stating that, similar to qualified immunity, “we have limited jurisdiction to review issues of law related to the district court’s denial of summary judgment based on [the defendant’s] official immunity defense”
How later courts described this case
- stating that, similar to qualified immunity, “we have limited jurisdiction to review issues of law related to the district court’s denial of summary judgment based on [the defendant’s] official immunity defense”
- stating that “it is not constitutionally unreasonable to use deadly force if an officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a threat of serious physical harm, either to the officer or others”
- noting that, under Missouri law, an officer’s actions when interacting with a suspected criminal are generally discretionary, and thus they are protected by official immunity
- explaining the scope of our jurisdiction to review a district court’s denial of summary judgment
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
KELLY, Circuit Judge, concurring.
I concur in the court's opinion, but mindful of our lack of jurisdiction over Dill's appeal, I would offer no comment on the likelihood of what either party ultimately may be able to show with respect to whether Dill's actions were reasonable.