Screenshot of video of attorney Clifford Haines incident.

Prominent Philadelphia attorney Clifford Haines has sued Sheriff Jewell Williams and sheriff's deputies, claiming they engaged in a conspiracy to defame and discredit him following a violent altercation at the Criminal Justice Center nearly two years ago.

Haines filed the suit, Haines v. Williams, in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas on Aug. 16. It is the second lawsuit he filed over the Aug. 22, 2017, incident, which left him with a broken shoulder. The 15-page complaint raises claims of conspiracy to defame, false arrest, malicious prosecution and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

The first lawsuit, filed in December 2017, alleged assault and battery, false arrest and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

The lawsuit filed Aug. 16 contends that Williams and others "engaged in a conspiracy to defame, discredit, and maliciously prosecute him in an attempt to create a post hoc justification for his unlawful assault and battery." Specifically, the complaint contends that the defendants refused to investigate the incident, and made allegedly false statements that he was intoxicated on the morning of the incident.

"The conspiracy continued for at least another 13 months, as defendants continued to repeat these false and defamatory statements about plaintiff in written reports, interviews with Philadelphia Police Detectives assigned to investigate the incident, interviews with Internal Affairs investigators, and at deposition," the complaint said.

Greenblatt, Pierce, Funt & Flores attorney Patricia Pierce filed both lawsuits on behalf of Haines.

Haines is a prominent member of Philadelphia's legal community. The founder of Haines & Associates, he was also head of the Pennsylvania Bar Association, and is a past chancellor of the Philadelphia Bar Association, which makes him one of a select group to have headed both organizations.

According to Haines' first civil complaint, the 2017 incident occurred while he was at the CJC to meet with a client. After realizing he forgot his bar card identification, he had to enter through the general security screening area and have his cellphone locked in a pouch, which is the practice for most nonlawyers entering the building. However, he realized he had not turned off his phone, so he attempted to return to the front of the building in order to have the pouch unlocked so he could turn his phone off, the complaint said.

According to the complaint, a deputy "rudely" ordered him to leave through a different part of the building, which he did. However, after Haines passed through the metal detectors a second time he approached the deputy and reprimanded the officer about his conduct. Citing a video of the events, the complaint said Haines spread his arms and then the officer shoved him twice in the chest, before one officer choked him while another shoved him onto the belt of the metal detector and then threw him to the floor.

Haines was arrested after the incident, but the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office ultimately declined to press charges.

The latest lawsuit contends that two officers involved in the incident "falsely and with no good faith basis" claimed that he had been intoxicated and smelled of alcohol, and that one officer similarly indicated Haines had hit him "a few times" before they took down the attorney.

The complaint further said a high-ranking official in the office pushed for a full investigation, but, although it was the office's policy to investigate similar incidents, "Williams nevertheless refused," and later told Internal Affairs not to conduct an investigation. The complaint said an investigation eventually began one year later without Williams' approval, but was later shut down.

The complaint also says several officers who initially did not indicate that Haines smelled of alcohol before the incident indicated during their depositions that he had been intoxicated.

Pierce declined to comment beyond the complaint, and a spokeswoman for the sheriff's press office declined to comment on pending litigation.