# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls

For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

No. 1 7- 38 27

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

Ch arl es W at ers ; An it a Waters

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff s - Ap pe ll an ts

v.

B. Mad so n; Aly ss a Newb ur y ; Ci ty of Co on Rap id s

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an ts - App el le es

Men ard , Inc

.

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l

Defe nd an t

Tom Hawley; Em il y

Kirc hn er

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an ts - App el le es

__ __ __ __ __ __
App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta - Mi nn eap ol is

__ __ __ __ __ __

Su bm it te d: Nov em

be r 15 , 20 18
Fi le d: Apri l 1 1, 2 01 9

__ __ __ __ __ __

Befo re COLLOTON, SHEPHERD, and STRAS, Ci rcu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __SHEPHERD, Cir cu it Ju dg e.

In 2 0 1 6

, Ch arl es W at ers refu se d to al lo w Men ard s ho m e su pp ly st or e

em pl oyees, pu rs ua nt to po st ed st or e po li cy , to se arch th e t r u n k o f h i s ve hi cl e as he

ex it ed a Men ard s lu m

be ry ard in Co on Rap id s, Mi nn es ot a. Mr. W at ers ev e n t u al ly

cal le d th e po li ce, who res po nd ed to th e sc en e. Bas ed on th is en co un te r, Mr. W at ers

an d hi s wife Ani ta fil ed a 19 -co un t Am en de d Co m pl ai nt in fed eral di s t r ic t co ur t, 1

al le gi ng vi ol at io ns of bo th fed eral an d st at e l a w a g a i n st th e Ci ty of Co on Rap id s,

va rio us Co on Rap id s po li ce of fic ers , an d Men ard

, In c. The de fen da nt s fil ed a m ot io n

to di sm is s th e Am en de d Co m pl ai nt pu rs ua nt to Fed

. R

. Ci v. P. 12 (b )(6 ), whi ch th e
di st ric t co ur t gr an te d. Mr. an d Mrs

. W at ers no w ap pe al

. Hav in g juri sd ic ti on un de r

28 U.S.C. § 1 29 1, we af

fir m

.

I.

On Mar ch 27

, 20 16

, App el la nt s vi si te d a Men ard s st or e in Co on Rap id s,

Mi nn es ot a, to ex ch an ge a sa w M r. W at ers ha d pr ev io us ly p ur ch as ed fo r a ne w s aw
he ha d pu rch as ed on li ne

. Mr. W at er s v id eo -rec or de d th ei r vi si t th ro ug h a su ng la ss

cam era cl ip pe d to hi s sh irt

. (He la te r po st ed ex cerp ts of th is vi de o on hi s You Tub e 2

ch an ne l. See Dis t. Ct

. Dkt

. 16 -1 .) An em pl oyee in si de th e st or e di rect ed App el la nt s

The Hon or ab le Pa

ul A

. Magn us on , Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e Dis tri ct 1

of Mi nn es ot a.

App el la nt s at ta ch ed a hi gh ly-edi te d ve rs io n of Mr. W at ers ’s su ng la ss cam era 2

reco rd in g an d th e of

fic ers ’ sq ua d car reco r d i n g s to th ei r Am en de d Co m pl ai nt

. App el le es pr od uc ed th e da sh bo ard cam era vi de o fro m Offic er Sm it h’s sq ua d car in

su pp or t of th ei r m ot io n to di sm is s. The di st ric t co ur t de te rm in ed th at th e vi de os were

“ ne ces sa ril y em

br aced by th e pl ead in gs ” an d co ns id ered th em , to ge th er wit h th e pl ead in gs , whe n ru li ng on App el le es ’ m ot io n to di sm is s. S e e A s h a n t i v. Ci ty of
Gol de n Vall ey , 6 66 F.3 d 11 48 , 1 15 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 )

. Neit he r pa rty o bjec te d to th e di st ric t co ur t’s u se of t he vi de os in it s d et erm in at io n.

-2

-to th e on li ne pi ck up lo cat io n in si de th e Men ard s lu m be ry ard

. Mr. W at ers dr ov e in to

th e lu m be ry ard wit h Mrs . Wate rs in th e pa ss en ge r se at

. W hi le it is un d is pu te d th at

Men ard s ha d po st ed si gn s at th e y ard ’s en tra nc e an d ex it st at in g th at ve hi cl es le av in g

th e lu m be ry ard were su bjec t to in sp ect io n, App el la nt s cl ai m th ey di d no t se e an y su ch

si gn s u po n e nt ry

.

A f te r App el la nt s arri ve d in th e lu m be ry ard

, a Men ard s em

pl oyee lo ad ed th e

sa w in to th ei r ve hi cl e’s tru nk

. App el la nt s th e n p r o c e ed ed to th e lu m be ry ard ex it

, whe re a Men ard s em

pl oyee req ue st ed th at th ey op en th e i r v e h i c le ’s tru nk fo r

in sp ect io n as pe r th e si gn s. Mr. W at ers r e f u s e d

, s ta ti ng th at he ha d no le ga l

ob li ga ti on to do so

. W he n th e ga te em pl oyee refu se d to op en th e ex it ga te an d cal le d

fo r a m an ag er, Mr . W at ers cal le d t he po li ce.

Co on Rap id s po li ce of

fic ers Alyssa Sm it h an d Em il y Ki r c h ne r arri ve d in 3

res po ns e to Mr. W at ers ’s cal l. Afte r be in g to ld by th e Men ard s m an ag er th at po st ed

st or e p o l i c y req ui red Men ard s to ve rif y Mr. W at ers ’s pu rch as e be fo re App el la nt s

co ul d le av e th e lu m

be ry ard an d th at Mr. W at ers be li ev ed he was be in g un la wfu ll y
de ta in ed

, Offi cer Sm it h ap pr oa ch ed App el la nt s’ ve hi cl e an d to ld Mr. W at ers to al lo w
th e Men ard s em

pl oyees to ve rif

y hi s pu rch as e

. Wh e n M r. W at ers refu se d, Offi cer

Sm it h ask ed Mr. W at ers fo r id en ti fic at io n, whic h he refu se d t o p ro vi de

, st at in g th at

he was “ no t cu rren tl y dr iv in g” an d di d no t ha ve to “ pr ov i d e I D u n t i l th ere [was ] a

reas on ab le su sp ic io n of a cri m e.” Offi ce r S mi t h i n f or m ed Mr. W at ers th at sh e ha d

reas on ab le su sp ic io n he ha d co m m it te d a cri m e be cau se he wou ld no t op en th e tru nk

.

Offi cer Sm it h t h e n a s ke d Mr. W at ers to st ep ou t of hi s ve hi cl e, an d Offi cer
Kirc hn er ex pl ai ne d th at

, be cau se Mr. W at ers was no nc om pl ia nt wit h Men ard s po li cy , th e of fic ers reas on ab ly su sp ect ed he ha d so m et hi ng in hi s ve hi cl e’s tru nk th at he was

At the ti m e of th e in ci de nt

, Offi cer Sm it h’s n am e was Aly ss a Newbu ry

. Fo r 3

co ns is te nc y

wit h t he di st ric t co ur t o pi ni on , we refer to he r as Offic er Sm it h.

-3

-no t su pp os ed to ha ve

. The of fic ers ag ai n to ld Mr. W at ers to st ep ou t of hi s veh ic le

. Mr. W at ers , st il l vi de o- reco rd in g, st at ed

, “ I’m be in g or de red ou t of m y ve hi cl e. I’m

be in g pl aced u n d e r a r r es t,” to whi ch Offi cer Sm it h cal m ly res po nd ed , “ I di dn ’t s ay

y ou were un de r arre st ; I sa id y ou ne ed to st ep ou t of th e ve hi cl e.” W he n Mr. W at ers

as ke d if he was free to go , Offi cer Sm it h st at ed

, “ You are no t free to go .” Mr. W at ers

rep li ed

, “ The n I’m be in g de ta in ed

. Und er wha t reas on ab le su sp ic io n of wha t cri m e? ”

The of fic ers ag ai n to ld Mr. W at ers to ge t ou t of hi s car an d he rep eat ed hi s qu es ti on , th en rep eat e dl y as ke d th e of fic ers fo r th ei r na m es an d ba dg e nu m be rs

. Offi cer
Kirc hn er to ld Mr. W at ers y et ag ai n to s t e p o ut of hi s car an d, whe n he fai le d to

co m pl y , to ld hi m

he co ul d g o t o jai l.

Mr. W at ers ev en tu al ly co m pl ie d wit h or de r s t o s t e p ou t of hi s car. Offi cer

Ki r c h n e r s earc he d hi m fo r weap on s an d to ld hi m th at th e of fic ers ha d “ reas on ab le

su sp ic io n th at [h e] ha [d ] so m et hi ng in th e tru nk ,” st at in g, “ You cam e in to a sh ip m en t

y ard whi ch ha s a po li cy th at y ou are n o t su pp os ed to le av e wit ho ut sh owi ng th e

pr od uc t th at y ou ha ve pi ck ed up , an d y ou are no t wil l i n g t o do th at .” Offi cer
Kirc hn er th en ha nd cu ffed Mr. W at ers , who is si gn ifi can tl y ta ll e r t h a n e i th er of th e

fem al e of fic ers , an d pl aced hi m in th e ba ck se at of a sq ua d car. Offi cer Sm it h sp ok e

to th e ne arb y Men ard s e mp l o y ees an d as ke d th em if th ey ha d ev er de al t wit h

so ve rei gn ci ti zen s, m en ti on in g th at Mr. W at ers ’s be ha vi or res em bl ed th at ex hi bi te d
by sov erei gn cit iz en s. 4

So ve rei gn cit iz en s ar e a l oo se ly-affi li at ed gro up who be li ev e g ov ern m en t i n 4

th e Uni te d St at es op erat es il le gi ti m at el y an d ou ts id e th e bo un ds of it s ju r i sd ic ti on

. FBI Co un te rte rro ris m Ana lysis Sect io n, So ve rei gn Ci ti zen s: A Gro win g Dom es ti c Thre at to Law Enfo rcem en t, F B I L. Enfo rcem en t Bu ll

., Sep t. 20 11

, at 20

, 21

. The

FBI h a s l a b e l e d th e so ve rei gn ci ti zen s a do m es ti c te rro ris t gr ou p. See Dom es ti c Te r r o ris m : The S o v e r e i g n C i t i z e n M o v e men t

, F B I ( A p r

. 1 3

, 2 0 1 0 )

, h t t p s : / / a r c h iv es .fbi .go v/ arch iv es /n ews /s to r i e s / 2 0 1 0 / a p r i l / s o v e r e i g n c i t i z e n s

_ 0 4 1 3 1
0/ do m es ti c-t erro ris m -th e-s ov erei gn -ci ti zen -m ov em en t.

