Case 1:16-cv-02674 Document 1 Filed 10/28/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 17

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No.:
JEFFREY MARK TOMLINSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
MICHAEL DE LAURENTIS, in his individual capacity; and
SEAN HUMPHREY, in his individual capacity,
Defendant.
______________________________________________________________________________
PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND
______________________________________________________________________________
Plaintiff, Jeffrey Mark Tomlinson, by and through counsel, David A. Lane and Eudoxie
(Dunia) Dickey of KILLMER, LANE & NEWMAN, LLP, respectfully alleges for his Complaint and
Jury Demand as follows:
I.
1.

INTRODUCTION

This action arises out of Defendant Florence Police Chief Michael De Laurentis

and Defendant Florence Police Sergeant Sean Humphreys use of excessive and totally

disproportionate force in releasing and sicing a ferocious, highly-trained police dog to take down
and capture Jeffrey M. Tomlinson by jumping onto him with the full force of his massive body
and viciously mauling him, biting him three separate times and leaving gaping wounds and
permanent injuries and scars on his upper back, shoulder, torso, bicep and shinbone.
2.

At approximately 2:10 P.M. on October 30, 2014, Defendant De Laurentis pulled

over the Plaintiff as he was driving in downtown Florence for allegedly failing to make a right
1

Case 1:16-cv-02674 Document 1 Filed 10/28/16 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 17

turn signal and driving with a suspended or denied driver license. Upon stopping Mr.
Tomlinson, Defendant De Laurentis conducted a search and found a small pocket knife and glass
pipe on him, and when Plaintiff made an attempt to grab the pipe for fear of being charged with
drug possession, Defendant De Laurentis attempted to arrest Plaintiff, who took off running.
Although Plaintiff, who is 54 and weighs just 110 pounds, had not committed any violent
offenses, had not verbally or physically threatened Defendant De Laurentis, was unarmed and
did not pose any threat to public safety and merely ran off and hid in a ditch in town,
nevertheless Defendant De Laurentis chose to unnecessarily escalate the situation in a wholly
disproportionate response in relation to the circumstances. Defendant De Laurentis called in an
entire team comprising both Florence Police Department officers and Fremont County Sheriffs
Office deputies to mount a full-scale search operation and directed Defendant Humphrey to use
excessive force if necessary to capture Plaintiff by releasing his police service dog to repeatedly
bite Plaintiff, which Defendant Humphrey did with devastating consequences, inflicting deep
bite marks over various parts of his body and leaving Plaintiff in extreme pain.
3.

Defendants violated Plaintiffs constitutionally protected right to be free of

excessive force guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, causing Plaintiff
significant pain, injuries, emotional distress and lasting and permanent injuries and scars.
II.
3.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

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.

4.

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

5.

Jurisdiction supporting Plaintiffs claim for attorneys fees and costs is conferred

by 42 U.S.C. 1988.
2

Case 1:16-cv-02674 Document 1 Filed 10/28/16 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 17

6.

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 at the time of the events giving rise to this litigation.
III.

PARTIES

Plaintiff
7.

Plaintiff, Jeffrey Mark Tomlinson, is a citizen of the United States and was at all

times relevant hereto a resident of and domiciled in the State of Colorado.

Defendants
8.

At all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendant Michael De Laurentis was a

citizen of the United States, resident of and domiciled in the State of Colorado and was acting
under color of state law in his capacity as Chief of Police employed by the Florence Police
Department. In his capacity as Police Chief, Defendant Michael De Laurentis is a final
policymaker for the city of Florence, Colorado with respect to all matters concerning the
Florence Police Department and all of its divisions.
9.

At all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendant Sean Humphrey was a citizen

of the United States, resident of and domiciled in the State of Colorado and was acting under
color of state law in his capacity as a Sergeant employed by the Florence Police Department.
IV.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

Jeffrey Tomlinsons Life

9.

Mr. Tomlinson is of diminutive stature, standing only 54 tall and weighing just

110 pounds.
10.

He is 46 years old and was born in Pueblo, Colorado on January 24, 1970.

Case 1:16-cv-02674 Document 1 Filed 10/28/16 USDC Colorado Page 4 of 17

11.

Mr. Tomlinson was raised in Fremont County, Colorado and graduated from

Florence High School.

12.

Mr. Tomlinson is a trained carpenter and makes his living by practicing his trade

in taking on various carpentry jobs.

