Sherrie Manton IFoA v. Sheriff Rodney “Jack” Strain, Jr. et al.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
SHERRIE BURAS MANTON
FIRST AND SECOND AMENDMENT
INDEPENDENT FIREARM OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.
ACTION NO.
VERSUS
MAGISTRATE JUDGE:
SHERIFF RODNEY “JACK” STRAIN, JR.,
DEPUTY CHIEF AL STRAIN, ST. TAMMANY PARISH SHERIFF’S OFFICE, FRED OSWALD,
SHERIFF’S COUNSEL CHARLES HUGHES,
DEPUTIES BRIAN O’CULL, ALLEN SCHULKENS,
RANDY THIBODEAUX, JERRY COYNE
JERRY ROGERS, AND ALLEN MCGUIRE,
AND JOHN AND JANE DOES 1-5
JURY TRIAL
ORIGINAL COMPLAINT AND REQUEST FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
1. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
St. Tammany Parish Sheriff Jack Strain’s deputies executed a search warrant on the home of Sherrie Buras Manton and Norman J. Manton, Jr. on January 24, 2008. The deputies tore apart the Manton home and took items protected by the First and Second Amendments to the United States Constitution and Articles I, § 8 and § 11 of the Louisiana Constitution.
Among the items unlawfully taken by Sheriff Jack Strain, Deputy Chief Al Strain, and their deputies were:
- One of the Manton Bibles with select chapters from the Old and New Testaments;
- The Missal they use to Celebrate Mass [Buras is, her Children were Roman Catholic];
- Their son David’s Rosary, given to him at First Communion;
- A Wooden Prayer Box brought from Europe during WWII;
- Two St. Francis Medals blessed by Pope John Paul II;
- Two “Our Lady of Medjugorje” Medals given to Norman Manton;
- Small Journals used by Sherrie Buras Manton at Metairie Cenacle Retreats;
- Various Religious and Prayer Cards;
- An American Flag carrying bag, made of blue denim; and
- David Manton’s Remington 870 Youth Model 20 Gauge Shotgun with his initials “DJM” carved in the stock; his Mother gave David the shotgun when he was ten years old.
David was 18 years old when the shotgun was taken from the Manton home, although it was not identified in the search warrant, nor were any other firearms.
Neither the Holy Bible, the other religious items, nor the shotgun have been returned although this illegal seizure took place on January 24, 2008. Only the shotgun is listed on the Return of the Search Warrant. Sheriff Jack Strain and his office have an established and well-documented history of violating the Second Amendment rights and the privacy rights of the residents and citizens of St. Tammany Parish.
2.
New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin and co-defendant Sheriff Jack Strain were sued by the National Rifle Association and Second Amendment Foundation for prior unconstitutional seizures of firearms lawfully owned by St. Tammany and Orleans Parish citizens immediately after Hurricane Katrina. National Rifle Association of America, Inc. et al v. Ray Nagin, Jack Strain, et al. [USDC I EDLA 2:05-cv-04234-CJB-JCW]. Nagin and Strain were permanently enjoined by the federal court from such unlawful seizures and forced to return all known firearms taken at that time. [See: Rec. docs. 9, 12, 66].
3.
The United States Court specifically ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED THAT: “JACK STRAIN, Jr., Sheriff, St. Tammany Parish and Sheriff’s Deputies and all of [Strain’s] officers, agents, servants and employees are hereby enjoined and ordered to cease and desist confiscating lawfully-possessed firearms from all citizens, including but not limited to, members of plaintiffs’ National Rifle Association of America, Inc. and Second Amendment Foundation, Inc.” [NRA v. Nagin & Strain Case No. 05-4234, Rec. d. 9, at pp.2-3. January 3, 2006].
4.
The United States Court judgment against Jack Strain is still in force and the federal Court PERMANENTLY ENJOINED STRAIN to “cease and desist [from] confiscating lawfully-possessed firearms from all citizens…” [NRA v. Nagin & Strain Case No. 05-4234, Rec. d. 9, at pp.2-3. January 3, 2006]. Jack Strain’s co-defendant Ray Nagin was ordered to do the same. Ms. Buras and the Independent Firearm Owners Association ask the Court to enforce its standing order against Sheriff Strain, once again.