-4

-Offi cer Sm it h th en ret ur ne d to App el la nt s’ ve hi cl e. W he n Offi cer Sm it h as ke d

if Mr

. Wa t e r s w a s a so ve rei gn ci ti zen , M rs . Wate rs rep li ed th at he r hu sb an d “ ta ke s

it al l ve ry se rio us ly.” Offi cer Sm it h th en to ld Mrs

. W at ers th at Mr. W at ers was

crea ti ng m or e pr ob le m s fo r hi ms e l f

. Mrs

. W at ers res po nd ed

, “ I kn ow.” Offi cer

Sm it h a sk ed Mrs . W at ers to id en ti fy he r hu sb an d, an d M rs . W at ers di d s o.

W hi le Offi cer Sm it h was sp eak in g wit h Mrs

. W at ers , Co on Rap i d s Po li ce Serg ean t Br ad y Mad so n arri ve d on sc en e. Offi cer Sm it h co nf erre d wit h Serg ean t

Mad so n. Offi cer Kirc hn er th en ap pr oa ch ed Mrs

. W at ers an d as ke d, “ W ou ld y ou be 5

wil li ng to op en th e tru nk fo r th es e ge nt le m en ? Bec au se th at ’s t he on ly t hi ng t h at ’s

ho ld in g us up he re.” W he n Mrs

. W at ers ex pl ai ne d th at App el la nt s ha d co m e in to th e
lu m be ry ard to pi ck up a sa w, whi ch a Men ard s em pl oyee pl aced in th e tru nk fo r th em , Of f i c e r K irc hn er st at ed

, “ It’d be do in g us a hu ge fav or if y ou co ul d jus t br in g th at

in vo i c e a nd st ep ou t wit h th es e gu y s an d po p th e tru nk fo r us

. W e’ll ch al k it up to
[Mr

. W at ers ] ha vi ng a ba d da y .” Mrs

. W at ers di d as Office r Kirc hn er requ es te d. A

Men a r d s e mp l o y ee an d on e of th e of fic ers lo ok ed in to th e tru nk an d ve rif ie d th e

pu rch as e. The of

fic ers th en rel eas ed Mr. W at ers , is su in g a tre sp as s warn in g t ha t

pr ev en te d h im

fro m reen te rin g t he Co on Rap id s M en ard s fo r a y ear.

Afte r rece iv in g th e tre sp as s warn in g bu t be fo re le av in g th e lu m be ry ard

, Mr.

W at ers req ue st ed th e of

fic ers ’ na m es an d bad ge nu m be rs

. He ap pr oa ch ed Serg ean t

Mad so n to read th e n am e an d b ad ge nu m be r of f th e se rg ean t’s u ni fo rm . W he n M r.

W at ers reac he d well wit hi n arm ’s le ng th of Serg ean t Mad so n, th e se rg ean t ph y si cal ly

tu rn ed Mr. W at ers away fro m hi m an d pu sh ed hi m to ward App el la nt s ’ v e h i c l e. App el la nt s th en dr ov e ou t of th e lu m be ry ard

. The en ti re en co un te r wit h th e of fic ers

la st ed les s t ha n t wen ty m in ut es

.

The di st ric t co ur t’s Ord er m is id en ti fie s Offi cer Kirc hn er as Offi cer Sm it h 5

du rin g t hi s i nt erac ti on

.

-5

-Fo ll owi ng t h e in ci de nt

, Mr. W at ers em ai le d th e Co on Rap id s Po li ce

Dep art m en t, se ek in g to fil e a fo rm al co m pl ai nt ag ai ns t th e of

fic ers in vo lv ed

. Cap ta in

Tho m as Hawle y in it ia ll y refu se d to acce pt a writ te n co m pl ai nt th ro ug h em ai l, st at in g

th at Mr. W at ers or hi s r ep res en ta ti ve ne ed ed to co m m un ic at e wit h th e po li ce
de pa rtment by te le ph on e or in pe rs on

. Alt ho ug h th e reco rd do es no t in di cat e th at Mr.

W at ers , p e r s o n a ll y or th ro ug h a rep res en ta ti ve , fu rth er co m m un ic at ed wit h th e
d e p art m en t ot he r th an by em ai l, Co on Rap id s Ch ie f of Po li ce Brad W is e rev i e w e d

Mr. W at ers ’s co m

pl ai nt

, de t e r mi n e d th e of fic ers ha d act ed la wfu ll y , an d fo rm al ly

cl os ed th e co m

pl ai nt

.

App el la nt s fil ed a 19 -cl ai m Am en de d Co m pl ai nt in th e Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct

Co ur t fo r th e Dis tri ct of Mi nn es ot a, al le gi ng vi ol at io ns of th e Fi rs t, Fo ur th

, an d

Fo ur te en th Am en dm en ts

, Tit le II of th e Am eri can s wit h Dis ab il it ie s Act, § 50 4 of th e
Reh ab il it at io n Act of 19 73

, an d th e Mi nn es ot a Hum an Ri g h t s A ct

, as well as

co m m on -la w cl ai m s fo r fal se im pr is on m en t, b at te ry , def

am at io n, t res pa ss , in va si on

of pr iv acy, an d ne gl ig en ce. The y na m ed Serg ean t M a d s o n, Offi cers Sm it h an d

Kirc hn er, an d Cap ta in Hawle y , in th ei r in di vi du al cap aci ti es ; th e Ci t y o f Co on Rap id s; an d M en ard , Inc . as d efen da nt s.

Men ard s fil ed a m ot io n to di sm is s fo r fai lu re to st at e a cl ai m un de r Fed

. R. Ci v.

P. 12 (b )(6 ), al le gi ng th at Men ard s is no t a st at e act or an d th at App el la nt s co ns en te d

to th e se arch of th ei r ve hi cl e’s tru nk whe n th ey en te red th e lu m be ry ard

. The of

fic ers

an d th e Ci ty al so fil ed a Ru le 12 (b )(6 ) m ot io n to di sm is s, arg ui ng th a t A p p el la nt s

fai le d to pl au si bl y al le ge th ei r cl ai m s an d rai si ng th e affi rm at iv e de fen se s of qu al ifi ed

, of fic ia l, an d ab so lu te im m

un it y

. All de fen da nt s m ov ed in th e al te rn at iv e fo r su m m ary jud gm en t.

The di st ric t co ur t fo un d th at

, wit h th e ex cep ti on of th ei r Fo ur th Am en dm en t

cl ai m fo r un la wfu l se arch

, App el la nt s fai le d to pl au si bl y al le ge an y vi ol at io n of th ei r
cl earl y -es ta bl is he d co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht s, an d th at th e of fic ers were th eref

or e en ti tl ed

-6

-to qu al ifi ed im m un it y on al l bu t on e of App el la nt s’ co ns ti tu ti on al cl ai m s. W hi le th e
di st ric t co ur t de te rm in ed th at App el la nt s pl au si bl y al le ge d a vi ol at io n of th ei r cl earl y

es ta bl is he d co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht to be free fro m un la wfu l se arch es , it al so de te rm in ed

th at th ey fai le d to al le ge , as req ui red fo r a da m ag es cl ai m un de r 42 U.S.C. § 19 83

, th at th e vi ol at io n cau se d an y co m pe ns ab le in

jury. The di st ric t co ur t fu rth er fo un d th at App el la nt s f

a i le d to id en ti fy a Ci ty po li cy or cu st om th at cau se d th e al le ge d

co ns ti tu ti on al vi ol at io ns , th at App el la nt s fai le d to pl au si bl y al le ge th ei r st at e la w
cl ai m s, an d th at Men ard s was no t a st at e act or su bjec t to § 19 83 cl ai m s. The di st ric t

co ur t th eref

or e gr an te d th e de fen da nt s ’ moti on s an d di sm is se d al l of App el la nt s’

cl ai m s wi th pre

jud ic e.

App el la nt s su bs eq ue nt ly s et tl ed th ei r cl ai m s ag ai ns t Men ard , I nc

. The y no w

ap pe al th e di st ric t co ur t’s di sm is sa l o f th ei r cl ai m s ag ai ns t th e of fic ers an d th e Ci ty

fo r in te rf er en ce an d ret al ia ti on un de r th e Fi rs t Am en dm en t; un la wfu l arre st

, ex ces si ve

fo rce, un la wfu l se arch

, an d un la wfu l se iz ur e un de r th e Fo ur th Am en dm en t; an d fal se

im pr iso nm en t, ba tt ery, an d de fam at io n un de r Mi nn es ot a co m m on la w; and the ir cl ai m

ag ai ns t th e Ci ty un de r Mo ne ll v. Dep art m en t of So ci al Serv ic es , 43 6 U.S. 65 8 (1 97 8)

.

II.

