Kathryn Pollard v. City of Columbus, Ohio
780 F.3d 395
| 6th Cir. | 2015Background
- On July 7, 2009, Abram Bynum led Columbus police on a high-speed chase, crossed the median, drove the wrong way, and collided head-on with a semitrailer; his car was heavily damaged and he was injured and trapped inside.
- Officers approached; after an initial belief Bynum was unconscious, he moved inside the car and twice reached toward the floorboard and then held his hands clasped in a shooting posture pointed at officers.
- Officers ordered him to "show his hands" and "drop it;" within seconds multiple officers fired in two volleys, discharging 80 shots; 23 struck Bynum and he died; no gun was recovered.
- Plaintiffs (Bynum’s mother, Pollard) sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for excessive force, brought a Monell claim against the City, and state wrongful-death claims; district court denied qualified immunity; this interlocutory appeal followed.
- The Sixth Circuit reversed, holding the officers had probable cause to believe Bynum posed a threat of serious physical harm based on the totality of circumstances and thus were entitled to qualified immunity; the City’s Monell claim and state wrongful-death claim also failed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether officers violated the Fourth Amendment by using deadly force | Pollard: officers shot an unarmed, injured, trapped suspect to prevent escape or without provable threat | Officers: they reasonably believed Bynum had a gun and posed an immediate deadly threat after his movements and shooting posture | Held: No constitutional violation; officers had probable cause to believe threat existed and deadly force was reasonable |
| Availability of interlocutory appeal on denial of qualified immunity | Pollard: appeal barred because factual disputes exist | Officers: denial is appealable under collateral-order doctrine when presenting a pure legal issue | Held: Appealable as to officers and City (City appeal pendent) because the dispute raised a pure legal issue about qualified immunity |
| Municipal liability under Monell given officer conduct | Pollard: City has policy permitting deadly force for failure to follow commands absent observed weapon | City: municipal liability requires underlying constitutional violation by officers | Held: Monell claim fails because no constitutional violation was found |
| State-law wrongful-death claim (Ohio immunity) | Pollard: officers acted recklessly or wantonly in shooting | Officers: conduct was objectively reasonable (not reckless) | Held: Reversed denial of summary judgment; officers entitled to immunity because conduct was reasonable |
Key Cases Cited
- Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985) (deadly force permissible only when officer has probable cause to believe suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (use-of-force claims reviewed under Fourth Amendment objective-reasonableness standard)
- Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223 (2009) (qualified immunity two-step framework — constitutional violation and clearly established law)
- Owen v. City of Independence, 445 U.S. 622 (1980) (municipalities are not entitled to qualified immunity)
- Weeks v. Portage Cnty. Exec. Offices, 235 F.3d 275 (6th Cir. 2000) (municipal liability requires a deprivation of constitutional rights)
- Binay v. Bettendorf, 601 F.3d 640 (6th Cir. 2010) (liability assessed individually based on each officer's actions)
- Leary v. Livingston Cnty., 528 F.3d 438 (6th Cir. 2008) (denial of qualified immunity is immediately appealable when based on a pure question of law)
- Ciminillo v. Streicher, 434 F.3d 461 (6th Cir. 2006) (assess probable cause from the totality of circumstances)
- Smith v. Freland, 954 F.2d 343 (6th Cir. 1992) (officer may assume suspect who resisted arrest will use force against others)
- Mingus v. Butler, 591 F.3d 474 (6th Cir. 2010) (qualified immunity appeal presents a pure legal issue where facts are conceded)