Under the “provocation” rule, an officer may be held responsible for an otherwise reasonable use of force where the officer intentionally or recklessly provoked a violent confrontation, and the provocation was itself an independent Fourth Amendment violation. The questions presented are: (1) Whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit's “provocation” rule should be barred as it conflicts with Graham v. Connor regarding the manner in which a claim of excessive force against a police officer should be determined in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for a violation of a plaintiff's Fourth Amendment rights, and has been rejected by other courts of appeals; and (2) whether, in an action brought under Section 1983, an incident giving rise to a reasonable use of force is an intervening, superseding event which breaks the chain of causation from a prior, unlawful entry in violation of the Fourth Amendment.
REPORTER: Bill Pruitt
IMPORTANT NOTE: This website is not affiliated in any way with the United States Supreme Court or any agency of the United States Government. Nothing contained on this website constitutes legal advice and if you desire legal advice you should contact an attorney.
JOIN US: We are currently searching for bright and creative lawyers and law school students to join our group of volunteer reporters. While our reporter positions are unpaid, you will have the satisfaction of having your work published to a large audience on a regular basis. If you would like to join us simply send an email to us at firstname.lastname@example.org with your resume.