$150,000 Jury Award in Owens vs Sheriff Michael Hunt et al.

by Don Moniak

November 30, 2022

The first general provision of Title 24 of South Carolina law—Corrections, Jails, Probations, Paroles, and Pardons—pertains to a Sheriff’s responsibility for managing county jails:

“The sheriff shall have custody of the jail in his county and, if he appoints a jailer to keep it, the sheriff shall be liable for such jailer and the sheriff or jailer shall receive and safely keep in prison any person delivered or committed to either of them, according to law.”

On November 4, 2022, an Aiken County jury in the Second Circuit Court of South Carolina returned a verdict finding Aiken County Sheriff Michael Hunt and three local government agencies grossly negligent in their supervision and confinement” of Aiken Detention Center inmate Otis Owens in January, 2017. The jury awarded $150,000 in damages.

Owens has a criminal record dating back to the late 1990’s for convictions ranging from receiving stolen goods and grand larceny to a variety of illegal drug possession charges. According to court records, at the time of the incident he was in pre-trial detention.

Sheriff Hunt was first elected in 2003, and since then has easily won five re-elections. Captain Nick Gallum is presently the Jail Administrator for the Aiken County Detention Center, but was not named in the lawsuit. The jail also has chronic understaffing issues—job openings for underpaid detention center officers are a fixture in the county’s jobs listings.

According to the sheriff’s office , the average daily population at the facility is 407 inmates. Around the time of the incident the jail reported to the Aiken Standard that it had exceeded its official capacity—317 inmates at the time—sixteen times in 2016.

The case was filed in June, 2017; and the subsequent five years of litigation featured:

• Sheriff Hunt and Aiken County declining an offer to settle, in 2018, for $75,000; and again in 2021 for $100,000. 
• Defense lawyers unsuccessfully preventing Sheriff Mike Hunt from being deposed. 
• Allegations emerging of pervasive mistreatment of inmates at Aiken County Detention Center; including another personal injury lawsuit in 2022.
• The Aiken County Sheriff’s Office being accused of “gamemanship” and “nefariously colluding” to force a trial without Owens present.

Timeline of Owens vs Sheriff Michael Hunt et al (1)

June 20, 2017:  On behalf of Otis Owens of Warrenville, SC, Greenville, SC Attorney Joshua Hawkins  files a lawsuit  against Sheriff Michael Hunt, the Aiken County Sheriff’s Office, the Aiken County Detention Center, and Aiken County, claiming:

“”On or about January 27, 2017, when the plaintiff was going in from the recreation yard, an Aiken County Detention Center corrections guard, in searching the plaintiff, probed the plaintiff’s belly button, ran his hands up the inside of the plaintiff’s legs, and grabbed and squeezed the plaintiff’s testicles. The guard maliciously and aggressively assaulted the plaintiff, going beyond anything necessary to search the plaintiff. The guard, while acting for the governmental defendants, acted in disregard for the plaintiff’s rights, and acted in a way that could only be construed as at least reckless and grossly negligent.”

The complaint went on to state that Owens requested and was denied medical treatment; but a month after the assault “ a sonogram revealed that the plaintiff had sustained injuries to his groin and that fluid had accumulated around his testicles, and was treated with Tylenol and antibiotics for ten days for the injuries he sustained as a direct and proximate result of the defendants’ tortious acts.”

The complaint asserted that “all governmental and non-governmental entities condoned and ratified the actions of guards, officers, employees, and agents acting on their behalf during the events related to this action.”

July 25, 2017: Attorney William Davidson, representing Sheriff Hunt, the Sheriff’s Office, and Aiken County, answers the complaint by denying all charges and claiming immunity for his clients.

June 15, 2018; Judge Keesley orders mediation, to be completed by October 1, 2018. The deadline is later extended to June 2019.

October 23, 2018: Owens offers to settle for $75,000, and defense declines offer.

