VIEWS: 7 PAGES: 13 CATEGORY: Law POSTED ON: 5/22/2010
Some scholars have expressed concern that judges are encroaching on the fact-finding role of the jury through the use of summary judgment.1 This concern is more acute in cases that turn on fact-specific inquiries, such as lawsuits where the defense claims qualified immunity.2 Last term, in Scott v. Harris,3 the Supreme Court overturned the decisions of the district and appellate courts, which had denied summary judgment to a defendant who claimed qualified immunity.4 In Harris, the plaintiff argued that he had been unreasonably seized by a police officer who had rammed the plaintiffs car off the road to end a high speed car chase, leaving the plaintiff paralyzed.5 After reviewing video footage of the chase,6 the Court determined that there was no genuine issue of material fact as to whether the plaintiff posed a danger to the community, making the officer's seizure of the plaintiff objectively reasonable.7 Because an objectively reasonable seizure does not violate clearly established Fourth Amendment rights, the officer enjoyed qualified immunity from the suit.
JUSTICES IN THE
Pages to are hidden for
"JUSTICES IN THE JURY BOX: VIDEO EVIDENCE AND SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN SCOTT V. HARRIS, 127 S. Ct. 1769 (2007)"Please download to view full document