Deputy J.K. Maston v. Thomas Jefferson Wagner
236 W. Va. 488
| W. Va. | 2015Background
- On April 11, 2009, Thomas Wagner left a bar and was observed by Trooper Shaun Curran and Deputy Joshua Maston; a brief interaction occurred and Wagner walked toward his nearby apartment in the rain.
- Officers pursued Wagner when he jogged/ran to his residence; during the stop Wagner was slammed against a porch and had his right arm forced behind him, later sustaining severe elbow injuries requiring surgery.
- Officers initially gave shifting reasons for the detention/arrest (fleeing on foot, public intoxication, disturbing the peace, refusal of PBT, obstructing/resisting) and the criminal charges were later dismissed with prejudice.
- Wagner filed a civil suit alleging unlawful arrest, excessive force, assault/battery, emotional distress, and employer liability for failure to train/supervise; defendants claimed qualified immunity and moved for summary judgment.
- The circuit court denied summary judgment, finding genuine disputes of material fact on foundational issues underlying qualified immunity; the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed, holding factual disputes precluded resolving qualified immunity as a matter of law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officers violated Wagner's constitutional/statutory rights by stopping/arresting him | Wagner: officers lacked probable cause or articulable suspicion; the stop followed only because he ran to his home in the rain | Officers: facts (red/glassy eyes, odor of alcohol, slurred speech, flight) supported reasonable suspicion/probable cause | Denial of qualified immunity appropriate because genuine disputes over foundational facts (probable cause/suspicion) exist |
| Whether officers used constitutionally excessive force during arrest | Wagner: force used (face slammed into porch, arm yanked) was excessive given the circumstances and limited public-safety threat | Officers: used trained wristlock; Wagner resisted; force was reasonable and consistent with training | Existence of triable fact issue on objective reasonableness of force; immunity not resolved at summary judgment |
| Whether the relevant rights were clearly established at the time of the incident | Wagner: Fourth Amendment and analogous WV constitutional protections were clearly established governing arrest/seizure and excessive force | Officers: even if a violation occurred, the law was not clearly established to deprive them of immunity | Court: law on objective reasonableness was sufficiently established; fact disputes preclude granting immunity |
| Whether employers (State Police, Sheriff’s Department) are entitled to qualified immunity for training/supervision/retention claims | Wagner: agencies may be liable if an employee violated clearly established rights or policies were deliberately/recklessly defective | Agencies: training/supervision are discretionary functions entitled to immunity | Court: agencies not entitled to immunity at summary judgment because factual disputes exist about violations and agency policies/causation |
Key Cases Cited
- Robinson v. Pack, 223 W.Va. 828 (2009) (denial of summary judgment on qualified immunity is immediately appealable collateral order)
- Hutchison v. City of Huntington, 198 W.Va. 139 (1996) (two-step qualified immunity framework; jury decides foundational facts)
- Bennett v. Coffman, 178 W.Va. 500 (1987) (qualified immunity shields discretionary governmental actors from liability absent violation of clearly established rights)
- W.Va. Reg’l Jail & Corr. Facility Auth. v. A.B., 234 W.Va. 492 (2014) (training, supervision, and retention are discretionary but not immune if they violate clearly established rights)
- Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (2001) (qualified immunity two-step: constitutional violation then whether right was clearly established)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (excessive-force claims judged by objective reasonableness under the circumstances)
- Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (1982) (qualified immunity protects officials from suit, balancing accountability and protection from harassment)
- Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009) (courts may exercise discretion in applying Saucier sequence)
- City of Saint Albans v. Botkins, 228 W.Va. 393 (2011) (officer actions evaluated under objective reasonableness; facts may distinguish cases)
- Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (2007) (reasonableness inquiry in Fourth Amendment contexts is fact-intensive)