United States Sixth Circuit

In plaintiffs' 42 U.S.C. section 1983 suit against police officers in connection with the execution of a search warrant at plaintiffs' apartment, district court's orders denying summary judgment to defendants on the basis that they are not entitled to qualified immunity under federal law or governmental immunity under Michigan law are affirmed where: 1) plaintiffs have alleged sufficient facts to show that defendants' conduct violated the Fourth Amendment; 2) plaintiffs have alleged sufficient facts to show that there is a disputed issue of material fact as to whether the two officers were personally involved in the constitutional violations; 3) district court did not err in finding that the officers were not entitled to qualified immunity as to plaintiffs' Fourth Amendment claim; and 4) district court did not err by finding that the officers are not entitled to governmental immunity as to plaintiffs' assault and battery claim, for if plaintiffs allegation concerning officer's continued force against plaintiffs are true, there is a question of fact as to whether the officers believed that they were acting within the scope of their authority.

Appellate Information

• Argued 03/03/2010
• Decided 04/20/2010
• Published 04/20/2010

Judges

• Before: KEITH, CLAY, and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:Joseph Nimako, Cummings, McClorey, Davis & Acho, P.L.C., Livonia, Michigan, Stephon B. Bagne, Kupelian, Ormond & Magy, Southfield, Michigan, for Appellants. Michael M. Wachsberg, Pedersen, Keenan, King, Wachsberg & Andrzejak, P.C., Commerce Township, Michigan, for Appellees. ON BRIEF:Joseph Nimako, Cummings, McClorey, Davis & Acho, P.L.C., Livonia, Michigan, for Appellants. Michael M. Wachsberg, Pedersen, Keenan, King, Wachsberg & Andrzejak, P.C., Commerce Township, Michigan, for Appellees.