Casebooks
Federal Courts
Named the #9 fastest growing education company in the United States. Thank you for your support!Named the #9 fastest growing education company in the United States. Thank you for your support!
Police officer Rochelle Brosseau (defendant) shot Kenneth Haugen (plaintiff) in the back as he tried to escape arrest by driving away in his vehicle. Brosseau was dispatched to the scene of a fight between Haugen and two other men. At the time, Haugen had a felony warrant for his arrest on drug and other charges. Haugen fled the scene on foot, but later returned and tried to flee in his Jeep. Brosseau chased Haugen to his Jeep and gave repeated commands for him to exit the Jeep. Brosseau shattered the driver’s side window of the Jeep and struck Haugen in the head with the barrel and butt of her gun. As the Jeep began to pull away, Brosseau shot Haugen and later explained she was fearful for the safety of the other officers on foot in the area and any other motorists or pedestrians in Haugen’s path. Haugen survived and later pleaded guilty to a felony fleeing charge. Haugen then filed a federal civil rights action against Brosseau, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging a violation of his Fourth Amendment right to be free from excessive force. The United States District Court for the Western District of Washington granted Brosseau’s motion for summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed, finding that Brosseau used excessive force and was not entitled to qualified immunity, because the particularized right against excessive force was clearly established under the law. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari on the question of qualified immunity.
The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.
To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.
The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.
To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.
The holding and reasoning section includes:
To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.
The dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the dissenting judge or justice’s opinion.
To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.