696 F. App'x 79
3rd Cir.2017Background
- On Nov. 1, 2013, Keith W. Anthony suffered convulsions while under his vehicle; a bystander called 911 reporting a seizure.
- EMTs Barzev and Brett and Allentown police officers Seltzer and Alles responded; initial medical care was hindered by Anthony’s involuntary convulsions.
- Officer Seltzer deployed his Taser in drive-stun mode to gain compliance and handcuffed Anthony; the amended complaint alleges Anthony was tased more than a dozen times, including after being handcuffed, strapped to a gurney, and loaded into an ambulance.
- Anthony sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment; defendants moved to dismiss asserting qualified immunity.
- The District Court denied qualified immunity; the Third Circuit reviewed de novo and affirmed, focusing on allegations that force continued after Anthony was subdued and posed no ongoing threat.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the complaint sufficiently alleges a Fourth Amendment excessive-force violation | Anthony alleges repeated tasings ("in excess of a dozen times") including after he was subdued and loaded into ambulance | Officers argue use of Taser was to enable medical treatment of a noncompliant, seizing individual and similar cases granted immunity | Court: Complaint plausibly alleges continued force against a subdued, nonthreatening person — sufficient to state a Fourth Amendment claim |
| Whether defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because the law was not clearly established in Nov. 2013 | Anthony: long-established law forbids continued force against subdued, nonthreatening individuals; that principle applies to Tasers | Defendants: precedents (e.g., Aldaba) show using taser to hasten life-saving care is not clearly unlawful | Court: It was clearly established before Nov. 2013 that continued use of force on a subdued, unthreatening person — including repeated tasings — is unreasonable; qualified immunity denied at pleading stage |
Key Cases Cited
- George v. Rehiel, 738 F.3d 562 (3d Cir. 2013) (pleading-stage inference rule)
- Ashcroft v. al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731 (2011) (avoid defining clearly established law at high level of generality)
- Hope v. Pelzer, 536 U.S. 730 (2002) (state of law can give fair warning even in novel factual circumstances)
- Santini v. Fuentes, 795 F.3d 410 (3d Cir. 2015) (objective reasonableness Fourth Amendment standard for seizures)
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (1989) (factors for excessive-force reasonableness)
- Aldaba v. Pickens, 844 F.3d 870 (10th Cir. 2016) (upholding taser use to hasten life-saving care)
- Rivas v. City of Passaic, 365 F.3d 181 (3d Cir. 2004) (continued force on subdued seizure victim unconstitutional)
- Perea v. Baca, 817 F.3d 1198 (10th Cir. 2016) (repeated taser use on subdued offender unreasonable)
- Meyers v. Baltimore County, 713 F.3d 723 (4th Cir. 2013) (taser use on subdued individual unreasonable)
- Brown v. City of Golden Valley, 574 F.3d 491 (8th Cir. 2009) (continued force on subdued suspect unreasonable)
- Carroll v. Ellington, 800 F.3d 154 (5th Cir. 2015) (similar principle applied to taser use)
- Wate v. Kubler, 839 F.3d 1012 (11th Cir. 2016) (repeated taser use against subdued individual violates clearly established law)