Miller v. Albright, et al., No. 10-2971 (8th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CasePlaintiff filed suit against St. Louis police officers for violating his Fourth Amendment rights by unlawfully entering his home, using excessive force, and unlawfully arresting him, and for violating Missouri common law by maliciously prosecuting him. A jury rendered a verdict for plaintiff on the unlawful entry claim and for the officers on the excessive force, unlawful arrest, and malicious prosecution claims. At issue was whether the district court abused its discretion by failing to order a jury to award nominal damages following the entry of the verdict and by denying plaintiff's Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend the judgment to award nominal damages. The court affirmed the judgment of the district court and held that the district court did not plainly err in denying either plaintiff's post-verdict request to direct the jury to award nominal damages, or his Rule 59(e) motion to alter or amend the judgment to award nominal damages. The court also declined to adopt an exception to Rule 51 that would permit plaintiffs to request nominal damages after the verdict was rendered.
Court Description: Civil Case - civil rights. Jury rendered verdict in favor of Miller on an unlawful entry claim against two police officers but awarded no damages. Before the jury was discharged, Miller asked for an award of nominal damages even though he did not request such an award or object to the instructions. District court's denial of request for entry of nominal damages and subsequent Rule 59(e) motion is affirmed, as Miller waived right to appeal error in jury instruction or verdict form and court did not commit plain error. Court declines to adopt an exception to Rule 51.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.