Police misconduct
When police officers and deputies abuse their authority, using force that isn’t justified or punishing people for speaking, the harm can follow a person for years. The firm brings Section 1983 claims against officers, departments, and the governments that employ them, including cases that have drawn national attention.
Overview
Section 1983 lets people sue government officials who violate their constitutional rights. In police-misconduct cases, that usually means the Fourth Amendment (unreasonable searches, seizures, and force), the First Amendment (retaliation for protected speech), or the Fourteenth (due process). The defense of qualified immunity makes these cases difficult, and they are contested at every step.
The firm has the record to see them through. Its police-misconduct work includes a matter that reached the United States Supreme Court, which unanimously revived a family’s claim after a wrong-house raid, and a malicious-prosecution trial that produced what is believed to be the largest verdict of its kind in Georgia history.
Initial consultation is free. Most civil rights matters are handled on a contingency basis: you owe no attorney fee unless we recover for you.
Excessive force
The Fourth Amendment allows only the force that is reasonable under the circumstances. When officers use force that is disproportionate to the situation, against someone who is restrained, compliant, or posing no threat, and cause serious injury or death, the firm pursues the officers and the policies, training, and supervision behind the incident. Body-camera and bystander video, medical records, and use-of-force policies are central to proving these claims.
First Amendment retaliation
People have the right to record police, to criticize the government, and to protest, and officers may not arrest or charge someone in retaliation for exercising those rights. Retaliatory-arrest claims are governed by a demanding framework that asks whether there was probable cause for any offense, and the firm litigates that question where an arrest was really about silencing speech. For free-speech cases beyond the policing context, see First Amendment.
Wrongful arrest and prosecution
An arrest made without probable cause, a charge pursued after officers knew it could not stand, and evidence invented or withheld to keep a prosecution alive are treated together on their own page, along with the firm’s results in those cases: see Wrongful arrest and prosecution.
Representative results
A jury verdict for a client who was maliciously prosecuted, in a police-misconduct case tried in federal court.
A settlement with the City of Atlanta and an individual officer resolving a Section 1983 claim.
A series of civil rights settlements against a Georgia city and its police officers, recovering more than $1,000,000 for clients who were falsely arrested or punished for speaking out.