los
angeles
lyons
argued
november
decided
april
respondent
filed
suit
federal
district
petitioner
city
los
angeles
certain
police
officers
alleging
stopped
officers
traffic
violation
although
offered
resistance
officers
without
provocation
justification
seized
applied
chokehold
rendering
unconscious
causing
damage
larynx
addition
seeking
damages
complaint
sought
injunctive
relief
petitioner
barring
use
chokeholds
except
situations
proposed
victim
reasonably
appeared
threatening
immediate
use
deadly
force
alleged
pursuant
petitioner
authorization
police
officers
routinely
applied
chokeholds
situations
threatened
use
deadly
force
numerous
persons
injured
result
thereof
respondent
justifiably
feared
future
contact
might
police
officers
might
result
choked
without
provocation
thus
threatened
impairment
various
rights
protected
federal
constitution
district
ultimately
entered
preliminary
injunction
use
chokeholds
circumstances
threaten
death
serious
bodily
injury
appeals
affirmed
held
case
rendered
moot
even
though
pending
city
police
authorities
prohibited
use
certain
type
chokehold
circumstances
imposed
moratorium
use
another
type
chokehold
except
circumstances
deadly
force
authorized
moratorium
terms
permanent
thus
intervening
events
irrevocably
eradicated
effects
alleged
misconduct
pp
federal
courts
without
jurisdiction
entertain
respondent
claim
injunctive
relief
littleton
rizzo
goode
pp
satisfy
case
controversy
requirement
art
iii
plaintiff
must
show
sustained
immediately
danger
sustaining
direct
injury
result
challenged
official
conduct
injury
threat
injury
must
real
immediate
conjectural
hypothetical
past
exposure
illegal
conduct
show
present
case
controversy
regarding
injunctive
relief
unaccompanied
continuing
present
adverse
effects
supra
pp
respondent
failed
demonstrate
case
controversy
petitioner
justify
equitable
relief
sought
respondent
may
illegally
choked
police
presumably
affording
standing
claim
damages
individual
officers
perhaps
petitioner
establish
real
immediate
threat
stopped
traffic
violation
offense
officer
illegally
choke
unconsciousness
without
provocation
chokeholds
authorized
counter
resistance
arrest
suspect
thwart
effort
escape
future
threat
respondent
petitioner
policy
conduct
police
officers
real
possibility
encounter
police
either
illegally
resist
arrest
officers
disobey
instructions
render
unconscious
without
provocation
equitable
doctrine
cessation
challenged
conduct
seconds
chokehold
applied
respondent
bar
injunction
controlling
since
respondent
lack
standing
rest
termination
police
practice
speculative
nature
claim
experience
injury
result
practice
even
continued
rule
claim
become
moot
capable
repetition
yet
evades
review
likewise
inapposite
pp
even
assuming
respondent
pending
damages
suit
affords
art
iii
standing
seek
injunction
remedy
claim
arising
events
nevertheless
equitable
remedy
unavailable
respondent
failed
show
irreparable
injury
requirement
met
showing
real
immediate
threat
plaintiff
wronged
respondent
injury
allegedly
suffered
go
unrecompensed
injury
adequate
damages
remedy
law
recognition
need
proper
balance
state
federal
authority
counsels
restraint
issuance
injunctions
state
officers
engaged
administration
state
criminal
laws
absence
irreparable
injury
great
immediate
pp
white
delivered
opinion
burger
powell
rehnquist
joined
marshall
filed
dissenting
opinion
brennan
blackmun
stevens
joined
post
frederick
merkin
argued
cause
petitioner
briefs
ira
reiner
lewis
unger
michael
mitchell
argued
cause
respondent
brief
fred
okrand
charles
sims
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
filed
robert
logan
city
san
jose
california
et
al
myron
dale
national
association
chiefs
police
et
al
benjamin
brown
lamar
shelley
james
brennan
henry
underhill
roy
bates
george
agnost
roger
cutler
john
dekker
lee
holt
george
knox
walter
powell
william
taube
aaron
wilson
john
witt
max
zall
conard
mattox
charles
rhyne
national
institute
municipal
law
officers
george
franscell
wayne
schmidt
courtney
evans
los
angeles
police
protective
league
et
al
justice
white
delivered
opinion
issue
whether
respondent
lyons
satisfied
prerequisites
seeking
injunctive
relief
federal
district
case
began
february
respondent
adolph
lyons
filed
complaint
damages
injunction
declaratory
relief
district
central
district
california
defendants
city
los
angeles
four
police
officers
complaint
alleged
october
lyons
stopped
defendant
officers
traffic
vehicle
code
violation
although
lyons
offered
resistance
threat
whatsoever
officers
without
provocation
justification
seized
lyons
applied
chokehold
either
bar
arm
control
hold
control
hold
rendering
unconscious
causing
damage
larynx
counts
iv
complaint
sought
damages
officers
city
count
principally
concerned
sought
preliminary
permanent
injunction
city
barring
use
control
holds
count
alleged
city
police
officers
pursuant
authorization
instruction
encouragement
defendant
city
los
angeles
regularly
routinely
apply
choke
holds
innumerable
situations
threatened
use
deadly
force
whatsoever
numerous
persons
injured
result
application
chokeholds
lyons
others
similarly
situated
threatened
irreparable
injury
form
bodily
injury
loss
life
lyons
justifiably
fears
contact
los
angeles
police
officers
may
result
choked
strangled
death
without
provocation
justification
legal
excuse
lyons
alleged
threatened
impairment
rights
protected
first
fourth
eighth
fourteenth
amendments
injunctive
relief
sought
use
control
holds
except
situations
proposed
victim
said
control
reasonably
appears
threatening
immediate
use
deadly
force
count
vi
sought
declaratory
relief
city
judgment
use
chokeholds
absent
threat
immediate
use
deadly
force
per
se
violation
various
constitutional
rights
district
order
granted
city
motion
partial
judgment
pleadings
entered
judgment
city
counts
vi
appeals
reversed
judgment
city
counts
vi
holding
city
objection
despite
decisions
littleton
rizzo
goode
lyons
standing
seek
relief
application
chokeholds
lyons
city
los
angeles
appeals
held
sufficient
likelihood
