UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY

AT COVINGTON

* CASE NO.____________
*
STEVEN JORDAN *
*
PLAINTIFF * JUDGE __________________
*
-vs- *
*
KENTON COUNTY, KENTUCKY and the *
KENTON COUNTY FISCAL COURT *
as the operators of the *
KENTON COUNTY DETENTION CENTER *
3000 Decker Crane Lane *
Covington, KY 41017 *
*
KENTON COUNTY DETENTION CENTER *
3000 Decker Crane Lane *
Covington, KY 41017 *
*
JAILER TERRY CARL *
In his individual capacity and *
his official capacity as elected *
jailer in Kenton County *
3000 Decker Crane Lane *
Covington, KY 41017 *
*
DAVID NUSSBAUM *
in his individual capacity and his official *
capacity as an employee of the *
Kenton County Detention Center *
3000 Decker Crane Lane *
Covington, KY 41017

DEFENDANTS

1
Steven Jordan vs. Kenton County Detention Center, et al.
United States District Court, Eastern Division at Covington, KY
 COMPLAINT WITH JURY DEMAND

NOW APPEARS Steven Jordan, Plaintiff in the above-captioned action, and for his

Complaint against the Defendants states as follows:

JURISDICTION

1. Jurisdiction in this Court is proper pursuant to 28 USC §1343(a)(3) and 28 USC §1331

because Plaintiff alleges constitutional violations and asserts his federal constitutional and

statutory rights pursuant to 42 USC §1983 against persons acting under color of state law and for

causes of action under the laws and Constitution of Kentucky. This Court has mandatory

jurisdiction over Plaintiff's state law causes of action pursuant to 28 USC §1367.

THE PARTIES

2. Plaintiff Steven Jordan is and was, for all times relevant hereto, a resident and

domiciliary of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. Plaintiff demands trial by jury on issues.

3. Defendant Kenton County, Kentucky, has a four member fiscal court comprised of a

judge executive and three county commissioners each of whom is an elected official.

4. The Defendant Terry Carl is the elected jailer for Kenton County, Kentucky and together

with the Fiscal Court is responsible for the care, custody and treatment of inmates at the

Defendant Kenton County Detention Center.

FACTS

Plaintiff repeats, realleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation

contained within paragraphs 1 through 4 as if fully recited herein and further states as follows:

5. The Fiscal Court pursuant to KRS 441.025 is required to provide for the incarceration of

prisoners arrested in the county or sentenced or held by order of the courts in the county.
2
Steven Jordan vs. Kenton County Detention Center, et al.
United States District Court, Eastern Division at Covington, KY
6. The Fiscal Court, pursuant to KRS 441.045 must “prescribe rules for the government,

security, safety, and cleanliness of the county jails and the comfort and treatment of prisoners.”

7. The Fiscal Court must establish education and training requirements for deputies. (KRS

441.055)

8. The Commonwealth of Kentucky endorses private prisons. Operating a jail in Kentucky

is not solely a governmental function.

9. Defendant Kenton County Fiscal Court for all times relevant hereto, approves the Kenton

County Detention Center written policies, procedures and controls funding of the jail operations.

10. The use of excessive force occurs with such frequency at the Kenton County Detention

Center that it has become the custom and policy of Defendant the Fiscal Court of Kenton

County.

11. By controlling the funding of the Kenton County Detention Center and controlling and

approving the written policies and procedures of the Detention Center, the Kenton County Fiscal

Court is responsible for the care and protection of the prisoners in the Kenton County Detention

Center at Covington, Kentucky.

12. The Defendant Terry Carl is the elected jailer for Kenton County, Kentucky and through

the responsibility, authority and power granted to him by the Kentucky Constitution and

Kentucky Statutes is empowered to and is required to enforce the policies and procedures of the

Detention Center, including but not limited to policies and procedures governing the use of force,

the safety of prisoners and the provision of medical treatment to the inmates.

13. Jailer Terry Carl is required to treat inmates and prisoners humanely and furnish them

with proper food and lodging during their confinement pursuant to KRS 70.040.

