In May of 2006, a city police officer initiated a traffic stop on a vehicle that had an expired license plate. When the officer activated the patrol vehicle’s overhead lights to pull over the vehicle, the driver refused to stop and led the officer on a high speed chase through a residential area. The driver finally brought the vehicle to a stop. The officer cautiously approached the vehicle with his service weapon drawn, and ordered the driver out of the car. The driver opened his door, but his seat belt was on, and the officer could not remove him from the vehicle.

The officer’s supervisor, a lieutenant, arrived at the scene and observed a struggle between the officer and the driver. The lieutenant also grabbed the driver’s arm and pulled him just as the man unlatched his seat belt. The officers pulled the man out of the car. The man fell to the ground and injured his hip and leg. He was placed under arrest and taken to the hospital.

The injured man filed suit in federal district court in Detroit against both police officers and the city. The man claimed that the officers violated his federal constitutional rights by using excessive force to arrest him, and that the city did not adequately train its officers as to how much force to use in making arrests.

CMDA Attorney Susan Lumetta filed a motion on behalf of the defendants, asking the court to dismiss the case because the officers’ actions were reasonable considering all the circumstances. The federal district judge agreed and held that the officers did not violate the plaintiff’s constitutional rights. The judge dismissed the case against the city as well, because without a constitutional violation, there could be no valid claim against the city.

The plaintiff then appealed the dismissal of his federal claims to U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, arguing that the case should have proceeded to trial. Ms. Lumetta briefed and argued the case before the Sixth Circuit, which upheld the district judge’s ruling. The appeals court agreed that the officers’ conduct was reasonable under the circumstances, and therefore no constitutional violation had occurred. Ms. Lumetta was able to dispose of the plaintiff’s federal claims in their entirety as a matter of law.

In the meantime, the plaintiff had filed suit under state law for assault and battery and other claims in the Wayne County Circuit Court. Attorney Lumetta again moved the court to dismiss the case, given the federal courts’ determination that the officers acted reasonably. The circuit court judge, however, denied the defendants’ request for dismissal. The defendants, again led by Ms. Lumetta, appealed to the Michigan Court of Appeals.

The Michigan Court of Appeals sided with the defendants, stating that the plaintiff was bound by the federal courts’ determination that the officers had acted reasonably. The Court of Appeals reversed the trial judge’s ruling, and ruled that the case should be dismissed.