Lombardo v. St. Louis

On summary judgment, courts must apply “careful, context-specific analysis” in excessive force cases.

Nicholas Gilbert was arrested for trespassing and for failing to appear in court for a traffic citation. While in a holding cell, Gilbert tried to hang himself with clothing around the bars of the cell and placed it around his neck. He struggled when intervening officers attempted arrest and he was ultimately handcuffed and shackled. Officers then placed him face down on the floor. Three officers held his limbs and at least one other pressed down upon his back and torso. Gilbert tried to raise his chest and said, “It hurts. Stop.” Gilbert stopped moving and displayed abnormal breathing after 15 minutes in this position. Rescue attempts were unsuccessful, and he was declared dead after being transported to the hospital.

Gilbert’s family, Petitioner here, sued for excessive use of force. The District Court granted summary judgment to the Respondent officers under qualified immunity because they did not “violate a constitutional right that was clearly established at the time.” On appeal to the Eighth Circuit, the court affirmed on different grounds, holding that the officers did not apply unconstitutionally excessive force.

In a per curiam opinion, the Court noted that officer training included instruction that: (1) pressing down on on the back of a subject can cause suffocation; (2) officers should get a subject off their stomach once handcuffed; and (3) a subject’s struggle may be indicative of oxygen deficiency. The Court explained that in assessing excessive force claims, courts must ask whether the officers’ actions are objectively reasonable in light of the facts and circumstances. The Court found that the Eighth Circuit either failed to analyze evidence or characterized it as insignificant. Accordingly, it was unclear whether the Eighth Circuit’s inquiry “clearly attends to the facts and circumstances.”

Vacated and remanded.