14. Jailer Terry Carl pursuant to KRS 441.045 is responsible for a curriculum of basic and

3
Steven Jordan vs. Kenton County Detention Center, et al.
United States District Court, Eastern Division at Covington, KY
continuing annual training for jailers and jail personnel; as well as responsibility for the custody,

care and treatment of prisoners and their medical care.

15. Deputies at the jail have the same powers and are subject to the same penalties as the

jailer. (KRS 71.060)

16. The Kentucky Constitution at § 17 prohibits cruel and unusual punishment.

17. The United States Constitution protects the rights of pretrial detainees, inmates and

prisoners under the Fourth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments

18. The Defendant David Nussbaum is or was a deputy jailer employed by the Kenton

County Detention Center through the Kenton County Fiscal Court on behalf of Kenton County,

Kentucky.

19. Deputy David Nussbaum has a well-known and documented propensity for physical

violence toward other persons that is well-known by Defendant Jailer Carl and other persons

responsible for the safety of pretrial detainees and other inmates at the Kenton County Detention

Center.

20. The website for the Kenton County Jail states:

The Kenton County Jailer and Deputies strive to make the Jail a Community
Institution, in which we exercise fiscal responsibility, reasonable conditions of
confinement, service to the People, and an unwavering commitment to Public
Safety.” (emphasis supplied)

http://www.kentoncountyjail.org/index.php (September 25, 2017)

21. On the date of November 2, 2018, as the Plaintiff was being released from Kenton

County Detention Center custody to go to an addiction treatment center, he was slammed to the

concrete floor by Defendant Nussbaum and suffered a large gash on his forehead that required 28

stiches to close.

4
Steven Jordan vs. Kenton County Detention Center, et al.
United States District Court, Eastern Division at Covington, KY
22. The Plaintiff did nothing that would have or should have provoked the attack or the use

of excessive force by a competent deputy jailer or Defendant Nussbaum.

23. Plaintiff was slammed face first to the concrete floor, and his wound, as can be seen in

the picture included below as part of the Complaint, needed immediate medical attention.

24. Plaintiff was not immediately taken to the hospital and not one deputy offered him aid.

Everyone waited for medical personnel, who are not trained to close a gash above the eye, to

come from the back of the jail

25. Plaintiff’s claim of excessive force is analyzed under the Fourth Amendment to the

United States Constitution and Section 17 of the Kentucky Constitution.

26. Defendant Nusbaum used excessive force in slamming Jordan to the floor and acted

unlawfully in not getting him immediate medical attention.

27. Defendant Nussbaum violated official jail policy and procedure when he failed to call for

backup as well as Plaintiff’s constitutional rights under the Kentucky and United States

Constitutions.

28. Defendant Nussbaum lied on the Incident Report about the use of excessive force on the

Plaintiff.

29. No one at the Detention Center sought immediate emergency medical attention for the

Plaintiff. Plaintiff’s Mother took him to the emergency room.

30. On November 30, 2018, Defendant Nussbaum was suspended for 30 days for the use of

excessive force on Plaintiff Steven Jordan.

31. Defendant Fiscal Court is required to maintain insurance to cover injuries caused by the

use of excessive force by a deputy jailer at the Kenton County Detention Center pursuant to KRS

65.150.

5
Steven Jordan vs. Kenton County Detention Center, et al.
United States District Court, Eastern Division at Covington, KY
32. Defendant Fiscal Court is required to maintain insurance for liability of the jailer or his

deputies in their official capacities.

33. Plaintiff will file a CD containing a video the Plaintiff being thrown to the floor which

includes the aftermath and failure to get immediate emergency medical treatment.

KENTON COUNTY DETENTION CENTER

POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

Plaintiff repeats, realleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation

contained within paragraphs 1 through 33 as if fully recited herein and further states as follows:

34. Kenton County Detention Center Policies and Procedures, written and/or approved by the

Fiscal Court and relevant to this situation are as follows.

