# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 2- 23 95

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
Mi le s LaC ro ss

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

ff - App el la nt

v.

Ci ty of Dul ut h; Offic er An to n M ark ; Lt . Dan Ch ic os ; Unk no wn/ Unn am ed Po li ce Offi cers of t he Cit y of Du lu th

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: Marc h 1 3, 2 01 3 Fil ed : M ay

8, 2 01 3

__ __ __ __ __ __
Befo re WOL LMAN, BYE, and COLLOTON, Cir cu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

W OLLMAN, Circ ui t J ud ge

.

Mi le s LaCro ss ap pe al s fro m th e d i s t ric t co ur t’s gr an t of su m m ary jud gm en t 1

to of fic er Ant on Mar k on LaCro ss ’s 42 U.S.C. § 1 9 8 3 act io n al le gi ng a Fo ur th

The Hon or ab le Jo an N. Eric ks en , 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.Am en dm en t vi ol at io n ba se d on an ex c e s si ve us e of fo rce cl ai m

. LaCro ss al so

co nt en ds th at th e di st ric t co ur t sh ou ld ha ve gr an te d hi s m ot io n to am en d th e 2

co m pl ai nt . W e aff

irm.

I. Back gr ou nd

Acco rd in g to po li ce lo gs , Dul ut h, Mi nn es ot a, po li ce of fic er Ant on Mar k cam e in to co nt act wit h LaCro ss d u r i n g th e earl y m or ni ng ho ur s of Sep te m be r 17
, 20 06

. Mar k su sp ect ed th at LaCro ss , who ap pe ared to be a m in or an d who was acco m pa ni ed by a y ou ng fem al e co m

pa ni on , m ay ha ve be en dr in ki ng al co ho l. Ult im at el y , LaCro ss

was ha nd cu ffed an d se at ed in th e ba ck se at of a sq ua d car. At le as t two ot he r of fic ers
were p res en t at th e sc en e wit h M ark an d LaC ro ss

.

The pa rti es of

fer su bs ta nt ia ll y di ffer in g acco un ts of w h a t n e x t oc cu rred

. Acco rd in g to LaCro ss , on e of fic er op en ed th e dr iv er’s si de rear do or , “ gr ab be d on to

m y sh irt

, rip pe d m e in to th e se at an d h el d m e o nt o t he ba ck of t he po li ce car” whil e

an ot he r of

fic er op en ed th e pa ss en ge r’s si de rear do or an d “ be ga n ta se rin g m e fro m be hi nd .” Acco rd in g t o t he po li ce repo rt and th e Tase r-u se rep or t, Ma rk ap pl ie d t he
Tase r on ce, in st un -d riv e m od e, aft er LaCro ss ha d ki ck ed at th e car’s win do ws, sp at ,

an d a tt em pt ed to bi te Mark

. 3

On Sep te m

be r 18
, 20 06
, LaCro ss so ug ht m ed ic al care fo r br ui si ng on hi s wris ts
rel at ed to th e ha nd cu ffs

. He te st ifi ed th at he “ ne ve r th ou gh t ab ou t te ll in g [th e do ct or ]

The Hon or ab le Leo I. Bri sb oi s, Uni te d St at es Mag is tra te Ju dg e fo r th e Dis tri ct 2 of Mi nn es ot a, to who m pr et ria l m at te rs were as si gn ed pu rs ua nt to 2 8 U

. S .C. § 6 36 (b )(1 )(A).

Mar k’s Tase r was di sc ha rg ed th ree ti m es in th e earl y m or ni ng ho ur s of 3 Sep te m be r 17
, 20 06

. LaCro ss ch al le ng es on ly th e Tase r ap pl ic at io n th at oc cu rred whi le he was h an dc uf

fed an d s eat ed in th e sq ua d c ar.

