a potential disturbance.
11. When police responded and made contact with the occupants of the home it was
determined that one of the occupants (Tyrin Tanks) was wanted on an active warrant
and was arrested.
12. Alexis Acker, who was 18 years old and visibly intoxicated, attempted to say goodbye
to Tanks and tightly embraced him at which time Officer Walker physically removed
Ms. Acker from her embrace with Mr. Tanks.
13. According to Officer Walker, Ms. Acker resisted his tactics to physically control her
(which involved applying certain painful grips to Ms. Acker) at which time Officer
Walker claims Ms. Acker attempted to kick at him and another officer striking the other
officer (Sergeant Mary Walsh) in the thigh.

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 24

14. Officer Walker admits that at this point he pinned Ms. Acker face-down on a sofa and
advised Ms. Acker that she was under arrest. Ms. Acker panicked because she could
not breathe and flailed her arms and legs, kicking and twisting in an attempt to unbury
her face out of the cushions of the sofa so that she could reach air and breathe.
15. Officer Walker and the other officer then walked Ms. Acker whose hands were
handcuffed behind her back to Officer Walkers patrol car, where according to Officer
Walker, Ms. Acker refused to enter and sit down in the back seat of the patrol car.
16. Officer Walker admits that he pushed Ms. Acker in her waist area causing her to sit in
the car and claims that Ms. Acker sat back in the seat and deliberately attempted to
kick at the two officers.
17. What Officer Walker described as a push was actually an open fisted punching
technique involving enough force that it caused Ms. Acker to fold at the waist and to be
thrown backwards onto the back seat of the patrol car where she landed on her back
and arms with no ability to protect herself because her hands were handcuffed behind
her back.
18. Officer Walker then drove Ms. Acker to Memorial Hospital for medical clearance due to
Ms. Ackers high-level of intoxication. Because Ms. Acker was underage and
intoxicated she needed to be medical cleared in order to determine if it was medically
safe to book into the El Paso County Jail.
19. Surveillance video obtained from Memorial Hospital shows Office Walker leading Ms.
Acker (who is still handcuffed behind her back) down the corridor of the hospital.
Officer Walker is clutching Ms. Ackers right bicep with his left hand. Ms. Acker is
walking appropriately and is not resisting Officer Walker in any way.

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 24

20. Officer Walker leads Ms. Acker to a point in the corridor and turns her so that she is
standing facing him with her back facing the adjacent wall in front of a plastic, armless
chair.

21. Although there is no audio, the video clearly shows Ms. Acker standing nearly
motionless as Officer Walker and Ms. Acker are apparently talking. According to Officer
Walker he was ordering Ms. Acker to sit and she was not complying with his sit order.

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 24

22. The video clearly shows that Ms. Acker was standing almost motionless talking to
Officer Walker and had not made any movement that could have been misinterpreted
by Officer Walker as an aggressive or threatening movement.
23. As Ms. Acker is standing nearly motionless, facing Officer Walker with her hands
handcuffed behind her back, Officer Walker inexplicably, and without warning strikes
Ms. Acker in the waist with an open fist with enough force to cause Ms. Acker to fold at
the waist and be knocked off her feet into the chair behind her.

24. As Ms. Acker is slammed against the chair she reacts by making a kicking motion
towards Officer Walker with her right foot from her seated position in the chair.
25. Officer Walker claims in his official, written report that after he pushed her down into
the chair, Ms. Acker kicked him in the crotch area causing him immediate pain.
Officer Walker described the kick as more of a forward extension of her leg, with the
bottom flat portion of her boot striking my pelvic area, rather than that of an upward
sweeping kicking motion directed towards my genitals.

