Whitlock v. Jackson
United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
754 F.Supp. 1394 (S.D. Ind. 1991)
Eileen Whitlock (plaintiff), the administrator of the estate of Richard Gaisor, brought suit against Jackson, et al. (defendants), claiming that the defendants arrested Gaisor and in the process caused him serious injuries which resulted in his death. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Whitlock for $29,700. The jury found the defendants liable for battery, but not for a violation of the ban on unreasonable use of force under the Fourth Amendment. Whitlock filed a motion arguing that the inconsistencies in the jury’s answers to special interrogatories required an additur or a new trial. The defendants claimed that Whitlock’s failure to object to the inconsistencies prior to the jury being discharged constituted a waiver of her claim.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (McKinney, J.)
What to do next…
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.
Here's why 154,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 13,500 briefs, keyed to 184 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.