5.
At no time in modern memory did the citizens of St. Tammany and Orleans Parishes and the State of Louisiana need the elemental protections guaranteed by their right to own and bear firearms than during the weeks and months after Katrina.
6.
At no time during the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita did any other law enforcement agency in the State of Louisiana, or Mississippi, or Texas for that matter, seize the lawfully-possessed firearms of their people. Only those agencies run by Jack Strain and Ray Nagin did so. Upon information and belief, Strain agreed to hire NOPD police officers who were fired and otherwise removed from the New Orleans Police Department, the proof of which is now evidenced by the fact of such numerous hirings.
7.
While the Founding Fathers anticipated such abuses by local authorities and enshrined the Second Amendment protections to prevent those abuses, the Founding Fathers never envisioned the seizure of a family’s Holy Bible and other items used in worship, such as were seized from Sherrie Buras and her family by Sheriff Jack Strain, Chief Deputy Al Strain, and their employees.
8.
As the Strains were acting under the color of law, their seizure of Sherrie Buras’s Holy Bible, her son’s First Communion Rosary and other items of worship and prayer violate her First Amendment rights under the Constitutions and laws of Louisiana and of the United States.
9.
“Article I, § 8 of the Louisiana Constitution provides that no law shall prohibit a citizen from the free exercise of his or her religion…;” and “Article I, § 11, of the Louisiana Constitution provides: ‘The right of each citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged….'”
10.
The Strains’ actions also violated Sherrie Buras’ Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights of (1) freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, (2) due process, and (3) equal protection.
CUSTOM AND PRACTICE OF PRIVACY VIOLATIONS
11.
Defendants Strain and his office have a custom and practice of intruding into the private lives of St. Tammany citizens and violating not only their First and Second Amendment rights but also violating their general rights to privacy. Strain and the Sheriff’s Office have installed hidden cameras on the streets and intersections of Covington and other areas around the parish and have set up a surveillance center in the Old Courthouse on Boston Street [911 Communications Center – 2nd Floor], from which they conduct 24-hour-a-day surveillance. Defendant Strain’s spying on the people of Covington and St. Tammany constitutes government intrusion—being local—at its worst and most offensive.
JURISDICTION
12.
The United States District Courts have jurisdiction over this matter as it arises under the First and Second Amendments to the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America and under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, 28 U.S.C. § 1343(3), 28 U.S.C. §§ 2201, 2202, and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and in that this action seeks to redress the deprivation of the rights, privileges, and immunities of complainant Sherrie Buras Manton guaranteed by the United States Constitution including, but not limited to the First, Second, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments and by Acts of Congress, and further guaranteed by the Constitution of the State of Louisiana and other pertinent statutes, laws and ordinances of the State.
13.
Venue is vested in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana under 28 U.S.C. § 1391. Ms. Buras Manton and all defendants are domiciled in the Parish of St. Tammany, State of Louisiana within the Eastern District of these Courts.
PARTIES
14.
The Petitioners in this cause of action are:
A. SHERRIE BURAS MANTON, a person of the full age of majority, a third-grade teacher at Lyon Elementary School in Covington, Louisiana, a Parishioner of St. John’s Catholic Church, a resident and domiciliary of the Parish of St. Tammany, State of Louisiana.
B. IFOA, INC., INDEPENDENT FIREARMS OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. is a Delaware Corporation with its primary office located in Rindge, New Hampshire 03461. The purpose of the IFOA includes the protection of the right of families and citizens to keep and bear firearms in the guaranteed exercise of their Second Amendment rights for the lawful defense of their families, persons, and property, and to promote public safety and law and order. The Independent Firearm Owners Association joins this action in support of itself and its members and associations in the Parish of St. Tammany, State of Louisiana.
15.
