Case 5:18-cv-00092-DCB-MTP Document 5 Filed 08/23/18 Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
WESTERN DIVISION

BARBARA BLACKMON PLAINTIFF

VS. CAUSE NO.: 5:18-CV-00092-DCB-MTP

MARIE CLARK, in her individual and official capacity,
DANIEL PORTER, in his individual and official capacity,
RONALD SHOULDERS, in his individual and official capacity, and
CLAIBORNE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DEFENDANTS

NOTICE OF VOLUNATRY DISMISSAL PURSUANT TO F.R.C.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i)

Pursuant to F.R.C.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Plaintiff

Barbara Blackmon and her counsel, hereby give notice that the above-captioned action is

voluntarily dismissed, without prejudice against the defendants, Marie Clark, in her individual and

official capacity, Daniel Porter, in his individual and official capacity, Ronald Shoulders, in his

individual and official capacity, and the Claiborne County Board of Supervisors.

THIS the 23rd day of August, 2018.

BARBARA BLACKMON, Plaintiff

BY: /s/Edward Blackmon, Jr.

Edward Blackmon, Jr., Esq. (MSB #3354)

OF COUNSEL:

Bradford J. Blackmon, Esq. (MSB #104848)

Marcus A. Williams, Esq. (MSB #104817)
BLACKMON & BLACKMON, PLLC
Attorneys At Law
Post Office Drawer 105
Canton, MS 39046
Telephone: (601) 859-1567
Facsimile: (601) 859-2311
edblackmon@blackmonlawfirm.com
bjblackmon@blackmonlawfirm.com
mwilliams@blackmonlawfirm.com

1
Case 5:18-cv-00092-DCB-MTP Document 1-1 Filed 08/21/18 Page 1 of 2
Case 5:18-cv-00092-DCB-MTP Document 1-1 Filed 08/21/18 Page 2 of 2
 Case 5:18-cv-00092-DCB-MTP Document 1 Filed 08/21/18 Page 1 of 11

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
WESTERN DIVISION

BARBARA BLACKMON PLAINTIFF

VS. CAUSE NO.: 5:18-cv-92-DCB-MTP

MARIE CLARK, in her individual and official capacity,

DANIEL PORTER, in his individual and official capacity,
RONALD SHOULDERS, in his individual and official capacity, and
CLAIBORNE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DEFENDANTS

COMPLAINT

COMES NOW, Plaintiff, by and through undersigned counsel of record, and respectfully

files her Complaint for declaratory, injunctive, and other relief against Marie Clark, in her

individual and official capacity, Daniel Porter, in his individual and official capacity, Ronald

Shoulders, in his individual and official capacity, and Claiborne County Board of Supervisors and

alleges:

INTRODUCTION

1. Plaintiff alleges that she performed the duties of county attorney in according with

Federal and State laws until her wrongful, defamatory, demeaning and unlawful termination by the

defendants on August 20, 2018 while acting in their individual and official capacities as members

of the Claiborne County Board of Supervisors.

2. This due process lawsuit is authorized and instituted pursuant to the Fourteenth

Amendment of the United States Constitution. This Court has jurisdiction over these claims

under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1343(a)(3). Barbara Blackmon seeks declaratory relief pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 2201-2202 and F e d . R . Civ.P. 57 and 65. The federal right asserted by Barbara

1
 Case 5:18-cv-00092-DCB-MTP Document 1 Filed 08/21/18 Page 2 of 11

Blackmon is enforceable under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Art.3, Section 14 of the Miss. Constitution, and

the common laws of the State of Mississippi.

3. Plaintiff further alleges that she is entitled to damages against defendants Clark, Porter

and Shoulders and other potential persons whose identities are unknown to Plaintiff pursuant 42 U.

S.C. for their willful, malicious, intentional violations and deliberate indifference to Plaintiff’s

known rights. The actions of the individually named defendants constitute deliberate indifference

to the known rights of Plaintiffs entitling her to compensatory and punitive damages against said

defendants in their individual capacities.

4. Venue is proper in this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 139 l (e). Barbara Blackmon resides

in the Southern District of Mississippi, Jackson Division, where she worked as the County

Attorney of the Claiborne County Board of Supervisors (hereinafter “Board”) until her

employment was unlawfully terminated on August 20, 2018 by Board defendants Marie Clark,

(hereinafter “Clark”), Daniel Porter, (hereinafter “Porter”) and Ronald Shoulders (hereinafter

“Shoulders”) in Violation of her Fourteenth Amendment right to Due Process.

