2008 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 8-22-2008 

# B e nde r v . M onro e P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 07-2141

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2008 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" Be nde r v . M onr oe " (2008). 2008 D e cisio n s . P ape r 630. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008/630NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

___________ N o. 07- 2141

___________ KEVI N BENDER a n d P ATRI CI A BENDER, A pp el l ants , v. TOW NSH I P OF M ON RO E, M ON RO E TOW NSH I P P OLI CE D EPARTM ENT, PATRO L OFFI CER J OH N M c BRI DE, PATRO L OFFI CER BA RT M c I LVA NE, P ATROL OF F I CER M I CHAEL J . DORAN , a n d S GT. ROBER T CL ARK A pp el l ees.

________________________ O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt

fort he D i s t r i ctof N ew J er s ey N o: 05- cv- 216 D i s t r i ctJ udge: H onor abl e J os eph E. I r enas

________________________ A r gued J ul y22, 2008 B efore: M cK ee, F U E N T E S , and JO R D A N , C i rcui tJudg es.

( O pi ni on Fi l ed: A ugus t22, 2008) D avi d A . A vedi s s i an ( A r gued) 1 3 5 K in g s H ig h w a yE a st H addonfi el d, N ew Y or k 08033 A tto rn e yf

o r A p p e llan tsJ ames R. B i r chmei er( A r gued)

P o w e ll, B irc h m e ier , & P o w e ll 1891 St at e H i ghw ay50 P. O . B ox 582 T uckahoe , N J 08250 A t t or neyforA ppel l ees

____________ OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

____________
FU E N T E S, C i r cui tJ udge. T hi s i s an appe al fr om a gr antof s um m aryj udgm enti n a § 1983 cl ai m . T he di s put e conc erns A ppel l antK evi n B ender ’ s al l egat i ons thathe w as beat en bythe pol i ce, a f ter b e in g a rre ste d f

o r a d o m e stic d istu rb a n c e . F o r th e re a so n s s e t f o rth b e lo w , w e w ill
r ever s e the D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s gr antof s um m aryj udgm entforthe def endant s , and r emand f o r f u rt h e r p ro c e e d in g s . I. T he D i s t r i ctC our thad s ubj ectm att erj ur i s di ct i on overthi s cas e pur s uantt o 28 U . S. C . § 1331, as B enderal l eged vi ol at i ons of 42 U . S. C . § 1983, and s uppl ement al j ur i s di ct i on overB ender ’ s s t at e l aw cl ai m s pur s uantt o 28 U . S. C . § 1367. W e have ju ri s d ic tio n o v e r t h e D is tr ic t C o u rt ’s g ra n t o f s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t p u rs u a n t to 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . W e w il l exe rcise p lena ryrev iew o f th e D istri ct C o u rt ' s g ran t of su m m ary ju d g m e n t, an d w ill a p p lyth e sta n d a rd th a t th e D istric t C o u rt sh o u ld h a v e a p p lied in det erm i ni ng w hethers um m aryj udgm entw as appr opr i at e. R uehl v. V i acom, I nc. , 500F. 3d 375, 380 ( 3d C i r . 2007) . Sum m aryj udgm ents houl d be gr ant ed onl y“i f the

