City of Los Angeles v. Heller

Ronald Heller (plaintiff) was stopped by two Los Angeles police officers, Craig Bushey and Calvin Brasher (defendants) for being under suspicion of driving while intoxicated. Heller was administered field sobriety tests and complied. The officers then attempted to take Heller into custody so that he could undergo a breath test at the police station. At this point, Heller became combative and resisted arrest. During the altercation with the officers, Heller fell through a plate-glass window, becoming injured. Heller filed suit against the officers and the City of Los Angeles (the city) (defendant) under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, claiming that he was arrested without probable cause in violation of his due-process rights and that the officers had used excessive force. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Officer Brasher, and the cases against Officer Bushey and the city proceeded to trial. The district court bifurcated the trial, first trying the claims against Officer Bushey. The jury was not given any instruction on an affirmative defense such as qualified immunity, and it returned a verdict in favor of Officer Bushey. As a result, the district court dismissed the remaining action against the city. Heller appealed, arguing that, despite no instruction being given, the jury could have believed that Officer Bushey was entitled to qualified immunity while still finding that the city committed a constitutional violation. The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the dismissal of the remaining case against the city but upheld the jury’s verdict in favor of Officer Bushey. The Ninth Circuit agreed with Heller that a reasonable jury could believe that Officer Bushey was entitled to a qualified-immunity defense and still believe that Heller had a valid claim for a constitutional injury against the city. The city appealed.