lyons
stopped
subjected
unlawful
use
force
constitute
case
controversy
warrant
issuance
injunction
injunction
otherwise
authorized
denied
certiorari
remand
lyons
applied
preliminary
injunction
lyons
pressed
count
claim
point
see
infra
motion
heard
affidavits
depositions
government
records
district
found
lyons
stopped
traffic
infringement
without
provocation
legal
justification
officers
involved
applied
chokehold
resulted
injuries
plaintiff
found
department
authorizes
use
holds
situations
one
threatened
death
grievous
bodily
harm
officers
insufficiently
trained
use
holds
involves
high
risk
injury
death
employed
continued
use
situations
neither
death
serious
bodily
injury
threatened
unconscionable
civilized
society
concluded
use
violated
lyons
substantive
due
process
rights
fourteenth
amendment
preliminary
injunction
entered
enjoining
use
carotid
artery
bar
arm
holds
circumstances
threaten
death
serious
bodily
injury
improved
training
program
regular
reporting
recordkeeping
also
ordered
appeals
affirmed
brief
per
curiam
opinion
stating
district
abused
discretion
entering
preliminary
injunction
granted
certiorari
reverse
ii
since
grant
certiorari
circumstances
pertinent
case
changed
originally
lyons
complaint
alleged
least
two
deaths
occurred
result
application
chokeholds
police
first
amended
complaint
alleged
deaths
occurred
may
five
deaths
may
chief
police
los
angeles
prohibited
use
chokehold
circumstances
days
later
may
board
police
commissioners
imposed
moratorium
use
chokehold
except
circumstances
deadly
force
authorized
based
events
june
city
filed
memorandum
suggesting
question
mootness
reciting
facts
arguing
case
moot
lyons
turn
filed
motion
dismiss
writ
certiorari
improvidently
granted
denied
motion
reserved
question
mootness
later
consideration
brief
oral
argument
lyons
reasserted
position
light
changed
conditions
injunctive
decree
unnecessary
longer
subject
threat
injury
urges
preliminary
injunction
vacated
city
hand
acknowledging
subsequent
events
significantly
changed
posture
case
asserts
case
moot
moratorium
permanent
may
lifted
time
agree
city
case
moot
since
moratorium
terms
permanent
intervening
events
irrevocably
eradicated
effects
alleged
violation
county
los
angeles
davis
nevertheless
hold
another
reason
federal
courts
without
jurisdiction
entertain
lyons
claim
injunctive
relief
iii
goes
without
saying
seek
invoke
jurisdiction
federal
courts
must
satisfy
threshold
requirement
imposed
art
iii
constitution
alleging
actual
case
controversy
flast
cohen
jenkins
mckeithen
opinion
marshall
plaintiffs
must
demonstrate
personal
stake
outcome
order
assure
concrete
adverseness
sharpens
presentation
issues
necessary
proper
resolution
constitutional
questions
baker
carr
abstract
injury
enough
plaintiff
must
show
sustained
immediately
danger
sustaining
direct
injury
result
challenged
official
conduct
injury
threat
injury
must
real
immediate
conjectural
hypothetical
see
golden
zwickler
public
workers
mitchell
maryland
casualty
pacific
coal
oil
massachusetts
mellon
littleton
dealt
case
brought
class
plaintiffs
claiming
subjected
discriminatory
enforcement
criminal
law
among
things
county
magistrate
judge
accused
discriminatory
conduct
various
respects
sentencing
members
plaintiff
class
harshly
defendants
appeals
reversed
dismissal
suit
district
ruling
allegations
proved
appropriate
injunction
entered
reversed
failure
complaint
allege
case
controversy
although
claimed
case
particular
members
plaintiff
class
actually
suffered
alleged
unconstitutional
practices
observed
ast
exposure
illegal
conduct
show
present
case
controversy
regarding
injunctive
relief
unaccompanied
continuing
present
adverse
effects
past
wrongs
evidence
bearing
whether
real
immediate
threat
repeated
injury
prospect
future
injury
rested
likelihood
plaintiffs
arrested
charged
violations
criminal
law
subjected
bond
proceedings
trial
sentencing
petitioners
ibid
said
plaintiffs
standing
plaintiffs
proceed
violate
unchallenged
law
charged
held
answer
tried
proceedings
petitioners
subjected
discriminatory
practices
petitioners
alleged
followed
find
case
controversy
circumstances
threat
plaintiffs
sufficiently
real
immediate
show
existing
controversy
simply
anticipate
violating
lawful
criminal
statutes
tried
offenses
assumed
plaintiffs
conduct
activities
within
law
avoid
prosecution
conviction
well
exposure
challenged
course
conduct
said
followed
petitioners
observed
considerations
obviously
shade
determining
whether
complaint
sound
basis
equitable
relief
went
hold
even
complaint
presented
existing
case
controversy
adequate
basis
equitable
relief
petitioners
demonstrated
plaintiffs
failed
moreover
establish
basic
requisites
issuance
equitable
relief
circumstances
likelihood
substantial
immediate
irreparable
injury
inadequacy
remedies
law
already
canvassed
necessarily
conjectural
nature
threatened
injury
plaintiffs
allegedly
subjected
plaintiffs
ever
prosecuted
face
trial
illegally
sentenced
available
state
federal
procedures
provide
relief
wrongful
conduct
alleged
golden
zwickler
case
arising
analogous
situation
directly
apposite
zwickler
sought
declaratory
judgment
new
york
statute
prohibiting
anonymous
handbills
directly
pertaining
election
campaigns
unconstitutional
although
zwickler
convicted
statute
sole
concern
related
congressman
left
house
representatives
place
new
york
likely
candidate
unanimous
held
unlikely
zwickler
subject
statute
case
controversy
sufficient
immediacy
reality
present
allow
declaratory
judgment
zwickler
assertion
former
congressman
candidate
congress
hardly
substitute
evidence
prospect
immediacy
reality
lyons
assertion
may
subject
illegal
chokehold
create
actual
controversy
must
exist
declaratory
judgment
entered
note
also
per
curiam
opinion
ashcroft
mattis
father
boy
killed
police
sought
damages
declaration
missouri
statute
authorized
police
officers
use
deadly
force
apprehending
person
committed
felony
unconstitutional
plaintiff
alleged
another
son
ever
arrested
brought
attempt
arrest
suspicion
felony