Policy 1.1.1 MANAGEMENT PHILOSOPHY

6
Steven Jordan vs. Kenton County Detention Center, et al.
United States District Court, Eastern Division at Covington, KY
III. PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES

A. Philosophy

1. The Office of the Kenton County Jailer is established in accordance with

applicable statutes and regulations defining the constitutional responsibilities of
this elected official with a goal of ensuring the public safety by providing
professionally managed detention services to confined offenders, pursuant to
court judgments and orders.

Policy 1.3.11 EMPLOYEE CODE OF CONDUCT

Policy 1.3.11 B.1. Each employee’s conduct should be guided by this policy, which is
consistent with the Detention Center’s policy and procedure, post orders.
Command Memorandum, or like operating directive or adopted regulation.

Policy 1.3.11 C.1.a Personnel are required to adhere to Detention Center policy and
procedure, Kenton County Personnel regulations and County Ordinances,
State Statues (sic) and all other laws applicable to the general public.

Policy 1.3.11 E.2. Brutality in the treatment of the inmates is not tolerated and is cause for
dismissal and possible criminal charges

Policy 1.3.11 E.3. Only a reasonable amount of force is used to control an unruly inmate.
Deputies should not strike or lay their hands on an inmate except to defend
them, prevent an escape, prevent serious injury or damage to person or
Kenton County property, quell a disturbance or search an inmate.

Policy 1.3.11 D.6 USE OF FORCE Employees use force only in accordance with law and
Detention Center policy and procedures and only a reasonable amount of
force necessary under the circumstances to control the situation or protect
themselves and/or others from harm. No employee will use force in a
discriminatory manner.

Policy 3.1.8 USE OF FORCE

I. POLICY It is the policy of the Kenton County Detention Center (KCDC) that all
members recognize the importance of human life, respect basic human
rights and have an intolerant attitude towards the abusive treatment of all
persons. Bearing this in mind, officers’ use of force shall be value driven,
utilizing only the force reasonable under the circumstances so as to
minimize the chance of injury to themselves and others. The purpose of
this policy is to establish guidelines concerning the authorization,
implementation, investigation, and documentation of the use of force by
KCDC personnel.

7
Steven Jordan vs. Kenton County Detention Center, et al.
United States District Court, Eastern Division at Covington, KY
 Officers are sometimes confronted with situations where control must be
exercised to affect the security of the facility and safety of others. Control
and security of the facility and the safety of personnel and others may be
achieved through verbalization or by the use of physical force. While the
use of physical force may be necessary in situations that cannot be
otherwise controlled, force may not be resorted to unless other reasonable
alternatives have been exhausted would reasonably be ineffective under
the particular circumstances. …

***

IV. USE OF PHYSICAL FORCE

***
The use of physical force by an officer upon another person is justifiable
but not limited to when the officer, acting under official authority:

• To defend oneself from personal harm

• To defend or aid other staff, inmates or third parties from personal harm
• To prevent the commission of felonies to include escapes
• To prevent suicides or self-harm
• To enforce institutional rules and regulations
• To prevent damage to property
• To prevent or stop disturbance

35. Plaintiff suffered emotional and traumatic injuries, a black eye and other facial injuries

that required 28 stitches. A picture of the Plaintiff is included.

36. Deputies are trained to be and are aware of inmate statutory and constitutional rights as

well as the fact that the use of excessive force is unlawful in light of clearly established law.

37. Deputies are required to read and be familiar with the contents of the Kenton County

Detention Center Policy and Procedure Manual.

38. Nussbaum’s use of force and throwing the Plaintiff to the concrete floor was excessive,

was a violation of the Policy and Procedure Manual, and unlawful in light of clearly established

law and the information possessed at the time by Deputy Nussbaum.

8
Steven Jordan vs. Kenton County Detention Center, et al.
United States District Court, Eastern Division at Covington, KY
39. Defendants’ conduct as alleged in this Complaint violates clearly established statutory

and constitutional rights known by all the deputy jailers at the Kenton County Detention Center.

