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

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 08-11-2023

Case Style:

Timothy A. Raimey v. City of Niles, et al.

Case Number: 4:20-cv-00005

Judge: Sara Lioi

Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio (Mahoning County)

Plaintiff's Attorney: Andrew K. Jondahl, Earl Ward, Jonathan Abady, Kevin Hulick, Vivake Prasad, Nicolas DiCello

Defendant's Attorney: Andrea Ziarko, Greg Beck, and Melvin Lute

Description: Youngstown, Ohio civil rights lawyers represented Plaintiff who sued Defendants on excessive force theories.

In January 2019, Officer Christopher Mannella fatally shot James Burroughs at an apartment complex in Niles, Ohio. On behalf of Burroughs's estate, Timothy Raimey brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law against the City of Niles and several involved police officers. The Defendants moved for summary judgment, which Raimey did not oppose except as to his claims against Mannella. The district court granted summary judgment to the other Defendants but denied Mannella's assertions of qualified and state law immunity, allowing Raimey's claims of excessive force, wrongful death, assault and battery, and reckless conduct, to proceed against Mannella. Mannella timely appealed. We deny Raimey's motion to dismiss the appeal and affirm the denial of qualified immunity to Mannella.

I. BACKGROUND

The parties in this case dispute the facts surrounding the shooting. To determine the relevant set of facts in an interlocutory appeal of a denial of qualified immunity, "we follow the same path as did the district court" by "drawing all reasonable inferences in the plaintiff's favor-and, ideally .... look[ing] no further than the district court's opinion for the pertinent facts and inference." Bunkley v. City of Detroit, 902 F.3d 552, 560 (6th Cir. 2018) (citing DiLuzio v. Vill. of Yorkville, 796 F.3d 604, 611 (6th Cir. 2015). Accordingly, we draw the following facts from the district court opinion.

On January 2, 2019, Matthew Burroughs went to the Niles Municipal Court to pay a traffic fine. As the court processed Burroughs's payment, the electronic docketing system alerted court officials that there was an active warrant for Burroughs's arrest that related to a recent domestic violence incident. Officer James Reppy was one of the officers who responded to that incident.

Court personnel asked Todd Zickefoose, a probation officer, to ensure that Burroughs did not leave while a bailiff summoned the police, but Burroughs left through the front doors. 3

Zickefoose followed Burroughs outside, commanded him to stop and come back into the court because there was a warrant for his arrest, and told him to put his hands behind his back. When Zickefoose tried to grab Burroughs's forearm, he pulled away and ran toward the building's parking lot; Zickefoose chased Burroughs and caught up with him as Burroughs was opening the door to his car. Zickefoose grabbed Burroughs's arm as he was getting into the car and attempted to pull him out, but Burroughs started the car, put it in reverse, and as he pulled away, the open car door hit Zickefoose in his midsection. Zickefoose reported the incident and the vehicle's license plate number to the police.

Dispatch notified police Lieutenant Daniel Adkins and Officers Mannella, Reppy, and Hogan about the altercation, and each officer responded separately to Burroughs's apartment on Royal Mall Drive. Hogan arrived first and saw Burroughs turn onto Royal Mall Drive traveling approximately 30 to 35 miles per hour-"not over" the speed limit. Burroughs was followed closely by Mannella, who was then on foot, and then was followed by the police cruisers driven by Reppy and Adkins. Burroughs's car approached and stopped about three feet from Hogan's cruiser, in what Hogan described as a "controlled stop" that did not require Burroughs to slam on the brakes. Burroughs then put the car in reverse and backed away from Hogan's cruiser at a speed that Hogan testified was "not overexcessive." But as Burroughs reversed his car, Reppy pulled into the apartment complex behind him, blocking him between Reppy's SUV and Hogan's cruiser. Burroughs stopped again to avoid hitting Reppy's vehicle. Burroughs then shifted the car back into drive.

Officers Hogan and Mannella failed to activate their body cameras before or during the incident, in violation of the Niles Police Department's body camera policy. Reppy's body camera was on and partially captured the fatal encounter that ensued, recording the sound of all eight shots fired and images of the position of Mannella and Burroughs's car for seven out of eight shots. Mannella approached the car on foot, with his gun drawn, and yelled for Burroughs to "[s]hut the car off" and "[g]et out of the vehicle." Mannella then fired three rounds into the windshield, which penetrated the windshield and hit Burroughs in the chest, killing him. Reppy fired an additional five shots that penetrated the car but did not hit Burroughs. Mannella turned his body camera on after the shooting and immediately stated that he feared that he would be run over. Mannella's body camera footage also captures Mannella admonishing Hogan to be careful of what he said on camera.[1] After the shooting, Officers broke the car window to gain entry. When they tried to remove Burroughs's body from the driver's seat without putting the car in park, the car lurched forward and hit a dumpster before coming to a complete stop.

Mannella disputes a number of these facts. Based on the record evidence and drawing inferences in Raimey's favor, however, the district court determined that a reasonable jury could credit Raimey's version of events and find that, when Mannella opened fire, Burroughs was moving slowly or was stationary; Burroughs was complying with Mannella's commands by bringing the vehicle to a stop; and Mannella was standing to the side of the car, not in the vehicle's path. In making these findings, the district relied on witness testimony, including Hogan's statement that Burroughs's vehicle was "slowing down . . . to a great degree" when Mannella fired, along with Reppy's body camera footage showing that when Mannella fired, Burroughs was travelling very slowly-if at all-and decreasing his speed, as evidenced by his car's lit brake lights. The district court also relied on an unrebutted forensic analysis by Raimey's expert, Jason Fries, Ph.D., which determined that Burroughs's car was pointed away from Mannella and that Mannella was to the side of the vehicle when he fired.[2] An investigation by the Bureau of Criminal Investigation for the Ohio Attorney General's office ensued.

On behalf of Burroughs's estate, Raimey sued the City of Niles, the City's Police Chief, and Officers Mannella, Reppy, and Hogan, bringing claims for violation of Burroughs's Fourth Amendment rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and for wrongful death, reckless conduct, and assault and battery under Ohio law. The Defendants moved for summary judgment, asserting qualified immunity on the §1983 claims and immunity from liability under Ohio law. Raimey opposed summary judgment only as to Mannella, and the district court granted summary dismissal to the other Defendants. The district court held that genuine issues of material fact precluded a grant of summary judgment to Mannella because "[c]onsidering the totality of the circumstances in a light most favorable to [Raimey], . . . a jury could find that Burroughs did not present an imminent or ongoing danger to the officers or others at the scene." Mannella timely appealed, and Raimey moved to dismiss the appeal, arguing that Mannella raised factual disputes that deprived this court of appellate jurisdiction.
Raimey v. City of Niles, Ohio (6th Cir. 2023)

Outcome: Summary judgment to the other Defendants but denied Mannella's assertions of qualified and state law immunity, allowing Raimey's claims of excessive force, wrongful death, assault and battery, and reckless conduct, to proceed against Mannella. Mannella timely appealed. We deny Raimey's motion.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments:



Find a Lawyer

Subject:
City:
State:
 

Find a Case

Subject:
County:
State: