United States Fourth Circuit

In a homeowner's suit against a bail bondsman and others alleging civil rights violations under 42 USC section 1983 and various state law tort claims, stemming from the bail bondsman's efforts to apprehend a fugitive in and around the plaintiff's home, the jury's verdict and damages award in favor of the plaintiff are affirmed, where: 1) the qualified immunity defense does not apply to bail bondsmen, so the district court’s jury instruction on that defense could not be erroneous; 2) there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's conclusions that the plaintiff's consent to enter her home was involuntary and that she was in reasonable fear of bodily harm; and 3) the district court did not err by denying the defendant's Rule 59 motion for a new trial or remittitur on damages.

Appellate Information

• Decided 04/30/2012
• Published 04/30/2012

Judges

• Diaz

Court

• United States Fourth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Adam Tremaine Silvernail, William Elvin Hopkins, Jr.