Jerome Knockum VS Sheriff Michael J. Waguespack, Donald Calamia, Deputy Officer and Patrick Sons, Deputy Officer
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF LOUISIANA COURT OF APPEAL FIRST CIRCUIT NUMBER 2012 CA 0277 JEROME KNOCKUM VERSUS MICHEAL J WAGUESPACK SHERIFF ASSUMPTION PARISH DONALD CALAMIA DEPUTY OFFICER PATRICK SONS DEPUTY OFFICER Judgment Rendered November 2 2012 Appealed from the Third Twenty Judicial District Court In and for the Parish of Assumption State of Louisiana Docket Number 33 217 Honorable Guy Holdridge Judge s Jerome Knockum St Gabriel LA Appellant Plaintiff In Proper Person Fred Schroeder Counsei for Jason P Wixom Appellees Defendants New Sheriff J Michael Orleans LA Waguespack Deputy Donald Calamia and Deputy Patrick Sons BEFORE CARTER C GUIDRY AND GAIDRY JJ J GUIDRY J Plaintiff Jerome Knockum an inmate housed at the Elayn Hunt Correctional Center appeals the dismissal of his personal injury suit as prescribed According to the plaintiffs petition on August 13 2010 two deputies with the Assumption Parish Sheriffs Office Donald Calamia and Patrick Sons committed assault battery police brutality used excessive force not necessary to make an arrest of a non resisting unarmed nonviolent criminal suspect in the course of responding to a burglar alarm that had been activated at a local business As a result of the deputies actions the plainriff alleged that he sustained serious injuries While incarcerated the plaintiff filed a petition for damages asserting claims against the two deputies for injuries he allegedly sustained during his arrest The plaintiff also named Sheriff Michael J Waguespack as a defendant in the petition alleging that he was liable for failing to train the deputies to properly and safely perform an arrest without inflicting injuries and for failing to promulgate appropriate arresting policy regulations and procedures on arrest without excessive force unnecessary violence of police brutality assault and battery Plaintiff delivered his petition to prison officials for mailing to the district court on August 11 2011 and the petition was received and filed by the Twenty Third Judicial District Clerk of Court on August 1 S 201 L In response to the plaintiff s petition the defendants filed a peremptory exception raising the objection of prescription asserting that the plaintiff s claim was barred because the delictual action was filed more than one year after the alleged injuries occurred See La C art 3492 Following a hearing the trial court sustained the peremptory exception and dismissed the plaintiff s petition with prejudice The plaintiff appeals asserting that based on the mailbox rule his petition was timely filed However the mailbox rule pronounced by the U Supreme S 2 Court in Houston v Lack 487 U 266 108 S 2379 101 L 245 1988 S Ct 2d Ed has been held not to apply to non civil suits filed by prisoners See administrative Richardson v Sav 31 p 4 App 2d Cir 7 740 Sa 2d 771 774 989 La 99 22 writ denied 99 La 11 749 So 2d 677 cert denied 529 U 1100 2493 99 19 S 120 S 1836 146 L 779 2000 Thus we find no error in the trial court Ct 2d Ed s judgment sustaining the peremptory exception raising prescription however as the plaintiff was granted leave to pursue this appeal in forma pauperis we will not assess costs in this matter AFFIRMED 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
