Parrish v. Dingman, No. 17-3705 (8th Cir. 2019)
Annotate this CaseThe Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of qualified immunity to defendant, a jailer, in an action alleging excessive force under 42 U.S.C. 1983 and assault and battery under Iowa law. The court held that the district court did not err in determining that the jailer was entitled to qualified immunity on the excessive force claim during the booking procedure where the amount of force the jailer used was objectively reasonable in light of the need to maintain order and institutional security, and the jailer's reasonable belief that plaintiff posed a security threat. Likewise, the court held that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment on the state law claim where the amount of force was objectively reasonable.
Court Description: Benton, Author, with Wollman and Colloton, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Civil rights. The district court did not err in determining defendant jailer Dingman was entitled to qualified immunity on plaintiff's claim the jailer used excessive force during plaintiff's booking procedure; a reasonable officer could believe plaintiff was trying to leave the holding cell, thereby justifying the use of force to maintain order and security; further, the officer could reasonably interpret plaintiff's actions as passive resistance and a threat to his safety; amount of force used was objectively reasonable; the district court did not err in granting the jailer summary judgment on plaintiff's state-law claims for assault and battery based on the court's determination that the amount of force used was objectively reasonable. Home | Contact Us | Employment | Glossary of Legal Terms | Site Map | RSS Privacy Policy|BrowseAloud
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.