5. That Plaintiff has a liberty interest in her good name and reputation and a protected

property interest in her contract. That the actions of defendants, and upon information and belief,

other unknown persons have deprived Plaintiff of her liberty and property interests without due

process of law in violation of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution and the due

process clause of the Miss. Constitution.

JURISDICTION

6. That jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331, 29 U.S.C.

§ 1343, the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff

further alleges the she is entitled to assert her state claims in this Court pursuant to the pendant

2
 Case 5:18-cv-00092-DCB-MTP Document 1 Filed 08/21/18 Page 3 of 11

jurisdiction of this Court.

PARTIES

7. Barbara Blackmon is an adult resident citizen of Madison County, Mississippi.

8. Defendant Marie Clark is an adult resident of Claiborne County, Mississippi

and may be served with process of this Court at 2021 Williams Drive, Port Gibson,

Mississippi 39150.

9. Defendant Daniel Porter is an adult resident citizen of Claiborne County,

Mississippi and may be served with process of this Court at 1067 Carroll Road, Port

Gibson, Mississippi 39150.

10. Defendant Ronald Shoulders is an adult resident citizen of Claiborne County,

Mississippi and may be served with process of this Court at 20134 Highway 18,

Hermanville, Mississippi 39086.

11. Defendant, Board of Supervisors of Claiborne County is the governing body

of a County of the State of Mississippi and may be served with process of this Court

through service of its President, Marie Clark at 410 Market Street, Claiborne County,

Mississippi 39150.

12. Plaintiff further asserts and alleges that she is bringing this action against the

individually named defendants herein in their official and personal capacities seeking to

impose personal liability upon the individually named defendants for their official actions

taken under color of state law. The individually named defendants’ intent was to deprive

Plaintiff of due process, equal protections, or equal privileges and immunities and there

was malice and evil intent behind the individual defendants’ actions. Further, Plaintiff

reserves the right to amend this complaint to add others who may have acted in concert
3
 Case 5:18-cv-00092-DCB-MTP Document 1 Filed 08/21/18 Page 4 of 11

with the defendants to deprive Plaintiff of her rights.

13. Plaintiff would show that the acts and conduct of the defendants named herein

were engaged in with the aim and intent to deprive Plaintiff of her employment and

contractual rights without due process of law and other opportunities secured by the laws

of the United States in violation of 42 U.S.C. §1983.

14. Plaintiff asserts and alleges that the actions taken against her by the \

individually defendants named herein were engaged in with the aim and intent to deprive

Plaintiff of her employment and contractual rights without due process of law and other

opportunities secured by the laws of the United States in violation of 42 U.S.C. §1983.

15. Plaintiff asserts and alleges that she has both federal and state constitutional

protected liberty interest in her employment and that defendants herein discharged her in

a manner that has the purpose, effect and result of creating a false and defamatory

impression of her that has stigmatized her.

16. That Plaintiff asserts and alleges that she has a property interest in her

contract and that the termination of said interest was arbitrary and capricious in violation

of the due process clauses of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Art. 3, §14

to the Miss. Constitution.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

17. On or about February 2012, Barbara Blackmon was hired as the county attorney

pursuant to Mississippi Code Annotated Section 19-3-47 (1) (a) of Board and was subsequently

rehired each year. On February 1, 2018 Barbara Blackmon’s Employment Agreement was executed

for a term of one year. See Exhibit “A”.

18. Barbara Blackmon served as County Attorney without incident and was never cited

4
 Case 5:18-cv-00092-DCB-MTP Document 1 Filed 08/21/18 Page 5 of 11

for any cause.

19. On August 20, 2018, in a 3-2 vote, Defendants Clark, Porter and Shoulders voted to

terminate Barbara Blackmon as Board’s County Attorney. Plaintiff was present at the meeting but

was neither informed of the basis for her termination nor given an opportunity to address the Board.

Mississippi Code Ann. Section 19-3-47 (1) (a) provides, that ‘the board of supervisors shall have

the power, in its discretion, to employ counsel by the year at an annual salary at an amount that it

deems proper, not to exceed the maximum annual amount authorized by law for payment to a

member of the board.” The Board employed Barbara Blackmon on February 1, 2018 for a one year

period at the maximum annual amount authorized by law for payment to a member of the board.

See Ex “A”. Barbara Blackmon had a property right to her employment pursuant to the state statute

for a year and pursuant to the contract until February 1, 2018.