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 7 of 24

26. The surveillance video obtained from Memorial Hospital, however, contradicts Officer
Walkers version of the facts. At the point in the video after Officer Walker knocked Ms.
Acker off of her feet and into the chair, Ms. Ackers right foot is seen kicking forward.
27. When Ms. Acker kicks with her right foot it is important to note that she is seated in the
chair with her hands handcuffed behind her back. Officer Walker is standing upright
with his back to the camera which places him at a 90 degree angle with the plane of
the front of his body roughly even with the plane of the left side of Ms. Ackers seated
body. In other words, Officer Walker was not directly in front of Ms. Acker nor was the
front of his body facing the front of Ms. Ackers body.
28. It is clear from the video that Officer Walkers version of the facts is untrue and that his
claim of being kicked in the groin is false. The video when slowed to 25% speed shows
Ms. Ackers right foot move in a sweeping motion forward and up from her seated,
handcuffed position and appears to completely miss Officer Walkers body. What is
observed, however, is that the clipboard Officer Walker is holding in his left hand flips
outward away from his body. The video shows that Ms. Acker did not contact Officer
Walker with her foot but rather contacted the clipboard he was holding in his left hand.
Further, if Officer Walker had actually been kicked in his groin area his body would
have moved, flinched or reacted in some involuntary manner consistent with a male
being kicked in such a sensitive area. Officer Walkers body makes no such movement
and, in fact, it appears that Ms. Ackers foot is moving cleanly past Officer Walkers
body and contacting his clipboard. The following two photographs show the laptop
flipping out away from Officer Walkers body.

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 8 of 24

29. As Ms. Acker remains in her defenseless, handcuffed, seated position, Officer Walker
is seen lunging towards Ms. Acker, grasping her by her left arm (which is chickenwinged behind her back) with his left hand and with his right hand grasping her by the
base of her skull where it connects to her neck.

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 9 of 24

30. Officer Walker then in one fluid motion, lifts Ms. Acker out of the chair in an arc at a
height approximately even with his shoulders and with great and excessive force and in
an arching and twisting motion drives her face-first into the hard-surfaced floor.

31. It is obvious on the video that Officer Walker puts all of his weight and force into driving
Ms. Ackers face violently into the floor while gripping her at the base of the skull in
order to maximizing the impact, pain and injury.

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 10 of 24

32. After violently slamming Ms. Acker face-first to the floor Officer Walker immediately
drives his knee into the small of her back placing his weight on his knee which is
against her spine. Officer Walker continues to clutch Ms. Acker by the base of her
skull/neck joint and sit on her for more than 2-1/2 minutes as blood begins to pool on
the floor and in spite of admitting he immediately saw splattered blood coming from
her mouth. Officer Walker admits that he was aware he had caused her injury and had
knocked her tooth out yet continues to sit with his knee on her spine and in spite of the
fact that Ms. Acker is offering no resistance. Officer Walker appears to be scolding her
during this time.

33. As blood runs from Ms. Ackers mouth and begins to pool on the floor, Officer Walker
continues to sit with his knee in the small of her back for more than two and a half
minutes. As a result of Officer Walkers use of excessive and unnecessary force, Ms.
Acker among other injuries suffered serious bodily injury to her mouth, face and head.

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 11 of 24

34. After Officer Walkers assault of Ms. Acker she was chained to a hospital bed while she
waited for a CT scan of her head/neck. Officer Walker was relieved by Officer Anthony
Carey who was tasked with waiting at the hospital until Ms. Acker could be medically
cleared and released for transport to the jail. After the CT scan was completed Officer
Carey was advised by Dr. Cohen that Ms. Acker had suffered moderate injuries to her
mouth and would not be cleared for several more hours due to the need to have Ms.
Acker evaluated by an oral surgeon. It is important to note that although Officer Carey
claims that Dr. Cohen described Ms. Ackers injuries as moderate, citizens in this
jurisdiction are routinely charged with 2nd Degree Assault (which carries a mandatory
prison sentence) because under Colorado law, knocking someones took out
constitutes serious bodily injury.
35. Ms. Acker was later evaluated by Dr. Hall, DDS who determined that Ms. Ackers #7
and #9 teeth had Class I mobility and tooth #8 had Class II mobility. Additionally, Dr.
Hall determined that Tooth #7 had blunting of apex consistent with a traumatic event-

