Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
Estate of Donovan L. Lewis v. City of Columbus, Ohio, et al.
Date: 11-14-2025
Case Number: 24-CV-1841
Judge: Michael H. Watson
Court: United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio (Franklin County)
Plaintiff's Attorney:
Click Here For The Best Columbus Personal Injury Lawyer Directory
Defendant's Attorney:
Click Here For The Best Columbus Insurance Defense Law Lawyer Directory
Description:
Columbus, Ohio personal injury lawyer represents the Plaintiff who sued on an excessive force civil rights violation theory.
Twenty-year-old Donovan Lewis was at home in bed, around 2 a.m., when police officers entered his apartment to arrest him on outstanding warrants. Once inside the residence, Officer Ricky Anderson fatally shot the unarmed Lewis in the abdomen as he sat up in bed. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Lewis's estate ("the Estateâ€) brought an action against the City of Columbus (the "Cityâ€) and the Columbus Division of Police ("CPDâ€) Chief, in her official capacity (together, "Defendantsâ€). The Estate alleges that Anderson used excessive—indeed deadly—force against Lewis as a result of an official policy or custom of racially discriminatory policing and excessive force maintained by Defendants. The Estate is seeks damages and permanent injunctive relief, along with other forms of relief.
Motion by the Columbus Fraternal Order of Police sought to intervene in the case.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24 governs a non-party's right to intervene in an action. It provides that a court "must†allow intervention for anyone who makes a timely motion to do so, "claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action, and is so situated that disposing of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede the movant's ability to protect its interest, unless existing parties adequately represent that interest.†Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a)(2). Thus, under the rule, FOP must establish four elements to intervene as of right: (1) timeliness; (2) a substantial legal interest in the subject matter of the case; (3) an impaired ability to protect that interest absent intervention; and (4) inadequate protection of its interest by current litigants. See Grainger v. Ottawa Cnty., 90 F.4th 507, 513 (6th Cir. 2024).
Twenty-year-old Donovan Lewis was at home in bed, around 2 a.m., when police officers entered his apartment to arrest him on outstanding warrants. Once inside the residence, Officer Ricky Anderson fatally shot the unarmed Lewis in the abdomen as he sat up in bed. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Lewis's estate ("the Estateâ€) brought an action against the City of Columbus (the "Cityâ€) and the Columbus Division of Police ("CPDâ€) Chief, in her official capacity (together, "Defendantsâ€). The Estate alleges that Anderson used excessive—indeed deadly—force against Lewis as a result of an official policy or custom of racially discriminatory policing and excessive force maintained by Defendants. The Estate is seeks damages and permanent injunctive relief, along with other forms of relief.
Motion by the Columbus Fraternal Order of Police sought to intervene in the case.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24 governs a non-party's right to intervene in an action. It provides that a court "must†allow intervention for anyone who makes a timely motion to do so, "claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action, and is so situated that disposing of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede the movant's ability to protect its interest, unless existing parties adequately represent that interest.†Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a)(2). Thus, under the rule, FOP must establish four elements to intervene as of right: (1) timeliness; (2) a substantial legal interest in the subject matter of the case; (3) an impaired ability to protect that interest absent intervention; and (4) inadequate protection of its interest by current litigants. See Grainger v. Ottawa Cnty., 90 F.4th 507, 513 (6th Cir. 2024).
Outcome:
Motion to intervene denied.
Reversed
Reversed
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:
About This Case
What was the outcome of Estate of Donovan L. Lewis v. City of Columbus, Ohio, et al.?
The outcome was: Motion to intervene denied. Reversed
Which court heard Estate of Donovan L. Lewis v. City of Columbus, Ohio, et al.?
This case was heard in United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio (Franklin County), OH. The presiding judge was Michael H. Watson.
Who were the attorneys in Estate of Donovan L. Lewis v. City of Columbus, Ohio, et al.?
Plaintiff's attorney: Click Here For The Best Columbus Personal Injury Lawyer Directory. Defendant's attorney: Click Here For The Best Columbus Insurance Defense Law Lawyer Directory.
When was Estate of Donovan L. Lewis v. City of Columbus, Ohio, et al. decided?
This case was decided on November 14, 2025.