Aipperspach v. McInerney, 2013 WL 3990689

Plaintiff Aipperspach, as Personal Representative of Mahir Al-Hakim’s estate, sues after Al-Hakim was shot and killed by police on March 18, 2010 in Riverside, Missouri.
Defendants include Riverside Defendants (City of Riverside, Police Chief Mills, Sergeant Ballard, Officer Westrich) and Kansas City Board of Police Commissioners (KCBOPC) with Officer Robbie McLaughlan.
Officers responded to a 911 call; Al-Hakim allegedly held a firearm and refused commands to drop it; Al-Hakim’s weapon was later identified as a Daisy BB/pellet gun, not a real firearm.
A gun was described by officers as real or potentially threatening; multiple officers, including McLaughlan, Ballard, and Westrich, fired after perceiving an imminent threat.
Riverside policy allowed deadly force when the officer reasonably believes it is necessary to arrest and that the person poses a danger; training histories for involved officers are summarized.
Court grants summary judgment to the Riverside Defendants, KCBOPC, and Officer McLaughlan on §1983 claims, and to the officers on battery claims based on official immunity; several motions to exclude expert testimony are moot.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether use of deadly force by McLaughlan, Ballard, and Westrich violated the Fourth Amendment.	Plaintiff contends officers used excessive force.	Defendants argue officers acted reasonably under threat; qualified immunity applies.	Qualified immunity; actions were objectively reasonable; no §1983 violation.
Whether Riverside, Mills, and KCBOPC can be liable for failure to train/supervise.	Plaintiff claims supervisory failures caused rights violations.	Supervisor liability requires a constitutional violation by subordinates; none shown.	No liability; subordinates’ rights not violated; supervisors granted summary judgment.
Whether McLaughlan, Ballard, and Westrich are protected by official immunity on the battery claims.	Plaintiff asserts battery claims against officers.	Use of deadly force was discretionary; officials entitled to official immunity.	Official immunity; discretionary act; officers immune from battery claims.

Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (objective reasonableness standard for police use of force)
Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985) (probable cause to believe suspect poses deadly threat justifies deadly force)
Loch v. City of Litchfield, 689 F.3d 961 (8th Cir. 2012) (reasonableness assessed from perspective of on-scene officer)
Estate of Morgan v. Cook, 686 F.3d 494 (8th Cir. 2012) (deadly force reasonable when suspect poses serious threat)
Brown v. City of Golden Valley, 574 F.3d 491 (8th Cir. 2009) (qualified immunity in use-of-force context; objective standard)
Cole v. Bone, 993 F.2d 1328 (8th Cir. 1993) (official capacity vs personal capacity; standard for supervision)
City of Los Angeles v. Heller, 475 U.S. 796 (1986) (supervisory liability framework; constitutional injury required)
Moore v. Indehar, 514 F.3d 756 (8th Cir. 2008) (probable cause and threat assessment in use-of-force cases)
Ivester v. Lee, 991 F. Supp. 1113 (E.D. Mo. 1998) (official capacity considerations in §1983 claims)
Brown v. City of Golden Valley, 574 F.3d 491 (8th Cir. 2009) (qualified immunity and reasonableness standard)