The Defendants in this cause of action are:
A. RODNEY “JACK” STRAIN, JR. (“Sheriff Strain”), individually, and in his official capacity, who was, at all times pertinent hereto, the duly elected, qualified and acting Sheriff for St. Tammany Parish Sheriff’s Office and who is responsible for the policies and procedures and lack of those policies and procedures under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and its application under Monell and who is as well, vicariously liable for the actions of his deputies and employees under Louisiana law.
B. CHIEF DEPUTY OVER HUMAN RESOURCES AL STRAIN (Deputy Chief Strain), individually, and in his official capacity, who was, at all times pertinent hereto, the duly appointed, qualified and acting Deputy Chief Sheriff for St. Tammany Parish Sheriff’s Office and who is responsible for the policies and procedures and lack of those policies and procedures under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and its application under Monell and who is as well vicariously liable for the actions of all his deputies and employees under Louisiana law.
C. CHIEF DEPUTY OVER INVESTIGATIONS FRED OSWALD (Chief Deputy Oswald), Individually, and in his official capacity, who was, at all times pertinent hereto, the duly appointed, qualified and acting Chief of Deputies for St. Tammany Parish Sheriff’s Office and who is responsible for the policies and procedures and lack of those policies and procedures under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and its application under Monell and who is vicariously liable for the actions of all his deputies and employees under Louisiana law; who in violation of the Mantons’ First and Second Amendment rights unlawfully seized and conspired to seize the religious items belonging to Sherrie Buras and “the shotgun” belonging to her son David Manton.
D. SGT. BRIAN O’CULL (Sgt. O’Cull), Individually and in his official capacity, as a duly appointed, qualified and acting St. Tammany Parish Sheriff’s Deputy, and who in violation of the Mantons’ First and Second Amendment rights unlawfully seized and conspired to seize the religious items belonging to Sherrie Buras and “the shotgun” belonging to her son David Manton.
E. DEPUTY JERRY ROGERS (Deputy Rogers), Individually and in his official capacity, as a duly appointed, qualified and acting St. Tammany Parish Sheriff’s Deputy, and who in violation of the Mantons’ First and Second Amendment rights unlawfully seized and conspired to seize the religious items belonging to Sherrie Buras and “the shotgun” belonging to her son David Manton.
F. DEPUTY JERRY COYNE (Deputy Coyne), Individually and in his official capacity, as a duly appointed, qualified and acting St. Tammany Parish Sheriff’s Deputy, and who in violation of the Mantons’ First and Second Amendment rights unlawfully seized and conspired to seize the religious items belonging to Sherrie Buras and “the shotgun” belonging to her son David Manton.
G. DEPUTY ALLEN MCGUIRE (Deputy McGuire), Individually and in his official capacity, as a duly appointed, qualified and acting St. Tammany Parish Sheriff’s Deputy, and who in violation of the Buras’s First and Second Amendment rights unlawfully seized and conspired to seize the religious items belonging to Sherrie Buras and “the shotgun” belonging to her son David Manton.
H. DEPUTY RANDY THIBODEAUX (Deputy Thibodeaux), Individually and in his official capacity, as a duly appointed, qualified and acting St. Tammany Parish Sheriff’s Deputy, and who in violation of the Buras’s First and Second Amendment rights unlawfully seized and conspired to seize the religious items belonging to Sherrie Buras and “the shotgun” belonging to her son David Manton.
I. DEPUTY ALLEN SCHULKENS (Deputy Schulkens), Individually and in his official capacity, as a duly appointed, qualified and acting St. Tammany Parish Sheriff’s Deputy, and who in violation of the Buras’s First and Second Amendment rights unlawfully seized and conspired to seize the religious items belonging to Sherrie Buras and “the shotgun” belonging to her son David Manton.
J. DEPUTY ASSISTANT CHIEF TIM LINTZ (Deputy Asst. Chief Lintz), Individually and in his official capacity, as a duly appointed, qualified and acting St. Tammany Parish Sheriff’s Deputy, and who in violation of the Mantons’ First and Second Amendment rights unlawfully seized and conspired to seize the religious items belonging to Sherrie Buras and “the shotgun” belonging to her son David Manton.