40. Deputies at the Kenton County Detention Center are peace officers having the power to

arrest, search and seize, but they do not receive the Kentucky Department of Criminal Justice

Training’s 18-week basic police academy, which is mandatory for police officers in the

Commonwealth.

41. Deputies at the Kenton County Detention Center are peace officers having the power to

arrest, search and seize, but they do not receive formal training from the Kentucky Department

of Corrections in the use of force.

42.. Despite possessing the legal powers of police officers, and because the deputy jailers at

the Kenton County Detention Center are not required to take any formal excessive force training,

they are not adequately trained in the use of force, despite their awareness of inmate statutory

and constitutional rights as well as the fact that the use of excessive force is unlawful in light of

clearly established law.

43. Failure to train the Kenton County Deputies in the proper use of force is the fault of both

the Kenton County Fiscal Court and the Defendant Jailer Terry Carl and constitutes an official

policy and custom by the Kenton County Fiscal Court and Jailer Terry Carl.

CAUSES OF ACTION

Plaintiff repeats, realleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation

contained within paragraphs 1 through 43 as if fully recited herein and further states as follows:

44. Plaintiff is accorded certain rights under the Fourth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments

of the United States Constitution and the Kentucky Constitution and federal and state statutory

laws that are enforceable under 42 USC § 1983.

9
Steven Jordan vs. Kenton County Detention Center, et al.
United States District Court, Eastern Division at Covington, KY
45. Plaintiff is accorded the right under the United States Constitution and ancillary and

parallel provisions of the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, to be free from cruel

and unusual punishment, to be free from a violent attack by deputies and/or jail staff and a right

to be free from the deliberate indifference of the jailer and the deputies to his safety and welfare

while he is a prisoner under the custody, care and control of the Kenton County Detention

Center.

46. Plaintiff as an inmate at the Kenton County Detention Center is entitled to proper

medical attention.

COUNT I

VIOLATION OF RIGHTS ACCORDED BY THE

FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION
AND ANCILLARY AND PARALLEL PROVISIONS IN THE KENTUCKY
CONSTITUTION

Plaintiff repeats, realleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation

contained within paragraphs 1 through 46 as if fully recited herein and further states as follows:

47. On November 2, 2018, as the Plaintiff was being released from the detention center to

enter an addiction treatment center, he was violently thrown face first to the floor in the booking

area of the Kenton County Detention Center by Defendant Nussbaum.

48. Although it was obvious that the Plaintiff was bleeding all over the floor and that he

suffered a severe cut above his left eye, not one jail employee sought immediate emergency

medical attention for the Plaintiff.

49. The force applied to the Plaintiff occurred in bad faith, without provocation, with

deliberate indifference to the rights of the Plaintiff, and with no valid reason under the policies

and procedures of the Kenton County Detention Center or established law.

50. Being thrown to the floor was a violation of the Plaintiff’s right to be free from cruel and

10
Steven Jordan vs. Kenton County Detention Center, et al.
United States District Court, Eastern Division at Covington, KY
unusual punishment and to be free from the use of excessive force while under the custody, care

and control of the Commonwealth of Kentucky and the Kenton County Detention Center.

51. Deputy Nussbaum’s conduct as alleged in this Complaint violates clearly established

statutory and constitutional rights known by Deputy Nussbaum.

52. As a direct and proximate result of being unlawfully thrown to the floor, Plaintiff

suffered damages including but not limited to a black eye, a gash requiring 28 stitches,

permanent scarring and emotional distress and trauma.

COUNT II

LACK OF TRAINING IN THE PROPER USE OF FORCE

Plaintiff repeats, realleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation

contained within paragraphs 1 through 52 as if fully recited herein and further states as follows:

53. The Kenton County Detention Center has an elaborate and instructive Policy and

Procedures Manual defining, inter alia the proper and appropriate use of force at the Detention

Center.

54. As part of their employment, Kenton County Deputies are required to read, understand

and be familiar with the contents of the Manual and specifically the guidelines on the use of

force.

