Nimely v. City of New York
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
414 F.3d 381 (2005)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
New York City police officer John Muirhead (defendant) shot Thomas Nimely (plaintiff) during a police chase. Nimely sued Muirhead and the City of New York (defendant) for violating his civil rights by using excessive force. Muirhead claimed that he shot Nimely only because Nimely faced him and pointed a gun at him. Uncontroverted forensic evidence indicated that Muirhead shot Nimely in the back. At trial, Muirhead called Dawson, a forensic-pathology consultant, as an expert witness. Dawson testified that if Nimely was in the process of turning when Muirhead fired his gun, it would appear to Muirhead that Nimely was facing him and make Muirhead remember this. Dawson’s opinion was that because the processes of turning and firing the shot were both simultaneous and instantaneous, an illusion would be created such that Muirhead would remember only the result of Nimely’s turn. Dawson also testified that, based on this explanation, he rejected the possibility that Muirhead was lying about his encounter with Nimely. The jury returned a verdict in Muirhead’s favor. Nimely appealed, arguing that the admission of Dawson’s testimony was error.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Calabresi, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.