K. CHARLES M. HUGHES, JR., lead counsel for Sheriff Strain and for the St. Tammany Parish Sheriff’s Office, who formulates the legal policies for these defendants and whose decisions and policy recommendations are the cause-in-fact for a substantial portion of the Sheriff and his department’s violations of the constitutional and privacy rights of the citizens of St. Tammany, including but not only those violations visited upon Ms. Buras in this matter. Hughes had direct contact with officers in the Sheriff’s office who call him personally and obtain legal advice prior to making and acting on decisions.
L. DEPUTY DOES NOS. 1-5, Individually and in his/her official capacity, as a duly appointed, qualified and acting St. Tammany Parish Sheriff’s Deputy, and was, at all times pertinent hereto, who in violation of the Mantons’ First and Second Amendment rights unlawfully seized and conspired to seize the religious items belonging to Sherrie Buras and “the shotgun” belonging to her son David Manton.
16.
At all times pertinent hereto, defendants were employed by Sheriff Jack Strain and St. Tammany Parish Sheriff’s Office in the capacities previously identified; the acts and omissions of these individual defendants were performed in the course and scope of their employment with St. Tammany Parish Sheriff’s Office and were further carried out under the color of state law, regulations, customs, and policies.
17.
Defendants, St. Tammany Parish Sheriff’s Office, may not avail itself of the defense of qualified immunity on the grounds that the acts and omissions which lead to some and/or all of the constitutional deprivations and State law tortious conduct alleged herein, as those acts were the result of grossly deficient customs and policies created, supported, and/or promulgated by said defendants, as is more fully described herein below.
18.
The individual defendants, Sheriff Jack Strain, Deputy Chief Strain, O’Cull, Rogers, Coyne, and DOES may not avail themselves of the defense of qualified immunity, as these defendants acted personally upon and in disregard of policies created, supported, and/or promulgated the customs, and policies of the St. Tammany Parish Sheriff’s Office, which lead to some or all of the constitutional deprivations and State Law tortious conduct alleged herein.
Statement of Facts
19.
During November 2007, Deputy Chief Fred Oswald along with Sgt. Brian O’Cull opened and carried out an investigation regarding the disappearance of missing person Albert Bloch. At that time, a former Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s Deputy, Mark Hebert, was being investigated for the disappearance of Mr. Bloch.
20.
A person driving Mark Hebert’s truck tried to cash a check drawn on the account of Mr. Block at the Chase Bank on Boston Street in Covington, Louisiana.
21.
Norman J. Manton, Jr.—the husband of complainant Sherrie Buras—was falsely identified by a bank teller as the person driving the truck of Mark Hebert when in fact the person with Hebert’s truck was another sheriff’s deputy who Hebert’s wife has subsequently identified and testified about during her deposition. Defendants identified the other sheriff’s deputy who had the truck and had Mark Hebert’s keys at the time the attempted bank fraud took place. It was not Norman Manton.
22.
Additionally, the bank teller who made the false identification told Judge August J. Hand that she was pressured into making the identification of Norman Manton by the police officers who questioned her at midnight at her home. Judge Hand has testified to that fact under oath.
24.
After meeting with the teller and only eyewitness for approximately ten minutes, the Louisiana Assistant Attorney General Stefan Martin dismissed all charges against Manton.
25.
Based on a false affidavit ordered by Chief Oswald and sworn to by Sgt. O’Cull, defendants secured a warrant and searched the Buras-Manton home on January 24, 2008.
26.
Co-defendants Schulkens, Thibodeaux, McGuire, Coyne, and others conducted the search and took the religious items and David Manton’s shotgun, although not one of those items was listed on the Search Warrant itself. 3
27.
During the initial investigation, each of these defendants named above conspired to and did seize the religious articles from Sherrie Buras and the shotgun from her son David while Ms. Buras was teaching her third-grade class at Lyon Elementary.
28.
