No. 20-1471

Jonathan Lozada, Deputy Sheriff, in His Individual Capacity v. Dudley Teel, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Susan Teel

Lower Court: Eleventh Circuit
Docketed: 2021-04-20
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response RequestedRelisted (2)
Tags: 4th-amendment civil-rights due-process excessive-force fourth-amendment graham-factors law-enforcement obvious-factual-clarity-rule qualified-immunity use-of-force
Latest Conference: 2021-09-27 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)

Whether this Court should clarify the application of the Graham factors to a law enforcement officer's use of force during a call for service that does not involve commission of a crime as the officer should not start off, as the Sixth Circuit has described, with two strikes against him or her regarding the severity of the crime and intentional resistance to arrest factors.

Whether the obvious factual clarity rule can be applied by a Circuit Court panel to deny qualified immunity to a law enforcement officer in a Fourth Amendment excessive force case, where the District Court determined at the summary judgment stage of the case that the officer's use of deadly force was constitutional as a matter of law.

Whether the Eleventh Circuit misapplied the Graham factors to the evidence and improperly judged Deputy Lozada's conduct in hindsight.

Whether the Eleventh Circuit engaged in reversible error in finding that Deputy Lozada is not entitled to qualified immunity under the unique facts of this case, despite the absence of factually similar case law, by application of the obvious factual clarity rule contrary to this Court's prior opinions.

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Graham factors apply to a law enforcement officer's use of force during a call for service that does not involve commission of a crime

Docket Entries

2021-10-04
Petition DENIED.
2021-09-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/27/2021.
2021-08-23
Brief of respondent Dudley Teel, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Susan Teel in opposition filed.
2021-07-13
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including August 23, 2021.
2021-07-12
Motion to extend the time to file a response from July 22, 2021 to August 23, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-06-22
Response Requested. (Due July 22, 2021)
2021-06-08
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/24/2021.
2021-04-16
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 20, 2021)

Attorneys

Dudley Teel, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Susan Teel
Andrew Timothy TuttArnold & Porter Kaye Scholer, Respondent
Guy Bennett RubinRubin & Rubin, Respondent
Jonathan Lozada, in His individual Capacity
Summer Marie BarrancoPurdy, Jolly, Giuffreda, Barranco & Jisa, P.A., Petitioner