Mr. Tomlinsons Brutal and Unjustified Mauling by Police Service Dog Faraon
upon orders from Defendants Michael De Laurentis and Sean Humphrey
13.

On October 30, 2014 at approximately 2:10 P.M., Plaintiff was driving on E.

Main Street in Florence, Colorado with two passengers, when Defendant De Laurentis pulled
him over for allegedly failing to make a right turn signal. In reality, Defendant De Laurentis
pulled Plaintiff over because he was aware that Plaintiff was driving with a cancelled or denied
driver license.
14.

Plaintiff complied with Defendant De Laurentis signal for him to pull over his

vehicle. Upon Defendant De Laurentis request to present his driver license, insurance and
registration, Plaintiff admitted that he still did not have a driver license because it was cancelled
or denied.
15.

Defendant De Laurentis made several requests of Plaintiff, including asking him

to secure a knife found in the car into the trunk of his vehicle, with which demands Plaintiff fully
cooperated.
16.

Defendant De Laurentis then asked Plaintiff whether he had any drugs or weapons

on his person, to which Plaintiff replied No.

17.

Defendant De Laurentis next asked Plaintiff whether he could search him.

Plaintiff consented.
4

Case 1:16-cv-02674 Document 1 Filed 10/28/16 USDC Colorado Page 5 of 17

18.

Defendant De Laurentis asked Plaintiff to place his hands on the hood of his

squad car. Plaintiff complied and placed his hands on the hood of the police vehicle.
19.

In conducting his search, Defendant De Laurentis found a small pocket knife and

a glass pipe on Plaintiffs person. Defendant De Laurentis removed both objects from Plaintiffs
pants, and placed the pipe on the roof of his squad car.
20.

Plaintiff asked Defendant De Laurentis not to charge him with any drug charges,

and reached for the pipe. Defendant De Laurentis used his arm to block Plaintiff from grabbing
the pipe, and informed him that he would not charge him provided the pipe come back clean
after being tested for drug residue.
21.

Plaintiff, fearful that he would receive drug possession charges, again attempted

to reach for the pipe, and at this point Defendant De Laurentis grabbed his right hand and told
him he was under arrest.
22.

Plaintiff pulled away and broke free of Defendant De Laurentis grip and

proceeded to run away from the officer.

23.

At no point in time did the 54, 110 pound Plaintiff attempt to verbally or

physically threaten Defendant De Laurentis.

24.

In conducting his search of Plaintiffs person, Defendant De Laurentis had

removed the small pocket knife which Plaintiff is accustomed to carrying. Defendant De
Laurentis did not discover any other weapons as part of his search, and accordingly knew that
Plaintiff was unarmed. Plaintiff was not carrying a gun, and no gun or other weapons were later
discovered in the vehicle which Plaintiff had been driving.
5

Case 1:16-cv-02674 Document 1 Filed 10/28/16 USDC Colorado Page 6 of 17

25.

In connection with this incident, Plaintiff was eventually charged with several

non-violent drug possession charges, as well as driving under restraint with a cancelled or denied
driver license, failure to signal a turn and resisting arrest. He ultimately pled guilty to charges of
tampering with physical evidence, possession of a controlled substance and obstructing a peace
officer, all of which are non-violent offenses.
26.

Plaintiff has never been arrested for, charged with or convicted of any violent

offenses. Defendant De Laurentis knew Plaintiff did he have any outstanding warrants, because
Defendant De Laurentis backup officer, Byron Cline, had run a search of Plaintiffs record
shortly after Defendant De Laurentis pulled Plaintiff over. Further, as is often the case in small
towns such as Florence, Defendant De Laurentis knew who Plaintiff was, and as the Police
Chief, likely would have been aware that he is a not a violent individual who poses any threat to
the community.
27.

Defendant De Laurentis did discover some drug paraphernalia and small bags of

drugs in the back of Plaintiffs car, but it was never determined to which of the three individuals
in the car Plaintiff was driving these items belonged.
28.

Having broken free of Defendant De Laurentis, Plaintiff took off running through

downtown Florence, first heading toward an alley, then jumping over a wall, and cutting in
between houses on E. Main St. Defendant De Laurentis followed him on foot in hot pursuit.
Florence Police Department Officers Byron Cline and Michael Gordon along with Defendant De
Laurentis began to chase after the nimble Plaintiff, yelling for him to stop running.
29.

