Future Litigation Case Analysis

fficer liability, the next topic for your paper. Although each of the 4 questions seems to ask for nothing more than your opinion, remember that all papers require researched and supported positions and this one is no exception. Here are some tips to help you answer the questions:
Do you think that there is a trend in this country towards stopping litigation against law enforcement officials?
For this question, you should analyze the two cases and come to a conclusion about their effects on future litigation. What specific passages cause you to have this opinion? You may also conduct research and look for trends. Have there been more or fewer lawsuits since the cases? Do you agree with the decisions in these cases? Why or why not?
This was the bases for Brosseau v. Haugen. However, an individual officer’s greatest shield in a lawsuit that alleges a violation of civil rights is qualified immunity. The decision by the United States Supreme Court in this particular case helped strengthen the cause. Although the ninth circuit ruled that Officer Brosseau didn’t meet the standard for qualified immunity, the Supreme Court stated other wise. The Supreme Court stated: “Qualified immunity shields an officer from suit when she makes a decision that, even if constitutionally deficient, reasonably misapprehends the law governing the circumstances she confronted.” In the use of force context, “qualified immunity operates to protect officers from the sometimes hazy border between excessive and acceptable force.” The Court noted that “the parties point us to only a handful of cases [note: cases/court decisions put law enforcement on notice of clearly established law] relevant to the situation Brosseau confronted: whether to shoot a disturbed felon, set on avoiding capture through vehicular flight, when persons in the immediate area are at risk from that