might
flee
give
appearance
fleeing
therefore
danger
killed
defendants
police
officers
ruled
uch
speculation
insufficient
establish
existence
present
live
controversy
iv
extension
rizzo
necessary
hold
respondent
lyons
failed
demonstrate
case
controversy
city
justify
equitable
relief
sought
lyons
standing
seek
injunction
requested
depended
whether
likely
suffer
future
injury
use
chokeholds
police
officers
count
complaint
alleged
traffic
stop
choking
incident
five
months
lyons
may
illegally
choked
police
october
presumably
affording
lyons
standing
claim
damages
individual
officers
perhaps
city
nothing
establish
real
immediate
threat
stopped
traffic
violation
offense
officer
officers
illegally
choke
unconsciousness
without
provocation
resistance
part
additional
allegation
complaint
police
los
angeles
routinely
apply
chokeholds
situations
threatened
use
deadly
force
falls
far
short
allegations
necessary
establish
case
controversy
parties
order
establish
actual
controversy
case
lyons
allege
another
encounter
police
also
make
incredible
assertion
either
police
officers
los
angeles
always
choke
citizen
happen
encounter
whether
purpose
arrest
issuing
citation
questioning
city
ordered
authorized
police
officers
act
manner
although
count
alleged
city
authorized
use
control
holds
situations
deadly
force
threatened
indicate
lyons
might
realistically
threatened
police
officers
acted
within
strictures
city
policy
example
chokeholds
authorized
used
counter
resistance
arrest
suspect
thwart
effort
escape
future
threat
lyons
city
policy
conduct
police
officers
real
possibility
encounter
police
either
illegally
resist
arrest
detention
officers
disobey
instructions
render
unconscious
without
provocation
rizzo
allegations
insufficient
basis
provide
federal
jurisdiction
entertain
count
complaint
apparently
conclusion
district
dismissing
lyons
claim
injunctive
relief
although
district
acted
without
opinion
findings
appeals
interpreted
action
based
lack
standing
rizzo
lyons
must
held
made
insufficient
showing
police
likely
plaintiff
several
reasons
infirm
view
appeals
thought
reliance
rizzo
misplaced
reversed
district
first
appeals
thought
lyons
immediately
threatened
plaintiffs
cases
since
according
appeals
lyons
need
stopped
minor
traffic
violation
subject
strangleholds
even
assuming
lyons
stopped
traffic
violation
reasonably
near
future
untenable
assert
complaint
made
allegation
strangleholds
applied
los
angeles
police
every
citizen
stopped
arrested
regardless
conduct
person
stopped
agree
odds
lyons
stopped
traffic
violation
also
subjected
chokehold
without
provocation
whatsoever
sufficient
make
federal
case
equitable
relief
note
five
months
elapsed
october
filing
complaint
yet
allegation
unfortunate
encounters
lyons
police
course
may
among
countless
encounters
police
citizens
great
city
los
angeles
certain
instances
strangleholds
illegally
applied
injury
death
unconstitutionally
inflicted
victim
said
however
conjecture
suggest
every
instance
traffic
stop
arrest
encounter
police
citizen
police
act
unconstitutionally
inflict
injury
without
provocation
legal
excuse
surely
speculation
assert
either
lyons
involved
one
unfortunate
instances
arrested
future
provoke
use
chokehold
resisting
arrest
attempting
escape
threatening
deadly
force
serious
bodily
injury
second
appeals
viewed
rizzo
cases
plaintiffs
sought
massive
structural
relief
local
law
enforcement
systems
therefore
holdings
cases
inapposite
cases
plaintiff
according
appeals
seeks
enjoin
established
sanctioned
police
practice
assertedly
violative
constitutional
rights
rizzo
however
easily
confined
facts
lyons
made
showing
realistically
threatened
repetition
experience
october
met
requirements
seeking
injunction
federal
whether
injunction
contemplates
intrusive
structural
relief
cessation
discrete
practice
appeals
also
asserted
lyons
live
active
claim
city
period
seconds
stranglehold
applied
two
reasons
claim
become
moot
disentitle
lyons
injunctive
relief
first
normal
rules
equity
case
become
moot
merely
complained
conduct
ceased
second
lyons
claim
capable
repetition
evading
review
therefore
heard
agree
lyons
live
controversy
city
indeed
still
claim
damages
city
appears
meet
art
iii
requirements
nevertheless
issue
whether
claim
become
moot
whether
lyons
meets
preconditions
asserting
injunctive
claim
federal
forum
equitable
doctrine
cessation
challenged
conduct
bar
injunction
little
help
respect
lyons
lack
standing
rest
termination
police
practice
speculative
nature
claim
experience
injury
result
practice
even
continued
rule
claim
become
moot
capable
repetition
yet
evades
review
likewise
inapposite
lyons
claim
illegally
strangled
remains
litigated
suit
damages
sense
claim
evade
review
furthermore
doctrine
applies
exceptional
situations
generally
named
plaintiff
make
reasonable
showing
subjected
alleged
illegality
defunis
odegaard
indicated
lyons
made
demonstration
record
findings
made
remand
improve
lyons
position
respect
standing
district
reversed
expressly
address
lyons
standing
seek
injunctive
relief
although
city
careful
preserve
position
question
finding
lyons
faced
real
immediate
threat
illegally
choked
city
policy
described
authorizing
use
strangleholds
circumstances
one
threatened
death
grievous
bodily
harm
policy
described
record
contained
department
existing
policy
respect
employment
chokeholds
nothing
policy
contained
police
department
manual
suggests
chokeholds
kinds
force
matter
authorized
absent
resistance
provocation
arrestee
suspect
contrary
police
officers
instructed
use
chokeholds
lesser
degrees
force
suffice
gain
control
suspect
violently
resisting
officer
trying
escape
app
conclusion
appeals
failed
heed
rizzo
relevant
authority
district
quite
right
dismissing
count
lyons
fares
better
assumed
pending
damages
suit
affords
art
iii
standing
seek
injunction
remedy
claim
arising
october
events
equitable
remedy
unavailable
absent
showing
irreparable
injury
requirement
met
showing
real
immediate
threat
plaintiff
wronged
likelihood
substantial
immediate
