Thompson v. Grida
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 18617
| 6th Cir. | 2011Background
- Thompson alleges arrest without probable cause and excessive force by Officers Roose, Shuburt, Olszewski, and Kelly in February 2007.
- Dispute centers on whether Thompson resisted and whether officers had probable cause to arrest him.
- Thompson disputes the officers’ version of events; officers rely on disputed facts to argue qualified immunity.
- District court denied summary judgment on qualified immunity due to genuine issues of material fact.
- The Sixth Circuit dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the dispute is fact-intensive and unresolved, requiring trial.
- Remand to district court for trial was ordered.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the appeal is jurisdictionally proper | Thompson contests the officers’ version of facts. | Officers contend no material fact dispute; appeal should be legal question. | Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; factual disputes prevent review. |
| Whether Thompson’s version of events defeats qualified immunity as a matter of law | Thompson did not resist or assault; facts favor Thompson. | Facts construed in officer’s favor show lack of illegality; qualified immunity may apply. | Jurisdiction lacking because disputes over facts, not purely legal questions. |
| Whether the district court properly denied summary judgment on qualified immunity | There are genuine disputes precluding immunity. | If facts are viewed in the light most favorable to Thompson, immunity not warranted. | Not decided on the merits; remand for trial due to unresolved facts. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 (1985) (immediately appealable collateral order question on qualified immunity)
- Berryman v. Rieger, 150 F.3d 561 (6th Cir.1998) (jurisdiction limits when facts are disputed on appeal)
- Grawey v. Drury, 567 F.3d 302 (6th Cir.2009) (pure legal questions when facts are undisputed)
- Johnson v. Jones, 515 U.S. 304 (1995) (focusing on when an appeal hinges on disputed facts)
- Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194 (2001) (clearly established rights inquiry in qualified immunity)
- Lyons v. City of Xenia, 417 F.3d 565 (6th Cir.2005) (analyzing when qualified-immunity appeal is appropriate given facts)