Case Law & Resources: Tennessee
Citation
Issue Presented & Facts
Holding
Penny v. City of Memphis,
276 S.W.3d 410 *; 2008 Tenn. App. LEXIS 137 **
In part, whether officer acted with excessive use of force when the victim did not have a weapon and did not pose an immediate danger to the officer.
Appellant appealing a charge of termination after killing an uncooperative mental patient.
The court supported the Commission's findings that the police officer acted with excessive use of force. The victim did not have any weapons and while a struggle ensued in which the victim resisted the officers' efforts to restrain him, he did not "directly confront" the officers. After the victim broke free and left the porch, there was no immediate danger that he would acquire a weapon. After the victim tripped and fell into the street, the officers, including the appellant continued to rain baton blows upon him in an effort to subdue him and the appellant used the baton to restrain the victim, placing it across the victim's shoulders and neck area even though he was not trained to use his baton in such a manner.
HN: Arrests, Reasonable Force Memphis, Tennessee, Police Department DR 301 regarding excessive force states: A. Control may be achieved through advice, warnings, and persuasion, or by the use of physical force. While the use of physical force may be necessary in situations which cannot be otherwise controlled, force may not be resorted to unless other reasonable alternatives have been exhausted or would clearly be ineffective under the particular circumstances. Members are permitted to use whatever force that is reasonable and necessary to protect others or themselves from bodily harm. B. A member shall not use unnecessary force or violence in making an arrest or in dealing with a prisoner or any person. Prisoners and suspects shall be treated in a fair and humane manner. They shall not be humiliated, ridiculed, or taunted.
Reference to Memphis, Tennessee, Police Department DR 301 regarding excessive force.
Stafford v Jackson Cty., 2017 Tenn. App. LEXIS 528
Whether an arresting sheriff's deputy, the sheriff, and a county were entitled to summary judgment on an arrestee's claims of assault and battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress.
An arrestee sued the arresting sheriff's deputy, the sheriff, and the county for assault and battery and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The trial court dismissed the case on summary judgment.
Note: Under Tennessee law, a police officer can be liable for damages caused by their excessive and unprivileged use of force under the intentional tort of battery. In making an arrest, a police officer is privileged to use only that force necessary to effect the arrest, while also maintaining their own personal safety and that of others present. Tennessee courts apply the same excessive force analysis in assault and battery claims as federal courts in 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 claims for excessive force. Thus, Tennessee courts may look to federal case law on excessive force in analyzing claims of assault and battery by police officers.
[1]-The trial court erred in granting summary judgment on the assault and battery claim, on the basis that there was no evidence of injury, because a genuine issue of
material fact existed as to the arrestee's damages. Furthermore, there was a question of fact regarding whether the sheriff's deputy used excessive force after handcuffing the arrestee; [2]-The trial court properly granted of summary judgment on the intentional infliction of emotional distress claim because the allegations asserted by the arrestee did not rise to the level of such outrageous and extreme conduct as to go beyond all bounds of decency and to be regarded as utterly intolerable in a civilized community.
HN: A claim of excessive force based upon handcuffing alone is proper only when an officer (1) handcuffs the plaintiff unnecessarily tightly; and (2) ignored the plaintiff's pleas to be released from the tight handcuffs.
HN: Gratuitous violence inflicted upon an incapacitated detainee constitutes an excessive use of force, even when the injuries suffered are not substantial.
HN: Liability for the intentional infliction of emotional distress does not extend to mere insults, indignities, threats, annoyances, petty oppression, or other trivialities.
HN: A claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress requires a showing that a defendant's conduct was (1) intentional or reckless; (2) so outrageous that it is not tolerated by civilized society; and (3) resulted in serious mental injury to the plaintiff. No perfect legal standard exists for determining whether particular conduct is so intolerable as to be tortious but Mississippi has adopted the high threshold standard. The cases thus far decided have found liability only when a defendant's conduct has been extreme and outrageous. It has not been enough that a defendant has acted with an intent which is tortious or even criminal, or that he has intended to inflict emotional distress, or even that his conduct has been characterized by malice, or a degree of aggravation which would entitle the plaintiff to punitive damages for another tort. Liability has been found only when the conduct has been so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all bounds of decency, and to be regarded as atrocious and utterly intolerable in a civilized community. Generally, the case is one in which the recitation of the facts to an average member of the community would arouse his resentment against the actor, and lead him to exclaim, "Outrageous."
Case Law
Resources
Citation
Summary and Notes
Relevant Excerpt
Governor announced on July 2, 2020 that law enforcement agencies across the state will review and update Use of Force and Duty to Intervene policies over the next 60 days.
In addition, the Tennessee Law Enforcement Training Academy, under the direction of the Tennessee Department of Commerce and Insurance, will require enhanced curriculum, increasing minimum curriculum hours from 400 to 488 to formalize the current practice of completing 88 additional hours.
Updates to the curriculum have been made to include relevant community-oriented policing concepts and at least 16 hours will be designated specifically to train officers on the following topics. Furthermore, the POST Commission will also require a total of eight hours of in-service training on DE-ESCALATION TECHNIQUES, officer's duty to intervene, public assembly interaction and emphasizing positive community and officer interactions and relationships.
N/A
A bodycam video taken on March 10th, 2018 shows a Chattanooga Police officer trying to get the driver, Fredrico Emanuel Wolfe, out of a car with his weapon drawn. Wolfe can then be seen being punched several times by the Chattanooga Police officer, who is accompanied by two other officers.
N/A