Despite demands made to counsel for the sheriff and in the pleadings of the earlier actions, to date, the defendants have NOT returned either the Bible, prayer books, rosary and medals, or the shotgun. The Mantons have subsequently lost both of their children in unrelated accidents.4
FRCP 9(b) Particularity
29.
The fraud and attacks perpetrated upon Sherrie Buras by these defendants are set forth below with the “particularity of circumstance” required under FRCP 9(b) as applied by the Fifth Circuit in United States Ex rei. James H Grubbs [No. 07-40963J].
30.
On or about January 23, 2008, Petitioner’s husband met with defendant O’Cull for questioning about the missing person, Albert Bloch.
31.
Unknown to Ms. Buras or Mr. Manton, O’Cull, in conspiracy with defendants Oswald and Lintz 3 Exhibit A – Defendant-deputies involved in January 24, 2008, search and items taken from Buras. 4 David Jay Manton 10/18/88 – 05/14/2010; Meghan Buras Manton 06/06/91 – 05/23/10 obtained a search warrant and directed defendants Coyne, Rogers, Thibodeaux, and McGuire to go to and search her home at the same time her husband was being interrogated on January 24, 2008.
32.
When Ms. Buras got home, she realized that a search warrant had been executed while Mr. Manton was being interrogated earlier that day. The house was torn apart. And the religious items and youth model shotgun identified above were taken. Her previous home was searched as well.
33.
All defendants named herein conspired to and did search Ms. Buras’s home and did authorize and otherwise condone or participate in the unlawful seizure of these items in violation of the First and Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and Art. I, §§ 8 & 8 of the Louisiana Constitution.
34.
Neither the Bible, the Missal, the Rosary, the Religious Medals, Prayer Books, or shotgun have been returned to Ms. Buras, although they were taken over three years ago.
35.
Ms. Buras and counsel have asked for the return of these items on several occasions and have brought it to the attention of another Court, which found that the request for these items was outside the scope of its proceedings. Upon information and belief, Ms. Buras learned that the religious items were thrown away or destroyed and her son’s shotgun sold or given away by defendant, Sheriff Jack Strain. 5
CLAIMS FOR RELIEF PURSUANT TO BOTH FEDERAL & LOUISIANA CAUSES OF ACTION
COUNT ONE
(Right to Keep and Bear Arms)
5 Evidence of other St. Tammany citizens’ firearms seized and given to STPSO officers, employees, and friends will be produced during discovery.
36.
Paragraphs 1 through 25 are realleged and incorporated herein by reference.
37.
Article I, § 11, of the Louisiana Constitution provides: “The right of each citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be abridged, but this provision shall not prevent the passage of laws to prohibit the carrying of weapons concealed on the person.” The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, which applies to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment, similarly provides: “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
38.
The above-described acts of Defendants ordering the confiscation of firearms of citizens and actually confiscating firearms from citizens abridged and infringed on the right of each Plaintiff and countless other citizens to keep and bear arms, in violation of La. Const., Art. I, § 11, and U.S. Const., Amends. II and XIV.
39.
The United States Supreme Court established that Second Amendment guarantees are rights secured for individual citizens and their families. McDonald v. Chicago 130 S.Ct. 3020 (2010). McDonald, incorporating District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), spoke to the issue of handguns, thus, a fortiori applies to long guns for self-defense in the home as in this case.
COUNT TWO
(Due Process)
40.
Paragraphs 1 through 29 are realleged and incorporated herein by reference.
41.
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that no State shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.
42.
The firearms confiscated by defendants constituted private property that was lawfully possessed by plaintiffs pursuant to State and Federal law. Moreover, the manner in which plaintiffs kept, bore, and possessed such property was a liberty interest recognized by State and Federal law.
43.
Said liberty and property interests are recognized by La. Const., Art. I, § 11, which guarantees the right to keep and bear arms; LSA-R.S. § 40:1379.3, which provides for a statewide permit which “shall grant authority to a citizen to carry a concealed handgun on his person” (subsection B) and which may be revoked only according to specified procedures; and by other provisions of Louisiana law.
44.