irreparable
injury
littleton
speculative
nature
lyons
claim
future
injury
requires
finding
prerequisite
equitable
relief
fulfilled
injury
lyons
allegedly
suffered
go
unrecompensed
injury
adequate
remedy
law
contrary
view
appeals
difficult
holding
see
anyone
ever
challenge
police
similar
administrative
practices
legality
violence
lyons
claims
subjected
issue
suit
damages
determined
absent
sufficient
likelihood
wronged
similar
way
lyons
entitled
injunction
citizen
los
angeles
federal
may
entertain
claim
citizens
assert
certain
practices
law
enforcement
officers
unconstitutional
cf
warth
seldin
schlesinger
reservists
stop
war
richardson
suggest
undifferentiated
claims
taken
seriously
local
authorities
indeed
interest
alert
interested
citizen
essential
element
effective
fair
government
whether
local
state
national
level
federal
however
proper
forum
press
claims
unless
requirements
entry
prerequisites
injunctive
relief
satisfied
decline
invitation
slight
preconditions
equitable
relief
held
recognition
need
proper
balance
state
federal
authority
counsels
restraint
issuance
injunctions
state
officers
engaged
administration
criminal
laws
absence
irreparable
injury
great
immediate
supra
younger
harris
mitchum
foster
held
suits
brought
exempt
flat
ban
issuance
injunctions
directed
proceedings
holding
displace
normal
principles
equity
comity
federalism
inform
judgment
federal
courts
asked
oversee
state
law
enforcement
authorities
exercising
equitable
powers
federal
courts
must
recognize
special
delicacy
adjustment
preserved
federal
equitable
power
state
administration
law
stefanelli
minard
littleton
supra
see
also
rizzo
goode
cleary
bolger
wilson
schnettler
pugach
dollinger
appeals
failed
apply
factors
properly
therefore
erred
finding
district
abused
discretion
entering
injunction
case
noted
withholding
injunctive
relief
mean
federal
law
exercise
deterrent
effect
circumstances
lyons
suffered
injury
barred
federal
constitution
remedy
damages
furthermore
deliberately
deprive
citizen
constitutional
rights
risk
conviction
federal
criminal
laws
ibid
beyond
considerations
state
courts
need
impose
standing
remedial
requirements
govern
proceedings
individual
may
permit
courts
use
injunctions
oversee
conduct
law
enforcement
authorities
continuing
basis
role
federal
absent
far
justification
lyons
proffered
case
judgment
appeals
accordingly
reversed
footnotes
order
also
gave
judgment
city
count
ii
insofar
count
rested
first
eight
amendments
well
count
vii
sought
declaratory
judgment
city
attorney
authorized
prosecute
misdemeanor
charges
appears
record
file
counts
iii
iv
previously
dismissed
motion
although
reappeared
amended
complaint
filed
remand
appeals
terms
injunction
continue
force
approved
training
program
presented
fair
assume
approval
given
program
confine
use
strangleholds
situations
use
view
district
constitutional
successive
stays
entered
appeals
injunction
gone
effect
board
police
commissioners
directed
los
angeles
police
department
lapd
staff
use
assess
effectiveness
alternative
control
techniques
report
findings
board
every
two
months
prior
oral
argument
case
two
reports
submitted
board
took
action
november
board
extended
moratorium
opportunity
review
evaluate
third
report
police
department
insofar
advised
third
report
yet
submitted
zwickler
conviction
reversed
grounds
city
brief
remand
appeals
first
judgment
parties
agreed
advised
district
respondent
damages
claim
served
effort
obtain
equitable
relief
brief
petitioner
respondent
suggest
otherwise
case
therefore
came
us
fours
judged
centerpiece
justice
marshall
dissent
lyons
standing
challenge
city
policy
recover
damages
prove
allegedly
occurred
october
pursuant
city
authorization
agree
completely
lyons
succeed
damages
action
necessary
prove
happened
alleged
choked
without
provocation
legal
excuse
whatsoever
pursuant
city
policy
several
reasons
however
follow
lyons
standing
seek
injunction
prayed
count
first
lyons
alleges
count
ii
first
amended
complaint
october
officers
carrying
official
policies
city
allegation
incorporated
reference
count
policy
however
described
paragraphs
count
authorizing
use
chokeholds
situations
officers
threatened
far
less
deadly
force
equivalent
unbelievable
assertion
city
either
orders
authorizes
application
chokeholds
resistance
provocation
second
even
allegation
thought
contained
complaint
belied
record
made
application
preliminary
injunction
third
even
complaint
must
read
containing
allegation
officers
authorized
apply
chokeholds
resistance
provocation
follow
lyons
standing
seek
injunction
application
restraint
holds
situations
experienced
example
suspect
resists
arrest
tries
escape
threaten
use
deadly
force
yet
precisely
scope
injunction
lyons
prayed
count
fourth
event
case
controversy
city
sustain
count
lyons
credibly
allege
faced
realistic
threat
future
application
city
policy
justice
marshall
nowhere
confronts
requirement
necessity
lyons
demonstrate
stopped
police
also
choked
without
provocation
legal
excuse
justice
marshall
plainly
agree
requirement
dissent
littleton
issue
respect
previously
indicated
supra
lyons
alleged
feared
choked
future
encounter
police
reasonableness
lyons
fear
dependent
upon
likelihood
recurrence
allegedly
unlawful
conduct
reality
threat
repeated
injury
relevant
standing
inquiry
plaintiff
subjective
apprehensions
emotional
consequences
prior
act
simply
sufficient
basis
injunction
absent
real
immediate
threat
future
injury
defendant
course
emotional
upset
relevant
consideration
damages
action
dissent
notes
lapd
training
officer
stated
police
authorized
employ
control
holds
whenever
officer
feels
bodily
attack
post
dissent
emphasis
word
feels
apparently
intended
suggest
lapd
officers
authorized
apply
holds
whenever
feel
like
distinction
permitting
use
holds
threat
serious
bodily
harm
officer
feels
believes
bodily
attack
dissent
failed
make
clear
dissent
point
written
oral
pronouncement
lapd
evidence
showing
pattern
police
behavior
indicate
official
policy
permit
application
control
holds
suspect