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 12 of 24

irreversible pulpitis with apical periodontis; Tooth #8 had blunting of apex consistent
with a traumatic event- irreversible pulpitis with apical periodontis; Tooth #9 had
blunting of apex consistent with a traumatic event, Tooth # 9 also has visible fracturein
the enamel running from the mid-mesial aspect of the tooth towards the incisal edge.
Dr. Hall also noted left temporomandibular joint disorder, articular disk disorder with
sounds on opening. Tooth #8 had been evulsed. Dr. Hall determined that both
damaged teeth would require root canal therapy. Dr. Hall advised that this would be a
temporary treatment intended to keep the damaged teeth in place until Ms. Acker is old
enough to accept dental implants which will be required to replace the two damaged
teeth. Dr. Hall also advised that there was damage to Ms. Ackers jaw joint which would
require her to wear internal appliance for an extended period of time to rehabilitate and
strengthen the joint.
36. In addition to the serious dental injuries Ms. Acker has also suffered from intense
headaches, dizziness, nausea, soreness in her neck and upper back. To this day Ms.
Acker continues to suffer from intense headaches, dizziness and nausea.
37. Officer Walker made provably false statements to Officer Anthony Carey and Sergeant
Mary Walsh. Office Carey states in his report that Officer Walker told him that after Ms.
Acker refused to be seated that he assisted Ms. Acker to be seated. According to
Officer Carey, Officer Walker told him that after he assisted Ms. Acker to be seated that
Ms. Acker kicked him with both feet. Officer Walker also told Officer Carey that he
then escorted Ms. Acker to the floor.

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 13 of 24

38. Officer Walkers statements to Officer Carey were not misstatements nor were they
Officer Careys interpretation or paraphrasing of Officer Walkers statements. Officer
Walker made similar false statements to Sergeant Mary Walsh.
39. According to Sergeant Walsh, Officer Walker also told her that Ms. Acker had kicked
him with both feet in the groin. Officer Walker told Sergeant Walsh that Ms. Acker
refused to sit in the chair so he had to push her down into the chair to get her seated.
Officer Walker told Sergeant Walsh that in order to do that he was standing directly in
front of her. Officer Walker stated that as soon as Ms. Acker sat down that she put her
head back and lifted both feet up and kicked him very forcibly in the groin area. Officer
Walker also told Sergeant Walsh that after Ms. Acker kicked him in the groin with both
feet that he grabbed her by both shoulders, and rolled her out of the chair to the floor.
40. Officer Walsh also states that she spoke with a Memorial Hospital employee (who was
also a city employee at the time) who according to Sergeant Walsh, described the
incident involving Officer Walker as he simply kind of rolled her out of the chair onto
the floor. Sergeant Walsh fails to identify the Memorial Hospital employee who
allegedly made the statement.
41. Officer Walker admitted that Ms. Acker was not resisting when he removed her from
his patrol car or during their walking into Memorial hospital and down the corridor to the
plastic chair. The video shows that Ms. Acker is not resisting and is not in any way
being aggressive towards Officer Walker; in fact it shows that prior to Officer Walker
beginning his assault Ms. Acker is standing facing him, nearly motionless and
defenseless with her hands handcuffed behind her back calmly speaking to him.

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 14 of 24

42. The video shows that Ms. Acker was in a no way a threat to Officer Walker when he
suddenly punched her in the waist area knocking her off her feet into the chair. The
video shows that in spite of Ms. Acker (who was in a seated, handcuffed position in the
plastic, armless chair) attempting to kick one time with her right foot at Officer Walker
that he was in no danger and was still in control of the situation.
43. The video further shows that after Ms. Ackers reactive, attempt to kick at Officer
Walker she is still seated and handcuffed behind her back and making no effort to
stand, leave her seat or kick again. Officer Walker was moving away from Ms. Acker
after striking her in the waist and was standing and in no danger. Officer Walker
actually had to step towards Ms. Acker and lean down in order to grab her by her left
bicep with his left hand and by her neck at the base of her skull with his right hand in
order to lift her entire body out of the seat and in an arching-twisting Mixed Martial Arts
style move which brought Ms. Acker to approximately his shoulder height prior to
driving her face-first into the floor. Officer Walker ignored all of his other options and
deliberately chose to escalate the situation by using obviously unnecessary and
excessive force against Ms. Acker who was at the time, an intoxicated, 54, 110lb
female who was handcuffed behind her back and posing no danger to Officer Walker.
V. CAUSES OF ACTION
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
(42 U.S.C. 1983 4th Amendment Violation-Excessive Force)
(Against Tyler Walker in his individual and official capacities)
44. Plaintiff hereby incorporates all other paragraphs of this Complaint as if set forth
herein.
45. 42 U.S.C. 1983 provides that:

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 15 of 24

Every person, who under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom or usage
of any state or territory or the District of Columbia subjects or causes to be subjected
any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the
deprivation of any rights, privileges or immunities secured by the constitution and law
shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other appropriate
proceeding for redress
46. Plaintiff in this action is a citizen of the United States and all of the individual police
officer Defendants to this claim are persons for the purposes of 42 U.S.C. 1983.
47. All individual Defendants to this claim, at all relevant times hereto, were acting under
color of state law in their capacity as Colorado Springs Police Officers and their acts
and/or omissions were within the scope of their duties or employment.
48. At the time of Plaintiffs injuries caused by the excessive and unnecessary physical
assault by Officer Walker, Plaintiff had a clearly established constitutional right under
the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution to be secure in her person
from unreasonable seizure through excessive force. Further, Officer Walker like any
reasonable law enforcement officer knew or should have known of this clearly
established right at the time of Plaintiffs injuries.
49. Defendant Walker engaged in the use of force that was objectively unreasonable in light
of the facts and circumstances confronting him, thereby violating Plaintiffs Fourth
Amendment rights and this use of objectively unreasonable force caused serious and
permanent physical and emotional injuries to Plaintiff.
50. Officer Walkers actions and conduct under the circumstances involved an objectively,
unreasonable excessive use of force and was malicious, willful, wanton and involved a
reckless indifference to Ms. Ackers constitutional rights, safety, health and life. Indeed,
his conduct was intentional and done with malice.

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 16 of 24

51. The willful and wanton acts and/or omissions of Defendant Walker were the moving
forces causing Plaintiffs injuries and Defendant Walkers acts and/or omissions
described herein deprived Plaintiff of her constitutional rights and caused her other
damages.
52. Defendant Walker is not entitled to qualified or any other type of immunity based on his
egregious, willful and wanton conduct.
53. As a proximate result of Defendant Walkers unlawful and outrageous contact, Plaintiff
has suffered actual physical and emotional injuries and other damages and losses as
described herein entitling her to compensatory and special damages, in amounts to be
proven at trial.
54. As a further result of Defendant Walkers unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has incurred
special damages, including medically related expenses and will continue to incur
further medical and other special damages, related expenses, in amounts to be proven
at trial.
55. Plaintiff is further entitled to reasonable attorneys fees and costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
1988, pre-judgment and post judgment interests and costs allowable by federal and
state law.
56. In addition to compensatory, economic, consequential and special damages, Plaintiff is
entitled to punitive damages (which may be pled through amendment at the
appropriate time) against Defendant Walker individually under 42 U.S.C. 1983, in that
the actions of Defendant Walker, individually, for his conduct which was malicious,
reckless, willful, and with wanton disregard of the constitutional rights of the Plaintiff.

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 17 of 24

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Violation of 42 U.S.C. 1983 Deliberately Indifferent Policies, Practices, Customs,
Training, and Supervision in violation of the Fourth Amendment)
(Against City of Colorado Springs and Peter Carey in his official capacity)
57. Plaintiff hereby incorporates all other paragraphs of this Complaint as if set forth
herein.
58. 42 U.S.C. 1983 provides that:
Every person, who under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom or usage
of any state or territory or the District of Columbia subjects or causes to be subjected
any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the
deprivation of any rights, privileges or immunities secured by the constitution and law
shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other appropriate
proceeding for redress

59. Plaintiff in this action is a citizen of the United States and Defendants to this action are
persons for purposes of 42 U.S.C. 1983.
60. The Defendants at all times relevant were acting under the color of state law.
61. At the time of Officer Walkers assault and battery of Plaintiff, she had the clearly
established right to be secure in her person from unreasonable seizures through
excessive force, under the Fourth Amendment.
62. The Defendants, City of Colorado Springs and Peter Carey knew or should have
known of these rights at the time of Officer Walkers assault and battery of Plaintiff as
they were clearly established at that time.
63. The acts and/or omissions of these Defendants, as described herein, deprived Plaintiff
of her constitutional and statutory rights and caused her other damages.
64. The acts and/or omissions of these Defendants as described herein intentionally
deprived Plaintiff of her constitutional and statutory rights and caused her other
damages.

