Michael McDonald v. Marico Flake, 814 F.3d 804

Interlocutory appeal from district court’s denial of summary judgment on §1983 claims (excessive force, arrest without probable cause) and municipal liability.
Plaintiffs McDonald and Lytle alleged off-duty Officer Flake and others assaulted them after an inflammatory racial slur; incident occurred around 3:00 a.m. near the EDU precinct on July 4, 2011.
Officers, including Flake, reportedly drank alcohol at the precinct; “Choir Practice” was a longstanding practice with no discipline for alcohol consumption.
Disputed facts centered on who initiated the violence, whether Flake identified himself as an officer, and whether his alleged alcohol use affected reasonableness of force.
District court adopted plaintiff-friendly version of facts for summary judgment; Flake appealed, asserting qualified immunity; City appealed on municipal liability via pendent jurisdiction.
Court granted sanctions against both defendants for a frivolous appeal and ultimately affirmed/ruled on issues as described.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Flake is entitled to qualified immunity	Plaintiffs argue there are genuine facts showing a violation of clearly established rights.	Flake contends factual disputes preclude a determination of objective reasonableness as a matter of law.	Affirmed denial of qualified immunity; legal question resolved in plaintiffs' favor.
Whether the City’s municipal liability claim is subject to appellate review	Plaintiffs contend pendent appellate jurisdiction applies to the City’s claim.	City argues for pendent appellate review of the district court’s ruling on municipal liability.	Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; no pendent appellate jurisdiction.
Whether sanctions should be awarded for frivolous appellate filings	Plaintiffs contend sanctions are warranted for frivolous, bad-faith appeals.	Defendants argue no sanction or smaller sanction is appropriate.	Sanctions awarded; $1,500 against Flake and $1,500 against the City.

Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 (1985) (establishes appealability of qualified-immunity rulings on legal questions)
Quigley v. Tuong Vinh Thai, 707 F.3d 675 (6th Cir. 2013) (burden on plaintiff to show clearly established rights at summary judgment)
Behrens v. Pelletier, 516 U.S. 299 (1996) (prohibits purely fact-based appeals from challenging district court findings)
Plumhoff v. Rickard, 134 S. Ct. 2012 (2014) (standard for reviewing district court’s factual determinations on summary judgment)
Roberson v. Torres, 770 F.3d 398 (6th Cir. 2014) (limits on appellate review of district court’s factual findings)
Estate of Carter v. City of Detroit, 408 F.3d 305 (6th Cir. 2005) (adopts method of reviewing district court facts for interlocutory appeal)
Ortiz v. Jordan, 562 U.S. 180 (2011) (clarifies limits on appellate review of district court’s evidence-sufficiency findings)
Yates v. City of Cleveland, 941 F.2d 444 (6th Cir. 1991) (warning against using qualified-immunity appeals to delay trial)
Harrison v. Ash, 539 F.3d 510 (6th Cir. 2008) (appellate review standards for immunity and related issues)
Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Smith, 714 F.3d 932 (6th Cir. 2013) ( Rule 38 sanctions standard for frivolous appeals)