offering
threatening
offer
physical
resistance
city
memorandum
suggesting
question
mootness
informed
use
control
holds
become
major
civic
controversy
april
may
spirited
vigorous
times
emotional
debate
issue
took
place
result
current
moratorium
use
holds
justice
marshall
justice
brennan
justice
blackmun
justice
stevens
join
dissenting
district
found
city
los
angeles
authorizes
police
officers
apply
chokeholds
citizens
pose
threat
violence
respondent
adolph
lyons
subjected
chokehold
today
holds
federal
without
power
enjoin
enforcement
city
policy
matter
flagrantly
unconstitutional
may
since
one
show
choked
future
one
even
person
like
lyons
almost
choked
death
standing
challenge
continuation
policy
city
free
continue
policy
indefinitely
long
willing
pay
damages
injuries
deaths
result
dissent
unprecedented
unwarranted
approach
standing
plainly
case
controversy
concerning
constitutionality
city
chokehold
policy
constitutionality
policy
directly
implicated
lyons
claim
damages
city
complaint
clearly
alleges
officer
choked
lyons
carrying
official
policy
municipality
liable
conduct
employees
acted
pursuant
policy
monell
new
york
city
dept
social
services
lyons
therefore
standing
challenge
city
chokehold
policy
obtain
whatever
relief
may
ultimately
deem
appropriate
none
prior
decisions
suggests
requests
particular
forms
relief
raise
additional
issues
concerning
standing
standing
always
depended
whether
plaintiff
personal
stake
outcome
controversy
baker
carr
precise
nature
relief
sought
jenkins
mckeithen
opinion
marshall
joined
warren
brennan
respondent
adolph
lyons
negro
male
resides
los
angeles
according
uncontradicted
evidence
record
october
lyons
pulled
curb
two
officers
los
angeles
police
department
lapd
traffic
infraction
one
taillights
burned
officers
greeted
drawn
revolvers
exited
car
lyons
told
face
car
spread
legs
ordered
clasp
hands
put
top
head
complied
one
officers
completed
patdown
search
lyons
dropped
hands
ordered
place
back
head
one
officers
grabbed
lyons
hands
slammed
onto
head
lyons
complained
pain
caused
ring
keys
holding
hand
within
seconds
officer
began
choke
lyons
applying
forearm
throat
lyons
struggled
air
officer
handcuffed
continued
apply
chokehold
blacked
lyons
regained
consciousness
lying
face
ground
choking
gasping
air
spitting
blood
dirt
urinated
defecated
issued
traffic
citation
released
february
lyons
commenced
action
individual
officers
city
alleging
violations
rights
fourth
eighth
fourteenth
amendments
constitution
seeking
damages
declaratory
injunctive
relief
claimed
subjected
chokehold
without
justification
defendant
officers
carrying
official
policies
customs
practices
los
angeles
police
department
city
los
angeles
count
ii
allegations
included
incorporated
counts
city
named
defendant
see
counts
ii
vi
lyons
alleged
city
authorizes
use
chokeholds
innumerable
situations
police
threatened
use
deadly
force
whatsoever
count
although
city
instructs
officers
use
chokehold
constitute
deadly
force
since
less
persons
died
following
use
chokehold
lapd
police
officer
twelve
negro
males
evidence
submitted
district
established
many
years
official
policy
city
permit
police
officers
employ
chokeholds
variety
situations
face
threat
violence
reported
altercations
lapd
officers
citizens
chokeholds
used
frequently
means
physical
restraint
february
july
lapd
officers
applied
chokeholds
least
occasions
represented
reported
altercations
undisputed
chokeholds
pose
high
unpredictable
risk
serious
injury
death
chokeholds
intended
bring
subject
control
causing
pain
rendering
unconscious
depending
position
officer
arm
force
applied
victim
voluntary
involuntary
reaction
state
health
officer
may
inadvertently
crush
victim
larynx
trachea
hyoid
result
may
death
caused
either
cardiac
arrest
asphyxiation
lapd
officer
described
reaction
person
choked
ing
chicken
exh
reference
apparently
reactions
chicken
neck
wrung
victim
experiences
extreme
pain
face
turns
blue
deprived
oxygen
goes
spasmodic
convulsions
eyes
roll
back
body
wriggles
feet
kick
arms
move
wildly
although
occasion
determine
precise
contours
city
chokehold
policy
evidence
submitted
district
provides
indications
lapd
training
officer
terry
speer
testified
officer
authorized
deploy
chokehold
whenever
feels
bodily
attack
made
app
emphasis
added
training
bulletin
ontrol
holds
allow
officers
subdue
resistance
suspects
exh
emphasis
added
proceedings
city
characterized
policy
authorizing
use
chokeholds
gain
control
suspect
violently
resisting
officer
trying
escape
subdue
resistance
suspects
permit
officer
resisted
necessarily
threatened
serious
bodily
harm
death
subdue
suspect
forcibly
resists
officer
emphasis
added
training
given
lapd
officers
provides
additional
revealing
evidence
city
chokehold
policy
officer
speer
testified
instructing
officers
concerning
use
force
lapd
distinguish
felony
misdemeanor
suspects
app
moreover
officers
taught
maintain
chokehold
suspect
goes
limp
app
pet
cert
despite
substantial
evidence
application
chokehold
invariably
induces
flight
flee
syndrome
producing
involuntary
struggle
victim
easily
misinterpreted
officer
willful
resistance
must
overcome
prolonging
chokehold
increasing
force
applied
see
supra
addition
officers
instructed
chokeholds
safely
deployed
three
four
minutes
app
app
pet
cert
robert
jarvis
city
expert
taught
los
angeles
police
academy
past
years
admitted
officers
never
told
control
cause
death
applied
two
seconds
app
nine
deaths
evidence
submitted
district
average
duration
choke
specified
approximately
seconds
determining
appropriateness
preliminary
injunction
district
recognized
city
policy
subject
constraints
imposed
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
found
uring
course
confrontation
said
officers
without
provocation
legal
justification
applied
chokehold
resulted
injuries
plaintiff
emphasis
added
found
city
los
angeles
department
authorize
use
holds
circumstances
one
threatened
death
grievous
bodily
harm
concluded
use
chokeholds
constitutes
deadly
force
city
may
constitutionally
