Sheriff candidate Raline named in federal suit

Lawsuit alleges wrongful arrest, excessive force, failures in police oversight

7:55 a.m. March 31, 2026

DUANE CROSS
MCO Publisher•Editor

A Monteagle business owner has filed a federal civil rights lawsuit alleging he was wrongly arrested, subjected to excessive force during one encounter with police, and later barred from a public board meeting through misuse of a no-contact order — all while town officials ignored repeated concerns about officer conduct.

The 30-page lawsuit, filed March 29 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee in Chattanooga, was brought by Rodney Lynn Kilgore, who says he owned Monteagle Truck and Tire and Monteagle Wrecker Service. Named as defendants are the Town of Monteagle, Police Chief William Raline – now a candidate in the 2026 Moore County sheriff’s race – Sgt. Alhafiz Ibn Karteron, and Treva Baker.

• Kilgore Lawsuit

According to the filing, the subsequent criminal cases were later dismissed or no-billed. A judge dismissed a false-imprisonment charge Jan. 6, 2026, after finding no probable cause; a Marion County grand jury later returned no bill on vandalism and resisting-arrest charges; and a separate retaliation-for-past-action charge was dismissed by the state without conditions.

The dispute, according to the lawsuit, began Sept. 15, 2025, when a customer allegedly refused to pay for work performed on a semi-tractor trailer at Kilgore’s business. Kilgore contends Tennessee law allowed him to keep possession of the vehicle under a mechanic’s lien until payment was made. Instead, the filing alleges, Karteron – after consulting by phone with Raline – arrested him for false imprisonment when he blocked the vehicle from leaving.

Kilgore further alleges that Karteron added vandalism and resisting-arrest charges and placed him, handcuffed, in a hot patrol vehicle. He says he became overheated, called out for relief, and was then removed from the vehicle, forced face-down, and shoved back into the patrol car after his handcuffs were tightened, injuring him. He also alleges he asked for medical treatment and did not receive it at the scene.

A separate set of allegations stems from Sept. 18, 2025. Kilgore claims Baker falsely reported that he approached and frightened her at a food truck and that Baker and Karteron falsely claimed to be married in order to support a felony retaliation-for-past-action charge. The lawsuit says that the charge was later dismissed and that the related no-contact order was eventually set aside.

Kilgore also alleges that on Nov. 4, 2025, Karteron used that no-contact order to keep him from attending a Monteagle board meeting, violating his First Amendment right to assemble.

Beyond the two incidents, the lawsuit accuses Monteagle of broader failures in oversight. The filing alleges that the town failed to properly investigate citizen complaints, failed to discipline officers, and continued to employ Karteron despite public concerns about his background and conduct.

The lawsuit also points to Monteagle board meetings in October 2025 and February 2026, where residents and officials allegedly raised concerns about Karteron’s qualifications, the town’s complaint-handling practices, and the difficulty citizens faced in reporting police misconduct.

Kilgore alleges seizure without probable cause, malicious prosecution, excessive force, civil-rights conspiracy, supervisory failures, deprivation of the right to assemble, intentional infliction of emotional distress, assault and battery, and related state-law violations.

Public docket records show this is not Kilgore’s first civil rights case in the Eastern District of Tennessee. His name appears in several earlier cases, including filings in 2014, 2016, 2018, and 2019.

The suit seeks millions of dollars in damages, including repeated claims for $3 million in compensatory damages and $6 million in punitive damages on several counts, as well as attorney’s fees and litigation costs.

The allegations have not been tested in court. No response from the defendants appeared in the attached filing.