The Stoddard Firm Quoted in the AJC After Landmark 11th Circuit Win: C.B. Will Get Her Day in Court

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution this week covered a landmark ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit — and quoted The Stoddard Firm in its reporting. The case at the center of our firm’s coverage: C.B. v. Naseeb Investments, Inc., our civil sex trafficking lawsuit against the operators of the Hilltop Inn in Conley, Georgia. The 11th Circuit reversed summary judgment and ruled that our client C.B. — who was fifteen years old when she was trafficked at the hotel — will have her case heard by a jury.

This is a major win, and not just for C.B. The court’s ruling is precedential, binding across Georgia, Florida, and Alabama, and is believed to be the first federal appellate decision to clearly establish the evidentiary standard for civil sex trafficking claims against hotel operators under the federal Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act. The law in this area had been unsettled and applied inconsistently by trial courts across the circuit. This ruling fixes that.

“I think that it will mean that a lot of victims get justice more swiftly. What the opinion seemed to say more broadly is that the types of evidence that are generally available when there’s been bad trafficking are enough that we would likely be able to talk to a jury most of the time.” — Matt Stoddard, The Stoddard Firm, as quoted in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Get a Consultation

Contact us or Call us today

What happened to C.B.

Timothy Chappell was a registered sex offender, recently released from federal prison on probation, who checked into the Hilltop Inn as a weekly renter in May 2010. The hotel knew his status and placed him in an area of the property where former employees testified sex offenders were routinely housed. On June 21, 2010, Chappell rented a second room directly next door to his own — paying by the night — and instructed hotel staff not to clean it. Hotel staff complied without question.

Chappell had lured C.B. — a fifteen-year-old girl — online through a Craigslist ad and had her transported to the hotel that same evening. Over the next day and a half, he sexually trafficked her in that second room, with multiple men paying for access to her. A housekeeper made eye contact with C.B. during that time. No one at the hotel intervened or reported anything. Chappell ultimately pleaded guilty to federal sex trafficking charges and received a twenty-year prison sentence.

C.B. filed a civil lawsuit against Naseeb Investments under the TVPRA, which allows trafficking survivors to pursue civil claims against third parties who knowingly benefit from participation in a sex trafficking venture. The district court dismissed her case on summary judgment. We appealed.

The law was unclear — and the courts were getting it wrong

Before this ruling, trial courts across the 11th Circuit were applying the TVPRA’s civil beneficiary standard inconsistently and, in many cases, far too narrowly. Courts had been dismissing strong cases — including C.B.’s — by imposing requirements that simply do not appear in the statute. Some courts demanded that plaintiffs show a hotel had explicit, direct knowledge of trafficking targeting the specific victim who was suing. Others required evidence that hotel employees actively conspired with traffickers before they would allow a case to reach a jury. The district court in C.B.’s case went so far as to express doubt that any TVPRA case built on constructive knowledge could succeed.

That reading of the law was wrong, and the 11th Circuit said so plainly. The statute requires that a defendant knew or should have known that the venture engaged in a TVPRA violation — not that it had explicit knowledge of the specific victim. The court clarified that imputing a hotel employee’s knowledge to ownership through standard common law agency principles is entirely appropriate. And it held that a hotel’s pattern of conduct in accommodating a known sex offender — placing him strategically, renting him a private second room on demand, following his instructions about housekeeping — can and does constitute “participation in a venture” under the TVPRA.

This is the clarification the law needed. And C.B.’s case is now the binding example the 11th Circuit itself points to as proof that constructive knowledge claims belong in front of juries.

Get a Consultation Now

Contact us or Call Us

The evidence in C.B.’s case was compelling

This was not a close case on the facts. The evidence that Naseeb Investments knew — or absolutely should have known — what was happening in that second room was substantial. A registered sex offender on active probation suddenly rented a private second room by the night, next door to his own, with instructions that housekeeping stay out. Five different men visited a visibly young girl in that room over less than 24 hours. Former employees testified extensively that the hotel had a longstanding practice of clustering sex offenders in the same area of the property, limiting housekeeping in their rooms, and — in the words of the hotel’s own owner — doing whatever it took financially to keep certain guests coming back. A housekeeper who made eye contact with C.B. was, under the hotel’s own internal policies, required to report suspicious activity involving underage girls. She did not. The owner later admitted the second room rental was a mistake.

Taken together, this evidence paints a clear picture: Naseeb Investments applied its own accommodating policies directly to Chappell’s operation, and a reasonable hotel operator exercising ordinary care would have known a minor was being trafficked next door. The 11th Circuit agreed. A jury will now get to hear all of it.

Were you or a loved one trafficked at a hotel in Georgia?

If you were a victim of sex trafficking at a hotel, motel, or inn — and the property’s management ignored obvious warning signs or accommodated your trafficker — you may have a powerful civil claim under federal law. The Stoddard Firm has represented survivors in some of the most significant sex trafficking civil cases in the country, including securing this week’s precedent-setting 11th Circuit ruling on behalf of C.B. We fight for survivors. Consultations are confidential, and there is no fee unless we recover for you.Call us today: 470-467-2200.