authorize
use
force
situations
death
serious
bodily
harm
threatened
basis
conclusion
district
entered
preliminary
injunction
enjoining
use
bar
arm
holds
circumstances
threaten
death
serious
bodily
injury
appeals
noted
trial
judge
done
far
tell
city
police
officers
may
apply
life
threatening
strangleholds
persons
stopped
routine
police
work
unless
application
force
necessary
prevent
serious
bodily
harm
officer
ii
outset
important
emphasize
lyons
entitlement
injunctive
relief
entitlement
award
damages
depend
upon
whether
show
city
chokehold
policy
violates
constitution
indispensable
prerequisite
municipal
liability
proof
conduct
complained
attributable
unconstitutional
official
policy
custom
polk
county
dodson
monell
new
york
city
dept
social
services
enough
plaintiff
show
employees
agents
municipality
violated
violate
constitution
municipality
held
liable
solely
theory
respondeat
superior
see
monell
supra
errs
suggesting
lyons
prayer
injunctive
relief
count
first
amended
complaint
concerns
policy
responsible
injuries
therefore
support
award
damages
ante
paragraph
complaint
alleges
lyons
choked
without
provocation
legal
justification
excuse
paragraph
expressly
alleges
defendant
officers
carrying
official
policies
customs
practices
los
angeles
police
department
city
los
angeles
virtue
thereof
defendant
city
liable
actions
officers
emphasis
added
allegations
incorporated
counts
city
including
count
basis
assertion
lyons
failed
allege
city
either
orders
authorizes
application
chokeholds
resistance
provocation
ante
completely
loss
understand
paragraphs
deemed
insufficient
allege
city
policy
authorizes
use
chokeholds
without
provocation
apparently
finds
lyons
complaint
wanting
although
alleges
choked
without
provocation
officers
acted
pursuant
official
policy
fails
allege
haec
verba
city
policy
authorizes
choking
suspects
without
provocation
aware
case
decided
since
abolition
old
forms
action
cites
none
way
supports
crabbed
construction
complaint
federal
capable
concluding
two
plus
two
equals
four
also
errs
asserting
even
complaint
sufficiently
alleges
city
policy
authorizes
use
chokeholds
without
provocation
allegation
event
belied
record
made
application
preliminary
injunction
ibid
conclusion
flatly
contradicts
district
express
factual
finding
left
undisturbed
appeals
officers
applied
chokehold
resulted
injuries
plaintiff
emphasis
added
city
contend
factual
finding
clearly
erroneous
sum
absolutely
clear
lyons
requests
damages
injunctive
relief
call
question
constitutionality
city
policy
concerning
use
chokeholds
show
policy
unconstitutional
entitled
damages
injunction
iii
since
lyons
claim
damages
plainly
gives
standing
since
success
claim
depends
upon
demonstration
city
chokehold
policy
unconstitutional
beyond
dispute
lyons
properly
invoked
district
authority
adjudicate
constitutionality
city
chokehold
policy
dispute
concerning
constitutionality
policy
plainly
presents
case
controversy
art
iii
nevertheless
holds
federal
power
art
iii
adjudicate
lyons
request
lawsuit
injunctive
relief
respect
policy
anomalous
result
supported
either
precedent
fundamental
concern
underlying
standing
requirement
moreover
fragmenting
single
claim
multiple
claims
particular
types
relief
requiring
separate
showing
standing
form
relief
decision
today
departs
traditional
conception
standing
remedial
powers
federal
courts
simply
disingenuous
assert
decision
requires
extension
littleton
rizzo
goode
ante
contrast
case
rizzo
involved
disputes
focusing
solely
threat
future
injury
plaintiffs
cases
alleged
faced
plaintiffs
allege
past
injury
seek
compensatory
relief
rizzo
plaintiffs
sought
declaratory
injunctive
relief
alleged
past
instances
police
misconduct
attempt
establish
substantiality
threat
future
injury
similarly
claim
damages
based
past
injuries
ashcroft
mattis
golden
zwickler
also
relies
decisions
support
holding
today
recognized
standing
art
iii
established
allegation
threatened
actual
injury
quoting
linda
richard
emphasis
added
see
also
plaintiffs
rizzo
mattis
zwickler
seek
redress
past
injury
standing
sue
depended
entirely
risk
future
injury
faced
apart
desire
eliminate
possibility
future
injury
plaintiffs
cases
personal
stake
outcome
controversies
contrast
lyons
request
prospective
relief
coupled
claim
damages
based
past
injury
addition
risk
subjected
chokehold
future
lyons
suffered
past
injury
live
claim
damages
need
rely
solely
threat
future
injury
establish
personal
stake
outcome
controversy
cases
relied
majority
simply
occasion
decide
whether
plaintiff
standing
litigate
dispute
must
clear
separate
standing
hurdle
respect
form
relief
sought
decision
likewise
finds
support
fundamental
policy
underlying
art
iii
standing
requirement
concern
federal
decide
legal
issue
plaintiff
lacks
sufficient
personal
stake
outcome
controversy
assure
concrete
adverseness
sharpens
presentation
issues
upon
largely
depends
illumination
difficult
questions
baker
carr
stated
flast
cohen
question
standing
related
whether
dispute
sought
adjudicated
presented
adversary
context
form
historically
viewed
capable
judicial
resolution
see
also
valley
forge
christian
college
americans
separation
church
state
standing
requirement
ensures
legal
questions
presented
resolved
rarified
atmosphere
debating
society
concrete
factual
context
conducive
realistic
appreciation
consequences
judicial
action
lyons
claim
damages
city
prevail
claim
unless
demonstrates
city
chokehold
policy
violates
constitution
personal
stake
outcome
controversy
adequately
assures
adversary
presentation
challenge
constitutionality
policy
moreover
resolution
challenge
largely
dispositive
requests
declaratory
injunctive
relief
doubt
requests
injunctive
relief
may
raise
additional
questions
questions
involve
familiar
issues
relating
appropriateness
particular
forms
relief
never
thought
implicate
litigant
standing
sue
denial
standing
separately
seek
injunctive
relief
therefore
justified
basic
concern
underlying
art
iii
standing
requirement
fragmenting
standing
inquiry
imposing
separate