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 18 of 24

65. Defendants City of Colorado Springs and Peter Carey are not entitled to qualified
immunity for the complained of conduct described herein.
66. Upon information and belief, the Defendant City of Colorado Springs and Peter Carey
developed and maintained policies, procedures, customs, and/or practices exhibiting
deliberate indifference to the constitutional rights of citizens , which were also moving
forces behind and proximately caused the violations of Plaintiffs constitutional, federal
and state rights as set forth herein and other claims, and also reflected a conscious or
deliberate choice to follow a course of action from among various available
alternatives.
67. Upon information and belief, the Defendants City of Colorado Springs and Peter Carey
have created and tolerated and maintained long-standing, department-wide customs,
law enforcement related policies, procedures and customs, practices, and/or failed to
properly train and/or supervise its officers in a manner amounting to deliberate
indifference with respect to the use of force, including potentially deadly force to
persons in police custody.
68. The need to provide specialized training and supervision to officers whose duties and
responsibilities include arresting, handcuffing, transporting, and safely detaining and
dealing with under-aged, intoxicated individuals (like Ms. Acker) is obvious.
69. Equally obvious, is that the failure to adequately train and supervise such officers is
likely to result in the types of violations of constitutional, federal and state rights such
as those described herein and that such failure is also likely to result in the types of
injuries suffered by this Plaintiff, Ms. Acker.

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 19 of 24

70. The Defendants City of Colorado Springs and Peter Careys failure to provide such
specialized training and supervision is deliberately indifferent to those rights. The
deliberately indifferent training and supervision provided by these Defendants resulted
from a conscious or deliberate choice to follow a course of action from among the
various alternatives available to these defendants resulted in the injuries suffered by
Plaintiff at the hands of Officer Tyler Walker.
71. As a direct and proximate result of these Defendants unlawful conduct, Plaintiff has
suffered very serious physical and emotional injuries, and other losses as described
herein entitling her to compensatory and special damages, and other damages as
allowed by law and as described throughout this Complaint, in amounts to be proven at
trial.
72. Finally, as the violent assault that occurred in this matter is capable of repetition and
evading review, and also of occurring again to Plaintiff and other citizens of Colorado
Springs in the future, Plaintiff seeks appropriate declaratory relief and injunctive relief
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983 to redress Defendants above described ongoing
deliberate indifference in training and supervision policies, practices, habits, customs,
and usages with respect to the rights described herein, and with respect to the ongoing
policy and/or practice of the Defendants City of Colorado Springs and Peter Carey
regarding the use of excessive force and failure to train regarding injuring members of
the public either during or subsequent to arrest.
THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
Common Law
(Willful and Wanton/Intentional Assault and Battery Against)
(Against Tyler Walker in his individual and official capacities)

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 20 of 24

73. Plaintiff hereby incorporates all other paragraphs of this Complaint as if set forth herein.
74. Defendant Tyler Walker is a public employee within the meaning of the Colorado
Governmental Immunity Act, C.R.S. 24-10-103.
75. Defendant Tyler Walker is not entitled to immunity under the Colorado Governmental
Immunity Act because his acts and omissions were willful and wanton within the
meaning of C.R.S. 24-10-105(1) and 24-10-118.
76.

Defendant Tyler Walker was acting within the scope of his employment when he
intentionally committed such willful and wanton acts and omissions that created an
unreasonable risk of proximately causing Ms. Ackers severe and persisting physical
and emotional injuries, damages and losses set forth herein.

77.

As set forth above in this Complaint, Defendant Tyler Walkers conduct resulted in and
constituted unlawful physical contact with Plaintiff. Defendant Walkers willful, wanton
and intentional conduct was intended by Walker to make physically offensive and
harmful contact with Plaintiff. Walkers conduct was physically harmful, offensive and
outrageous.

78. Defendant Walker was consciously aware that his intentional, willful, wanton, overt and
outrageous conduct, acts and/or omissions were creating unconsented harm and
offensive contact and serious bodily injury and damage to the bodily integrity of Plaintiff
and yet acted heedlessly, recklessly, and/or outrageously, in reflective disregard of and
without regard to the rights, bodily integrity and safety of Plaintiff, purposefully allowing
and causing this harm and injury to Plaintiff.
79. Defendant Walker intentionally, willfully and wantonly caused these physical, emotional
and economic injuries to Plaintiff.

