and the 3-judge court (Kavanaugh, Randolph and Douglas Ginsburg) ruled in favor of each side on different issues and remanded the case for a new trial.
Specifically, Brian Hundley's estate sued the officer that shot Hundley, the DC Chief of Police and the DC government for damages base on three separate causes of action. The jury found for defendants on assault and battery and excessive force claims, concluding that Officer Gaines was justified in shooting Hundley in self-defense. At the same time, however, the jury in a written interrogatory answer specifically rejected Officer Gaines’s version of events regarding the self-defense shooting. The jury found for plaintiffs on the negligence claim, concluding the initial stop was unreasonable; the jury also determined that the negligent stop proximately caused Hundley’s death. The jury awarded damages of $242,400 to plaintiffs.
On appeal, Hundley’s estate challenges the assault and battery and excessive force verdict for the defense, arguing that the jury’s verdict for defendants on those two claims was inconsistent with the jury’s written interrogatory answer, in which it directly rejected Officer Gaines’s version of events. And defendants challenge the negligence verdict, arguing that the negligent stop did not proximately cause the shooting death that formed the basis for the damages award.
The court agreed with Hundley’s estate that the jury verdict on the assault and battery and excessive force claims was inconsistent with the jury’s answer to the written interrogatory. It also agreed with defendants that the negligent stop, as a legal, not factual matter, did not proximately cause the shooting death and thus cannot justify the damages on that count. Thus, the court reversed the trial court judgment and remanded for a new trial for Hundley’s estate on the assault and battery and excessive force claims.
https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/FFAD8403BAED6190852574400045553E/$file/05-7152a.pdf
= new reply since forum marked as read