pl eadi ngs , t he di s coveryand di s cl os ur e mat er i al s on fi l e, and anyaff i davi t s s how that th e re is n o g e n u in e iss u e a s to a n ym a ter ial f a c t an d th a t th e m o v a n t is e n tit led to ju d g m e n t as a m a tter o f law .” F e d .R .C iv .P . 5 6 (c ). In m a k in g th is d e ter m in a tio n , all “[i ] nfer ence s s houl d be dr aw n i n t he l i ghtm os tfavor abl e t o t he non- m ovi ng par t y , and
w h e r e t h e n o n - m o v i n g p a r t y's e v i d e n c e c o n t r a d i c t s th e m o v a n t 's , th e n th e n o n - m o v a n t 's
m u st be take n as true . ” M o d rov ich v . A ll eg h en yC o u n ty , P a., 3 8 5 F . 3 d 3 9 7 , 4 1 5 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 4 ) (i n terna l qu o tat ion m ark s o m itted). A n issue is ge n u ine, an d thu s, su m m ary j u d g m e n tc a n n o tb e g r a n t e d , i f a r e a s o n a b l e j u r y c o u l d p o s s i b l y h o l d i n th e n o n m o v a n t 's fa v o r on that issue . C o n g reg ati o n K o l A m i v. A b ing ton T w p . , 3 0 9 F . 3 d 1 2 0 , 1 3 0 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 2 ). II. T h e p a rties p ro v id e d th e c o u rt w ith d ra m a tica llyd if f e re n t v e rsio n s o f

th e f a c ts in ques t i on. Si nce w e mustdet erm i ne w hetherther e i s anygenui ne i s s ue of mat er i al fac t
n e c e s s ita tin g a tr ia l, w e re v ie w th e tw o v e rs io n s o f th e e v e n ts in q u e s tio n in d e ta il. I ti s u n d i s p u t e d t h a t , o n M a r c h 9 , 2 0 0 3 , M r . a n d M r s . Be n d e rwe r e d r i v e n h o me fr om a part yw her e theyhad both been dr i nki ng, bythei rol des tdaught er , C ol l een. W hen t heyarr i ved ho m e, M rs . B end er, w ho w as drunk , cou l d n ot getthe d oo r t o thei r house open and a n ar gum entens ued. K evi n B enderdi d notpr ovi de the courtw i t h a des cr i pt i on of the ens ui ng ar gum entbutdi d notdi s put e ator al ar gum entthatal l thr ee of them st ar t ed slap p ing ea ch o ther. T h en , M rs. B en d er w en t i n to the b athro o m to ca ll 9 1 1 an d M r.B enderat t empt ed t o br eak the bathr oom dooropen. C ol l een then ca l l ed 911 fr om the

por ch. M r s . B enderj oi ned C ol l een on the por ch and M r . B enderl ocked them out of the hous e. W hen the pol i ce a r r i ved, C ol l een a nd M r s . B enderw er e out s i de the hous e, hy s t er i cal l ycry i ng, and M r . B enderw as l ocked i ns i de the hous e. M r s . B enderas ked the offi cer s t o for ce ope n t he doorbeca us e s he w as s car ed forthe s afe t yof hertw o other d au g h ters, w h o w ere lock ed inside the h o u se w ith M r. B en d er. A t th is p o in t in th e s to ry, th e tw o s id e s ’ f a c tu a l r e c ita tio n s ra d ic a lly d iv e rg e . A ccor di ng t o B ender , w hen the off i cer s br oke dow n t he doort o hi s hous e, he di d not hi ng t o t hr eat en the pol i ce of fi cer s . H e cl ai m s thatthe def endant s ’ al l egat i on thathe w as hol di ng an A l l en w r ench a nd s t andi ng i n a boxi ng s t ance w hen theyfor ced ope n t he door
ar e fa l s e, and that , i n fac t , he hel d not hi ng i n hi s hands w hen theycame i n, and di d not th re a ten th e o f

f ice rs in a n yw a y . H e sa y s th a t th e o f f ice rs ta c k led h im a f

ter b re a k in g h is d o o r o p e n , th a t th e yp u s h e d h is h e a d in to a c o f f e e ta b le , a n d u ltim a te ly h a n d c u f f e d h im . H e conc eded a tor al ar gum entt hathe, ats om e poi ntaft erhe w as handcuf fed, ki cked a n offi ceri n t he gr oi n. H e s ay s t he off i cer s l ed hi m fr om hi s hous e and be athi m on hi s fr ont l aw n, i n fr ontof hi s w i fe a nd t hr ee da ught er s , w hi l e he w as handcuf fed. H e cl ai m s that
w h ile th e o f