W e rev ie w d e no vo a gr an t of a m o t i o n t o d is m is s fo r fai lu re to st at e a cl ai m

u n d e r F e d

. R. Ci v. P. 12 (b )(6 ), acce pt in g as tru e al l fact ua l al le ga ti on s in th e li gh t

m os t fav or ab le to th e no nm ov in g pa rty. Aten v. Sco tt sd al e In s. Co ., 5 1 1 F

. 3d 81 8,

82 0 (8 th Ci r. 20 08 ). The co m pl ai nt “ m us t al le ge m or e th an ‘[t]hread ba re reci ta ls of

th e el em en ts of a cau se of act io n, su pp or te d by m ere co nc lu so ry st at em en ts [;]’

. . . [it

m us t] al le ge su ffi ci en t fact s th at

, ta ke n as tru e, ‘stat e a cl ai m to rel ie f th at is pl au si bl e

on it s face .’ ” K

. T. v. Cu lv er-S to ck to n Co ll

., 86 5 F.3 d 10 54

, 10 57 (8 th Ci r. 20 17 )
(fi rs t al te rat io n in or ig in al ) (q uo ti ng Ash cro f t v

. Iq ba l, 55 6 U.S. 66 2, 67 8 (2 00 9) )
(in te rn al qu ot a t i o n m ark s om it te d)

. W e ne ed no t acce pt as tru e a pl ai nt iff ’s

co nc lu so ry al le ga ti on s or le ga l co nc lu si on s dr awn fro m th e fact s. Han te n v. Sch

.

-7

-Dis t. of Ri ve rv ie w Gard en s, 1 83 F.3d 79 9, 8 05 (8 th Ci r. 19 99 ); W es tc ot t v. Ci ty o f

O m ah a, 90 1 F.2 d 14 86

, 14 88 (8 th Ci r. 19 90 ). Nor ne ed we ad op t th e pl ai nt iff ’s

ve rs io n of the fact s if the y are “ bl at an tl y co nt rad ic t[e d]” b y vi de o e vi de nc e. Bo ud e

v. Ci ty of Raym or e, 85 5 F.3 d 93 0, 93 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 17 )

. “ W e wil l no t affi rm a
di sm is sa l of a co m

pl ai nt fo r fai lu re to st at e a cl ai m un le ss th e pl ai nt iff can pr ov e no

se t of fact s th at wou ld de m on st rat e an en ti tl em en t to rel ie f.” Han te n, 18 3 F.3 d at 80 5.

App el la nt s br ou gh t a mu l t i t u de of co ns ti tu ti on al cl ai m s un de r 42 U.S.C.
§ 19 83

. Sect io n 19 83 pr ov id es a m ech an is m by whi ch ag gr ie ve d pl ai nt iff s m ay su e

a st at e act o r fo r vi ol at io n of th ei r co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht s. See Fo st er v. W y ric k, 82 3

F.2 d 21 8, 22 1 (8 th Ci r. 19 87 ). H o w e v e r , s ta te act or s, su ch as po li ce of fic ers , are

pr ot ect ed fro m § 19 83 su it s by th e affi rm at iv e de fen se of qu al ifi ed im m un it y. See

Mal le y v

. B r i g g s , 47 5 U.S. 33 5, 34 0 (1 98 6) ; Gom ez v. Tol ed o, 44 6 U.S. 63 5, 64 0
(1 98 0) (ex pl ai ni ng th at qu al ifi ed im m un it y is an affi rm at iv e de fen se ). Qua li fie d

im m un it y sh ie ld s po li ce of

fic ers fro m la wsu it s ba se d on of fic ia l co nd uc t if reas on ab le

of fic ers in th e sa m e po si ti on co ul d ha ve be li ev ed th ei r co nd uc t was “ la wfu l, in li gh t

of cl earl y es ta bl is he d la w an d th e in fo rm at io n th e

. . . of fic ers po ss es se d” at th e ti m e.
And ers on v. Cr ei gh to n, 4 83 U.S. 63 5, 6 41 (19 87 ).

Bec au se qu al ifi e d im m

un it y pr ot ect s of

fic ers fro m su it

, no t m erel y fro m

li ab il it y , co ur ts sh ou ld “ res ol v[ e] im m un it y qu es ti on s at th e earl ie st po ss ib le st ag e in

li ti ga ti on .” Hun te r v. Bryant

, 50 2 U.S. 22 4, 22 7 (1 99 1) (p er cu ria m ). To ov erco m e

qu al ifi ed im m

un i t y, a p l a in ti ff m

us t al le ge (1 ) a vi ol at io n of hi s st at ut or y or

co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht s, an d (2 ) th at “ th e rig ht at i s s u e was ‘clear ly es ta bl is he d’ at th e

ti me o f [th e] d efen da nt ’s a ll eg ed m is co nd uc t.” Pear so n v. Cal la ha n, 55 5 U.S. 2 23

, 232 (2 00 9)

. “ Qua li fie d im m un it y is ap pr op ria te on ly if no reas on ab le fact fin de r co uld

an swe r y es to bo th of th es e qu es ti on s.” Hes s v. Abl es , 71 4 F.3 d 10 48

, 10 51 (8 th Ci r.

20 13 ) (ci ta ti on om it te d)

. Co ur ts m ay an al y ze ei th er of th e qu al ifi ed im m un it y pr on gs

fir st . Pears on , 55 5 U.S. at 23 6.

-8

-The di st ric t c o u r t di sm is se d al l of App el la nt s’ co ns ti tu ti on al cl ai m s on

qu al ifi ed im m

un it y gr ou nd s ex cep t th e un la wfu l se arch cl ai m , whi ch it di sm is se d fo r

fai lu re to st at e a cl ai m

. Si m il arl y , o n each of App el la nt s’ c on st it ut io na l cl ai m s, we
wil l fir st de te rm in e whe th er qu al ifi ed im m un it y is ap pl ic ab le an d, if no t, whe th er App el la nt s s ta te d s uf

fic ie nt fact s t o s ur vi ve a Ru le 12 (b )(6 ) m ot io n t o d is m is s.

App el la nt s al so br ou gh t a n u mb er of to rt cl ai m s un de r Mi nn es ot a co m m on

l a w

. Po li ce of

fic ers in Mi nn es ot a m ay av oi d st at e to rt act io ns th ro ug h th e 6

ap pl ic at io n of an ot he r affi rm at iv e de fen se —o ffi ci al im m un it y. El w o od v. Ri ce

C o u n t y, 42 3 N.W .2d 67 1, 67 7 (Mi nn

. 19 88 ) (en ba nc ). “ The of fic ia l im m

un it y
do ct rin e pr ov id es th at ‘a pu bl ic of fic ia l ch arg ed by la w wit h du ti es whi ch cal l fo r th e

e x e r c is e of hi s jud gm en t or di sc ret io n is no t pe rs on al ly li ab le to an in di vi du al fo r
da m ag es un le ss he is gu il ty of a wil lfu l or m al ic io us wro ng .’ ” Id. (q uo ti ng Su sl a v

. St at e, 24 7 N.W .2d 90 7, 91 2 (Mi nn

. 19 76 ) (en ba nc )). W hi le th e of fic ers in th is cas e

as se rte d of

fic ia l im m

un it y , th e di st ric t co ur t di d no t an al y ze whe th er im m un it y ba rred
App el la nt s’ st at e to rt c la im s. Ra th er, i t d is m is se d t ho se cla im s fo r fai lu re to st at e a
cl ai m un de r Fed

. R. Ci v. P. 12 (b )(6 ). Bec au se we di sp os e of each of App el la nt s’ st at e

la w cl ai m s on ot he r gr ou nd s, we, to o, fin d it un ne ces sa ry to ex am in e th e ap pl ic at io n

of off ic ia l i m m un it y in th is cas e.

W e n ow ad dr es s ea ch of t he ele ve n c la im s o n a pp eal

.

W hi le a di st ric t co ur t m ay de cl in e to ex erci se su pp le m en ta l juri sd ic ti on ov er 6

a st at e-l aw cl ai m br ou gh t pe nd en t to fed eral -q ue st io n cl ai m s whe n th e di st ric t co ur t

“ ha s di sm is se d al l cl ai m s ov er whi ch it ha s or ig in al juri sd ic ti on ,” it is no t req ui red to do so if de cl in in g juri sd ic ti on wou ld ru n co nt rary to “ jud ic ia l eco no m

y , co nv en ie nc e, fai rn es s, an d co m it y .” Ci ty of Ch ic ag o v. In t’l Co ll

. of Su rg eo ns , 52 2 U.S. 15 6, 17 3 (1 99 7) (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s om it te d) ; se e al so 28 U.S.C. § 13 67 (c)( 3)

. The
di st ric t co ur t he re ch os e to ex erci se su pp le m en ta l juri sd ic ti on ov er App el la nt s’ st at e la w cl ai m s, an d we m ay th eref or e rev ie w th e di st ric t co ur t’s de ci si on on th os e cl ai m s. See 2 8 U.S.C. § 12 91

.

-9

-III.

App el la nt s br ough t fo ur cl ai m s fo r vi ol at io n of th ei r Fo ur th Am en dm en t rig ht s.
The Fo ur th Am en dm en t gu aran te es th e rig ht to be free fro m “ un reas on ab le se arch es

an d se iz ur es .” U.S. Co ns t. am en d. IV. Mr. Wa te rs al le ge s un la wfu l arre st an d

ex ces si ve fo rce, Mrs

. W at ers al le ge s un la wfu l se iz ur e, an d bo th Mr. an d Mrs

. W at ers

al le ge un la wfu l s earc h. We ana lyze each of t he se cla im s i n t ur n.

A.

Co un t 3 of th e Am en de d Com pl ai nt al le ge s th at Offi cers Sm it h and Kirc hn er

an d Serg ean t Mad so n vi ol at ed Mr. W at ers ’s Fo ur th Am en dm en t rig ht s by de ta in in g

or arre st in g hi m wit ho ut pr ob ab le cau se

. Po li ce of fic ers vi ol at e th e Fo ur th

Am en dm en t whe n th ey co nd uc t an arre st wit ho ut a warra nt o r pr ob ab le cau se

. Bari be au v. Ci ty of Mi nn e a p o l is

, 59 6 F.3 d 46 5, 47 8 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ) (p er cu ria m ).

