Vaughan v. Cox

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a collision with a police car that could be viewed by a jury as accidental did not automatically justify deadly force
• holding that a collision with a police-car that could be viewed by a jury as accidental did not automatically justify deadly force
• holding that a passenger who was accidentally shot was subjected to a Fourth Amendment seizure because the officer fired his weapon to stop the car
• holding that a passenger who was accidentally shot was subjected to a Fourth Amendment seizure because the officer fired his weapon to stop the car
• holding that there were factual disputes as to whether the suspect intentionally rammed a police vehicle and whether the suspect made aggressive moves immediately before the officer fired
• explaining that the dispositive question is whether the force was “meant to stop” the plaintiff

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).