standing
hurdle
respect
form
relief
sought
decision
today
departs
significantly
traditional
conception
standing
requirement
remedial
powers
federal
courts
never
required
plaintiff
standing
litigate
claim
whether
entitled
obtain
particular
forms
relief
prevail
never
understood
issue
standing
determining
whether
plaintiff
standing
always
focused
personal
stake
outcome
controversy
issues
sought
litigated
flast
cohen
supra
precise
nature
relief
sought
jenkins
mckeithen
opinion
marshall
joined
warren
brennan
cases
uniformly
state
touchstone
art
iii
standing
requirement
plaintiff
personal
stake
underlying
dispute
particular
types
relief
sought
plaintiff
establishes
personal
stake
dispute
done
necessary
invok
authority
challenge
action
sought
adjudicated
valley
forge
christian
college
americans
separation
church
state
supra
see
flast
cohen
stake
dispute
adjudicated
lawsuit
eisenstadt
baird
plaintiff
must
sufficient
interest
challenging
statute
validity
personal
stake
litigant
depends
turn
whether
alleged
legally
redressable
injury
determining
whether
plaintiff
sufficient
personal
stake
outcome
controversy
asked
whether
personally
suffered
actual
threatened
injury
gladstone
realtors
village
bellwood
emphasis
added
whether
injury
fairly
traced
challenged
action
simon
eastern
kentucky
welfare
rights
whether
plaintiff
injury
likely
redressed
favorable
decision
see
also
duke
power
carolina
environmental
study
group
warth
seldin
criteria
determining
whether
plaintiff
established
requisite
personal
stake
fragment
standing
inquiry
series
discrete
questions
plaintiff
stake
particular
types
relief
sought
quite
contrary
ask
simply
whether
plaintiff
sufficient
stake
seeking
judicial
resolution
controversy
lyons
alleged
past
injury
risk
future
injury
linked
city
chokehold
policy
established
principles
additional
question
determining
standing
art
iii
whether
injuries
alleged
remedied
prevented
form
judicial
relief
satisfaction
requirement
ensures
lawsuit
entail
issuance
advisory
opinion
without
possibility
judicial
relief
exercise
remedial
powers
actually
redress
alleged
injury
therefore
lyons
needs
demonstrate
prevail
merits
exercise
remedial
powers
redress
claimed
injuries
duke
power
supra
see
also
warth
seldin
supra
simon
supra
lyons
easily
made
showing
monetary
relief
plainly
provide
redress
past
injury
prospective
relief
reduce
likelihood
future
injury
nothing
ever
required
establish
standing
decision
turns
principles
heads
requiring
separate
standing
inquiry
respect
request
relief
questions
concerning
remedy
relevant
threshold
issue
standing
limited
sense
relief
must
possible
approach
adopted
today
drastically
alters
inquiry
remedy
must
made
determine
standing
fragmentation
standing
inquiry
also
inconsistent
way
federal
courts
treated
remedial
issues
since
merger
law
equity
federal
practice
reserve
consideration
appropriate
relief
determination
merits
foreclose
certain
forms
relief
ruling
pleadings
prayer
relief
part
plaintiff
cause
action
see
moore
lucas
moore
federal
practice
moore
cases
cited
therein
wright
miller
kane
federal
practice
procedure
wright
miller
kane
rather
usual
rule
legal
rights
invaded
federal
statute
provides
general
right
sue
invasion
federal
courts
may
use
available
remedy
make
good
wrong
done
bell
hood
omitted
rule
federal
rules
civil
procedure
specifically
provides
every
final
judgment
shall
grant
relief
party
whose
favor
rendered
entitled
even
party
demanded
relief
pleadings
question
whether
plaintiff
stated
claim
turns
whether
asked
proper
remedy
whether
entitled
remedy
emphasis
added
wright
miller
kane
fully
consistent
approach
taken
standing
cases
supra
page
provides
justification
departing
traditional
treatment
remedial
issues
demanding
separate
threshold
inquiry
form
relief
plaintiff
seeks
anomalous
require
plaintiff
demonstrate
standing
seek
particular
form
relief
requested
complaint
rule
remedy
party
may
entitled
need
even
demanded
complaint
see
holt
civic
club
tuscaloosa
albemarle
paper
moody
traditional
federal
practice
sound
one
even
appears
highly
unlikely
outset
lawsuit
plaintiff
establish
entitled
particular
remedy
dangers
inherent
doctrine
permits
foreclose
consideration
remedy
ruling
pleadings
plaintiff
lacks
standing
seek
broad
discretion
grant
appropriate
equitable
relief
protect
party
injured
unlawful
conduct
well
members
class
future
injury
may
occur
wrongdoer
permitted
continue
unlawful
actions
plaintiff
alleges
past
injury
risk
future
injury
presents
concededly
substantial
claim
defendant
implementing
unlawful
policy
rarely
easy
decide
certainty
outset
lawsuit
equitable
relief
appropriate
conceivable
set
facts
might
establish
support
claim
sum
approach
standing
wholly
inconsistent
standing
principles
clashes
longstanding
conception
remedial
powers
necessary
invoke
authority
resolve
particular
dispute
iv
apart
question
standing
remaining
question
presented
petition
certiorari
whether
preliminary
injunction
issued
district
must
set
aside
constitute
substantial
interference
operation
municipal
police
department
pet
cert
view
portion
brief
concerning
second
question
city
argues
district
ignored
principles
federalism
set
forth
rizzo
goode
brief
petitioner
city
reliance
rizzo
misplaced
case
involved
injunction
significantly
revis
ed
internal
procedures
philadelphia
police
department
injunction
required
police
department
adopt
comprehensive
program
dealing
adequately
civilian
complaints
formulated
accordance
extensive
guidelines
established
district
quoting
council
organizations
phila
police
rizzo
supp
guidelines
specified
detailed
revisions
police
manuals
rules
procedure
well
adoption
specific
procedures
processing
screening
investigating
adjudicating
citizen
complaints
addition
district
supervised
implementation
comprehensive
program
issuing
detailed
orders
concerning
posting
distribution
revised
police
procedures
drawing
citizen
complaint
report
format
designated
district
also
reserved
jurisdiction
review
progress
police
department
concluded
sweeping
nature
injunctive