Howev er, in or de r to effe ct a te m po rary in ve st ig at iv e de te nt io n, of fic ers ne ed on ly

r e a s o na bl e su sp ic io n ba se d on th e to ta li ty of th e ci rcu m st an ces

. See Ill in oi s v

. W ard l o w , 5 2 8 U

. S

. 11 9, 12 3 (2 00 0) ; De La Ro sa v. W hi te , 8 52 F.3 d 74 0, 74 4 (8 th

Ci r. 20 17 ). W hi le “ [r]eas on ab le su sp ic io n is a lo wer th res ho ld th an pr ob ab le cau se ,”

Uni te d St at es v. Carp en t er, 46 2 F.3 d 98 1, 98 6 (8 th Ci r. 20 06 ), it req ui res “ at le as t

so m e m in im al le ve l of ob

jecti ve jus ti fic at io n.” De La Ro sa , 85 2 F.3 d at 74 4 (in te rn al

qu ot at io n m ark s om it te d) ; se e al so Terry v

. O h i o , 3 92 U.S. 1, 27 (1 96 8) (d efi ni ng

reas on ab le su sp ic io n as so m et hi ng m or e th an an “ in ch oa te an d un pa rt i c u la riz ed

su sp ic io n o r ‘hun ch ’”).

In de te rm in in g whet he r an off ic er po ss es se d reas on ab le su sp ic io n to co nd uc t

a te m po rary in ve st ig at iv e de te nt io n, or “ Terry st op ,” co ur t s l o o k on ly at th e

in fo rm at io n th e of

fic er po ss es se d at th e ti m e. See Terry, 39 2 U.S. at 21 -2 2; se e al so
Grah am v. Co nn or , 49 0 U.S. 38 6, 39 6 (1 98 9)

. “ W he n ev al ua ti ng whe th er reas on ab le

su sp ic io n fo r a Ter ry st op ex is ts

, ‘w e vi ew th e [o ffi c e r s ’] o b s erv at io ns as a who le

,

-1 0-rat he r th an as di sc ret e an d di sc on ne ct ed oc cu rren ces .’ ” Uni te d St at es v. Hig ht owe r,

71 6 F.3 d 11 17

, 11 21 (8 th Ci r. 20 13 ) (al te rat io n in or ig in al ) (q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es v.

Po it ie r, 81 8 F.2 d 67 9, 68 3 (8 th Ci r. 19 87 )). If we de te r mine th at an of fic er la ck ed

re as on ab le su sp ic io n an d th us co nd uc te d an un la wfu l Terry st op , sh e m ay no ne th ele ss
be en ti tl ed to qu al ifi ed im m un it y if sh e ha d ar

gu ab le reas on ab le su sp ic io n— th at is

, if a re as on ab le of

fic er in th e sa m e po si ti on co ul d ha ve be li ev ed sh e ha d reas on ab le

su sp ic io n. De La Ro sa , 85 2 F.3 d at 74 5- 46 (ex am in in g arg ua bl e reas on ab le su sp ic io n

un de r th e “ cl earl y

est ab li sh ed ” p ro ng of q ua li fie d i m m un it y ).

Th e di st ric t co ur t di sm is se d th e un la wfu l de te nt io n cl ai m , fin di ng th at th e

of fic ers ha d arg u ab le reas on ab le su sp ic io n to de ta in Mr. W at ers an d were th us

en ti tl ed to qu al ifi ed im m un it y

. App el la nt s arg ue th at th e of fic ers di d n ot ha ve

reas on ab le su sp ic io n or arg ua bl e reas on ab le su sp ic io n to de ta i n Mr. W at ers

. Alt ern a t i v e l y, App el la nt s co nt en d th at th e of fic ers ne ed ed arg ua bl e pr ob ab le cau se
be ca us e th e te m

po rary de te nt io n be cam e a de fact o arre st whe n th e of fic ers

ha nd cu ffed Mr. W at ers an d d et ai ne d hi m “ in th e sq ua d car fo r twen ty m in ut es .”
App el la nt ’s Br. 43

.

W it h res pe ct to th is cl ai m , we ne ed no t di sc us s ar gu ab le reas on ab le su sp ic io n
be cau se , in fact

, th e of

fic ers act ed pu rs ua nt to reas on ab le su sp ic io n in de ta in in g Mr.

W at ers

. The vi de os at ta ch ed to th e pl ead in gs sh ow th at Mr. W at ers refu se d to op en

hi s ve hi cl e’s tru nk at th e lu m be ry ard ex it

, de sp it e si gn s at th e e n t ran ce an d ex it

in fo rm in g vi si to rs th at ve hi cl es wou ld be in sp ect ed as th ey le ft th e lu m be ry ard

. The

req ui rem en t was cl earl y pa rt of Men ard s’s c u s t o mar y pr ot oc ol as cu st om ers ex it ed

th e l u mb e r ya rd aft er pi ck in g up m erch an di se in th ei r ve hi cl es

. Offi cers Sm it h an d

Kirc hn er arri ve d at Men ard s in res po ns e to Mr. W at ers ’s 9 1 1 c a l l an d Mr. W at ers

refu se d t o i de nt ify himself to th e o ffi cers or t o a ll ow an y on e to ve rif y hi s p ur ch as e.

At th at po in t, Offi cer Sm it h an d Offi cer Kirc hn er ha d “ a pa rti cu la riz ed an d ob jecti ve
ba si s” to de ta in Mr. W at ers

. Tho m as v. Dick el

, 21 3 F.3 d 10 23

, 10 25 (8 th Ci r. 20 00 )
(q uo ti ng Orne la s v . Uni te d S ta te s, 5 17 U.S. 69 0, 6 96 (19 96 )).

-1 1-In de ed

, th e of fic ers to ld Mr. W at ers at th e ti m e th at he was be in g de ta in ed th at

hi s refu sa l to co m

pl y wit h Men ard s’s cl earl y -p os te d po li cy affo rd ed th em reas on ab le

su sp ic io n th at he ha d so m et hi ng in cri m in at in g in hi s ve hi cl e’s tru nk

. Bec au se
Offi cers Sm it h an d K i r c h n er po ss es se d sp eci fic

, art ic ul ab le fact s th at le d th em to

su sp ect Mr. W at ers m ig ht b e e n g a g ed in cri m in al act iv it y , se e Hii be l v. Si xt h Ju d.

Dis t. Ct

. of Nev

., 54 2 U.S. 17 7, 18 6 (2 00 4)

, we fin d th at

, un de r t h e t o t a l i ty of th e
ci rcu m st an ces , Offi cers Sm it h an d Kirc hn er ac t u a l l y ha d reas on ab le su sp ic io n to

de ta in Mr. Waters

.

H a v i n g co nc lu de d th at th e of fic ers po ss es se d reas on ab le su sp ic io n to de ta i n

Mr. W at ers , we m

us t ne xt de te rm in e whe th er th at de te nt io n be cam e a de fact o arre st

.

“ A Terry st op m ay be co m e an arre st

, req ui rin g pr ob ab le cau se , if th e st op la st s fo r an

un r e a s o n a b l y lo ng ti m e or if of fic ers us e un reas on ab le fo rce.” Uni te d St at es v.
Newel l, 59 6 F.3 d 87 6, 87 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ) (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s om it te d)

. W hi le

of fic ers m us t us e “ th e le as t in tru si ve m ean s of de te nt io n a n d i n v e st ig at io n

. . .

reas on ab ly ne ces sa ry ” to co nd uc t th e st op , Uni te d St at es v. Nav arre t e

- B a r r o n, 19 2

F.3 d 78 6, 79 0 (8 th Ci r. 19 99 ), th ey are pe rm it t e d to “ ta ke an y m eas ur es th at are

‘reaso na bl y ne ces sa ry to pr ot ect th ei r pe rs on al sa fet y an d to m ai nt ai n th e st at us qu o
du rin g th e co ur se of th e st op .’ ” Uni te d St at es v. San fo rd

, 81 3 F.3 d 70 8, 71 3 (8 th Ci r.

20 16 ) (p er cu ria m ) (q uo ti ng Uni te d St at es v. Sm it h, 64 8 F .3d 65 4, 65 9 (8 th Ci r.

20 11 )). Fi nd in g th at no un reas o n a b l e de la y or un reas on ab le fo rce oc cu rred in th e

co ur s e o f Mr. W at ers ’s de te nt io n, we al so fin d th at th e of fic ers di d no t arre st Mr.

W at ers

.

The Su pr em e Co ur t h as he ld “ th at a twen ty-m in ut e d et en ti on was re as on ab le

w h e n t he po li ce act ed di li ge nt ly an d de fen da nt co nt rib ut ed to th e de la y .” Un i t e d

St at es v. Bl oo m fie ld

, 40 F.3 d 91 0, 91 7 (8 th Ci r. 19 94 ) (en ba nc ) (ref eren ci ng Uni te d

St at es v. Sh arp e, 47 0 U.S. 67 5, 68 6- 88 (1 98 5) ). Here, th e vi de o ev id en ce sh ows th at App el la nt s’ “ en ti re en co un te r wit h la w enfo rcem en t la st ed ab ou t 20 m in ut es ,” W at ers

v. M ad so n, Ci v. No. 1 7- 93 5 (P AM/ SER), 2 01 7 WL 64 03 09 9, at *2 (D. Min n. Dec

.

-1 2-14

, 20 17 ), th at th e of fic ers wor ke d di li ge nt ly to co m pl et e th ei r in ve st ig at io n, an d th at

th e en co un te r on ly la st ed as lo ng as it di d be cau se Mr. W at ers was arg um en ta ti ve an d

refu se d to co op erat e wit h th e po li ce in ve st ig at io n b y fai li ng to ob ey le gi ti m at e

req ue st s to id en ti fy hi m se lf an d st ep ou t of hi s ve hi cl e. W e th us fin d no un reas on ab le

de la y he re.

“ [T]he us e of ha nd cu ffs du rin g a Ter ry st op

. . . req ui res so m e reas on ab le be li ef

th at th e su sp ect is arm ed an d da ng ero us or th at th e res tra in ts are ne ces sa ry fo r so m e

ot he r le gi ti m at e pu rp os e.” El-Gh azza wy v. Bert hi au m e, 63 6 F.3 d 45 2, 45 7 (8 th Ci r.