Officer Cline chased Plaintiff on foot until Plaintiff started to scale a 6-foot

wooden fence. Standing within 10 feet of him, Officer Cline yelled for Plaintiff to stop or he

Case 1:16-cv-02674 Document 1 Filed 10/28/16 USDC Colorado Page 7 of 17

would tase him. When Plaintiff kept climbing, Officer Cline deployed his Taser and one of the
prongs stuck in Plaintiffs jean jacket. Plaintiff climbed the fence and jumped over.
30.

Defendant De Laurentis and Officers Cline and Gordon soon lost track of

Plaintiff, who ran off and eventually hid in a ditch in town.

31.

At this point, despite the fact that he was aware Plaintiff had not committed any

violent offenses, had not threatened him or any other officer, was unarmed and did not pose a
threat to the community, Defendant De Laurentis made the decision to disproportionally escalate
the situation, rather than waiting for the opportunity to apprehend Plaintiff at a future time.
32.

Frustrated that he and his officers were too slow to catch up to the quick-footed

Plaintiff, Defendant De Laurentis requested assistance from both the Florence Police Department
and the Fremont County Sheriffs Office, calling in a number of officers to the scene in a wholly

disproportionate response in relation to the nature of Plaintiffs non-violent charges, the fact that
Defendant De Laurentis knew Plaintiff was unarmed, had not physically or verbally threatened
him or any other officers, and clearly did not pose a threat to public safety. Nevertheless, at the
direction of Defendant De Laurentis, numerous officers arrived on scene and set up a search
perimeter. Defendant De Laurentis provided Plaintiffs physical and clothing description to the
officers, with orders to search for him in and around town.
33.

At approximately 2:20 P.M., Defendant De Laurentis chose to further escalate

the situation by requesting assistance from Defendant Florence Police Department Sergeant Sean
Humphrey K-91, the handler of Police Service Dog (PSD) Faraon, a powerful, highly-trained
Belgian Malinois with a massive head and muscular buildthe same breed of dog used by U.S.
7

Case 1:16-cv-02674 Document 1 Filed 10/28/16 USDC Colorado Page 8 of 17

Secret Service Agents to guard the White House. When Defendant Humphrey arrived on scene
at approximately 2:30 P.M., Defendant De Laurentis directed him to track and apprehend
Plaintiff by releasing PSD Faraon to attack, bite and take down the Plaintiff if necessary.
34.

At this point, as Officer Gordon was walking down a ditch from Third Street

southbound toward Main St., he discovered Plaintiff hiding in a ditch under a bridge, whereupon
Officer Gordon pulled out his gun and yelled for Plaintiff to stop and get on the ground. Plaintiff
continued running and jumped out of the ditch over a fence onto E. Main St. at Florence Mini
Storage.
35.

The police dispatch advised Defendant De Laurentis and the other pursuing

officers that Plaintiff had been spotted. Defendant De Laurentis immediately directed all
Florence Police Department and Fremont County Sheriffs Office officers to search and capture
the Plaintiff in downtown Florence.
36.

Next, Officer Cline and Fremont County Sheriffs Deputy Brody spotted Plaintiff

hiding in some weeds near two large oil tanks, whereupon Plaintiff began to run again, this time
toward Robinson Storage, and jumped another fence. A number of officers were now chasing
Plaintiff through downtown Florence as he raced northbound by a carwash and across E. Main
St.
37.

As Plaintiff raced behind Best Car Wash in downtown Florence, Defendant De

Laurentis instructed Defendant Humphrey to respond to the area where Plaintiff had been spotted
and capture him by any means necessary, including releasing PSD Faraon to take down Plaintiff
with his muscular body mass, sharp teeth and powerful claws.

Case 1:16-cv-02674 Document 1 Filed 10/28/16 USDC Colorado Page 9 of 17

38.

At approximately 2:50 P.M., Defendant Humphrey prepared PSD Faraon for

attack, placing a harness on him displaying POLICE on both sides and securing him on a 30foot leash. The two walked the area where Plaintiff had been seen.
39.

As he raced through downtown and eventually into the Chaps Patio Bar and Grill

parking lot, a large number of officers, as many as 10 or 12, were pursuing and began to
surround Plaintiff, including Defendant Humphrey with PSD Faraon.
40.

Looking around for Plaintiff, Defendant Humphrey readied Faraon for attack by

making canine commands to Faraon identifying his authority and ordering him to search for
Plaintiff.
41.

Defendant Humphrey and Faraon discovered Plaintiff crouching in a corner at the

end of a storage building. When Plaintiff noticed Defendant Humphrey armed with the large and
dangerous police dog, he ran again and climbed over a fence in an effort to get away from the
fearsome creature.
42.

