CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT
MICHAEL ANDREW WOOD,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
CHAD EUBANKS, in his individual and official capacity as Sergeant of the Clark County Sheriff’s Department; MARIO TROUTMAN, JR., CHERISH STEIGER, MATTHEW YATES, JACOB SHAW, and JOSEPH JOHNSON, in their individual and official capacities as Deputies of the Clark County Sheriff’s Office,
Defendants-Appellees.
   No. 20-3599
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio at Dayton.
No. 3:18-cv-00168—Thomas M. Rose, District Judge.
Argued: November 2, 2021
Decided and Filed: February 8, 2022
Before: GUY, GIBBONS, and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges.


_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

JULIA SMITH GIBBONS, Circuit Judge. Michael Wood wore a shirt bearing the words “Fuck the Police” to the county fair. According to Wood, the defendant police officers ordered him to leave and escorted him from the fairgrounds because of his shirt. While leaving, Wood made his displeasure known through numerous coarse insults levied at the police and the fairground’s administrator. The defendants then arrested Wood for disorderly conduct. After the charges were dismissed, Wood filed this § 1983 action against the officers, alleging false arrest and retaliation. The district court granted summary judgment to the defendants. We reverse because Wood’s speech was protected by the First Amendment.



CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT
PEARLIE SUE GAMBREL, Personal Representative of the Estate of Jessie J. Mills,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
KNOX COUNTY, KENTUCKY; MIKEY ASHURST, Officer, Knox County Sheriff’s Department, in his individual capacity; BRANDON BOLTON, Knox County Constable, in his individual capacity,
Defendants-Appellees.
   No. 20-6027
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky at London.
No. 6:17-cv-00184—Robert E. Wier, District Judge.
Argued: June 10, 2021
Decided and Filed: February 8, 2022
Before: GIBBONS, KETHLEDGE, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.


_________________________
OPINION
_________________________

MURPHY, Circuit Judge. In Scott v. Harris, 550 U.S. 372 (2007), the Supreme Court disregarded a plaintiff’s claim that he had been driving safely during a high-speed chase because the claim was “blatantly contradicted” by objective video evidence showing his dangerous maneuvers. Id. at 380. This case requires us to decide how far Scott goes in allowing courts at the summary-judgment stage to ignore a plaintiff’s evidence about what happened during a police encounter on the ground that the evidence conflicts with the bulk of the summary-judgment record.

Responding to a 911 call, two officers came upon Jessie Mills bizarrely and dangerously carrying his kidnapped daughter down the middle of an unlit road on a dark night. After a struggle, one of the officers shot and killed Mills. The ensuing police investigation initially revealed a largely consistent story from the officers and bystanders: Mills had threatened to harm the officers, fought them with “super-human” strength, and charged at one of them just before the shooting. In this litigation, however, one of the bystanders, Ricky Hobbs, claimed that he had lied to the police during that investigation. He now says that the officers brutally beat Mills even though Mills did not resist, that they could have easily handcuffed him, and that the shooting should not have happened. The officers ask us to disregard Hobbs’s testimony because it conflicts with the testimony from several others. But we do not think Scott reaches so far. This testimonial dispute instead raises a classic jury question. We thus respectfully disagree with the district court’s decision to grant summary judgment to the officers outright. Even accepting Hobbs’s testimony, however, the officers are still entitled to qualified immunity with respect to their initial use of force to recover the child, and the relevant local government is entitled to summary judgment on the federal claim against it. We thus affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.