20 11 ) (ci ta ti on om it te d)

. In El-Gh azza wy v. Bert hi au m e, we fo un d th at a po li ce

of fic er who us ed ha nd cu ffs to de ta in a m an su sp ect ed of se ll in g co un te rfei t watc he s

to a pa wn s ho p d id no t hav e su ch a reas on ab le be li ef. Id

. at 45 9. The re, t he off ic er

ha nd cu ffed th e in d i v i d ua l im m ed ia te ly aft er arri vi ng on th e sc en e an d be fo re

co nd uc ti ng an y in ve st ig at io n. Id

. at 45 8. Afte r a c tu al ly in ve st ig at in g, th e of fic er

arre st ed El-Gh azza wy fo r th eft by swi nd le ; th e ch arg es were la te r dr op pe d whe n th e

pa wn s ho p d et erm in ed th e wat ch es were g en ui ne . Id. at 45 5- 56

.

In de te rm in in g th at th e of fic er in El-Gh azza wy act ed un reas on ab ly, we rel ie d

on fiv e fact or s: (1 ) th e of fic er ha d no i n d ic at io n th at El-Gh azza wy was arm ed an d

d a n g ero us ; (2 ) th eft by swi nd le

, th e su sp ect ed cri m e, di d no t ne ces sa ril y in v o l v e a

weap on ; (3 ) El-Gh a z z a w y ex hi bi te d no su sp ic io us be ha vi or an d co op erat ed wit h

of fic ers th ro ug ho ut th e in ci de nt ; (4 ) th e of fic er fai le d t o c o n d uc t an y in ve st ig at io n
be fo re ha nd cu ffi ng El-Gh azza wy ; an d (5 ) no ex ig en t ci rcu m st an ces ex is te d be cau se

th e pa wn sh op al read y ha d po ss es si on of th e al le ge dl y co un te rfei t watc he s. I d

. at

45 7- 58

.

By co nt ras t, whe n th e of

fic ers he re arri ve d on sc en e, th ey sp ok e to th e Men ard s

emp lo y ees an d Mr. W at ers to de te rm in e th e si tu at io n. The y di d no t ha nd cu ff Mr.

W at ers or de ta in hi m in th e sq ua d car un ti l he di so be y ed m ul ti pl e co m

m an ds to st ep

ou t of hi s ve hi cl e. Mr. W at ers ex hi bi te d su sp ic io us be ha vi or be fo re th e of fic ers ev en

-1 3-arri ve d on th e sc en e by fai li ng to al lo w st or e em pl oyees to ve rif

y hi s pu rch as e

pu rs ua nt to a po st ed po li cy , an d he co nt in ue d to ex hi bi t su sp ic io us be ha vi or by fai li ng

to id en ti fy hi m se lf or co m pl y wit h th e of

fic ers ’ in st ru ct io ns to st ep ou t of hi s ve hi cl e.

See Uni te d St at es v. Jo ne s, 26 9 F.3 d 91 9, 92 4 (8 th Ci r. 20 01 ) (s ta ti ng th at an of fic er,

in th e co ur se of a Terry st op in vo lv in g a ve hi cl e, m ay as k a su sp ect fo r id en ti fic at io n,

“ req ue st th at th e dr iv er st ep ou t o f t h e ve hi cl e,” an d ru n co m pu te r se arch es to

de te rm in e if

th e d riv er h as a cri m in al hi st or y or ou ts ta nd in g warran ts ). In a dd it io n,

th e vi de o at ta ch ed to th e pl ead in gs sh ows th at Mr. W at ers is si gn ifi can tl y la rg er th an
ei th er Offi cer Sm it h or Offi cer Kirc hn er, whi ch fact o r s in to th e ap pl ic ab le

ci rcu m st an ces

. See El-Gh azza wy , 63 6 F.3 d at 45 7- 59 (ex am in in g of fic er’s co nd uc t

in th e co nt ex t o f th e su rro un di ng cir cu m st an ces ).

The of fic ers di d no t kn ow Mr. W at ers ’s ba ck gr ou nd an d wit ne ss ed hi s

arg um en ta ti ve , ev as iv e, an d un co op erat iv e be ha vior. Se e U nit ed St ates v. Bai le y , 41 7

F.3 d 87 3, 87 7- 78 (8 th Ci r. 20 05 ) (s ta ti ng th at ev as ive ne ss co nt rib ut es to “ a reas on ab le

an d pa rti cu la riz ed su sp ic io n th at cri m in al act iv it y m ay be afo ot ” (in te rn al qu ot at io n

m ark s om it te d) ). The y co ul d reas on ab ly co nc lu de th at Mr. W at ers ’s un pr ed ic ta bl e
be ha vi or wou ld co nt in ue to es cal at e an d th at ha nd cu ffi ng hi m an d br ie fly pl aci ng hi m

in th e sq ua d car was th e le as t in tru si ve m ean s of m ai nt ai ni ng th e st at us qu o an d

pr ot ect in g Mr. W at ers , th em se lv es , an d bysta nd ers w h i l e th e of fic ers in ve st ig at ed

. See Uni te d Stat es v. Sm it h, 64 5 F.3 d 99 8, 10 01 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ) (h ol di ng th at aft er a

sus pe ct

, ini tia lly co ope ra

tiv e, be cam e ag it at ed an d refu se d pe rm is si on whe n an of fic er

as ke d to se arch hi s car, th e of fic er co ul d m ai nt ai n th e st at us qu o by ha nd cu ffi ng th e

su sp ect an d pl aci ng hi m in th e ba ck of a pa tro l car un ti l a dr ug -s ni ffi ng do g arri ve d)

.

W e no te th at Mr. W at ers ’s un pr ed ic ta bi li ty, ev as iv en es s , arg um en ta ti ve
de m ea n o r , refu sa l to di so be y le gi ti m at e of fic er co m m an ds

, an d th e si ze di ffer en ce
be t w e e n Mr. W at ers an d th e of fic ers , each vi ewed in is ol at io n, li ke ly wou ld no t jus ti fy th e of

fic ers ’ us e of res tra in ts in th is cas e. Howev er, vi ewed as a who le

, th es e

fact or s co ul d cau se Offi cers Sm i t h an d Kirc hn er to reas on ab ly b el ie ve th ey ne ed ed

-1 4-to ha nd cu ff Mr. W at ers an d pl ace hi m in th e sq ua d car to pr es erv e th e st at us qu o. See

id . at 1 00 2 (“ W e h av e rep eat ed ly hel d t ha t p ol ic e o ffi cers m ay reas on ab ly han dc uf

f

a su sp ect an d pl ace hi m in a sq ua d car du rin g th e co ur se of a Ter ry st op in or de r to

pr ot ect th ei r sa fet y

an d m ai nt ai n t he st at us qu o.” ).

B ecau se we vi ew th e of fic ers ’ act io ns in th e co nt ex t of th e to ta l i t y o f t h e
ci rcu m st an ces , se e El-Gh azza wy , 63 6 F.3 d at 45 7- 59

, we fin d th at it was reas on ab le

fo r th e of fic ers to br ie fly h a n d c u f f Mr. W at ers an d de ta in hi m in th e sq ua d car.
Offi cers Sm it h an d Kirc hn er an d Serg ean t Mad so n are th eref or e en ti tl ed to qu al ifi ed

im m un it y , a nd we affi rm th e di sm is sa l of M r . Wate rs ’s F ou rth Am en dm en t se iz ur e
cl ai m

.

B.

Co un t 6 of th e Am en de d Com pl ai nt al le ge s th at Offi cers Sm it h and Kirc hn er

an d Serg ean t Mad so n se iz ed Mrs

. W ate rs in vi ol at io n of th e Fo ur th Am en dm en t whe n

th ey th reat en ed to arre st he r if sh e di d n o t pr ov id e Mr. W at ers ’s id en ti fy in g

in fo rm at io n an d al lo w of fic ers to se arch th e tru nk of th e Wa te rs ’s ve hi cl e. The

di st ric t co ur t di sm is se d th is cl ai m be cau se th e of fic ers de ta in ed App el la nt s pu rs ua nt

to arg ua bl e rea so na bl e su sp ic io n.

It is well -s et tl ed la w in th is ci rcu it th at bo th a pa ss en ge r an d a dr iv er are se iz ed

du rin g a Terry st op of a ve hi cl e. Uni te d St at es v. Oli ve r, 55 0 F.3 d 73 4, 73 7 (8 th Ci r.

20 08 ) (ci ti ng Bre n dl in v. Cal ifo rn ia

, 55 1 U.S. 24 9, 25 7- 58 (2 00 7) ; Mar y la nd v.

W il so n, 51 9 U.S. 40 8, 41 3- 15 (1 99 7) ; Pen ns y lv an ia v. Mi m m s, 43 4 U.S. 10 6, 11 1- 12
(1 97 7) ). I f a n o f

fic er act s la wfu ll y in de ta in in g th e dr iv er, he act s la wfu ll y in

co nc ur ren tl y de ta in in g th e pa ss en ge r. See Bren dl in

, 55 1 U.S. at 25 7

- 5 9. As we

co nc lu de d ab ov e th at th e of fic ers act ed pu rs ua nt to reas on ab le su sp ic io n in de ta in in g

Mr. W at ers , th e ve hi cl e’s dr iv er, we co nc lu de th at th ey act ed pu rs ua nt to reas on ab le

su sp ic io n in de ta in in g Mrs

. Wa te rs , th e pa ss en ge r. The of fic ers are en ti tl ed to

-1 5-qu al ifi ed im m un it y , an d we affi rm th e di sm is sa l of Mrs

. W at ers ’s Fo ur th Am en dm en t

se iz ur e cl ai m

.

C.