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 21 of 24

80. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant Walkers willful and wanton conduct in
committing batteries against Plaintiff, Plaintiff was severely injured, traumatized, and is
suffering ongoing physical injuries, harm and emotional distress which requires
ongoing care and treatment including medical evaluations, physical therapy, root
canals, crowns, dental implants and joint rehabilitation. As a result of the injuries
caused by Defendant Walker, Plaintiff has ongoing limitations, impairments,
impingements on her functional capacities, pain and suffering as well as past, present
and future medical expenses.
81. Plaintiff is therefore entitled to general and compensatory damages for such injuries,
pain and suffering, physical impairment and disability as well as to special damages for
any medical and health care related expenses in an amount to be proven at trial.
82. There is no cap under the Governmental Immunity Act on this state law claim as
Defendant Walkers conduct, acts and omissions were willful and wanton within the
meaning of C.R.S. 24-10-118.
83. Plaintiff hereby gives notice that she may be seeking exemplary damages for willful
and wanton acts of individual Defendant Tyler Walker on this state law claim upon
appropriate amendment.
FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF
Common Law
(Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress)
(Against Tyler Walker in his individual and official capacities)
84. Plaintiff hereby incorporates all other paragraphs of this Complaint as if set forth
herein.

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 22 of 24

85. Tyler Walkers decision to apply the excessive and potentially deadly force by picking
up a defenseless, 18 year old, 5-4, 110 lb intoxicated female (who at the time was
seated with her hands handcuffed behind her back) by her upper arm and the base of
her skull and neck then lifting her to approximately his shoulder height and in a
twisting, arching motion slamming her face-first into the hard floor while putting all of
his weight and force behind the assault, and where there was no emergency or
imminent threat of injury to anyone or any police officer was extreme and outrageous
conduct.
86. Acting under the color of law, Tyler Walker intentionally, recklessly or with deliberate
indifference and callous disregard of Plaintiffs rights proximately caused and was
intended to cause severe emotional distress to Plaintiff and damage to her in various
respects. Tyler Walkers actions and conduct as described herein deprived Ms. Acker
of her rights, privileges, liberties, and immunities secured by the Constitution of the
United States of America and the State of Colorado and the actions and conduct of
Tyler Walker are the direct and proximate cause of the damages and injuries suffered
by Ms. Acker. Ms. Acker is entitled to the damages described throughout this
Complaint in an amount to be proven at trial.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in her
favor and against each of the Defendants, and award her all relief allowed by law,
including but not limited to the following:
(a) Appropriate relief at law and equity;
(b) Declaratory relief and other appropriate equitable relief;
(c) Economic losses on all claims as allowed by law;

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 23 of 24

(d) Compensatory and consequential damages, including damages for emotional

distress, humiliation, loss of enjoyment of life, and other pain and suffering on all
claims allowed by law in an amount to be determined at trial;
(e) Punitive damages on all claims allowed by law and in an amount to be
determined at trial;
(f) Attorneys fees and costs associated with this action, including expert witness
fee, on all claims allowed by law;
(g) Pre- and post-judgment interest at the appropriate lawful rate;
(h) Any further relief that this court deems just and proper, and any other relief as
allowed by law.
PLAINTIFF HEREBY DEMANDS A JURY TRIAL ON ALL ISSUES SO TRIABLE.

s/ signature: Shimon Kohn

____________________________
Shimon Kohn, Esq.
Shimon Kohn, P.C.
14 West Costilla Street
Colorado Springs, CO 80903
(719) 328-9555
email: skohn@kohndefense.com
Reg. No.: 31710
Attorneys for Plaintiff

s/ signature: Ann Kaufman

____________________________
Ann Kaufman, Esq.
Ann Kaufman, P.C.
14 West Costilla Street
Colorado Springs, CO 80903
(719) 447-1511
email: ann@annkaufman.com
Reg. No.: 15089
Attorneys for Plaintiff

s/ signature: Phil Winegar

____________________________

Case 1:15-cv-01582 Document 1 Filed 07/24/15 USDC Colorado Page 24 of 24

Phil Winegar, Esq.

Winegar Law, LLC.
303 South Cascade Ave., Suite 101
Colorado Springs, CO 80903
(719) 634-2336
email: philwinegarlaw@msn.com
Reg. No.: 35207
Attorneys for Plaintiff
*Electronically filed. Duly signed original on file at the offices of Shimon Kohn, P.C.