Kilnapp v. City of Cleveland et al

On July 13, 2022, Jennifer Kilnapp (“Plaintiff”), represented by Cathleen M. Bolek and Matthew D. Besser of Bolek Besser Glesius, filed a civil rights lawsuit against Dornat Drummond, City of Cleveland Division of Police (“CDP”) and Bailey Gannon (collectively, “Defendants”), seeking injunctive relief and damages for Defendant’s alleged use of excessive force on Plaintiff. This case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio with Judge Christopher A. Boyko presiding.

In the complaint, Plaintiff alleged, “On the morning of July 20, 2020, rookie Cleveland Police Officer Bailey Gannon shot his partner. Screaming as he fled in panic down a flight of stairs from a man who was neither chasing nor threatening him, Gannon pointed his gun over his head in the opposite direction he was running and began firing blindly behind him. One of his bullets hit his partner, whom he had just run right past.”

Plaintiff further alleged, “Before the end of the day, Cleveland homicide detectives and the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigations conducted a forensic examination of the scene. The results suggested it was probably Gannon who shot his partner. Nevertheless, the Cleveland Division of Police and Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s Office quickly charged an African American man named Darryl Borden with attempted murder, wrongly claiming he shot Gannon’s partner. They did not drop the attempted murder charges against Borden until June 2021, almost a year after the shooting.”

Plaintiff also alleged, “Investigators concluded that Gannon lied about his role in the shooting. Yet the City did not discipline Gannon for lying, let alone for shooting his partner. To the contrary, three months after the shooting the City rated Gannon’s overall performance as exceeding expectations. His supervisor called the shooting a ‘minor setback’ for Gannon.”

Plaintiff then alleged, “It wasn’t minor for his partner. Gannon’s bullet ripped through her forearm before fragmenting in her bicep and chest, lodging near her spine. She believed she was going to die. Nearly two years later, she still has nerve damage that causes pain and numbness in her dominant arm, wrist, and hand. Far worse, she suffers from PTSD.”

Plaintiff also alleged, “She has frequently relived the feeling she was about to die and experienced recurring nightmares. Because of her injuries, she is still unable to return to duty. It is unclear whether she ever will be. Her name is Jennifer Kilnapp. She brings this claim to redress her rights under the United States Constitution.”

Plaintiff then alleged, “The Chief of Police ratified Gannon’s shooting of Kilnapp by failing to discipline him for it or to further investigate it, despite Gannon’s admission on the night of the shooting and despite the fact that Gannon mislead or lied to investigators, which conduct by the Chief equates to an official policy or custom.”

Plaintiff listed two claims for relief, including for the alleged excessive force thereby violating the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. 

In the prayer for relief, Plaintiff requested a judgment granting injunctive relief. Plaintiff also requested an award for damages along with costs of litigation.

This case summary may not reflect the current position of the parties to this litigation or the status of this case. Sign up to view the latest case updates and court documents.