55. Kenton County Deputies are not properly trained in the use of force. They do not

undergo formal law enforcement training in the appropriate use of force, despite their possession

of significant law enforcement powers and despite being required to the know the proper use of

force as mandated in the Policy and Procedures Manual.

56. Neither Defendant the Fiscal Court nor the Defendant Jailer Terry Carl take any action to

ensure that the deputies employed at the Kenton County Detention Center have formal or

11
Steven Jordan vs. Kenton County Detention Center, et al.
United States District Court, Eastern Division at Covington, KY
adequate training in the appropriate use of force to comply with the law or the policy and

procedures manual and this inaction constitutes a custom and official policy by Kenton County

Fiscal Court and Jailer Terry Carl.

57. Deputies at the Kenton County Detention Center do not have training from the Kentucky

Department of Corrections or any formal law enforcement training.

58. As a direct and proximate result of being unlawfully thrown to the floor, Plaintiff

suffered damages including but not limited to a black eye, a gash requiring 28 stitches,

permanent scarring and emotional and trauma.

COUNT III

NEGLIGENCE UNDER STATE LAW

Plaintiff repeats, realleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation

contained within paragraphs 1 through 58 as if fully recited herein and further states as follows:

59. The Fiscal Court, Jailer Carl and the Kenton County Detention Center together with the

deputies employed there are under a duty to protect the safety and welfare of the prisoners under

their custody and control.

60. Defendants Fiscal Court of Kenton County and Jailer Carl violated this duty by failing to

require proper training for any Deputy who interacts with inmates to have adequate training in

the use of force.

61. Defendants Fiscal Court of Kenton County and Jailer Carl violated this duty by

continuing to allow, condone and even encourage the use of force at the Kenton County

Detention Center.

62. The use of excessive force is a regular occurrence at the Detention Center and constitutes

an official policy and custom condoned by the Defendants.

12
Steven Jordan vs. Kenton County Detention Center, et al.
United States District Court, Eastern Division at Covington, KY
59. Defendants violated this duty when Plaintiff was thrown face first to the concrete floor by

Deputy Nussbaum.

63. Deputy Nussbaum negligently failed to follow the policies and procedures of the Kenton

County Detention Center with respect to the appropriate use of force.

64. The Fiscal Court and Jailer Carl violated this duty by failing to properly train deputy

jailers in the appropriate of use of force.

65. As a direct and proximate result of being unlawfully thrown to the floor, Plaintiff suffered

damages including but not limited to a black eye, a gash requiring 28 stitches, permanent

scarring and emotional and trauma.

COUNT IV

ASSAULT AND BATTERY UNDER STATE LAW

Plaintiff repeats, realleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation

contained within paragraphs 1 through 65 as if fully recited herein and further states as follows:

66. Defendant Nussbaum intended to put the Plaintiff in fear for his safety.

67. Plaintiff was in fear for his safety and was assaulted by Defendant Nussbaum.

68. As alleged herein, Defendant Nussbaum intended to cause harm to the Plaintiff and did in

fact cause harm to the Plaintiff.

69. Plaintiff was assaulted by Defendant Nussbaum’s reckless indifference to his safety.

70. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant Nussbaum’s assault and battery by the

use of excessive force upon the Plaintiff, Plaintiff suffered damages as alleged herein.

71. As a direct and proximate result of being unlawfully thrown to the floor, Plaintiff suffered

damages including but not limited to a black eye, a gash requiring 28 stitches, permanent

scarring and emotional and trauma.

13
Steven Jordan vs. Kenton County Detention Center, et al.
United States District Court, Eastern Division at Covington, KY
 COUNT V

FAILURE TO RENDER IMMEDIATE EMERGENCY MEDICAL ASSISTANCE

Plaintiff repeats, realleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation

contained within paragraphs 1 through 71 as if fully recited herein and further states as follows:

72. The Fiscal Court of Kenton County has duty to provide for the safety of inmates at the

Kenton County Detention Center under KRS 441.045

73. Defendant Jailer Carl is under to a duty to provide for the safety, care and treatment of

inmates at the Kenton County Detention Center while they are under his custody pursuant to

KRS 70.040.

