Stewart v. McBride, 1:16-cv-00021

Plaintiff Donte Stewart, an Augusta University student, left an on-campus party after a noise complaint; Officer Wesley Martin fired at Stewart’s car as Stewart attempted to leave, striking him and the vehicle multiple times.
Stewart alleges Martin shot him without provocation while Stewart was fleeing a nonviolent noise-investigation; Stewart sued Martin for excessive force and Chief William McBride for supervisory liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
Martin had a documented history of aggressive, allegedly excessive-force incidents (multiple prior stops involving tasing, threats, and shootings); McBride received reports/investigations about those incidents and adopted findings that Martin’s actions were justified.
Stewart alleges McBride knew of Martin’s pattern and ratified or failed to correct it, amounting to deliberate indifference and a failure to supervise that led to the constitutional violation.
McBride moved to dismiss Stewart’s supervisory-liability claim on qualified-immunity grounds; Stewart dismissed his official-capacity claims and the court considered only the individual-capacity supervisory claim against McBride.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether McBride can be held liable under a supervisory-liability theory for Martin’s excessive force	McBride knew of Martin’s history of excessive force, failed to discipline or change supervision, and ratified prior incidents, creating deliberate indifference that caused Stewart’s injury	McBride is entitled to qualified immunity and cannot be held personally liable absent clearly established law requiring the supervision he omitted	Court: Denied dismissal — plaintiff pleaded facts showing a constitutional violation by McBride through failure to supervise and ratification
Whether qualified immunity shields McBride	Stewart: clearly established law prohibited shooting a fleeing, nonviolent suspect; McBride should have known supervision was required given Martin’s record	McBride: his supervisory decisions fall within discretion and thus should receive immunity absent clear law showing he must have acted differently	Court: Denied — law was clearly established and the need for corrective supervision was obvious given Martin’s history

Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1985) (deadly force against fleeing suspect permissible only if suspect poses immediate threat)
Vaughan v. Cox, 343 F.3d 1323 (11th Cir. 2003) (applying Garner to prohibit shooting a fleeing nonviolent suspect absent immediate threat)
Morton v. Kirkwood, 707 F.3d 1276 (11th Cir. 2013) (officer violated Fourth Amendment by shooting without probable cause of a violent felony or necessity to prevent escape)
Cottone v. Jenne, 326 F.3d 1352 (11th Cir. 2003) (supervisory liability under § 1983 requires personal participation or causal connection such as deliberate indifference)
Belcher v. City of Foley, 30 F.3d 1390 (11th Cir. 1994) (supervisory liability where need for more supervision is obvious)
Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (U.S. 2001) (two-step qualified immunity framework)
Gibbons v. McBride, 124 F. Supp. 3d 1342 (S.D. Ga. 2015) (prior case involving Martin and McBride relied on as factual background and precedent)