Cowlin v. Bennett et al.

On November 13, 2018, plaintiff Cowlin initiated a civil rights action in federal court against defendant Bennett and other officers. Cowlin alleged that during a law enforcement encounter, Bennett employed excessive force, causing physical injuries and violating the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable seizure. The confrontation reportedly arose when officers responded to a call and encountered Cowlin, who claimed to be compliant and unarmed. Cowlin asserted that he was tackled, struck, and subjected to gratuitous violence. The defendants countered that their actions were objectively reasonable under the circumstances and raised the defense of qualified immunity. The court reviewed dashcam footage, medical records, and deposition testimony. It ultimately found that the force used did not amount to a constitutional violation and that the law was not clearly established, shielding the officer from liability.

The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants, ruling that the force applied was not constitutionally excessive and that the officer was protected by qualified immunity. The decision was subsequently affirmed on appeal.

Whether the defendant officer’s use of force was objectively unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment, and whether the officer was entitled to qualified immunity from the excessive force claim.

The case intensified discussions surrounding qualified immunity reform, often cited by advocates as illustrating the difficulty of holding police officers accountable for alleged misconduct absent a prior case with virtually identical facts.