October 23, 2019. Owens attorney Joshua Hawkins files a second lawsuit against individual Aiken County detention center guards. The complaint alleges that before assaulting Owens, Deputy Timothy Gibson “accused the plaintiff and other inmates of playing dice,” that no dice were ever found, and that Gibson had “violated another prisoner’s rights in the same way.” (2)

August 12, 2020: Following a separate incident, three Aiken County Detention Center guards are fired after an internal investigation into the beating of an inmate. (3)

February 5, 2021: An Alternative Dispute Mediation results in an impasse.

August, 2021: Owens offers to settle for $100,000.

December 21, 2021: Parties agree to a trial date the week of February 21, 2022.

February 5, 2022: “Due to unique circumstances,” the court orders a 90-day continuance of the case and the jury trial is postponed.

March 1, 2022: Attorney Hawkins files a Motion for Costs (4) describing the twist in the case leading to postponement. Before the trial date, Owens violated parole during house arrest and could not be located. Hawkins alleged that the Aiken County Sheriff’s office knew where Owens was located, chose not to apprehend him, and “nefariously colluded, deceived opposing counsel, and wasted the Court’s time for the purpose of attempting to force the trial without Owens present.

April 4, 2022:  Attorney Davidson files a motion to quash to prevent Sheriff Hunt from being deposed, arguing that he had no firsthand knowledge and his position involves many responsibilities, and that being deposed would only serve to embarrass him:

“This witness, who is Sheriff of Aiken County, has little or no firsthand knowledge about the facts of this case. Any information he does have that is even arguably relevant can be gathered from other sources without burdening Sheriff Hunt for a deposition. Because of the demands of his position and the absence of any firsthand knowledge relevant to this case, requiring him to appear for a deposition would be a needless imposition on Sheriff Hunt and his many responsibilities and can only amount to an effort to harass, embarrass or cause undue burden on him in violation of the rules.” 

An affidavit from Sheriff Hunt was also filed, in which he swore he was unaware of the facts in the case—even though the case also involved his overall management of the jail.

May 4, 2022: Judge Keesley orders a jury trial to begin October 31, 2022.

June 20, 2022: Circuit court judge William P. Keesley denies Davidson’s motion to quash the deposition of Sheriff Hunt, writing that because the allegations were part of a pattern in the Sheriff’s Department, that he could be deposed under oath:

“The Sheriff has filed an affidavit stating that he knows nothing about any issues related to this lawsuit, aside from what he has learned from staff. He argues that taking his deposition is a waste of time and that the Apex Doctrine prevents his being required to sit for a deposition because he is merely the head of the Department. The court finds that the plaintiff is entitled to depose Sheriff H. Without limiting the scope of the examination, there appears to be an ability to conduct this deposition based on the assertion that this alleged misconduct was a pattern in which members of the Sheriff’s Department engaged.”

Sheriff Hunt was deposed under oath and the deposition was entered into the court record. (5)

October 31 to November 4, 2022. After three previously schedule trials were postponed, a five day jury trial is held. Thirteen witnesses were listed for the Plaintiff, while the Defense called no additional witnesses.

The jury ruled in favor of the plaintiff that, based on the preponderance of evidence, the defendants were grossly negligent.

November 14, 2022.  On behalf of the defense, attorneys Davidson and Andrew Lindemann file a motion for a new trial and to dismiss Aiken County from the case, arguing that: 

• The Sheriff is solely responsible for the management of the Aiken County Detention Center. 
• The Sheriff is a state officer and not a County officer; therefore Detention Center officers are employees of the Sheriff’s Office and not County employees, and therefore, “Aiken County is not liable under state law for any acts or omissions by an employee of the Sheriff working at the Detention Center.” 
• The verdict is “grossly excessive.” 
• There was no expert medical witness testimony. 
• The plaintiff failed to prove gross negligence in the hiring of employees. 
• The plaintiff should have filed a charge of assault instead of, or in addition to, gross negligence, against the guards. 

In regard to the latter contention, Davidson and Lindemann argued that: 

“ The gross negligence standard is not applicable to the intentional tort of assault and battery or any vicarious liability claim based on a sexual assault or sexual misconduct committed by Deputy Gibson. In other words, if the Plaintiff intended to bring a tort claim for the sexual misconduct alleged against Deputy Gibson, the proper cause of action would be for assault and battery – not for gross negligence.”

