Briggs v. Morales
7:19-cv-05012
| D. Neb. | Nov 24, 2021Background
- Briggs (father) and Musick (mother) had a disputed custody relationship; Musick reported Briggs harassing her after a January 6, 2016 encounter.
- Musick called Ostmeyer (now her husband) and a deputy; Officer Daniel Morales (recent hire, not yet fully certified) obtained a written statement from Musick then went to Briggs’s home intending to effect an arrest for disturbing the peace.
- Morales knocked but did not verbally identify as police; Briggs opened the door holding a shotgun, then complied with commands; Morales drew his weapon, ordered Briggs out, placed him on the ground, kneeled on his back, handcuffed him, and transported him to jail.
- Briggs was criminally charged; later acquitted of terroristic-threats and weapon/use-related charges and the disturbing-the-peace incident, but convicted on counts arising from conduct at the jail.
- Defendants moved for summary judgment on § 1983 claims (unlawful arrest, excessive force, denial of counsel previously dismissed, interference with custody/substantive due process, failure-to-train, and conspiracy). The court granted summary judgment in part and denied it in part.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unlawful (warrantless in-home) arrest | Morales and Ostmeyer orchestrated Briggs’s arrest at his home without a warrant or exigent circumstances | Probable cause existed and arrest authority under state law; arrest was lawful | Denied summary judgment; factual dispute whether arrest occurred inside home and whether exigent circumstances existed precludes ruling for defendants |
| Excessive force (knee on back; cuffing injury) | Force used was unreasonable and caused injury | Force was objectively reasonable given Briggs appeared with a shotgun and officer safety concerns | Granted for defendants; Morales entitled to qualified immunity on excessive-force claim |
| Failure to train (official-capacity / municipal) | City failed to train/supervise Morales (inexperienced, uncertified), causing the unlawful arrest | No underlying constitutional violation, so municipal claim fails as a matter of law | Denied as to failure-to-train at summary judgment stage (court found underlying arrest claim survives) |
| Substantive due process (interference with parental rights) | Officers (Ostmeyer, Wisnieski) intimidated/influenced custody exchanges to interfere with Briggs’s parental rights | Conduct did not deprive Briggs of custody or unreasonably interfere; bare allegations insufficient | Granted for defendants; conduct did not shock the conscience or deprive parental liberty interest |
| Conspiracy to violate civil rights | Ostmeyer, Musick, and Morales conspired to arrest Briggs in his home without a warrant | No underlying constitutional violation and no evidence of agreement | Mixed: conspiracy based on unlawful-arrest claim survives against Morales and Ostmeyer; conspiracy claims tied to excessive force and substantive due process dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573 (warrantless entry into a home to make an arrest presumptively unreasonable absent exigent circumstances)
- United States v. Santana, 427 U.S. 38 (a voluntary appearance in a home’s doorway can be a public place for arrest)
- United States v. Connor, 127 F.3d 663 (8th Cir.) (compelled presence in a doorway invokes home-protection principles)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (objective-reasonableness test for excessive-force claims)
- City of Canton v. Harris, 489 U.S. 378 (municipal liability for failure to train requires deliberate indifference)
- Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (qualified immunity two-step analysis)
- White v. Pauly, 137 S. Ct. 548 (clearly established law must be specific to the circumstances)
- Partlow v. Stadler, 774 F.3d 497 (8th Cir.) (officer’s use of force objectively reasonable when suspect seen with a shotgun)
- Small v. McCrystal, 708 F.3d 997 (8th Cir.) (Fourth Amendment excessive-force standards)
- Torgerson v. City of Rochester, 643 F.3d 1031 (8th Cir.) (summary-judgment evidence-construction principles)
- Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (video evidence may refute plaintiff’s account for summary judgment)