Co un t 4 of th e Am en de d Co m pl ai nt as se rts th at Of

f i c e r S m it h an d Serg ean t

7

Mad so n vi ol at ed Mr. W at ers ’s Fo ur th Am en dm en t rig ht s by us in g ex ces si ve fo rce

ag ai ns t hi m

. To st at e an ex ces si ve fo rce c l a i m un de r th e Fo ur th Am en dm en t, a pl ai nt iff m

us t sh ow th at an of

fic er’s us e of fo rce was “ ob jecti ve ly unr ea so na bl e, gi ve n

th e fact s an d ci rcu m st an ces of th e pa rti cu la r cas e, as ‘j ud ge d fro m th e pe rs pe ct iv e of

a reas on ab le of

fic er on th e sc en e, rat he r th an wit h th e 20 /2 0 vi si on of hi nd si gh t

. ’”

Ch am be rs v. Pen nycoo k, 64 1 F.3 d 89 8, 90 5- 06 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ) (q uo ti ng Grah am , 49 0

U.S. at 39 6)

. “ [A] cl ai m m us t be ba se d up on m or e th an ‘a de m in im is us e of fo rce.’”

Atk in so n v. Ci ty of Mo un ta in V ie w, 70 9 F.3 d 12 01

, 12 10 -1 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 13 )
(em ph as is om it te d) (qu ot in g C ha m be rs , 64 1 F .3d at 9 06 ).

The di st ric t cou rt di sm is se d t hi s cl ai m be cau se App el la nt s fail ed to pl au si bl y
al le ge th at Serg ea

nt Ma dson ’s us e of fo rce was ob jecti ve ly un reas on ab le

, an d be cau se

Mr. W at ers fai le d to pl ead th e req ui si te res ul ti ng in jury fro m th e ha nd cu ffi ng

. W hi le
App el la nt s arg ue on ap pe al th at th e di st ric t co ur t im pr op erl y di sm is se d th is cl ai m , in

th ei r op en in g br ie f th ey on ly di sc us s th e di st ric t co ur t’s de ci si on as it pe rta in s to th e
cl ai m ag ai ns t Serg ean t Mad so n. The y ha ve th eref or e waiv ed th e rig ht to ap pe al th e
di st ric t co ur t’s di sm is sa l of th ei r ex ces si ve fo rce cl ai m a g a i n s t O ffi cer Sm it h. See

Ch av ero -Lin ares v. Sm it h, 7 82 F.3d 10 38 , 10 40 (8t h C ir. 2 01 5)

.

W e fin d th at Serg ean t Mad so n us ed ob jecti ve ly reas on ab le fo rce in red ire ct in g

Mr. W at ers ou t of hi s pe rs on al sp ace. The vi de o at ta ch ed to th e pl ead in gs sh ows Mr.

Mr. Wa t e r s ’s vi de o sh ows , an d App el la nt s co nc ed e on ap pe al

, th at Offi cer 7

Kirc hn er, rat he r th an Offi cer Sm it h, ha nd cu ffed Mr. W at ers

. See App el la nt ’s Br. 16

.

-1 6-W at ers ap pr oa ch well wit hi n arm ’s le ng th of Serg ean t Mad so n, who was le an in g on

th e sq ua d car. Serg ean t Mad so n th en tu rn ed Mr. W at ers away fro m hi m an d ga ve hi m

a li gh t pu sh in th e di rect io n of App el la nt s’ ve hi cl e. W e fin d th is to be a de m in im is

us e of fo rce, se e Cav at ai o v. Ci ty of Bel la Vil la

, 57 0 F.3 d 10 15

, 10 18

, 10 20 (8 th Ci r.

20 09 ) (fi nd in g th at an of fic er us ed de m in im is fo r c e whe n he kn eed th e co m pl ia nt

, ha nd c u f f e d

, 7 5- y ear- ol d arre st ee in th e ba ck whi le pl aci ng hi m in a pa tro l car) ;

Dur ru th y v. Pas to r, 35 1 F.3 d 10 80

, 10 94 (1 1t h Ci r. 20 03 ) (fi nd in g th at an of fic er us ed

de m in im is fo rce in wrap pi ng hi s arm s aro un d a ne ws ca m eram an , d rag gi ng hi m to

th e g r o u n d

, a nd ha nd cu ffi ng hi m ), es pe ci al ly co ns id eri ng th at Mr. W at ers do es no t

al le ge an y ph y si cal in

juri es as a res ul t of Serg ean t Mad so n’s co nd uc t. See Ch am be rs , 64 1 F.3 d at 90 6 (“ The de gr ee of in jury is

. . . rel ev an t in so far as it ten ds to sh ow th e

am ou nt an d t y

pe of f or ce u se d.” ).

B ecau se a de m in im is us e of fo rce can no t fo rm th e ba si s fo r a Fo u r t h

Am en dm en t ex ces si ve fo rce cl ai m , it ca n n o t b e ob jecti ve ly un reas on ab le in th is

co nt ex t. See id

. (“ Th e a p p ro pr ia te in qu iry is ‘w he th er th e fo rce us ed to effe ct a

pa rti cu la r se iz ur e is “ reas o n a b l e

. ” ’ A de m in im is us e of fo rce is in su ffi ci en t to

su pp or t a cl ai m

. . . .” (em ph as is om it te d) (q uo ti ng Grah am , 4 90 U.S. a t 39 6) ). W e

th eref or e fin d th at Serg ean t Mad so n’s u s e of fo rce was reas on ab le un de r th e
ci rcu m st an ces , an d we affi rm th e di st ric t co ur t’s di sm is sa l of Mr. W at ers ’s ex ces si ve

fo rce c la im

.

D.

Co un t 16 of th e Am en de d Co m pl ai nt as se rts th at Offi cers Sm it h an d Kirc hn er

an d Serg ean t Mad so n vi ol at ed App el la nt s’ F o u r t h Am en dm en t rig ht s by se arch in g App el la nt s’ ve hi cl e wit ho ut la w fu l au tho ri ty

. W

hil e the Fo urth Am en dm en t ge ne ral ly

pr oh ib it s un reas on ab le se arch es , s ee Terry, 39 2 U.S. at 9, warra nt le ss se arch es can
be va li d if co nd uc te d pu rs ua nt t o p r o b a bl e cau se or vo lu nt ary co ns en t. See Uni te d

St at es v. Mat lo ck

, 41 5 U.S. 16 4, 16 5- 66 (1 97 4) ; se e al so Co ll in s v. Virg in ia

, 13 8 S.

-1 7-C t. 16 63

, 16 69 (2 01 8) (s ta ti ng th at “ th e se arch of an au to m ob il e can be reas on ab l e

wit ho ut a warra nt ” if of

fic ers ha ve pr ob ab le cau se ). Th e st at e act or ha s th e bu rd en

to pr ov e th at an in di vi du al co ns e n t ed to a se arch

. Bu m pe r v. Nor th Caro li na , 39 1

U.S. 54 3, 5 47 (1 96 8) ; Uni te d St at es v. Sa nc he z, 15 6 F .3d 87 5, 8 78 (8t h C ir. 1 99 8)

.

Here, th e of

fic ers co nt en d th at Mrs

. W at ers vo lu nt ari ly co ns en te d to th e se arch

of App el la nt s’ ve hi cl e, whi le App el la nt s arg ue th at Mrs

. W at ers was co erce d in to

co ns en ti ng

. The di st ric t co ur t co nc lu de d t h a t A p pe ll an ts al le ge d su ffi ci en t fact s to

pr ecl ud e di sm is sa l of th is cl ai m on vo lu nt ary co ns en t gr ou nd s. Howev er, th e di st ric t

co ur t al so fo un d th at App el la nt s fai le d to al le ge an y act ua l, co m pe ns ab le in

jury

st em m in g fr om

th e o ffi cers ’ se arch of th ei r ve hi cl e’s tru nk an d, th us , f ai le d t o s ta te

a cl ai m fo r da m ag es un de r § 19 83

. A pl ai nt iff se ek in g da m ag es un de r § 19 83 fo r an

un reas on ab le se arch m

us t al le ge (1 ) an un la wfu l se arch an d (2 ) an “ act ua l,

co m pe ns ab le in

jury[,] ” Heck v. Hum

ph rey, 51 2 U.S. 4 77 , 4 87 n.7 (1 99 4) , b ecau se
“the ab st ract va lu e of a co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht m ay no t fo rm th e ba si s f o r § 1 9 8 3

da m ag es .” Mem

ph is Cm ty. Sch . Dis t. v . Sta ch ur a, 47 7 U.S. 2 99 , 30 8 (1 98 6)

. 8

App el la nt s arg ue on ap pe al th at th ey su pp or te d th ei r un la wfu l se arch cl ai m by
pl ead in g ov er $7 5,0 00 in em ot io na l di st res s da m ag es

. Howev er, i n th ei r Am en de d

Thi s is th e st an da rd f

o r c o mp e ns at or y an d pu ni ti ve da m ag es un de r § 19 83

. 8

See St ach ur a, 47 7 U.S. at 30 6- 08

. The di st ric t co ur t di d n o t ad dr es s th e is su e of

no min al da m ag es fo r vi ol at io ns of a Fo ur th Am en dm en t rig ht

. See Garre tt v. Cl ark e, 14 7 F.3 d 74 5, 74 7 (8 th Ci r. 19 98 ) (“ If [ p l a i n t i f f] pr ov es [h is Fo ur th Am en dm en t

se arch ] cl ai m , he is en ti tl ed to a fin di ng of li ab il it y an d no m in al da m ag es ev en if he

can no t pr ov e act ua l da m ag es .”). To t h e e x te nt th at App el la nt s m ig ht pr em is e th ei r Fo ur th Am en dm en t s earc h c la im on th e av ai la bi li ty of no m in al da m ag es , th ey ha ve waiv ed th at is su e by f

a i l i n g to rai se it on ap pe al

. See Mi ll er v. Alb rig ht

, 65 7 F.3 d
73 3, 73 7- 38 (8 th C i r

. 20 11 ) (h ol di ng th at no m in al da m ag es are no t au to m at ic in a § 1 98 3 cl ai m fo r a Fo ur th Am en dm en t vi ol at io n an d th at fai lu re to ti m el y r e q u e s t th em res ul ts in waiv er); Je nk in s v. W in te r, 54 0 F.3 d 74 2, 75 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 08 ) (“ Cl ai m s n ot rai se d i n a n o pe ni ng bri ef are de em ed waiv ed .”).