At this point, Defendant Humphrey was running with Faraon approximately 35-

40 feet behind Plaintiff. Although Defendant Humphrey apparently yelled that he would release
his police dog if Plaintiff did not stop running, witnesses at the scene attested that because
Faraon was barking loudly, they could not clearly hear what Defendant Humphrey was saying.
Running 35-40 feet ahead of Defendant Humphrey, Plaintiff likewise was unable hear or make
out Defendant Humphreys words over Faraons loud and excited barking. He kept running and
ended up in the Chaps parking lot, now surrounded by 10 or 12 officers, and ran to hide behind a
car.

Case 1:16-cv-02674 Document 1 Filed 10/28/16 USDC Colorado Page 10 of 17

43.

Despite the fact that based on his discussion with Defendant De Laurentis,

Defendant Humphrey would have been aware of the non-violent nature of Plaintiffs charges;

despite Plaintiffs diminutive size and his total lack of physical or verbal threats to Defendant De
Laurentis or any of the officers pursuing him; despite the fact that Defendant De Laurentis had
already searched Plaintiff and knew him to be unarmed; despite the fact that Plaintiff had been
discovered merely hiding in and near downtown several times without posing any threat to the
officers or public safety and there was no emergency situation or reason to immediately
apprehend the terrified man; and despite the fact that at this point, Plaintiff was already
surrounded by a large number of officers in the Chaps parking lot and was attempting to hide
behind and under a car; Defendant Humphrey nevertheless made the decision to order Faraon to
excessively forcefully capture Plaintiff by biting.
44.

According to Defendant Humphreys police incident report, a reason he made the

unjustified decision to use excessive and potentially deadly force to capture Plaintiff was because
he was out of breath, [and] tired from running after [Plaintiff]. He gave a command that
sounded like SHAH! indicating to Faraon to bite Plaintiff.
45.

Running at full speed, the ferocious canine jumped up onto the Plaintiff, who was

cowering by a car, and viciously bit him on his upper back and right shoulder, digging in deeply
with his teeth and knocking him to the ground with his full mass on top of him.
46.

Although Plaintiff was already on the ground and could have been handcuffed and

taken into custody, Defendant Humphrey did not order the dog to release Plaintiff; instead,
Plaintiff tried to fight the dog off, and succeeded in getting Faraon to release his bite.
10

Case 1:16-cv-02674 Document 1 Filed 10/28/16 USDC Colorado Page 11 of 17

47.

Defendant Humphrey gave a second SHAH! command for Faraon to again bite

Plaintiff, who had now partially squeezed himself under the car in extreme pain and fear. Faraon
obeyed Defendant Humphreys command as he had been specially trained to do, and now sank

his teeth deep into Plaintiffs ribcage and bicep. Again, Plaintiff managed to fight the huge,
barking creature off.
48.

Defendant Humphrey then gave a third SHAH! command, and the excited dog

continued viciously mauling Plaintiff, jumping on top of him again and biting into Plaintiffs shin
bone, at which point, Defendant Humphrey finally commanded Faraon to release his bite.
49.

Defendant Humphrey, Defendant De Laurentis and numerous other officers who

had already surrounded Plaintiff now piled on top of Plaintiffs small frame. Sheriffs Deputy

Brody handcuffed him as Defendant De Laurentis pushed down his police baton upon Plaintiffs
lower back with full force.
50.

Defendant Humphrey called for medical personnel. When the Emergency

Medical Services team arrived, medical personnel noticed Plaintiff was bleeding profusely and
saw how grave his injuries were, telling him and the officers on scene he needed to be taken to
the hospital immediately.
51.

Still handcuffed, the traumatized and bleeding Plaintiff was transported by

ambulance to St. Thomas More Hospital in Caon City, Colorado, where he required 17 stitches
to close the numerous wounds Faraons sharp teeth had inflicted over various parts of his body.

11

Case 1:16-cv-02674 Document 1 Filed 10/28/16 USDC Colorado Page 12 of 17

He was later transported to the Fremont County Jail and was released on bail two days later.
Due to the serious nature of his pain and injuries, he was placed in a medical unit at the jail.
52.

The below image is a photograph taken by Plaintiff upon his release from jail,

approximately 48 hours following Faraons ferocious attack, and shows the dog bite wounds on
his upper back:

53.

