Waid v. County of Lyon

In Waid v. County of Lyon, the Ninth Circuit addressed whether two Nevada deputies used excessive force during a domestic violence response, ultimately affirming the district court’s grant of qualified immunity.

The case arose after officers responded to a 911 call in Silver Springs, Nevada. Upon arrival, they were told by the couple’s children that their mother needed medical attention and there were no weapons in the house besides a BB gun. Inside, Robert Anderson yelled obscenities, ignored commands, and quickly charged down a hallway toward the officers. One deputy fired three shots, followed by two more from the other officer. Anderson later died from his wounds.

His estate filed suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. The Ninth Circuit, in a majority opinion by Judge Ryan Nelson, held that while Anderson was unarmed, the situation was not an “obvious” constitutional violation. The panel emphasized the officers had minimal time to react, were confined in a narrow hallway, and faced an escalating threat.

The court distinguished this case from A.K.H. v. City of Tustin, noting that prior precedent did not clearly establish the unlawfulness of deadly force in these specific circumstances. As such, the officers were entitled to qualified immunity. The court also rejected the Fourteenth Amendment substantive due process claim, finding no evidence the officers acted with a purpose to harm unrelated to legitimate law enforcement objectives.

Judge Berzon dissented, highlighting that Anderson was unarmed and outnumbered, and questioned whether deadly force was truly necessary under the facts.

This decision underscores the complexities of domestic violence calls and how courts assess use-of-force incidents in tense and rapidly evolving situations.