f ice rs w e re b e a tin g h im , o n e o f th e m h it h im in th e f

a c e w ith a f

las h lig h t, causi ng a fracture i n h i s l eftcheek bo ne. H e al so cl ai m s that one o f t he d efen dan t s, O ffi cerC l ark, t hr eat ened hi m w hi l e he w as i n t he hos pi t al , t el l i ng hi m that , i f he t ol d t he h o s p ita l s ta f

f h o w h e g o t in

ju re d , C la rk w o u ld re ta lia te a g a in s t h im . T he def endant s ver s i on of B ender ’ s arr es ti s qui t e di ffe r ent . A ccor di ng t o t hedefe ndant s , t he off i cer s had t o pl ace M r . B enderunderarr es tverbal l ythr ough t he cl os ed doort o hi s hous e, beca us e he r efus ed t o open i t . T hen, aft err ece i vi ng encour agement fr om M r s . B ender , t heyfor ced the dooropen. O nce theygotthe dooropen, the defe ndant s cl ai m t hatM r . B enderm etthem i n a boxi ng s t ance , hol di ng an A l l en w r ench i n hi s hand. T heys ayt hatM r . B enderr efus ed t o dr op the w r ench s o t heyfor ci bl yt ook hi m t o t he fl oorand handc uffe d hi m . T he def endant s al l ege thathi s fac e mayhave be en i nj ur ed att hi s poi nt , beca us e he s t ruck a c offe e t abl e i n t he l i vi ng r oom w i t h hi s fac e, as th e yw e re stru g g lin g to g e t th e h a n d c u f f s o n h im . T h e n , as th e ye sc o rte d M r. B e n d e r to t he pol i ce c ar , t heys ayhe w as fi ght i ng and ki cki ng, and ki cked one of the off i cer s i n the g roin . T h eyclaim that M r. B en d er f ell to the g rou n d , an d co n ti n u ed to k ick a t th e o ff icers t o keep them aw ayfr om hi m . O nce theyfi nal l ygothi m i nt o t he ca r , theys aythathe
re p e a te d ly h e a d b u tte d th e p a rt itio n , a ls o p o te n tia lly c a u s in g th e in ju ry to h is f

a c e . T he depos i t i ons of fa m i l ym ember s s uppor tM r . B ender ’ s ver s i on of the eve nt s of t hatni ght . H i s daught erC ar a t es t i fi ed thatw hen the cops ki cked i n t he door , M r . B ender step p ed b ac k an d the c o p s slam m ed h im o n the g rou n d an d h an d cu ff ed h im . C ara t es t i fi ed thatonce theygothi m out s i de, a bal d offi cerr ai s ed a f l as hl i ghti nt o t he ai rand th re a ten e d h e r d a d w ith it. S h e sta ted th a t sh e d id n o t se e h im h it h e r f a th e r w ith it b e c a u s e s h e tu rn e d h e r h e a d . H is da u g h ter C o ll ee n also test ifi ed that h er f athe r j u st st o o d there w h en the o ff icers opened the doorand thatt heyt ackl ed hi m t o t he fl oor . C ol l een s t at ed thatw hi l e they
w er e tr ans por t i ng hi m , handcuf fed, t o t he patr ol car , he w as y el l i ng and cur s i ng and tr i edt o ki ck att he off i cer s . C ol l een s ai d t hat , i n r es pons e, the off i cer s punched hi m i n t he
s t om ach, s endi ng hi m t o t he gr ound, and thatal l the off i cer s pi l ed on t op of hi m , beat i ng h im , a n d h ittin g h im w ith a f la s h lig h t. K ai t l yn B ender , hi s t hi r d daught er , t es t i fi ed thatthe off i cer s t ackl ed hi m i n t he hous e t o handcuf