No date has been set to hear the motion for a new trial.

For another story on a larger jury award for gross negligence, see
Another Verdict of Gross Negligence

Footnotes

(1) Information was obtained primarily from court records available at https://publicindex.sccourts.org/Aiken/PublicIndex/
and through the PACER federal court records system available at
https://pacer.login.uscourts.gov/csologin/login.jsf

(2) Hawkins moved to consolidate the cases two months later, but it was instead transferred to federal court. On April 26, 2022, U.S. Magistrate Judge Molly Cherry granted a motion for summary judgement that dismissed all defendants in that case with the exception of detention Timothy Gibson. The case against Gibson is pending.

(3) The case was turned over to South Carolina Law Enforcement Division (SLED), which filed charges of “misconduct in office” against the three officers on January 15, 2021. Court records show a dismissal in one case; and the Aiken Standard reported the cases were diverted to alternative disposition routes.

On July 20, 2022 Neil Alger and Austin Crosby filed a civil suit against the Aiken County Sheriff’s Department on behalf of Clifford Beaudin, alleging gross negligence and claiming, in part, that:

“Additionally, ACSO has a practice and history of allowing violations of policies and procedures by employees pertaining to excessive force and the improper treatment of inmates.”

The case is pending.

(4) Three weeks after the case was continued for 90 days, Hawkins filed the March 1, 2022, Motion for Costs, which reads as follows:

“The plaintiff filed a motion for a day certain in this case, and this case was set for February 21, 2022. While preparing for trial, the undersigned learned that the plaintiff violated the terms of his parole and could not be located. Because the undersigned was unable to contact the plaintiff, the undersigned reached out to the defendants and indicated the plaintiff would resolve the case for the defendants’ last offer. The defendants instructed the undersigned to send power of attorney documents proving that the plaintiff’s mother had authority to settle the case, which the undersigned did. Then the defendants refused to settle the case.

When the defendants refused resolve the case for their last offer, the undersigned asked the defendants if they would agree to a strike the case pursuant to SCRCP 40(j) so that the undersigned could attempt to locate the plaintiff. The defendants refused. The undersigned then had to file a motion with the Court, which the defendants opposed and continued to oppose at a hearing on February 1, 2022.

After February 21, 2022, passed, Otis Owens was immediately arrested. A deputy told Owens that the Sheriff’s Office had known where Owens was for some time, but that Defendant Michael Hunt instructed deputies not to pick Owens up until after the trial date passed. This means that the defendants nefariously colluded, deceived opposing counsel, and wasted the Court’s time for the purpose of attempting to force the trial without Owens present. The defendants should have arrested Owens when they knew where he was instead of attempting to pull a fast one with the Court. Worse, is that the defendants are public servants and instead of doing the job tax dollars compensate them for, they engaged in gamesmanship, wasting tax payor resources with an unnecessary hearing in the process.

Based upon the conduct of the defendants, the plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court order the defendants to pay costs and fees associated with the previously filed Rule 40(j) motion and this motion.”

The motion to pay costs and fees was denied in the same order denying the defense motion to quash the deposition of Sheriff Hunt.

(5) The depositions of Sheriff Hunt, other ACSO officials, Owens, and other detention center inmates are not publicly available at sccourts.org because they are not scannable. At least one is a video deposition. The depositions have been requested from the Aiken County Clerk of Courts.

On May 22, 2022, during the same period an effort was made to prevent Sheriff Hunt from being deposed, The Aiken Standard publishes a major investigative story by reporter Alexandra Koch detailing a pattern of late night to early morning, warrantless searches on passenger buses on the Aiken County and Lexington County line. The only significant arrest for drug possession during years of routine, warrantless searches was later dismissed by the courts after a judge ruled there was no probable cause for the search, passenger civil rights were violated, and the pretext for the stop was not verified by dashcam video. Sheriff Hunt declined to comment on the issues or the story.