NEW ORLEANS – A majority component of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has reversed a Texas lower court’s granting of qualified immunity-related summary judgment, in an excessive force and false arrest action against Harris County and members of its law enforcement.
In an Aug. 30 memorandum opinion written by Fifth Circuit Judge James L. Dennis, alongside colleague judges Edith H. Jones and Don R. Willett, issued such an opinion in Corey Spiller’s case versus Harris County, Texas, Harris County Constable Precinct 7, Constable May Walker and Sgt. Jared Lindsay.
“At approximately 4 a.m. on Dec. 21, 2019, Corey Spiller drove to assist his girlfriend, Dashanelle Moore, after her minor single-car accident on a Houston elevated expressway. Much of the episode forming the basis of this lawsuit was captured on police body-worn cameras. Both parties rely on those videos as accurately capturing and showing the facts in their conflicting versions of what happened. At the scene, Spiller and Moore peaceably conversed with officers until a supervisor, Sergeant Jared Lindsay, arrived,” Dennis stated.
“Lindsay briefly questioned Moore and rebuked Spiller for attempting to answer for her. He then directed Moore to go with an officer to a nearby truck stop for further police procedures and he told Spiller to follow in his car. Spiller attempted to ask Lindsay and other officers about what would happen to Moore. Lindsay became enraged, seized Spiller at his neck, and slammed him on his back on the hood of a parked car. The two tumbled to the pavement and continued to scuffle as the other officers intervened and grasped Spiller. One officer tased Spiller in his back. Spiller was arrested and taken into custody, but charges against him were later dropped.”
Spiller brought claims against the defendants for excessive force and false arrest, bystander liability, retaliation and a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas dismissed Harris County, Precinct 7 and Chief Constable Walker for failure to state a claim and later granted summary judgment for Lindsay on the basis of qualified immunity.
Spiller then appealed to the Fifth Circuit, challenging the entry of summary judgment dismissing his Fourth Amendment excessive force, Fourth Amendment false arrest, First Amendment retaliation and bystander liability claims against Lindsay; and the dismissal of his Monell claim against Harris County.
Dennis began the analysis by stating Lindsay was not due to receive qualified immunity, based upon the video evidence presented.
“Spiller’s declaration states that Lindsay attacked him with excessive, unreasonable force, which was totally unjustified and unprovoked by any act by Spiller. Spiller’s declaration specifically asserts that he did not elbow Lindsay and that he was not actively resisting. Lindsay and the dissent exaggerate the video evidence by arguing it ‘clearly shows that the first blow was struck by Spiller when he elbowed Sergeant Lindsay in the chest. The key moment in the footage is when Lindsay steps into Spiller’s face and Spiller moves his elbow. The video evidence does not show Spiller striking Lindsay,” Dennis said.
“Instead, the body-cams show Spiller maneuvering to get a view of the officers he was addressing and creating space between himself and Lindsay. At that same time, Lindsay barreled toward Spiller, which caused Spiller’s elbow to rub up against Lindsay. Because the video evidence in the record does not completely refute Spiller’s declaration, we apply Rule 56, find there is a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether Spiller ‘elbowed’ Lindsay, and assume that the jury will believe the non-moving party’s evidence at trial.”
As a result, Dennis found that since “genuine fact disputes material to the existence of a constitutional violation and concluding that the right at issue was clearly established at the time Lindsay’s misconduct occurred, we reverse the District Court’s grant of summary judgment to Lindsay on Spiller’s excessive force claim.”
With respect to the remainder of Spiller’s other claims against both Lindsay and Harris County, Dennis found those were properly dismissed by the trial court – and on the excessive force claim, remanded the case for further proceedings.
Willett authored a concurring opinion which explained issues of material fact persist and opined on the altercation in question.
“I certainly cannot describe it with anything close to the dissent’s unswerving conviction, and more importantly for the excessive force claim before us, it was well after Sergeant Lindsay decided that the circumstances warranted a choke slam,” Willett said.
As Willett alluded to, Jones dissented from her two colleagues, found Spiller had in fact elbowed Lindsay in the chest (thus, permitting Lindsay to respond with force) and wrote that the trial court’s opinion should have been affirmed in all respects.
“The video evidence shows that Spiller’s conduct established probable cause for arrest – before the scuffle commenced. The question here is simply whether Sergeant Lindsay used excessive force to consummate the arrest. Neither this Court nor the Supreme Court has authored any case that I know of, or the parties have cited, where the law enforcement officer got injured when confronting a suspect and the suspect himself suffered no injury, yet qualified immunity was denied so that the suspect could sue for damages,” Jones said.
“Spiller’s claims should not survive the stringent test of ‘clearly established law,’ which is intended to protect law enforcement officers from strike suits, especially where insult is piled on injury as happened here. The summary judgment should have been affirmed. I dissent.”
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit case 22-20028
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas case 4:20-cv-03878
From the Southeast Texas Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com