COUNT I

20. That Plaintiff restates and realleges ¶¶1-19 and incorporates them within this Count by

reference as if fully copied herein.

21. That at all times herein, Plaintiff had a liberty and property interest in a written

employment contract with defendant. The 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution

establishes a liberty and/or property interest in employment and contracts and prohibits the

termination or violation of the same without due process of law. The individually named defendants

violated these known rights by failing to provide Plaintiff a hearing or the opportunity to present a

defense before the Board.

22. That Board and the individually named defendants, without just cause or good

reason therefor, intentionally and maliciously deprived Plaintiff of her liberty and property interests

under said contract in violation of the due process clause to the 14th Amendment. The individually

5
 Case 5:18-cv-00092-DCB-MTP Document 1 Filed 08/21/18 Page 6 of 11

named defendants knew that Plaintiff had a federally protected property and liberty interests in her

contract yet elected to knowingly and with deliberate indifference violate said rights.

23. That the actions of the individually named defendants occurred while they were acting

under color of state law.

24. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 the actions of Board and individually named defendants

entitled Plaintiff to all damages and other relief against them personally and individually.

COUNT III

25. That Plaintiff restates and realleges ¶¶1-24 and incorporates them within this Count by

reference as if fully copied herein.

26. That pursuant to Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, Plaintiff has a

constitutionally protected liberty interest in her reputation, good name and standing in the

community and in the employment market and the right to defend and protect the same against a

wrongful discharge by the individually named defendants that stigmatizes, demeans and damages

her reputation and good name. The right to the protection of her name and reputation is settled law

and known to the individually named defendants.

27. That Plaintiff would show that she was discharged in a manner the individually

defendants knew or should have known would have the purpose, effect and result of stigmatizing

her and causing damages to her good name and reputation. Further, Board and the individually

named defendants willfully, intentionally and maliciously carried out the discharge of Plaintiff in a

manner they knew would leave a disparaging mark.

28. That as a result thereof Plaintiff’s reputation and good name has been severely damaged

entitling her to all damages caused by the stigmatization of her good name and reputation by Board

and the individually named defendants as provided by 42 U.S.C. §1983.

6
 Case 5:18-cv-00092-DCB-MTP Document 1 Filed 08/21/18 Page 7 of 11

COUNT III

29. That Plaintiff restates and realleges ¶¶1-28 and incorporates them within this Count

by reference as if fully copied herein.

30. That Miss. Code Art. 3, §14 provides that “no person shall be deprived of life,

liberty, or property except by due process of law.

31. That Plaintiff had a liberty interest under Miss. law in her reputation and good name and

a right to be free from defendants’ falsely causing damages or injury to the same by and through

their willful and wanton actions.

32. Further, unless this Court immediately intervenes and order the reinstatement of Plaintiff

together with back pay, fringe benefits and other relief, it will have the purpose, effect and result of

continuing to cause harm to Plaintiff’s reputation and good name and the stigmatization of being

fired without just cause.

33. That Plaintiff is entitled to all damages proximately caused by defendants’ damages to

her reputation.

COUNT IV

34. Plaintiff restates and realleges ¶¶1-33 above and incorporates them within this Count

by reference as if fully copied herein.

35. That Plaintiff would show that she was deprived of the right to unbiased decision-

makers before Board, and that Federal and State constitutional due process requires that there be

fair and impartial decision-makers and that Defendants Clark, Porter and Shoulders were not

impartial and that their minds were irrevocably made to seek Plaintiff’s termination before

7
 Case 5:18-cv-00092-DCB-MTP Document 1 Filed 08/21/18 Page 8 of 11

coming to the board meeting without extending to Plaintiff the opportunity to know the

allegations against her and defend against the same before a fair and impartial tribunal.

36. That as a result of said acts, and the failure to provide Plaintiff a pretermination

hearing, Plaintiff is entitled to any and all relief available to her, including but not limited to

compensatory damages and injunctive relief.

COUNT VI

37. Plaintiff restates and realleges ¶¶1-36 above and incorporates them within this Count by

reference as if fully copied herein.

38. That on August 20, 2018, Board terminated a valid contract it entered into with Plaintiff

without a basis therefor.

39. That the actions of Board, the individually named defendants, and upon information

and belief, other unknown persons was intentionally designed to breach the contract with Plaintiff

and their actions had the purpose, effect and result of breaching Plaintiff’s valid contract with Board

and causing harm to her and her reputation.