-2

-ab ou t th e ta se r m ark s al l ov er m e or an y th in g li ke th at .” He d i d n o t se ek an y

tre at m en t fo r in

juri es rel at ed to th e Tase r ap pl ic at io n, no r ha s he be en di ag no se d wit h

an y in juri es or co nd it io ns rel at ed th eret o. LaCro ss te st ifi ed th at , at so m e po in t aft er Sep te m be r 17 or 18
, 20 06
, he be ga n ha vi ng ep is od es o f a n x i e t y. W he n as ke d to
de sc rib e hi s sym

pt om s, he rep li ed

, “ My he art jus t st art s be at in g, ge ts sc ared

. . . . [A]
weir d fe el in g c om es ov er m e.”

LaCro ss fil ed su it in Sep te m be r 20 10
, al le gi ng fed eral ci vi l rig ht s cl ai m s an d

st at e co m m on la w cl ai m s ag ai ns t a nu m b er of de fen da nt s. He th erea fte r so ug ht to

am en d t h e c om

pl ai nt to ad d a cl ai m un de r Mi nn es ot a St at ut es § 61 1A.7 9, en ti tl ed
Ci vi l Dam ag es fo r Bi as Offen se s. The m ag is tra te jud ge ap pl ie d th e pl ead in g st an da rd

se t fo rth in Bel l Atl an ti c Co rp

. v

. Twom bl y , 55 0 U.S. 54 4 (2 00 7)

, an d Ash cro ft v. Iq ba l, 55 6 U.S. 66 2 (2 00 9)

, an d de ni ed th e m ot io n to am en d as fu ti le

. Exc ep t fo r th e § 19 83 cl ai m al le gi ng th at Ma r k ’s ap pl ic at io n of th e Tase r co ns ti tu te d an

un co ns ti tu ti on al us e of f o rce, al l cl ai m s ag ai ns t al l de fen da nt s were ev en tu al ly
di sm is se d fr om

th e su it

.

The di st ric t co ur t gr an te d Mar k’s m ot io n fo r su m m ary jud gm en t, ho ld in g th at
he was en ti tl ed to qu al ifi ed im m un it y

. In do in g so , th e di st ric t co ur t de te rm in ed th at
Mar k ha d us ed a reas on ab le am ou nt of f or ce an d th at , e ve n if th e Tase r ap pl ic at io n

co ns ti tu te d ex ces si ve fo rce, it was no t cl earl y es ta bl is he d on Sep te m be r 17
, 20 06
, th at
th e u s e o f fo rce res ul ti ng in on ly de min imi s in juri es m ig ht vi ol at e th e Fo ur th
Am en dm en t.

II. Dis cu ss io n

A. Sum m ary Ju dg m en t Ba se d o n Qu al ifi ed Im m un it y

W e rev ie w de no vo th e di st ric t co ur t’s g r a n t o f s um m ary jud gm en t ba se d on
qu al ifi ed im m

un it y

. Ch am

be r s v. Pen nycoo k, 64 1 F.3 d 89 8, 90 4 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ).

-3

-Qua li fie d im m u n i ty sh ie ld s go ve rn m en t of fic ia ls fro m li ab il it y an d th e bu rd en s of
li ti ga ti on in a § 19 83 act io n un le ss th e of fic ia l’s co nd uc t vi ol at es a cl earl y es ta bl is he d

co ns ti tu ti on al or st at ut or y rig h t o f w h i c h a reas on ab le pe rs on wou ld ha ve kn own

. Harl ow v. Fi tz ge ral d, 45 7 U.S. 80 0, 81 8 (1 98 2) ; Bro wn v. Ci ty of Gol de n Vall ey , 57 4
F.3 d 49 1, 49 5 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ). Dete rm in in g t h e q u e s t i on of qu al ifi ed im m un it y in vo lv es a two -p art in qu iry: whe th er th e fact s sh own by th e pl ai nt iff m ak e ou t a vi ol at io n of a co ns ti tu ti on al or st at ut or y rig ht

, an d whe th er th at r i g h t w a s cl earl y

es ta bl is he d at t he ti m e o f th e d efen da nt ’s all eg ed m is co nd uc t. Sau ci er v. Katz
, 53 3
U.S. 19 4, 20 1 (2 00 1)

. W e ha ve di sc ret io n to de ci de whi ch pa rt sh ou ld be ad dr es se d
fir st , Pear so n v. Cal la ha n, 55 5 U.S. 22 3, 23 6 (2 00 9)

, an d ha ve de ci de d to ad dr es s th e la tt er.

