Emmanuel Wright Lawsuit
Emmanuel Wright Lawsuit
01-CV-2022-900890.00
205-325-5355
jackie.smith@alacourt.gov
DOCUMENT 1
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
3/25/2022 4:02 PM
01-CV-2022-900890.00
State of Alabama Case Number: CIRCUIT COURT OF
COVER SHEET JEFFERSON COUNTY, ALABAMA
Unified Judicial System
CIRCUIT COURT - CIVIL CASE 01-CV-2022-900890.00
JACQUELINE ANDERSON SMITH, CLERK
(Not For Domestic Relations Cases) Date of Filing: Judge Code:
Form ARCiv-93 Rev. 9/18
03/25/2022
GENERAL INFORMATION
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, ALABAMA
EMMANUEL WRIGHT v. MIKE BRYAN ET AL
NATURE OF SUIT: Select primary cause of action, by checking box (check only one) that best characterizes your action:
ATTORNEY CODE:
DAW002 3/25/2022 4:02:04 PM /s/ WILLIAM MONROE DAWSON JR.
Date Signature of Attorney/Party filing this form
Election to Proceed under the Alabama Rules for Expedited Civil Actions: YES NO
DOCUMENT 2
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
3/25/2022 4:02 PM
01-CV-2022-900890.00
CIRCUIT COURT OF
JEFFERSON COUNTY, ALABAMA
JACQUELINE ANDERSON SMITH, CLERK
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, ALABAMA
EMMANUEL WRIGHT,
)
)
Plaintiff, )
) Civil Action Number:
v. )
)
)
MICHAEL JONES, individually and in )
His capacity as Chief of Police of the
Town of Brookside; MIKE BRYAN, in his
official capacity as Mayor of the Town
of Brookside; and IVORY PRICE,
Defendants.
COMPLAINT
1. Plaintiffs is an adult citizen who was victimized by the police officers and
2. The Town of Brookside (“the Town”) is a municipal corporation located within the
Birmingham Division of Jefferson County, Alabama. In lieu of suing the Town, this action
is against the Mayor, Mike Bryan, in his representative capacity. He is the chief executive
of Brookside and can control its taking and keeping the property of arrested persons..
3. Defendant Ivory Price was a police officer for the Town of Brookside at the time
4. Defendant Michael Jones was the Chief of Police for the Town of Brookside and
was the chief policymaker and executive of Brookside at the times the matters complained
of herein occurred. He controlled the activities of the police department until his recent
5. On November 19, 2019, Plaintiff was driving on I-22 and was stopped by
Defendant Ivory Price, allegedly either for windows having too much tint or for having an
improper dealer’s tag on his vehicle. Plaintiff had recently purchased the Jeep in
6. Plaintiff and his vehicle were searched though there was no probable cause or
reasonable suspicion to do so. Plaintiff was told that his vehicle was listed as stolen. He
was taken to the Brookside Jail and charged with 7 misdemeanor offenses. Defendant
Price is the Brookside officer who stopped, arrested Plaintiff and took control of his
7. Plaintiff was held in Brookside for three days before being transferred to the
Jefferson County Jail on the charge of receiving stolen property in the first degree. During
those three days, Plaintiff was held without shoes and was forced to sleep on the floor.
8. When arrested, Plaintiff’s vehicle held a large amount of his belongings. Included
were expensive clothes, luggage, shoes, a Rolex watch, cell phones and considerable
personal jewelry. Plaintiff was an entertainment promoter and used expensive furnishings
in conjunction with his employment. He also had personal papers including property
records for real estate he was purchasing in Jefferson County and in California.
9. Plaintiff also $9,500 in cash with him when he was stopped. It and the property in
the vehicle were taken by defendant Price and Brookside upon the arrest.
10. Defendant Price wrote in his police report that he found $6.657 in the vehicle,
along with GUCCI luggage and bags, a large diamond necklace, bracelet, Rolex watch,
11. After Plaintiff was finally transferred, booked and released from the Jefferson
County Jail, he was given his personal clothes and identification, as the other matters of
12. Plaintiff called Brookside and inquired about the 2015 Jeep he had been driving
but was never given an answer about where it was or its status. He was left without funds
13. Plaintiff also called Brookside numerous times in an effort to recover his property
but never got an answer. He called over a period of two years and never got an answer
14. The defendants nor Brookside never filed to condemn any of the property.
15. As phone calls did no good, Plaintiff got a lawyer to write the Town Clerk on
February 17, 2022 to request return of his property and state that suit would be filed.
16. Plaintiff’s lawyer did write the wrecker service and was informed that the Jeep was
taken to its lot to be held for Brookside, but that Brookside came and got it a few days
later. The paperwork from the wrecker service bears that out.
17. Plaintiff has suffered a loss of income from being deprived of his money and
property. He was to promote entertainment in Atlanta, but that was cancelled by his arrest
and incarceration. Also, being deprived of his funds impaired his ability to travel and work.
He has lost the use of his property and had the expense of replacing expensive items of
clothes, shoes and other items. He also was unable to finance real estate that he was
buying since the deeds and financial papers were kept from him. One property in
California was foreclosed due to his inability to pay since Defendants had all of his funds.
DOCUMENT 2
18. Plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive relief in order to force defendants to
return his property or to pay him for the reasonable value of such items. Plaintiff seeks
actual damages for the loss of use of his property, for mental anguish and emotional hurt,
for conversion and punitive damages in an amount to punish defendants and to deter
converted his property as named in the earlier paragraphs of this complaint. He seeks
return of each item and appropriate damages for the detention, loss of use, damage to
any item, and appropriate monetary damages, both actual and punitive, for loss of income
requiring Defendants to be ordered to return his property without further delay following
21. COUNT THREE: IMPROPER BAILMENT: Even though the property may have
with Plaintiff and had a duty to safeguard his property. The failure and refusal to account
for such and return it to him indicates that Defendants have violated that obligation and
the legitimate requests of Plaintiff requires that they be ordered to account for each item
of Plaintiff which was taken from him, providing information about where each item is at
a. That defendants be required to account for each item of property taken from
b. The return of all such property or the fair market value of each such item which is
not returned,
c. Appropriate monetary damages for Plaintiff’s loss of use of such property and for
any incidental losses incurred by Plaintiff as a result of not having the use of his
d. Actual damages for mental anguish and inconvenience for the violation of his
f. Any other relief to which Plaintiff might be entitled, including all costs of this action