AELE LAW LIBRARY OF CASE SUMMARIES:
Civil Liability of Law Enforcement Agencies
& Personnel
Back to list of subjects Back to Legal Publications Menu
Off Duty/Color of Law: Assault and Battery
Monthly Law Journal Article: Civil Liability for Acts of
Off-Duty Officers -- Part One, 2007 (9) AELE Mo. L.J. 101.
Monthly Law Journal Article: Civil Liability for Acts of
Off-Duty Officers -- Part Two, 2007 (10) AELE Mo. L.J. 101.
A male concertgoer filed suit after he was injured when an off-duty police officer lifted him over a five-foot barrier and dropped him on his neck. The federal appeals court held that no reasonable jury could find that the officer used excessive force when grabbing the plaintiff, lifting him over the barrier, and throwing him to the ground. In this case, the officer had probable cause to arrest the plaintiff for disorderly conduct and the officer’s actions were reasonable in light of the circumstances, and the throw to the ground was a result of the officer losing his balance. The court also held that the officer was entitled to immunity as to the state law claims under Missouri’s doctrine of official immunity. Finally, because there was no constitutional violation, the board of police commissioners was not liable for the officer’s actions. Kasiah v. Crowd Systems, Inc., #17-3588, 2019 U.S. App. Lexis 4445, 2019 WL 610611 (8th Cir.).
Two African-American men and
four female friends, some of whom were Caucasian, walked past a police precinct
while leaving an entertainment district where they had spent the evening
drinking. Off-duty officers, including an African-American man, congregated in
a nearby parking lot and were drinking. The African-American officer approached
the group passing by and told them to move along, and referred to some of the
females in the group as "snow bunnies," intended as a racial slur.
One of the men questioned who the officer was. The officer allegedly said,
"I'll show you who I am," and attacked the man. Other off-duty
officers then joined in punching and kicking, and shouted "stop resisting
arrest." Both men were taken into custody and taken to a hospital. Charges
of resisting, public intoxication, and disorderly conduct were dismissed.
Qualified immunity was denied to the off-duty African-American officer, as a
jury could reasonably find that his conduct violated the arrestees' rights.
McDonald v. Flake, #14-6370, 2016 U.S. App. Lexis 3627 (6th Cir.).
A corrections officer,
returning home from work armed, found a naked young man hiding in the closet in
her daughter's room, with her daughter naked in bed. Handcuffing him at
gunpoint, she orders him to kneel or be shot and killed. She also permitted her
husband to assault him, and threatened to submit a false report of the incident
to discredit the young man if he later filed charges. Later, when her husband
says that he believes the daughter's statements that the young man was invited,
she relents and allows him to get dressed and leave. He filed a federal civil
rights lawsuit against the officer and the county sheriff who employed her. His
lawsuit was properly dismissed as the officer did not act under color of law,
but rather as a private person. She did not discover him in the closet as the
result of a law enforcement search. "(A)ny irate mother with an anger
management problem could have done what [she] did." She used her weapon
and handcuffs for a private purpose. Butler v. Sheriff of Palm Beach County,
#11–13933, 2012 U.S. App. Lexis 13844 (11th Cir.).
A bar customer sued off-duty officers who
allegedly assaulted him or assisted assaulting him on the premises, other
bystander officers who allegedly improperly failed to intervene, and the city
that employed the officers. There were no facts suggesting, for purposes of
federal civil rights claims, that the off-duty officers abused or misused their
official powers, as they were there off-duty drinking, were not in uniform, did
not use departmental weapons, and did not assert police authority. There was no
constitutional duty for the bystander officers to prevent the alleged assaults
by the off-duty officers, so the claims against them failed also. Since no
constitutional violations were proven, the city also could not be held liable.
Bustos v. Martini Club Incorporated, #09-50079, 2010 U.S. App. Lexis 4739 (5th
Cir.).
Plaintiffs failed to adequately show that either
the city or a former deputy chief of police were liable for the off-duty
conduct of officers who they claimed physically assaulted them in a dispute
over a bag of steak fajitas. The plaintiff failed to establish liability either
on the basis of a purported policy or custom of inadequate disciplinary
procedures, or the role of the former deputy chief of police as a supervisor at
the time of the incident. Summary judgment for the city and former deputy chief
was upheld. Snyder v. City and County of San Francisco, No. 06-15838,
2008 U.S. App. Lexis 15710 (Unpub. 9th Cir.).
Police officer who claimed that off-duty officers
assaulted him failed to show that they were acting under color of law at the
time of the incident. Additionally, a disinterested witness's version of the
incident was more consistent with the defendants' versions of the event than
with the plaintiff's version. Begley v. County of Kauai, No. 06-15801,
2008 U.S. App. Lexis 14953 (Unpub. 9th Cir.).
Off-duty deputy sheriff was not entitled to
qualified immunity on woman's claim that he violated her rights and used excessive
force against her by grabbing her without provocation, and then tossed her down
the stairs after they engaged in an argument following a movie that they both
separately attended. The deputy was allegedly upset about the woman's talking
during the film, and had told her to "shut up" and made a racial slur
about her Hispanic background. The appeals court found that it was without
jurisdiction to hear the deputy's appeal of the trial court denial of his
motion for qualified immunity, since he relied on his (disputed) version of the
facts, rather than on a legal argument. Arnold v. Curtis, No. 06-4080, 2007
U.S. App. Lexis 18509 (10th Cir.).
Under Alabama state law, a bar could be
found vicariously liable for an off-duty police officer's alleged assault and
battery of a patron while working as a security guard. The court further ruled
that, regardless of whether or not the off-duty officer was ultimately found to
have been acting as a security guard, rather than a police officer at the time
of the incident, this did not deprive the federal trial court of jurisdiction
over federal civil rights claims in the case, or of jurisdiction to rule on the
state law claims which were supplemental to the federal claims. Ortega v.
Brock, No.2:07cv368, 2007 U.S. Dist. Lexis 57532 (M.D. Ala.).
Off-duty, non-uniformed jail commander acted under
color of law while allegedly beating motorist who rear-ended his pickup truck
when he asserted his law enforcement authority by saying he was "a
cop" in order to prevent bystanders from interfering with his assault.
Anderson v. Warner, No. 04-15505, 2006 U.S. App. Lexis 15996 (9th Cir. June 26,
2006). [2006 LR Aug]