Clark v. Coleman, 448 F.Supp.3d 559

On July 25, 2016, plaintiff Brian Clark (a passenger) drove past Lt. Rob Coleman outside a Patrick County courthouse and made an offensive gesture (middle finger) at Coleman.
Coleman followed, radioed in plate/occupants, and effectuated a traffic stop of the vehicle; he approached the passenger side, spoke only to Clark, took Clark’s ID, and called dispatch to run a check.
Coleman testified he stopped the car because he suspected Clark might be intoxicated or mentally ill; Coleman had observed Clark in court shortly before and had seen no signs of intoxication or derangement.
Several deputies arrived; no criminal or traffic charges resulted; deputies served preexisting civil papers on Clark; detention lasted roughly 10–20 minutes.
A jury found for Coleman at trial. The district court thereafter granted Clark’s motion under Rule 50(b), set aside the verdict, entered judgment for Clark on the Fourth Amendment seizure claim, denied a new trial on damages, awarded nominal damages of $1 and attorney’s fees.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the traffic stop was a reasonable seizure under the Fourth Amendment	Clark: the stop was based solely on protected speech (gesture) and lacked reasonable suspicion of criminal activity	Coleman: the gesture suggested intoxication/mental illness and/or safety risk, providing reasonable suspicion	Held: stop unconstitutional — gesture alone did not give reasonable suspicion; jury verdict set aside
Whether community caretaking doctrine justified the stop	Clark: doctrine does not apply where action is investigatory or pretextual	Coleman: stop was a community-caretaking act to protect Clark/public welfare	Held: doctrine inapplicable — stop was tied to investigatory concerns and evidence suggested pretext
Whether exigent/emergency-aid exception justified the stop	Clark: no objective facts supported an emergency or need for immediate aid	Coleman: gesture created a plausible concern requiring immediate intervention	Held: exigency not established — no objectively reasonable belief of immediate harm
Whether Coleman is entitled to qualified immunity	Clark: right clearly established that insulting gesture cannot justify stop	Coleman: reasonable officer could have believed seizure lawful based on safety concern	Held: qualified immunity denied — law gave fair warning that gesture alone did not permit seizure

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) (establishes reasonable suspicion standard for investigatory stops)
Illinois v. Wardlow, 528 U.S. 119 (2000) (reasonable suspicion requirement in stop-and-frisk context)
Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. 690 (1996) (courts review legal conclusion of reasonable suspicion de novo)
United States v. Arvizu, 534 U.S. 266 (2002) (totality-of-the-circumstances test for reasonable suspicion)
Swartz v. Insogna, 704 F.3d 105 (2d Cir. 2013) (passenger’s middle-finger gesture insufficient to justify stop)
Cruise-Gulyas v. Minard, 918 F.3d 494 (6th Cir. 2019) (gesture was crude but not criminal; cannot justify seizure)
Brigham City v. Stuart, 547 U.S. 398 (2006) (emergency-aid exigency exception to warrant requirement)
Cady v. Dombrowski, 413 U.S. 433 (1973) (community caretaking doctrine and its limits)
Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982) (qualified immunity standard)
Carey v. Phiphus, 425 U.S. 247 (1976) (nominal damages award for established constitutional violation)
Farrar v. Hobby, 506 U.S. 103 (1992) (limits on attorney’s fees when only nominal damages recovered)
City of Houston v. Hill, 482 U.S. 451 (1987) (First Amendment protection for verbal criticism of police)