Accordingly, by ordering the confiscation of firearms and by actually confiscating the firearms belonging to Plaintiffs and countless other citizens, Defendants deprived them of liberty and property without due process of law, in violation of U.S. Const., Amend. XIV.
COUNT THREE
(Equal Protection)
45.
Paragraphs 1 through 34 are realleged and incorporated herein by reference.
46.
The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that no State shall deny to any person the equal protection of the laws.
47.
Defendants thereby discriminated against plaintiff for certain reasons underlying the targeting Buras and Manton for this treatment and, as a result of their predisposition against them, denied them the equal protection of the law.
COUNT FOUR
(Search and Seizure)
48.
Paragraphs 1 through 37 are realleged and incorporated herein by reference.
49.
The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which applies to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment, provides in part that “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated”.
50.
As described above, Defendants issued or executed orders that persons’ (including plaintiff) homes and personal religious belongings be searched, seized, and not returned, and that their firearms be seized and kept for an indefinite period. Plaintiff committed no unlawful acts, did not threaten any law enforcement officers, or engage in any other activity that would justify such searches and seizures. As well, no activities by this or other persons could justify the seizure of items used by those persons in worship and prayer.
51.
The above-described acts of defendants violated the right of each plaintiff and countless other citizens to be secure in their persons and houses against unreasonable searches and seizures, in violation of the United States and Louisiana Constitutions, their Amendments, and Articles.
POLICY FORMULATION BY COUNSEL & SHERIFF
52.
CHARLES M. HUGHES, JR., lead counsel for Sheriff Strain and for the St. Tammany Parish Sheriff’s Office, formulates the legal policies for these defendants, whose decisions and policy recommendations are the cause-in-fact for a substantial portion of the Sheriff and his department’s violations of the constitutional and privacy rights of the citizens of St. Tammany, including but not only those violations visited upon Ms. Buras in this matter. Hughes had and has direct contact with individual officers and deputies who call him personally and obtain legal advice prior to making and acting on decisions. Defendant Hughes, individually and officially, as in-house counsel, acting for and with—not only Sheriff Strain himself—but also acting with and advising the deputies directly, advising them as to actions they can and do take, is a de facto policymaker for Sheriff Strain and the St. Tammany Parish Sheriff’s office and is liable jointly and severally with the other defendants for the violations of the rights of Ms. Buras and of the other citizens of St. Tammany similarly affected.
INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
53.
Sherrie Buras and the IFOA ask the Court to enforce its Order of January 3, 2006, wherein The United States District Court ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED THAT: “JACK STRAIN, Jr., Sheriff, St. Tammany Parish and Sheriff’s Deputies and all of [Strain’s] officers, agents, servants, and employees are hereby enjoined and ordered to cease and desist confiscating lawfully-possessed firearms from all citizens, including but not limited to, members of plaintiffs’ National Rifle Association of America, Inc. and Second Amendment Foundation, Inc.” [NRA v. Nagin & Strain Case No. 05-4234, Rec. d. 9, at pp.2-3. January 3, 2006].
54.
The United States Court judgment against Jack Strain is still in force and the federal Court PERMANENTLY ENJOINED STRAIN “to cease and desist [from] confiscating lawfully-possessed firearms from all citizens….” [NRA v. Nagin & Strain Case No. 05-4234, Rec. d. 9, at pp.2-3. January 3, 2006]. Ms. Buras and the Independent Firearm Owners Association ask the Court to enforce its standing order against Sheriff Strain, once again.
DAMAGES
55.
Sherrie Buras has suffered the following as a result of defendants’ violation of her First Amendment, Second Amendment, Fourth Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment rights under the United States Constitution and their violations of her Article § 8, and § 11 rights under the Louisiana Constitution:
A. Unlawful taking of her Holy Bible, Missal, and other items used by her in worship and prayer;
B. Unlawful taking of her late son David Manton’s Holy Rosary, which she had given him for his First Communion;
C. Unlawful taking of her late son David Manton’s Remington 870 Youth Model 20 Gauge Shotgun with his initials “DJM” carved in the stock—which she had given him at age ten;
D. Mental anguish… from defendants’ taking of her own and her son’s religious items used at Mass and for worship and prayer;
E. Mental anguish from defendants’ taking of her son’s Remington 870 Youth Model 20 Gauge Shotgun;
F. Humiliation, insult, injury to reputation caused-in-fact by defendants’ unlawful search of her home and seizure of the items taken from the home; and
G. All other damages identified and set forth between now, the hearings, and trial on this matter.
56.
