Johnson v. Jones

515 U.S. 304 (1995) · Supreme Court of the United States · June 12, 1995 · No. No. 94-455

Summary

The United States Supreme Court held that a public official asserting qualified immunity may not immediately appeal a district court's summary judgment order to the extent the order determines only whether the pretrial record presents a genuine issue of fact. The Court distinguished immediately appealable legal questions concerning clearly established law from unreviewable fact-sufficiency determinations. The Court affirmed the Seventh Circuit's dismissal of the interlocutory appeal.

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Writing for the Court
Justice Breyer; Justice Stevens; Justice O'Connor; Justice Kennedy; Justice Souter; Justice Thomas; Justice Ginsburg
Jurisdiction
Federal
Decision date
June 12, 1995
Docket number
No. 94-455
Procedural posture
Three police officers sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 appealed the denial of their motion for summary judgment asserting qualified immunity. The Seventh Circuit dismissed the interlocutory appeal for lack of appellate jurisdiction over the officers' contention that the evidence was insufficient to create a genuine issue of fact. The Supreme Court granted certiorari and affirmed.
Standard of review
The appealability of the interlocutory summary judgment order was reviewed as a question of appellate jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and the collateral-order doctrine.
Precedential value
United States Supreme Court published opinion; binding precedent
Parties
Johnson et al. v. Jones
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

qualified immunityinterlocutory appealappellate jurisdictionsummary judgmentsection 1983

Practice areas

Federal appellate jurisdictionCivil rights litigationQualified immunityFederal civil procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether a defendant asserting qualified immunity may immediately appeal a district court's denial of summary judgment insofar as the order determines only whether the pretrial evidence is sufficient to create a genuine issue of fact.
  2. Whether the Seventh Circuit correctly dismissed the officers' interlocutory appeal for lack of jurisdiction over their evidence-sufficiency challenge.

Holdings

  1. A defendant entitled to invoke qualified immunity may not immediately appeal a district court's summary judgment order insofar as the order determines whether the pretrial record presents a genuine issue of fact for trial.

Key quotations

We hold that the defendants cannot immediately appeal this kind of fact-related district court determination. (515 U.S. at 305)
This kind of order, we conclude, is not appealable. (515 U.S. at 313)
For these reasons, we hold that a defendant, entitled to invoke a qualified immunity defense, may not appeal a district court's summary judgment order insofar as that order determines whether or not the pretrial record sets forth a "genuine" issue of fact for trial. (515 U.S. at 320)

Factual background

Houston Jones, a diabetic, suffered an insulin seizure on the street. Police officers mistakenly believed he was intoxicated, arrested him, and transported him to a police station; Jones later awoke in a hospital with several broken ribs. Jones alleged that the officers used excessive force during the arrest and beat him at the station. Three officers denied that the evidence showed they participated in or observed the alleged beating, but their depositions established that they were present at the arrest and in or near the booking room.

Procedural history

Jones brought a § 1983 action against five police officers, alleging excessive force and beating. Three officers moved for summary judgment, arguing that the record contained no evidence that they participated in or witnessed the beating. The district court denied the motion, finding sufficient circumstantial evidence to create a genuine issue of fact. The Seventh Circuit dismissed the officers' appeal, and the Supreme Court affirmed.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…