The below image is a photograph taken by Plaintiff upon his release from jail,

approximately 48 hours following Faraons ferocious attack, and shows the dog bite wounds on
his bicep:

12

Case 1:16-cv-02674 Document 1 Filed 10/28/16 USDC Colorado Page 13 of 17

54.

The below image is a photograph taken by Plaintiff upon his release from jail,

approximately 48 hours following Faraons ferocious attack, and shows the dog bite wounds on
his torso:

13

Case 1:16-cv-02674 Document 1 Filed 10/28/16 USDC Colorado Page 14 of 17

55.

Defendant De Laurentis and Defendant Humphreys unjustified and wholly

disproportionate and excessive use of force in unnecessarily escalating the situation by mounting
a full search for a terrified, unarmed and hiding individual who had not committed any violent
offenses, made any threats, was unarmed and did not pose a threat to public safety, and ordering
a massive, highly-trained police service dog to repeatedly bite Plaintiff three separate times over
14

Case 1:16-cv-02674 Document 1 Filed 10/28/16 USDC Colorado Page 15 of 17

multiple areas of his body, caused Plaintiff extreme pain and suffering, emotional distress,
lasting injuries and permanent scars.

STATEMENT OF CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
U.S.C. 1983 Fourth Amendment Violation
Excessive Force
(Against All Defendants)
45.

Plaintiff hereby incorporates all other paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set

forth herein.
46.

Defendants Michael De Laurentis and Sean Humphrey were acting under color of

state law in their actions and inactions that occurred at all times relevant to this action.
47.

At the time when Defendant Michael De Laurentis directed the entire law

enforcement force in Florence to search for and capture Plaintiff, and Defendant Humphrey
ordered his police service dog to excessively forcefully take down Plaintiff by repeatedly biting
him, Plaintiff had a clearly established constitutional right to be secure in his person from
unreasonable seizure through excessive force.
48.

Any reasonable law enforcement officer knew or should have known of this

clearly established right.

49.

Defendants De Laurentis and Humphrey engaged in use of force that was

objectively unreasonable in light of the facts and circumstances confronting them, violating
Plaintiffs Fourth Amendment rights.
50.

Defendants De Laurentis and Humphreys respective actions and inactions, as

described above, were motivated by intent to harm Plaintiff.

15

Case 1:16-cv-02674 Document 1 Filed 10/28/16 USDC Colorado Page 16 of 17

51.

Defendants De Laurentis and Humphreys respective actions and inactions, as

described herein, were undertaken intentionally, maliciously, willfully, wantonly, and/or in

reckless disregard of Plaintiffs federally protected rights.
52.

The acts and omissions of each Defendant described herein, were the legal and

proximate cause of Plaintiffs damages.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in his favor
and against Defendants, and award him all relief as allowed by law and equity, including, but not
limited to the following:
a. Declaratory relief and injunctive relief, as appropriate;
b. Actual economic damages as established at trial;
c. Compensatory damages, including, but not limited to those for past and future
pecuniary and non-pecuniary losses, emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience,
mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life, medical bills, and other non-pecuniary
losses;
d. Punitive damages for all claims as allowed by law in an amount to be determined
at trial;
e. Issuance of an Order mandating appropriate equitable relief, including but not
limited to issuance of a formal written apology from each Defendant to Plaintiff;
f. Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest at the highest lawful rate;
g. Attorneys fees and costs; and
h. Such further relief as justice requires.
PLAINTIFF DEMANDS A JURY TRIAL ON ALL ISSUES SO TRIABLE.
DATED this 28th day of October 2016.
16

Case 1:16-cv-02674 Document 1 Filed 10/28/16 USDC Colorado Page 17 of 17

KILLMER, LANE & NEWMAN, LLP

s/ David A. Lane
__________________________
David A. Lane
Eudoxie (Dunia) Dickey
1543 Champa Street, Suite 400
Denver, CO 80202
(303) 571-1000
dlane@kln-law.com
ddickey@kln-law.com
ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

17

Case 1:16-cv-02674 Document 1-1 Filed 10/28/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1

Please wait...
If this message is not eventually replaced by the proper contents of the document, your PDF
viewer may not be able to display this type of document.
You can upgrade to the latest version of Adobe Reader for Windows, Mac, or Linux by
visiting http://www.adobe.com/go/reader_download.
For more assistance with Adobe Reader visit http://www.adobe.com/go/acrreader.
Windows is either a registered trademark or a trademark of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries. Mac is a trademark
of Apple Inc., registered in the United States and other countries. Linux is the registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in the U.S. and other
countries.