This column continues the analysis of recent evidentiary developments in §1983 excessive force cases. Part I, published on Feb. 16, 2011, discussed the admissibility of evidence of plaintiff’s medical condition; of injuries suffered by the plaintiff; that the plaintiff was a member of a gang; and that the plaintiff was attempting to commit “suicide by cop.” We now turn our attention to the admissibility of evidence of plaintiff’s other lawsuits; the police officer’s character; the officer’s uses of excessive force on other occasions; standard police practices; and expert testimony.
To place the evidentiary issues in context, it will be recalled that under Graham v. Connor,1 excessive force claims growing out of an arrest, investigatory stop or other seizure are governed by the Fourth Amendment objective reasonableness standard. The critical issue is whether, based upon the facts and circumstances known to the officer, the force used could have been employed by an objectively reasonable officer.
Plaintiff’s Litigiousness
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