In Ch am

be rs v. Pen nycoo k, we co ns id ered whe th er a p l ai nt iff ’s sh owi ng of

“ on ly de min imi s in

jury n eces sa ril y fo recl os es a c l a i m of ex ces si ve fo rce un de r th e Fo ur th Am en dm en t[,]” an d co nc lu de d th at it di d no t. 6 4 1 F

. 3 d a t 9 06

. W e de te rm in ed th at “ [t]he ap pr op ria te in qu iry is ‘w he th er th e fo rce us e d to effe ct a
pa rti cu la r se iz ur e is “ reas on ab le .”’” Id . (qu ot in g Gra ha m v. Co nn or , 49 0 U.S. 3 86
, 39 6 (1 98 9) ) (em

ph as is om it te d)

. So al th ou gh a de min imi s us e of fo rce is in su ffi ci en t

to su pp or t a cl ai m , a de min imi s in jury do es no t ne ces sa ril y fo recl os e a cl ai m

. See id

.

The di st in ct io n be twee n de min imi s fo rce an d de min imi s in jury, ho wev er, was

no t cl ear un ti l Ch am

be rs was de ci de d. In Sep te m be r 20 06
, whe n Mar k de pl oyed hi s Tase r, “ a reas on ab le of

fic er co ul d ha ve be li ev ed th at as lo ng as he di d no t cau se m or e th an de min imi s in

jury to an arre st ee, hi s act io ns wou ld no t ru n afo ul of th e Fo ur th
Am en dm en t.” Ch am

be rs , 6 4 1 F

. 3 d a t 90 8. LaCro ss ha s no t se t fo rth su ffi ci en t

ev id en ce to sh ow th at Mar k’s app li cat io n of the Tase r cau se d m or e th an de min imi s in jury. Acco rd in gl y , Mar k is en ti tl ed to qu al ifi ed im m un it y be cau se he di d no t
vi ol at e LaCro ss ’s th en cle arl y est ab li sh ed co ns ti tu ti on al rig ht s.

-4

-LaCro ss co nt en ds th at th e Tase r is di ffer en t fro m ot he r im pl em en ts of fo rce in
th at it can cau se ex cru ci at in g pa in wit ho ut la st in g p h ys i c a l e ffec ts

. Bec au se it is
di ffer en t in ki nd

, th e arg um en t go es , th e Tase r sh ou ld no t be jud ge d by th e ph y si cal
in jury it cau se s. LaCro ss arg ue s th at ou r po st -Ch am be rs op in io n i n S h e kl et on v. Eich en be rg er, 67 7 F.3 d 36 1 ( 8 t h Ci r. 20 12 ), es ta bl is he s th at “ de min imi s in jury is
effe ct i v e l y irr el ev an t whe re an of fic er us es a ta se r on a no nr es is ta nt m is de m ean an t

su sp ect .” App el la nt ’s Rep ly Br. 7. In ot he r wor ds

, he arg ue s th at Ch am be rs do es no t

ap pl y to ex ces si ve fo rce cl ai m s in vo lv in g Tase r s

. W e di sa gr ee. Sh ek le to n di d no t

co ns i d e r t he ex te nt of th e pl ai nt iff ’s in juri es , be y on d no ti ng th at th e pl ai nt iff

su st ai ne d m in or he ad in

juri e s a nd was tre at ed at a ho sp it al

. 67 7 F.3 d at 36 5. The
d e c i s io n th us di d no t ad dr es s whe th er th e pl ai nt iff su ffer ed on ly de min imi s in ju r y,

an d if so , whe th er th at in

jury is vi ewed di ffer en tl y be cau se it was cau se d by a Tase r. 4

W hi le m en ti on ha s be en m ad e of “ th e un iq ue na tu re of th is type of weap on [,]”
McKe nn ey v. Harri so n, 63 5 F.3 d 35 4, 36 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ) (Mu rp hy, J., co nc ur rin g)

