23 F.4th 1065
8th Cir.2022Background
- After Officer Stockley’s acquittal (Sept. 15, 2017), protests occurred in downtown St. Louis; Brian Baude went to the Washington Ave. & Tucker Blvd. area the night of Sept. 17, 2017.
- SLMPD officers formed perimeter lines and corralled people into an intersection (“kettling”); Baude was inside, requested to leave, was pepper‑sprayed, arrested in a mass arrest, zip‑tied, detained ~14 hours, and later released.
- Baude alleges he was peaceful and not involved in earlier property damage; the crowd included residents, patrons, press, and bystanders; video and other exhibits accompany the complaint.
- Baude named multiple SLMPD supervisors and officers, alleging they planned, sanctioned, or executed indiscriminate use of chemical agents, force, and arrests without probable cause; some officers later were criminally indicted.
- Defendants moved to dismiss on qualified immunity grounds; the district court denied in part, and the officers appealed interlocutorily; the Eighth Circuit reviews denial of qualified immunity de novo and affirms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether mass arrest/kettling was an unreasonable Fourth Amendment seizure | Baude: officers boxed in, denied exit, and arrested peaceful bystanders without individualized probable cause | Officers: had at least arguable probable cause to arrest a unit of lawviolators and thus are immune | Denied qualified immunity; facts plausibly show unreasonable seizure and questions of fact preclude resolution on pleadings |
| Whether pepper‑spray, forcible arrest, and zip‑tying were excessive force | Baude: force was applied to a peaceful, compliant individual and thus objectively unreasonable | Officers: force was necessary and lawful under the circumstances | Denied qualified immunity; force claims plausible and not clearly reasonable on this record |
| Supervisor liability for failing to intervene or sanctioning tactics | Baude: supervisors planned/approved kettle and chemical dispersal and failed to stop abuses | Supervisors: did not personally use force and lacked time/knowledge to intervene or reasonably believed force was necessary | Denied qualified immunity as to supervisors; allegations and video plausibly show deliberate indifference/failure to intervene |
| Liability of subordinate officers who followed orders | Baude: subordinates participated in planning and had individualized involvement; cannot blindly rely on orders | Officers: reasonably relied on supervisors’ orders and probable cause determinations | Denied qualified immunity; factual disputes preclude finding reasonable reliance at pleading stage |
Key Cases Cited
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (Fourth Amendment excessive‑force reasonableness test)
- Brower v. County of Inyo, 489 U.S. 593 (1989) (setting roadblocks/physical impediments can constitute a seizure)
- United States v. Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544 (1980) (seizure occurs when a reasonable person would not feel free to leave)
- Bernini v. City of St. Paul, 665 F.3d 997 (8th Cir. 2012) (mass‑arrest rationale: arrests permissible when officers can reasonably believe arrestees were part of a unit violating the law)
- White v. Jackson, 865 F.3d 1064 (8th Cir. 2017) (qualified immunity in arrest context where officers had arguable probable cause for individual offenders)
- Nance v. Sammis, 586 F.3d 604 (8th Cir. 2009) (officer may be liable for failing to intervene to prevent excessive force)
- Ehlers v. City of Rapid City, 846 F.3d 1002 (8th Cir. 2017) (assisting officers may rely on another officer’s probable cause if such reliance is reasonable)
- LeMay v. Mays, 18 F.4th 283 (8th Cir. 2021) (complaint stating plausible Fourth Amendment claim defeats qualified immunity at pleading stage)
- Burbridge v. City of St. Louis, 2 F.4th 774 (8th Cir. 2021) (district‑court/summary‑judgment context distinguishing mass‑arrest analysis)
- Twombly v. Bell Atlantic Corp., 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (pleading must state a claim plausible on its face)