All of the defendants named herein are liable unto Sherrie Buras, jointly, severally, and in solido.
57.
Inasmuch as any of the allegations contained herein are inconsistent, they are deemed to have been pled in the alternative.
ATTORNEY’S FEES
58.
Undersigned counsel specifically pleads his right to attorney’s fees as authorized by the Civil Rights Attorney’s Fees Awards Act of 1976, amending Title 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1988, for his actions in enforcing Sections 1983 and 1985 of Title 42 of the United States Code.
JURY TRIAL
59.
As to federal and state constitutional issues not exclusive triable by the Court, Sherrie Buras and the Independent Firearms Owners are entitled to and request a trial by jury.
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, Complainants Buras and the Independent Firearm Owners Association pray that the Court:
(1) Order defendant Strain and his subordinates to return Sherrie Buras’s Holy Bible, Missal, and other religious items taken from her home on January 24, 2008;
(2) Enforce the January 3, 2006 Order against defendants Strain and all persons in his department, prohibiting their confiscation of firearms in violation of Buras’s right to keep and bear arms, to not be deprived of liberty or property without due process of law, to not be denied the equal protection of the laws, and to be free of unreasonable searches and seizures, all in violation of the First, Second, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, and of the Louisiana Constitution, Article I, § 8 and § 11.
(3) Issue a temporary restraining order and preliminary and permanent injunctions compelling defendants to return all unlawfully seized religious items and firearms to Sherrie Buras (including the members of the association Plaintiffs) and to their other lawful owners, and ordering them not to make further unlawful seizures of firearms.
(4) Grant such other and further relief as may be proper.
(5) Award plaintiffs attorney’s fees and costs.
(6) Reimburse costs, expenses, and pay judicial interest arising under law.
Complainants Buras and the Independent Firearm Owners pray that summons be issued, and once served and due process had, the Court enter judgment in favor of Sherrie Buras, against defendants, and grant all relief supported by the facts and applicable under federal and state law.
“A Government that does not trust its law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms, is itself unworthy of trust.”
— James Madison, Federalist Papers
Respectfully submitted:
/s/ Daniel G. Abel
Daniel G. Abel
[La. Bar No. 8348]
2421 Clearview Parkway
Legal Department
Suite 106
Metairie, LA 70001
Telephone: 504.208.9610
Facsimile: 888.577.8815
/s/ Richard J. Feldman
Richard J. Feldman, Esq.
[Washington D.C. Bar No. 399259]
President, IFOA, Inc.
PO Box 340
129 Mountain Road
Rindge, NH 03461
Telephone: 603. 899.6444
Facsimile: 888.727.2891
Counsel for Sherrie Buras Manton and Counsel for Sherrie Buras Manton and
Independent Firearm Owners Association Independent Firearm Owners Association
Affidavit of Sherrie Buras
And Verification of Facts
Before Me came Sherrie Buras [Manton], who was sworn, testified, and affirmed:
1. My name is Sherrie Buras Manton; I have personal knowledge of all facts set forth in this complaint.
2. I am the mother of David Manton and for his tenth birthday, I gave David the Remington 870 Youth Model 20 Gauge Shotgun that the Sheriff took from our home and never returned.
3. I was the owner of the seized religious items or gave those items to other members of my family including my Son and Daughter.
4. I confirm that all the other facts stated in this complaint are true and accurately set forth as written.
Sworn and subscribed to on April 10, 2011
Reviewed, edited and formatted by Daoud Legal: Sydney Criminal Defence & Traffic Lawyers.
