Estate of Jaquez Ex Rel. Public Administrator of Bronx County v. City of New York
706 F. App'x 709
| 2d Cir. | 2017Background
- On April 12, 2009, NYPD officers responded to a 911 call reporting Mauricio Jaquez armed with a knife and struggling with his wife; officers entered his Bronx apartment to arrest him.
- During a hallway/bathroom altercation Jaquez stabbed Officer Flood and attempted to stab Officer McNamee despite deployments of Tasers and rubber bullets; multiple officers then fired live rounds.
- Jaquez was struck by several bullets, one fatal; he fell face-down still holding a knife; Officer Flores fired a final head shot as Flores perceived Jaquez to be pushing himself up from the floor.
- The Estate of Jaquez and Ana Martinez sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for excessive force; defendants moved for qualified immunity and to exclude plaintiff’s expert testimony (Dr. Sullivan).
- The district court excluded Dr. Sullivan’s testimony under Daubert, granted summary judgment for the officers on non-lethal force and the initial use of lethal force, but submitted only the reasonableness of Flores’s final shot to a jury.
- The jury found Jaquez was pushing up and still had a knife when Flores fired, but that Flores did not use excessive force; the district court then granted Flores qualified immunity; the Second Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officers entitled to qualified immunity for use of non‑lethal force | Non‑lethal force was unreasonable and factual disputes (expert opinion on trajectory and psychosis) preclude immunity | Officers reasonably believed Jaquez posed a threat given erratic behavior, access to knife, and noncompliance | Granted: officers entitled to qualified immunity for non‑lethal force; no triable issue |
| Whether officers entitled to qualified immunity for initial use of lethal force | Bullet trajectories and expert opinion show Jaquez was on ground and not a threat when first live fire occurred | Officers reasonably perceived ongoing knife threat during attack on McNamee; split‑second judgment justified | Granted: initial lethal force entitled to qualified immunity |
| Whether Officer Flores liable for the final shot (jury/ JMOL) | Final shot unnecessary; Dr. Sullivan would show Jaquez could not have pushed up after prior wounds | Testimony supported that Jaquez was pushing up and posed threat; jury weighed credibility | Denied JMOL: jury could reasonably find Flores perceived a threat; qualified immunity granted to Flores |
| Admissibility of plaintiff’s expert and other evidence | Dr. Sullivan’s opinions on wound effects and scene analysis create material disputes; models/photos relevant | Expert lacked relevant scene/forensic expertise; proffered evidence unduly prejudicial or cumulative | Affirmed: district court did not abuse discretion excluding Dr. Sullivan and other evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., 509 U.S. 579 (1993) (trial court gatekeeping of expert evidence)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (objective‑reasonableness standard for police use of force)
- Messerschmidt v. Millender, 565 U.S. 535 (2012) (qualified immunity assessed by clearly established law and objective reasonableness)
- O’Bert ex rel. Estate of O’Bert v. Vargo, 331 F.3d 29 (2d Cir. 2003) (court may consider circumstantial evidence that discredits officer’s story)
- Thomas v. Roach, 165 F.3d 137 (2d Cir. 1999) (qualified immunity when reasonable officers could disagree)