A Michigan resident is seeking at least $3 million in damages after alleging that local police officers used excessive force and unlawfully seized him during a traffic stop, raising questions about police practices and accountability in the community. The complaint was filed on April 7, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan by Oliaran Pernell against the City of Flint and three named officers: Courtney Banks, Collin Hambrick, and Amir James.
According to the filing, the incident occurred on September 13, 2025, when Pernell was a passenger in a vehicle near Saginaw Street and North Dort Highway within the City of Flint. The complaint states that officers Banks, Hambrick, and James approached the vehicle without observing any illegal conduct or having probable cause regarding Pernell or other occupants. It further alleges that Pernell was not driving, was not suspected of any crime, did not resist arrest, nor posed any threat to the officers.
The lawsuit outlines several legal claims under both federal civil rights law (42 U.S.C. § 1983) and Michigan state law. Pernell asserts that his Fourth Amendment rights were violated when officers used “immediate and unjustified physical force” against him without probable cause or reasonable suspicion. The complaint cites relevant case law including Graham v. Connor (U.S. Supreme Court), Baker v. City of Hamilton (Sixth Circuit), Kent v. Oakland County (Sixth Circuit), and Goodwin v. City of Painesville (Sixth Circuit) to support its position that force against a non-resisting suspect is unconstitutional.
Pernell also claims that all three individual defendants either directly applied force or failed to intervene to prevent its use despite having an opportunity to do so. The document states: “Defendants observed OLIARAN PERNELL, a non-threatening passenger, subjected to excessive force and failed to act despite having a reasonable opportunity to prevent such conduct.” Specific allegations include forcibly removing Pernell from the vehicle, throwing him to the ground, and subjecting him to pepper spray.
In addition to accusing individual officers of misconduct, the lawsuit holds the City of Flint responsible for what it describes as failures in training, supervision, discipline, and policy implementation regarding its police department. Citing Monell v. Department of Social Services (U.S. Supreme Court), Pernell alleges that these failures amount to deliberate indifference towards citizens’ constitutional rights: “The City demonstrated deliberate indifference by failing to discipline officers.” The complaint further asserts that there is a custom within the city’s police department allowing unlawful stops and detentions without proper legal justification.
The plaintiff brings additional counts under Michigan law for assault and battery as well as gross negligence. He contends that “excessive force constitutes assault and battery” under state statutes and accuses defendants’ actions as reckless with substantial disregard for his safety.
As relief from the court, Pernell requests judgment against each defendant for no less than $3 million in damages along with compensatory damages for injuries suffered—including physical harm and economic losses such as loss of employment—punitive damages intended to deter future misconduct by public officials or entities, attorney fees under federal statute 42 U.S.C. § 1988, costs associated with litigation, and any other relief deemed appropriate by the court.
The case is represented by attorney W. Otis Culpepper of Detroit (615 Griswold Street Suite 1325). The official case number is 5:26-cv-11137-JEL-APP.
Source: 526cv11137_Oliaran_Pernell_v_City_of_Flint_Complaint_Eastern_District_of_Michigan.pdf
