Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Graham v. Connor

Date: 05-15-1989

Case Number: 87-6571

Judge: Rehnquist

Court: United States Supreme Court on cert. from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals

Plaintiff's Attorney:

Click Here For The Best Charlotte Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory


Defendant's Attorney: North Carolina Attorney General's Office

Description:
Charlotte, North Carolina, personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiff on a 42 U.S.C. 1983 civil rights violation theory.

Berry's car, and made an investigative stop, ordering the pair to wait while he found out what had happened in the store. Respondent backup police officers arrived on the scene, handcuffed Graham, and ignored or rebuffed attempts to explain and treat Graham's condition. During the encounter, Graham sustained multiple injuries. He was released when Conner learned that nothing had happened in the store. Graham filed suit in the District Court under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against respondents, alleging that they had used excessive force in making the stop, in violation of "rights secured to him under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and 42 U.S.C. § 1983." The District Court granted respondents' motion for a directed verdict at the close of Graham's evidence, applying a four-factor test for determining when excessive use of force gives rise to a § 1983 cause of action, which inquires, inter alia, whether the force was applied in a good faith effort to maintain and restore discipline or maliciously and sadistically for the very purpose of causing harm. Johnson v. Glick, 481 F.2d 1028. The Court of Appeals affirmed, endorsing this test as generally applicable to all claims of constitutionally excessive force brought against government officials, rejecting Graham's argument that it was error to require him to prove that the allegedly excessive force was applied maliciously and sadistically to cause harm, and holding that a reasonable jury applying the Johnson v. Glick test to his evidence could not find that the force applied was constitutionally excessive.
Outcome:
Held: All claims that law enforcement officials have used excessive force -- deadly or not -- in the course of an arrest, investigatory stop, or other "seizure" of a free citizen are properly analyzed under the Fourth Amendment's "objective reasonableness" standard, rather than under a substantive due process standard. Pp. 490 U. S. 392-399.
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:

About This Case

What was the outcome of Graham v. Connor?

The outcome was: Held: All claims that law enforcement officials have used excessive force -- deadly or not -- in the course of an arrest, investigatory stop, or other "seizure" of a free citizen are properly analyzed under the Fourth Amendment's "objective reasonableness" standard, rather than under a substantive due process standard. Pp. 490 U. S. 392-399.

Which court heard Graham v. Connor?

This case was heard in United States Supreme Court on cert. from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, DC. The presiding judge was Rehnquist.

Who were the attorneys in Graham v. Connor?

Plaintiff's attorney: Click Here For The Best Charlotte Criminal Defense Lawyer Directory. Defendant's attorney: North Carolina Attorney General's Office.

When was Graham v. Connor decided?

This case was decided on May 15, 1989.