LeMay v. Mays, No. 20-2632 (8th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this CaseThe Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of qualified immunity to defendant, a police officer, on a motion to dismiss an unlawful seizure claim based on his shooting two dogs during a residential security check. Accepting the complaint's allegations as true, the court concluded that the officer did not act reasonably in shooting the dogs. In this case, defendant shot both dogs when they presented no imminent danger and were not acting aggressively. Furthermore, it was clearly established that an officer cannot shoot a dog in the absence of an objectively legitimate and imminent threat of harm to himself or others. The court rejected defendant's contention that the court should consider other materials because the materials defendant wishes the court to consider, when properly viewed, do not settle whether the shootings were objectively reasonable.
Court Description: [Grasz, Author, with Smith, Chief Judge, and Shepherd, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Civil rights. In action alleging Minneapolis police violated plaintiffs' civil rights by unlawfully searching their home and seizing their dogs by shooting them, the officer who shot the dogs was not entitled to qualified immunity because, accepting the allegations of the complaint as true, the officer was not in imminent danger when he shot the dogs; it was clearly established that an officer cannot shoot a dog in the absence of an objectively legitimate and imminent threat of harm to himself or others; the district court order denying the motion for summary judgment based on qualified immunity is affirmed.
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.