,

we ha ve no t cat eg or iz ed th e Tase r as an im pl em en t of fo rce who se us e e s t a b l i s h es ,

as a m at te r of la w, m or e th an de min imi s in jur y

. In Ch am

be rs , we sa id th at “ th e

na tu re of th e fo rce ap pl ie d can no t be co rrel at ed pe rfec tl y wit h th e type of in jury
in fli ct ed .” 64 1 F.3 d at 90 6. Thi s ob se rv at io n m ay be of sp eci al rel ev an ce reg ard in g Tase r-i nf li ct ed in juri es , so m e of whi ch are on ly m in or in na tu re, bu t ot he rs so m et im es

se ve re an d un ex pe ct ed

. Co m pa re Co ok v. Ci ty of Bel la Vil la

, 58 2 F.3 d 84 0, 85 0 (8 th
Ci r

. 2 0 09 ) (Arres te e “ su st ai ne d on ly m in or sc rap es an d two ta se r pu nc tu re m ark s whi ch di d no t req ui re m ed ic al tre at m en t.”)

, wit h McKe nn ey , 63 5 F.3 d at 35 7- 58 (Fo ll owi ng Tase r sh oc k, arre st ee fel l fro m a se co nd -s to ry win do w an d la te r di ed fro m hi s in juri es .), an d Mah am ad v. And ers on , 61 2 F.3 d 10 84
, 10 86 (8 th Ci r. 20 10 ) (Pri so ne r so ug ht m ed ic al an d ps y ch ia t r i c c a re fo r al le ge d in juri es in cl ud in g

Lik ewis e, ou r op in io n in Bro wn v. Ci ty of Gol de n Vall ey , 57 4 F.3 d 49 1 (8 th 4 Ci r. 20 09 ), di d no t ad dr es s th e qu es ti o n whe th er de min imi s in jury can su pp or t a cl ai m for ex ces si ve for ce.

-5

-in co nt in en ce, im po te nc e, an d ne rv e da m ag e fro m Tase r sh oc k to hi s te st ic le an d
ha nd .). Tho ug h it of

fers no ai d to LaCro ss , th e de gr e e o f i nju ry is no t di sp os it iv e aft er Ch am

be rs , an d it is no w cl earl y es ta bl is he d th at an of fic er is no t en ti tl ed to

qu al ifi ed im m

un it y if hi s us e of fo rce i s e xc es si ve in th e ci rcu m st an ces , e ve n if th e in jury infl ic te d was m in or

.

B. Deni al of M ot io n t o Am en d C om pl ai nt

LaCro ss arg ue s t ha t t he di st ric t cou rt e rred in ap pl y in g t he pl ead in g s ta nd ard

se t fo rth in Bel l Atl an ti c Co rp

. v. Twom bl y an d Ash cro ft v. Iq ba l to de ny as fu ti le hi s

m ot io n to am en d th e co m pl ai nt to ad d a st at e-l aw cl ai m

. W e fin d no erro r in th e
ap pl ic at io n of the pl ead in g st an da rd set fo rth in th os e cas es , fo r “ [w]e ap pl y fed eral pl ead in g st an da rd s

. . . to th e st at e su bs ta nt iv e la w to de te rm in e if a co m pl ai nt m ak es

ou t a cl ai m un de r st at e la w.” Karn at ch ev a v. JP Mo rg an Ch as e Ban k, N.A., 70 4 F.3 d
54 5, 5 48 (8t h C ir. 2 01 3)

.

III. Co nc lu si on

The jud gm en t i s af

fir m ed

.

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

-6

-