McCaig v. Raber
1:10-cv-01298
W.D. Mich.Mar 28, 2012Background
- December 31, 2007 to January 1, 2008, Raber responded to a fight at Bangor Tavern and encountered McCaig resisting being handcuffed.
- Raber placed a handcuff on McCaig's right wrist, performed a takedown, and then cuffed the left wrist, allegedly injuring McCaig's wrist, shoulder, and neck.
- McCaig asserts Fourth Amendment excessive force and seeks damages; Raber moves for summary judgment.
- The court applies summary judgment standards and evaluates whether the force used was objectively reasonable under the totality of the circumstances.
- Plaintiff provides deposition testimony alleging noncompliance due to Raber’s handling, while Raber contends there was resistance justifying the takedown; the court finds genuine disputes of material fact remain.
- The court denies Raber’s summary judgment motion on the excessive force claim, and also declines to grant qualified immunity at this stage, reserving immunity matters for the jury.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the takedown and handcuffing were objectively unreasonable | McCaig did not resist and Raber used excessive force | McCaig resisted, justifying the takedown as reasonable | Genuine fact issues preclude summary judgment on reasonableness |
| Whether McCaig’s alleged resistance was sufficient to justify force used | Plaintiff complied and was not resisting | Plaintiff jerked away and impeded handcuffing | Disputed facts about resistance prevent a legal ruling on reasonableness |
| Whether Raber is entitled to qualified immunity | Right to be free from excessive force was clearly established | If force was excessive, immunity may still apply depending on the facts | Immunity not resolved; jury must determine the factual posture to assess clearly established rights |
Key Cases Cited
- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386 (U.S. 1989) (objective reasonableness in the totality of circumstances)
- Rodriguez v. Passinault, 637 F.3d 675 (6th Cir. 2011) (factors for Fourth Amendment excessive force analysis)
- Slusher v. Carson, 540 F.3d 449 (6th Cir. 2008) (totality of circumstances governs reasonableness)
- Hayden v. Green, 640 F.3d 150 (6th Cir. 2011) (minimum force used to remove suspect with no excessive force)
- Bozung v. Rawson, 439 F. App’x 513 (6th Cir. 2011) (time to comply can affect reasonableness of takedown)
- Dunn v. Matatall, 549 F.3d 348 (6th Cir. 2008) (car-incident context where force was objectively reasonable)
- Blosser v. Gilbert, 422 F. App’x 453 (6th Cir. 2011) (officers may be justified in removing a resistant suspect from a vehicle)
- Adams v. Metiva, 31 F.3d 375 (6th Cir. 1994) (clearly established rights against excessive force)
- Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (U.S. 2001) (two-step qualified immunity analysis; clearly established right)
- Pershell v. Cook, 430 F. App’x 410 (6th Cir. 2011) (unreasonable use of force when suspect not resisting)
- Lawler v. City of Taylor, 268 F. App’x 384 (6th Cir. 2008) (disproportionate force when recipient merely insulted officer)
- Smoak v. Hall, 460 F.3d 768 (6th Cir. 2006) (unreasonable to tackle cuffed and compliant suspect)
- Solomon v. Auburn Hills Police Dep’t, 389 F.3d 167 (6th Cir. 2004) (not objectively reasonable to use force on compliant suspect)