-1 8-Co m

pl ai nt

, App el la nt s ti ed th es e da m ag es di rect ly to th ei r fal s e im pr is on m en t,

ex ces si ve fo rce, ba tt ery, an d un la wfu l se iz ur e cl ai m s. The y d id no t al le ge an y
da m ag es st em m in g sp eci fic al ly fro m th e of fic ers ’ se arch of th ei r ve hi cl e’s tru nk

. See

Mi ll er v. Alb rig ht

, 65 7 F.3 d 73 3, 73 8 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ) (“ Alt ho ug h [p la in ti ff ]

in tro du ced ev id en ce o f act ua l da m ag es res ul ti ng fro m hi s ex ces si ve for ce cl ai m , he

di d no t in tro du ce ev id en ce of da mag e s res ul ti ng fro m hi s un la wfu l en try cl ai m

. In

th at th es e two cl ai m s are se pa rat e an d di st in ct

, th e da m ag es res ul ti ng fro m th e

ex ces si ve fo rce clai m

are n ot su ffi ci en t t o s ho w th at [pl ai nt iff ] su ffer ed da m ag es as

a res ul t of th e of

fic ers ’ un la wfu l en try in to hi s ho m e.”). W e th eref or e ag ree wit h th e
di st ric t co ur t th at App el la nt s fai le d to ad eq ua te l y pl ead a co m pe ns at or y da m ag es
cl ai m un de r § 19 83 ari si ng fro m th e of fic ers ’ se arch of th ei r ve hi cl e’s tru nk

, an d we

affi rm th e d is tri ct co ur t’s d is m is sa l o f th is cla im

.

IV.

App el la nt s br ou gh t th ree cl ai m s un de r 42 U.S.C. § 19 83 fo r vi ol at io ns of Mr.

W at ers ’s Fi rs t Am en dm en t rig ht s, two of whi ch th ey ap pe al

. Co un t 1 of th e Am en de d

Co m pl ai nt al le ge s th at Offi cers Sm it h an d Kirc hn er an d Serg ean t Mad so n in te rfer ed

wit h Mr. W at ers ’s F irs t Am en dm en t rig ht s t o ch al le ng e th e of fic ers ’ act io ns an d to

refu se to pr ov id e id en ti fic at io n. Co un t 2 al le ge s th at th e th ree of fic ers th en ret al ia te d

ag ai ns t Mr. W at ers fo r ch al le ng in g th ei r act io ns an d as ki ng fo r th ei r na m es an d ba dg e

nu m be rs

. Bec au se ou r an al y si s of th e in te rfer en ce cl ai m in co rp or at es ou r an al y si s of

th e ret al ia ti on cla im , we add res s t he ret al ia ti on cla im fir st

.

A.

In or d e r t o o ve rco m e qu al ifi ed im m un it y an d st at e a pl au si bl e cl ai m fo r

in te rfer en ce wit h hi s Fi rs t Am en dm en t rig ht s un de r § 19 83

, a pl ai nt iff m us t sh ow th at

a st at e act or im

pe de d hi s ab il it y to ex erci se a cl earl y -es ta bl is he d co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht

. Pear so n, 5 55 U.S. a t 23 2. A p la in ti ff b rin gi ng a Fi rs t Am en dm en t re ta li at io n c la im

-1 9-un de r § 19 83 may s h o w th at of fic ers vi ol at ed hi s co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht s if “ (1 ) he

en ga ge d in a pr ot ect ed act iv it y , (2 ) [o ffi cers ] to ok a d ve rs e act io n ag ai ns t hi m th at

wou ld ch il l a pe rs on of or di na ry fir m ne ss fro m co nt in ui ng in th e act iv it y , an d (3 ) th e
ad ve rs e act io n was m ot iv at ed at le as t in pa rt by th e ex erci se of th e pr ot ect ed act iv it y .”

Rev el s v . Vin cen z, 38 2 F .3d 87 0, 8 76 (8t h C ir. 2 00 4)

.

W e req ui re a fo ur th el em en t in ret al ia to ry arre st cas es : “ la ck of pr ob ab le cau se

or arg ua bl e pr ob ab le cau se .” Pet ers on v. Ko pp , 75 4 F .3d 59 4, 6 02 (8t h C ir. 2 01 4) ;

s e e al so Rei ch le v. Howar ds

, 56 6 U.S. 65 8, 66 4- 65 (2 01 2) (“ Thi s Co ur t h a s n e v e r

reco g n i z e d a Fi rs t Am en dm en t rig ht to be free fro m a ret al ia to ry arre st th at is

su pp or te d by pr ob ab le cau se

. . . .”). Bu t see Lozm an v. Cit y of Ri vi era Beach

, 13 8

S. Ct

. 19 4 5

, 19 55 (2 01 8) (al lo win g pl ai nt iff to m ai nt ai n a Fi rs t Am en dm en t

ret al ia t o r y a r res t cl ai m ag ai ns t a m un ic ip al it y wit ho ut sh owi ng th e ab se nc e of

pr ob ab le cau se whe n th e cl ai m was pr em is ed on “ a pr em ed it at ed pl an [b y th e

m un ic ip al it y an d it s le gi sl at or s] to in ti m id at e hi m ”). Thi s is be cau se pr ob ab le cau se

pr ov id es su ffi ci en t gr ou nd s fo r an arre st

, Green m an v. Je ss en , 78 7 F.3 d 88 2, 88 7- 88
(8 th Ci r. 20 15 ), an d a pl ai nt iff arre st ed pu rs ua nt to pr ob ab le cau se can no t sh ow th at

ex erci si ng hi s co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht s was th e “ ‘but -fo r’ cau se of [h is ] arre st .” Bari be au , 59 6 F.3 d at 48 1; se e al so Hart m an v. Mo or e, 5 4 7 U

. S

. 25 0, 26 0 (2 00 6) (“ [A]ctio n

co lo red by so m e de gr ee of ba d m ot iv e do es no t am ou nt to a co ns ti tu ti on al to rt if th at

act io n wo ul d h av e b een tak en an y way .”).

As dis cu ss ed ab ov e, su pr a Part III.A, a te m po rary de te nt io n, un li ke an arre st

,

m ay be pr em is ed on th e le ss -s tri ng en t req ui r e men t s of reas on ab le su sp ic io n. See

W ard lo w, 52 8 U.S. at 12 3. The refo re, to sh ow th at ex e r c i s i n g hi s co ns ti tu ti on al
rig ht s was th e “ bu t-f

or ” cau se of a te m

po rary de te nt io n, a pl ai nt iff m us t sh ow th at th e
de fen da nt of

fic ers la ck ed reas on ab le su sp ic io n or arg ua bl e reas on ab le su sp ic io n. See

All en v. Ci sn ero s, 81 5 F

. 3 d 2 3 9

, 2 45 -4 6 (5 th Ci r. 20 16 ) (p er cu ria m ) (fi nd in g th at

of fic er who st op pe d, de ta in ed

, an d ha nd cu ffed th e pl ai nt iff was en ti tl ed to qu al ifi ed

-2 0-im m

un it y on a Fi rs t Am en dm en t ret al ia ti on cl ai m be cau se he ha d reas on a b le

su sp ic io n t o d et ai n t he pl ai nt iff on “ le ga l, n on -ret al ia to ry ” g ro un ds ).

App el la nt s al le ge th at th e of fic ers ret alia

te d ag ai ns t Mr. W at ers fo r ch al le ng in g

t he ir act io ns by “ arre st in g hi m , us in g ex ces si ve an d de li be rat el y pa in fu l f o r c e , ha nd cu ffi ng [h im ],

. . . a nd ba nn in g hi m fro m Co on Rap id s Men ard s fo r on e y ear.”

Am

. Co m pl

. 24

, Dis t. Ct

. Dkt

. 28

. The di st ric t co ur t di sm is se d App el la nt s’ ret al ia ti on
cl ai m , fin di ng th at th e of

fic ers were en ti tl ed to qu al ifi ed im m un it y be cau se th ey ha d

arg ua b l e r e a so na bl e su sp ic io n to te m po rari ly de ta in Mr. W at ers

. App el la nt s arg ue

th at th e di st ric t co ur t in co rrec tl y req ui red t h e of fic ers to act pu rs ua nt to arg ua bl e

reas on ab le su sp ic io n rat he r th an th e hi gh er st an da rd of pr ob ab le cau se

. App el la nt s’

arg um en ts are pr em is ed on th ei r co ns tru ct io n of Mr. W at ers ’s de te nt io n as an arre st

. Howev er, as we ha ve de te rm in ed th at Mr. W at ers was ne ve r arre st ed

, we ag ree wit h

th e di st ric t co ur t th at th e ap pl ic ab le st an da rd i s r e a s o n ab le su sp ic io n, no t pr ob ab le

cau se

. Fo r th e reas on s st at ed ab ov e we fin d th at th e of fic ers ha d reas on ab le su sp ic io n

to br ie fly de ta in Mr. W at er s

. We t he refo re fin d th at th e of fic ers di d no t

un co ns ti tu ti on a l ly ret al ia te ag ai ns t Mr. W at ers be cau se of hi s ex erci se of hi s Fi rs t

Am en dm en t rig ht s. The of fic ers are en ti tl ed to qu al ifi ed im m un it y , an d we affi rm th e
di st ric t co ur t’s d is m is sa l o f App el la nt s’ Firs t Am en dm en t re ta li at io n c la im

.

B.

