Charles Barnard v. Greg Theobald
721 F.3d 1069
| 9th Cir. | 2013Background
- December 8, 2001, LVMPD officers executed an arrest warrant at the Barnards’ home for David Barnard; Charles Barnard was present and confronted by officers.
- Officers drew weapons; Charles complied when asked to identify himself and place hands on the wall.
- A struggle ensued: Theobald handcuffed Charles’s right arm, tripped over a flower pot, and all three officers fell; Clark applied a chokehold while attempting to lift Charles by the neck.
- During the struggle, pepper spray was deployed twice; officers kneaded Charles’s back/neck area, and Theobald maintained knee pressure on Charles’s neck/back.
- Charles later experienced chronic pain and underwent multiple surgeries; he was not convicted of any crime related to the incident.
- Procedural posture: Charles sued LVMPD and Officers for excessive force; district court granted partial summary judgment; Ninth Circuit vacated/ remanded; a jury awarded over $2 million in damages in 2011; remittitur reduced damages; district court denied full attorney fees and prejudgment/post-judgment interest; both sides appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Qualified immunity for excessive-force claim | Barnard argues officers violated clearly established rights. | Theobald/Clark/Radmanovich contend they acted reasonably or had a reasonable mistake of fact. | No qualified immunity; jury verdict supported; evidence shows excessive force. |
| Attorney-fees award and calculation | Fees awarded should reflect reasonable hours and substantial success. | District court properly reduced hours/fees. | Fees award vacated and remanded for fuller explanation. |
| Prejudgment and post-judgment interest | Interest should be awarded as part of compensation where appropriate. | Court denied interest based on non-economic damages and verdict form. | Post-judgment interest must be awarded; prejudgment interest should be reconsidered on remand. |
Key Cases Cited
- Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009) (two-step qualified-immunity framework)
- Cameron v. Craig, 713 F.3d 1012 (9th Cir. 2013) (reasonableness generally a jury question; magistrate not sole decider)
- Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (2001) (two-step test for qualified immunity (later modified))
- Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424 (1983) (fee awards; most critical factor is degree of success)
- Padgett v. Loventhall, 706 F.3d 1205 (9th Cir. 2013) (require district court to show work when calculating attorney fees)