David Roberts v. City of Omaha
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 15624
| 8th Cir. | 2013Background
- Roberts suffers from paranoid schizophrenia and was involved in a basementside confrontation with Omaha police after a 911 call alleging a potential weapon and violent act.
- Officers Martinec, Ricker, Raders, and Jones responded; Martinec drew his weapon and Ricker secured Roberts; Roberts allegedly drew a knife and officers fired six rounds.
- District court denied summary judgment on most claims but granted it on one challenge to the manner of restraint; it later addressed qualified immunity and ADA/Rehabilitation Act defenses.
- The court treated the ADA and Rehabilitation Act claims as potentially subject to qualified immunity, but concluded no clearly established rights were violated under those statutes.
- On appeal, the Eighth Circuit ordered limited interlocutory review, applying a per-officer, fact-bound analysis to determine qualified immunity and intertwined municipal liability.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Martinec’s use of deadly force violated clearly established law | Roberts argues force was excessive and not objectively reasonable | Martinec acted to protect himself and others given alleged threat | Martinec not entitled to qualified immunity on excessive force claim |
| Whether Jones and Raders faced liability for excessive force | Roberts alleges they contributed to violation | Jones and Raders did not directly apply force | Jones and Raders entitled to qualified immunity on their conduct |
| ADA/Rehabilitation Act claims against officers and qualified immunity | Roberts claims disability-based seizure and discrimination | No clearly established duty to accommodate in this scenario | Officers entitled to qualified immunity on ADA/Rehabilitation Act claims |
| Whether the city can be liable for failure to train under ADA/Rehabilitation Act | City training allegedly deliberate indifference to rights | No notice of a pattern; qualified immunity forecloses liability | City liability reversed; district court remanded on related claims in light of immunity ruling |
Key Cases Cited
- Livers v. Schenck, 700 F.3d 340 (8th Cir. 2012) (review of qualified-immunity on summary judgment; accept district findings”)
- Anderson v. Creighton, 483 U.S. 635 (U.S. 1987) (clearly established rights; objective reasonableness standard)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (U.S. 1989) (excessive-force analysis; reasonableness on scene)
- Gorman v. Bartch, 152 F.3d 907 (8th Cir. 1998) (ADA/Rehabilitation Act applicability to disabled-arrest scenarios)
- Hainze v. Richards, 207 F.3d 795 (5th Cir. 2000) (ADA scope in on-scene responses prior to securing scene)
- Szabla v. City of Brooklyn Park, Minn., 486 F.3d 385 (8th Cir. 2007) (deliberate-indifference standard for municipal liability under ADA/RA)