711 F.3d 243
1st Cir.2013Background
- Martins killed by Officer Van Ness after a late-night vehicle pursuit in Yarmouth, MA; Campos, as Martins's administratrix, sued Van Ness and the Town under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 12, § 11I.
- Disputes center on whether Martins's Lincoln was moving as Van Ness fired and where Van Ness stood relative to the Lincoln.
- Campos commissioned accident reconstruction and ballistics reports; these and Van Ness's account generate competing factual narratives.
- District court denied summary judgment without opinion; the parties' accounts were treated as potentially genuine disputes of material fact.
- Appellants argued the Scott v. Harris exception should foreclose Campos’s version as blatantly contradicted by the record; the district court’s basis remained unclear, leading to appellate review.
- Court concludes the case is distinguishable from Scott; genuine issues of material fact remain; it dismisses for lack of jurisdiction rather than resolving immunity on the merits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Campos’s account is blatantly contradicted by the record | Campos's account is supported by reconstruction and ballistics | Record contradicts Campos's version | Not blatantly contradicted; Scott not satisfied |
| Whether the district court properly denied summary judgment on qualified immunity given disputed facts | Campos should survive summary judgment on the facts | Disputed facts prevent immunity ruling | Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; unresolved immunity issues remanded to trial court for fact-finding |
| Whether the record permits resolution of the reasonableness of force as a matter of law | Force was unreasonable given Martins’s car movement status | Reasonableness hinges on disputed timing and positioning | Not decided; factual questions remain for a jury |
Key Cases Cited
- Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (U.S. 2007) (video record can trump a nonmovant's version in summary judgment)
- Mlodzinski v. Lewis, 648 F.3d 24 (1st Cir. 2011) (when facts are undisputed, appellate review on legal questions only)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986) (burden shifting on summary judgment; moving party must show absence of genuine issue)
- Iverson v. City of Boston, 452 F.3d 94 (1st Cir. 2006) (summary judgment burden on proving no genuine issue of material fact)
- Constructora Andrade Gutiérrez, S.A. v. American Intl. Ins. Co. of Puerto Rico, 467 F.3d 38 (1st Cir. 2006) (arguments raised for first time at oral argument improper)