App el la nt s fu rth er co nt en d th at t h e of fic ers vi ol at ed Mr. W at ers ’s Fi rs t

Am en dm en t rig ht s to free sp eech

, free as se m bl y , an d free as so ci at io n by “ ph y si cal ly

ha nd cu ffi ng an d arre st in g hi m to pr ev en t h i m f ro m m on it or in g th ei r act iv it y an d

qu es ti on in g th ei r act io ns .” Am

. Co m pl

. 23

, Dis t. Ct

. Dkt

. 28

. Howev er, as refe ren ced

in th e pr ev io us se ct io n, in di vi du al s do no t ha ve a reco gn iz ed “ Fi rs t Am en dm en t rig ht

to be free fro m a ret al ia to ry arre st th at is su pp or te d by pr ob ab le cau se [,]” R e i c hl e,

56 6 U.S. at 66 4- 65 ; se e al so Pet ers on , 75 4 F.3 d at 60 2, an d, by ex te ns io n, do no t ha ve

a reco gn iz ed Fi rs t Am en dm en t rig ht to be free fro m in ve st ig at iv e st op s su pp or te d by

-2 1-reas on ab le su sp ic io n. See All en , 81 5 F.3 d at 24 5- 46

. Thu s, fo r th e sa m e reas on s we

d e t e r mine d th at th e of

fic ers are en ti tl ed to qu al ifi ed im m un it y on App el la nt s ’

ret al ia ti on cl ai m , we fin d th at th ey are en ti tl ed to qu al ifi ed im m un it y on App el la nt s’

Fi rs t Am en dm en t in te rfer en ce cl ai m

. W e affi rm th e di st ric t co ur t’s di sm is sa l of th is

cl ai m

.

V.

Co un t 7 of th e Am en de d Co m pl ai nt al le ge s th at

, un de r § 19 83 an d Mo ne ll

, 43 6

U.S. 65 8, th e Ci ty is vi car i ou sl y li ab le fo r th e of fic ers ’ act io ns

. Mo ne ll ho ld s a

m un ic ip al it y li ab le fo r act io ns of it s em pl oye e s o r a ge nt s th at vi ol at e a pl ai nt iff ’s

co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht s if th e vi ol at io n s t e mm e d fro m an of fic ia l m un ic ip al po li cy or

cu st om . 4 36 U.S. a t 69 4- 95 ; Ulri ch v. Po pe Co un ty, 71 5 F .3d 10 54 , 10 61 (8t h C ir.

20 13 ). “ The re m

us t be a cau sa l co nn ect io n be twee n th e m un ic ip al po li cy or cu st om

an d th e al le ge d co ns ti tu ti on al vi ol at io n in or de r to st at e a va li d cl ai m un de r § 19 83 .”

Ulri ch

, 71 5 F.3 d at 10 61 (ci ti ng Ci ty of Can to n v. Harri s, 48 9 U.S. 37 8, 38 5 (1 98 9) ).

App el la nt s as se rt th e Ci ty v io la te d th ei r Fi rs t, Fo ur th

, an d Fo ur te en th

Am en dm en t rig ht s be cau se Ch ie f W is e—a n of fic ia l po li cy m ak er— rat ifi ed th e

of fic ers ’ act io ns du rin g th e Men ard s in ci de nt whe n he de te rm in ed th e of fic ers act ed

la wfu ll y a n d c l o s e d Mr. W at ers ’s fo rm al co m pl ai nt

. The di st ric t co ur t di sm is se d
App el la nt s’ cl ai m , fin di ng th at th ey fai le d to es ta bl is h cau sa ti on

. W e ag ree wit h th e
di st ric t co ur t th at Ch ie f W is e’s aft er-t he -fac t de te rm in at io n di d no t cau se th e al le ge d

vi ol at io ns of App el la nt s’ co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht s an d th at App el la nt s, th eref or e, can no t

pr em is e a Mo ne ll cl ai m on Ch ie f W is e’s act io ns

. Bec au se App el la nt s do no t id en ti fy

a cau sa l li nk be twee n an of fic ia l m un i c i pa l cu st om or po li cy an d th e al le ge d

co ns ti tu ti on al vi ol at io ns , th ey fai l to st at e a Mo ne ll cl ai m fo r m un ic ip al li ab il it y

. W e

th eref or e aff irm th e d is tri ct co ur t’s d is m is sa l o f th is cla im

.

-2 2-VI.

Co un t 10 of th e Am en de d Co m pl ai nt al le ge s th at Offi cers Sm it h an d Kirc hn er, Serg ean t Mad so n, an d th e Ci ty fal se ly im pr iso ned Mr. W at ers by fai li ng to in ve st ig at e

w he ther he ha d sh op li fte d, ph y si cal ly res tra in in g hi m wit ho ut arre st in g hi m fo r fa ili ng

to pr od uc e id en ti fic at io n, an d pl aci ng hi m in th e ba ck se at of a sq ua d car in

ha nd cu ffs

. Co un t 11 as se rts th at th e of fic ers fal se ly im

pr is on ed Mrs

. W at ers

. Und er

Mi nn es ot a la w, po li ce of

fic ers fal se ly im

pr is on a pl ai nt iff if th ey arre st or de ta in hi m

“ wit ho ut pr op er le ga l au th or it y .” Lun de en v. Ren te ria

, 22 4 N.W .2d 13 2, 13 5 (Mi nn

. 19 74 ) (p er cu ria m ); se e al so Klei do n v. Glas co ck

, 10 N.W .2d 39 4, 39 7 (Mi nn

. 19 43 )
(“ Fal se im

pr is on m en t ha s be en de fin ed as an y im pr is on m en t whi ch is no t le ga ll y jus ti fia bl e.” (in te rn al qu ot at io n m ark s om it te d) ). As we ha ve al read y fo un d th at th e

of fic ers te m po rari ly de ta in ed App el la nt s pu rs ua nt to reas on ab le su sp ic io n, su pr a Part
III.A, we fin d th at th ey act ed wit h pr op er le ga l au th or it y

. App el la nt s th eref or e do no t

st at e a fal se im

pr is on m en t cl ai m un de r Mi nn es ot a la w, an d th e di st ric t co ur t pr op erl y
di sm is se d t he se cla im s.

VII.

Co un t 12 of th e Am en de d Co m pl ai nt al le ge s th at Serg ean t Mad so n co m m it te d

ba tt ery ag ai ns t Mr. W at ers whe n he ph y si cal ly tu rn ed Mr. W at ers away fro m hi m an d

pu sh ed Mr. W at ers in th e di rect io n of App el la nt s’ ve hi cl e. “ Bat te ry is an in te nt io na l,

un pe rm it te d of

fen si ve co nt act wit h an ot he r.” Jo hn so n v. Mo rri s, 45 3 N.W .2d 31

, 41
(Mi nn . 1 99 0) (en ba nc ). Und er Mi nn es ot a la w, “ on ly t he us e o f exce ss iv e fo rce by

a po li ce of

fic er wil l co ns ti tu te a ba tt ery. ” Jo hn so n v. Pet ers on , 35 8 N.W .2d 48 4, 48 5
(Mi nn

. Ct

. App

. 19 84 ); se e al so Para di se v. Ci ty of Mi nn eap ol is

, 29 7 N.W .2d 15 2,

15 5 (M in n. 1 98 0)

.

The di st ric t co ur t di sm is se d App el la nt s ’ ba tt ery cl ai m be cau se App el la nt s

fai le d to pl au si bl y al le ge th at Serg ean t Mad so n us ed ob jecti ve ly un reas on ab le fo rce,

-2 3-es pe ci al ly in li gh t of th e Am e n d e d C om pl ai nt ’s fai lu re to al le ge th at Mr. W at ers

su ffer ed an y in

jury. As wit h th ei r Fo ur th Am en dm en t ex c e s s i v e f or ce cl ai m , App el la nt s pres en t no arg um en t th at Serg ean t Mad so n em pl oyed exce ss iv e fo rce in

rem ov in g Mr. W at ers fro m hi s pe rs on al sp ace an d ha ve th eref or e waiv ed th e rig ht to

ch al le ng e th e di st ric t co ur t’s ch arac te r i z a t i o n of th at fo rce as reas on ab le

. In de ed

, App el la nt s pr es en t no m ean in gf ul arg um en t at al l reg ard in g th is cl ai m

. See Co x v.

Mo rtg . El ec. Re gi st rat io n S y s., In c., 68 5 F .3d 66 3, 6 74 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ) (s ta ti ng th at

th e ap pe ll an ts “ waiv ed [an ] is su e by fail in g t o p ro vi de a m ean in gf ul ex pl an at io n of

th e arg um en t an d ci ta ti on to rel ev an t au th or it y in th ei r op en in g br ie f”). W e th eref or e

affi rm th e d is tri ct co ur t’s d is m is sa l o f App el la nt s’ bat te ry cla im

.

VIII.

Co un t 13 of th e Am en de d Co m pl ai nt a ll eg es th at Offi cer Sm it h co m m it te d

de fam at io n whe n sh e accu se d Mr. W at ers , in fro nt of th ird pa rty bysta nd ers , of act in g

li ke a so ve rei gn ci ti zen

. The di st ric t cou rt di sm is se d th e cl ai m , fin di ng th at Offic er

Sm it h’s st at em en t was a su bjec ti ve op in io n an d, th us , no t act io na bl e, se e Tur k i s h

Co al . of Am ., Inc . v. Bru in in ks , 67 8 F .3d 61 7, 6 25 (8t h C ir. 2 01 2) (ci ti ng Geraci v.
Eck an ka r, 52 6 N .W .2d 39 1, 39 7 (Mi nn

. Ct

. App

. 19 95 )), an d th at

, al te rn at iv el y , if

Offi cer Sm it h’s st at em en t was act io na bl e, sh e an d th e Ci ty were sh ie ld ed by ab so lu te

im m un it y

. On ap pe al

, App el la nt s do no t ch al le ng e th e di st ric t co ur t’s de te rm in at io n

th at Offi cer Sm it h’s st at em en t was no t act io na bl e. The y ha ve th e r e f o r e waiv ed

arg um en t on th at di sp os it iv e is su e. See Co x, 68 5 F.3 d at 67 4. W e affi rm th e di st ric t

co ur t’s d is m is sa l o f App el la nt s’ def am at io n c la im

.

IX.

The jud gm en t o f th e d is tri ct co ur t i s af fir m ed in ful l.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-2 4-