f hi m and that , w hen theygotoutont o t he fr ontl aw n, s he hea r d herdad
m aki ng grunt i ng noi s es beca us e theyw er e bea t i ng hi m . M r s . B endert es t i fi ed ather depos i t i on t hats he di dn’ tw at ch as t he off i cer s t ook M r . B enderfr om the hous e t o t he patr ol car . She di d notknow t hathe had be en bea t en unt i l s he w as t ol d he w as bei ng ta k e n to th e h o s p ita l. In c o n n e c tio n w ith th is in c id e n t, M r. B e n d e r w a s c h a rg e d in a 6 c o u n t in d ictm e n t, i n c l u d i n g c o u n t s o f

r e s i s t i n g a r r e s ta n d p o s s e s s i n g a n Al l e n wr e n c h a s a we a p o n . He eventual l ypl ed t o one countof aggr avat ed as s aul ton a pol i ce of fi cer . A thi s gui l t ypl ea h e a ri n g , h e a d m itte d to k ic k in g a p o lic e o f f ic e r w h ile h e w a s h a n d c u f f e d . III . B en d er a rgu es th at th e D istri ct C o u rterred b yg ran ti n g the d ef en d an ts’ su m m ary ju d g m e n t m o tio n w ith re s p e c t to h is 4 2 U .S .C . § 1 9 8 3 e x c e s s iv e f o rc e c la im . W e a g re e . I n gr ant i ng t he def

endant s ’ s um m aryj udgm entm ot i on, the D i s t r i ctC our tanal y zed
w h e th e r t h e f

o rc e u s e d a g a in s t M r. B e n d e r w a s re a s o n a b le u n d e r t h e F o u rt h A m e n d m e n t. T he D i s t r i ctC our tfound thati tw as undi s put ed thatthe pol i ce of fi cer s pl ace d M r . B ender
u n d er a rrest be fo re e n teri n g h is ho m e, th at he ref u sed to o p en the d o o r an d there fo re r es i s t ed arr es t , and thatt he off i cer s neede d t o for ci bl yent erthe hous e. I n addi t i on, theD i s t r i ctC our tnot ed thatM r . B enderpl ed gui l t yt o one countof aggr avat ed as s aul ton a

pol i ce of fi cer . A ccor di ngl y , t he courtfound, w i t houtanyfur t heranal y s i s , thatthe for ce us ed t o r es t r ai n hi m w as r eas onabl e. T hi s fi ndi ng w as err or . T aki ng the fa ct s i n t he l i ghtm os tfavor abl e t o B ender , he
r es i s t ed arr es tbyr efus i ng t o open the doorw hen theyknocked, butdi d notthr eat en the po l i ce on ce t heyforced the do or open . N ext, i f M r. B end er i s t o b e beli eved , the o ffi cers , u n p ro v o k e d , s m a s h e d h is f a c e a g a in s t a c o f

f e e ta b le , in th e ire f

f o rt s to h a n d c u f

f h im . O n ce the o ff

icers led M r. B en d er o u t of h is ho u se, he k icke d o n e o f th em an d the o ff icers
r et al i at ed bybeat i ng hi m up, w hi l e he w as handcuf fed, hi t t i ng hi m i n t he fa ce w i t h a f las h lig h t an d b re a k in g h is c h e e k b o n e . T h e D istric t C o u rt sh o u ld h a v e a llo w e d a ju ryto det erm i ne w hi ch ver s i on i s t o be bel i eved a nd w hetherthe fa ct s fi nal l ypr oved attr i al
a m o u n t to e x c e s s iv e f

o rc e . IV . I ti s cl ear , as det ai l ed above , t hata genui ne i s s ue of mat er i al fac tr emai ns t o be deci ded att r i al . A ccor di ngl y , w e w i l l r ever s e the dec i s i on of the D i s t r i ctC our tand
re m a n d f o r f u rt h e r p ro c e e d in g s .