40. That as a result Plaintiff is entitled to damages for breach of contract and extra

contractual damages for bad faith breach of contract.

41. Therefore, Plaintiff requests that this Court order specific performance of her contract

including immediate reinstatement, back pay and other fringe benefits.

COUNT VII

42. That Plaintiff restates and realleges ¶¶ 1-41 above and incorporates them within this

Count by reference as if fully copied herein.

43. That defendants Clark, Porter and Shoulders met and conspired together and with others

8
 Case 5:18-cv-00092-DCB-MTP Document 1 Filed 08/21/18 Page 9 of 11

whose identities are unknown to Plaintiff prior to the August 20, 2018, Board meeting for the

purpose and intent of acting in concert to violate Plaintiff’s rights.

44. That as a result of said conspiracy the rights of Plaintiff were and continued to be

violated by the individually named defendants and their unknown persons.

45. That Plaintiff intends to determine the names and identities of the coconspirators during

discovery and add them as party defendants to this action on grounds they interfered with her lawful

contract with Board and encouraged the individually named defendants to breach Plaintiff’s

contract.

46. The United States Supreme Court has long held that in the context of public employment

there must be “some kind of a hearing’ prior to the discharge of an employee who has a

constitutionally protected property interest in his employment.” (BD of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S.

564, 569-70 (1972). Notwithstanding the clearly established law, Clark, Porter and Shoulders

terminated Barbara Blackmon in the absence of notice and a hearing.

47. The Defendants knew or should have known that Barbara Blackmon had a right to notice

and a hearing before she could be terminated by the Board.

48. Barbara Blackmon had a property interest in her employment and a clearly established

right to notice and hearing before she could be terminated from her position as county attorney of

the Board.

49. Clark, Porter and Shoulders unlawfully violated Barbara Blackmon’s Fourteenth

Amendment Right to Due Process guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States

Constitution. In light of the clearly established law, any reasonable supervisor in Mississippi knew

or should have known that Barbara Blackmon was entitled to notice and a hearing before she could

9
 Case 5:18-cv-00092-DCB-MTP Document 1 Filed 08/21/18 Page 10 of 11

be terminated. The actions of Defendants Clark, Porter and Shoulders were objectively

unreasonable.

50. As a proximate consequence of the actions of Clark, Porter and Shoulders, Barbara

Blackmon was unlawfully denied her right to due process.

WHEREFORE PREMISES CONSIDERED, based upon the foregoing, Barbara

Blackmon requests that this Honorable Court grant the following relief:

A. A declaration that Clark, Porter, and Shoulders violated her rights guaranteed by the

Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution when they terminated her without

proper notice and a hearing:

B. A declaration that Barbara Blackmon shall be reinstated to her position as county

attorney with full backpay, fringe benefits, and other amenities authorized by law.

C. A temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction enjoining defendants from

interfering with Barbara Blackmon’s constitutional rights when she returns to her

position as county attorney.

D. Award Plaintiff compensatory damages in the amount of $500,000.00 against Board or

by the jury as provided by 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

E. Award Plaintiff punitive damages in the amounts of $500,000.00 against each individual

defendant for a total ward of $1,500,000.00 in punitive damages and a similar amount

against any and all unknown persons.

F. Award Plaintiff f compensatory damages in the amount of $1,500,000.00, jointly and

severally, against the individually named defendants, Clark, Porter and Shoulders, and

10
 Case 5:18-cv-00092-DCB-MTP Document 1 Filed 08/21/18 Page 11 of 11

other unknown persons, for the willful intentional, malicious and premeditated violation

of Plaintiff’s federal and state protected rights

G. An award to Plaintiff of attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988; and

H. Such other and further as this Court deems appropriate and may be entitled under 42

U.S.C. § 1983.

Respectfully submitted, this the 21st day of August, 2018.

BARBARA BLACKMON, Plaintiff

BY: /s/Edward Blackmon, Jr.

Edward Blackmon, Jr., Esq. (MSB #3354)
OF COUNSEL:

Bradford J. Blackmon, Esq. (MSB #104848)

Marcus A. Williams, Esq. (MSB #104817)
BLACKMON & BLACKMON, PLLC
Attorneys At Law
Post Office Drawer 105
Canton, MS 39046
Telephone: (601) 859-1567
Facsimile: (601) 859-2311
edblackmon@blackmonlawfirm.com
bjblackmon@blackmonlawfirm.com
mwilliams@blackmonlawfirm.com

11