Quimbee logo
DMCA.com Protection Status

Massey v. Prince George's County

907 F. Supp. 138 (1995)

Case BriefRelatedOptions
From our private database of 33,600+ case briefs...

Massey v. Prince George’s County

United States District Court for the District of Maryland

907 F. Supp. 138 (1995)

Facts

Willie Massey (plaintiff) sued Prince George’s County (the county) (defendant) for allegedly using excessive force. Massey was sleeping in an abandoned building and claimed that he received no warning and offered no resistance before officers set a police dog on him. The officers claimed that they had warned Massey in a loud voice and that he had resisted arrest. Represented by the county attorney’s office, the county moved for summary judgment. The motion relied heavily on a Sixth Circuit case that held that using a police dog was justified if a suspect in a dark building did not respond to warnings and posed a threat to officers’ safety. Massey’s attorney filed a short opposition that did not cite any additional authority. The district court relied on the Sixth Circuit case to dismiss Massey’s federal claims and asked for briefing on Massey’s remaining state-law claims. In response, Massey’s attorney submitted a brief that, for the first time, mentioned the published Fourth Circuit case of Kopf v. Wing, 942 F.2d 265 (4th Cir. 1991). Kopf held that summary judgment was inappropriate in an excessive-force case involving a police dog if there were disputes about (1) the loudness of the officers’ warning or (2) whether the victim was resisting arrest or just resisting being bitten by a dog. Maryland was in the Fourth Circuit, which made this authority controlling on the district court. The county was also the defendant in the Kopf case, and the county attorney’s office had defended the county throughout the lengthy Kopf case. Further, one of the attorneys in Kopf still worked at the county attorney’s office. However, the attorney who was defending the county against Massey’s claim had never mentioned the Kopf opinion to the court.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Messitte, J.)

What to do next…

  1. 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 603,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. 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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 603,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 33,600 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 603,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 33,600 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership