Lum v. Koles

Summary

The Alaska Supreme Court reversed summary judgment for police officers and the North Slope Borough in the Lum family's trespass and invasion-of-privacy claims arising from the officers' warrantless entry into the family's home. The court held that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding whether the officers acted in bad faith, defeating qualified immunity at the summary-judgment stage. It also declined to hold that the officers were entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the tort claims because the legality of the entry remained factually disputed.

Holdings

1. The Lums presented sufficient objective evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact as to whether the officers acted in bad faith or with malice when entering the home. Because Alaska's qualified official immunity protects discretionary acts only when performed in good faith and without malice or corruption, summary judgment was improper.
2. The officers and the Borough were not entitled to summary judgment on the trespass and invasion-of-privacy claims because the legality of the warrantless entry depended on genuine disputes of material fact concerning whether the officers had reasonable grounds to believe an emergency existed.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the officers produced sufficient evidence of bad faith or malice to create a genuine issue of material fact and defeat qualified immunity at summary judgment.
2. Whether the officers and the North Slope Borough were entitled to summary judgment on the Lums’ trespass and invasion-of-privacy claims because the warrantless entry was privileged or lawful.
3. Whether information known by the dispatcher but not transmitted to the responding officers could be imputed to them to establish the emergency-aid exception to the warrant requirement for entry into a home.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded