District of Columbia v. Chinn

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the plaintiffs alleged that the officers assaulted him without provocation but did not assert any separate negligence claim such as that they mistakenly thought he was armed or was a threat
• noting that prior decisions have \recognized the perhaps somewhat confused and overlapping legal principles relating to police use of force\
• stating that a battery does not \transmogrify into negligence\ if officers mistakenly use excessive force but the battery instead becomes unprivileged
• acknowledging that negligence and battery claims are appropriately pled when the evidence supports \alternate scenarios\ supporting each distinct theory
• observing that “negligence must be distinctly pled and based upon at least one factual scenario that presents an aspect of negligence apart from the use of excessive force itself and violative of a distinct standard of care”
• defining assault as “an intentional and unlawful attempt or threat, either by words or acts, to do physical harm”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).