74. The Kenton County Detention Center Policy and Procedure Manual requires that an

inmate be provided immediate emergency medical treatment when necessary.

75. Defendants failed to provide immediate medical treatment to the Plaintiff after Deputy

Nussbaum threw him to the concrete floor and injured his face.

76. As a direct and proximate result of being unlawfully thrown to the floor, Plaintiff suffered

damages including but not limited to a black eye, a gash requiring 28 stitches, permanent

scarring and emotional and trauma.

COUNT VI

INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

Plaintiff repeats, realleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation

contained within paragraphs 1 through 76 as if fully recited herein and further states as follows:

77. Plaintiff has a right guaranteed under the Fourth Amendment to the United States

Constitution as well as the parallel and ancillary provisions in the Kentucky Constitution, to be

free from cruel and unusual punishment, to be free from a violent attack by jail employees and a

14
Steven Jordan vs. Kenton County Detention Center, et al.
United States District Court, Eastern Division at Covington, KY
right to be free from the deliberate indifference of the jailer and the deputies to his safety and

welfare while he is a prisoner under the care and control of the Defendant Jailer Carl and the

Kenton County Detention Center.

78. Each of these rights was violated by the actions of the Defendants as recounted in this

Complaint with the result that Plaintiff suffered and continues to suffer severe emotional trauma

and distress.

79. The actions of the Defendants as recounted in this Complaint represent a course of

conduct that offends against ordinary and decent standards of care.

80. The actions of the Defendants as recounted in this Complaint were extreme, outrageous

and intolerable in a civilized society.

81. As a direct, proximate and foreseeable result of the intentional and negligent actions of

the Defendants, both in their official and individual capacities, Plaintiff suffered damages

including but not limited to a black eye, a gash requiring 28 stitches, permanent scarring and

emotional and trauma.

PUNITIVE DAMAGES

Plaintiff repeats, realleges and incorporates by reference each and every allegation

contained within paragraphs 1 through 81 as if fully recited herein and further states as follows:

82. Plaintiff has a right guaranteed under the Fourth Amendment to the United States

Constitution as well as the parallel and ancillary provisions in the Kentucky Constitution, to be

free from cruel and unusual punishment and to be free from a violent attack by jail employees

while under the care, custody and control of the Kenton County Detention Center.

83. The Kenton County Detention Center through the Kenton County Fiscal Court, Jailer

Carl and Deputy Nussbaum, officially and in their individual capacities, violated Plaintiff’s

15
Steven Jordan vs. Kenton County Detention Center, et al.
United States District Court, Eastern Division at Covington, KY
rights by the actions as alleged in this Complaint.

84. The actions as alleged in this Complaint are the type of conduct for which punitive

damages are assessed to prohibit the same conduct in the future.

85. The actions as alleged in this Complaint rise to the level of deliberate indifference,

intentional and reckless conduct, gross negligence and constitute a reckless and wanton disregard

for the value of human life, the physical safety of the prisoners under their control and care, and

the dignity and well-being of the prisoners under their control making each Defendant liable for

punitive damages under Kentucky common law.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, for the reasons given in this Complaint, Plaintiff demands:

a) Trial by jury on all matters, including a jury instruction on awarding punitive damages;

b) To be compensated for his medical bills as well as the physical and mental damages
suffered as a result of an unlawful and unconstitutional beating;

c) An award of attorney’s fees and expenses of the case;

d) and for all other relief, both equitable and otherwise, as the Court may deem
reasonable and necessary.

Respectfully submitted by:

/s/Don Nageleisen
_________________________
Donald L. Nageleisen (829050)
2216 Dixie Highway #203
Ft. Mitchell, KY 41017
859-491-8887
dlnlegalmail@yahoo.com

16
Steven Jordan vs. Kenton County Detention Center, et al.
United States District Court, Eastern Division at Covington, KY