relief
inconsistent
principles
federalism
principles
federalism
simply
preclude
limited
preliminary
injunction
issued
case
unlike
permanent
injunction
issue
rizzo
preliminary
injunction
involved
entails
federal
supervision
lapd
activities
preliminary
injunction
merely
forbids
use
chokeholds
absent
threat
deadly
force
permitting
continued
use
threat
exist
limited
ban
takes
form
preventive
injunction
traditionally
regarded
least
intrusive
form
equitable
relief
moreover
city
remove
ban
obtaining
approval
training
plan
although
preliminary
injunction
also
requires
city
provide
records
uses
chokeholds
respondent
allow
access
records
requirement
hardly
onerous
since
lapd
already
maintains
records
concerning
use
chokeholds
district
mindful
intervention
daily
operation
large
city
police
department
undesirable
avoided
possible
rizzo
supra
blackmun
dissenting
modest
interlocutory
relief
granted
case
differs
markedly
however
intrusive
injunction
involved
rizzo
simply
implicate
federalism
concerns
arise
federal
undertakes
supervise
functioning
police
department
apparently
unwilling
rely
solely
unprecedented
rule
standing
goes
conclude
even
lyons
standing
equitable
remedy
unavailable
ante
reliance
alternative
ground
puzzling
two
reasons
says
lyons
lacks
standing
art
iii
federal
courts
power
decide
entitlement
equitable
relief
merits
view
art
iii
discussion
part
purely
advisory
opinion
addition
question
whether
injunctive
relief
available
equitable
principles
simply
us
granted
certiorari
determine
whether
lyons
standing
whether
preliminary
injunction
must
set
aside
constitutes
impermissible
interference
operation
municipal
police
department
grant
certiorari
consider
whether
lyons
satisfies
traditional
prerequisites
equitable
relief
see
supra
even
issue
properly
raised
agree
disposition
single
exception
rizzo
goode
supra
cases
relied
concerned
injunctions
state
criminal
proceedings
rule
younger
harris
injunctions
issued
extraordinary
circumstances
threat
injury
great
immediate
reflects
venerable
rule
equity
enjoin
criminal
prosecution
fact
constitutional
defenses
raised
state
prosecution
appreciation
friction
injunctions
state
judicial
proceedings
may
produce
see
ibid
steffel
thompson
prior
decisions
repeatedly
emphasized
injunction
directed
state
criminal
proceeding
relevant
principles
equity
comity
federalism
underlie
younger
doctrine
little
force
steffel
thompson
supra
citing
lake
carriers
assn
macmullan
outside
special
context
younger
doctrine
applies
held
appropriateness
injunctive
relief
governed
traditional
equitable
considerations
see
doran
salem
inn
whatever
precise
scope
younger
doctrine
may
concerns
comity
federalism
counsel
restraint
federal
asked
enjoin
state
criminal
proceeding
simply
apply
injunction
directed
solely
police
department
preliminary
injunction
granted
district
analyzed
general
equitable
principles
rather
stringent
standards
younger
harris
becomes
apparent
rule
law
precludes
equitable
relief
requires
preliminary
injunction
set
aside
reviewing
interlocutory
relief
may
consider
whether
issuance
injunction
constituted
abuse
discretion
brown
chote
district
concluded
basis
facts
lyons
choked
without
provocation
pursuant
unconstitutional
city
policy
supra
given
necessarily
preliminary
nature
inquiry
way
district
know
precise
contours
city
policy
ascertain
risk
lyons
alleged
policy
applied
discriminatory
manner
might
subjected
chokehold
view
conclusion
unprovoked
choking
lyons
pursuant
city
policy
lyons
satisfied
usual
basis
injunctive
relief
exists
cognizable
danger
recurrent
violation
rondeau
mosinee
paper
quoting
grant
risk
serious
injuries
deaths
citizens
also
supported
decision
grant
preliminary
injunction
courts
equity
much
greater
latitude
granting
injunctive
relief
furtherance
public
interest
private
interests
involved
virginian
railway
employees
see
wright
miller
kane
moore
case
know
district
amply
justified
considering
risk
public
preliminary
injunction
stayed
five
additional
deaths
occurred
prior
adoption
moratorium
see
supra
circumstances
believe
district
abused
discretion
indeed
approved
decision
directed
issuance
permanent
injunction
similar
situation
see
lankford
gelston
cited
approval
allee
medrano
see
supra
lankford
citizens
whose
houses
searched
solely
basis
uncorroborated
anonymous
tips
sought
injunctive
relief
fourth
circuit
sitting
en
banc
held
plaintiffs
entitled
injunction
enforcement
police
department
policy
authorizing
searches
even
though
evidence
homes
searched
future
lyons
less
entitled
seek
injunctive
relief
hold
otherwise
vitiate
one
valuable
features
equity
jurisdiction
anticipate
prevent
threatened
injury
damages
insufficient
irreparable
vicksburg
waterworks
vicksburg
unnecessary
consider
propriety
permanent
injunction
district
simply
sought
protect
lyons
citizens
los
angeles
pending
disposition
merits
time
enough
consider
propriety
permanent
injunction
district
grants
relief
vi
decision
removes
entire
class
constitutional
violations
equitable
powers
federal
immunizes
prospective
equitable
relief
policy
authorizes
persistent
deprivations
constitutional
rights
long
individual
establish
substantial
certainty
injured
injured
future
chief
justice
asked
bivens
six
unknown
fed
narcotics
agents
dissenting
opinion
judicial
response
police
order
authorizing
shoot
kill
respect
every
fugitive
answer
easy
predict
collective
wrath
outrage
ibid
learn
wrath
outrage
translated
order
cease
unconstitutional
practice
award
damages
victimized
practice
live
sue
survivors
fortunate
view
expressed
majority
today
police
adopt
policy
shoot
kill
policy
shooting
suspects
federal
courts
powerless
enjoin
continuation
cf
linda
richard
white
dissenting
federal
judicial
power
limited
levying
toll
systematic
constitutional
violation
following
summary
evidence
taken
lyons
deposition
notice
application
application
preliminary
injunction
declaratory
relief
points
authorities
pp
although
petitioner
answer
contains
general
denial
allegations
set
forth
complaint
petitioner
never
presented
evidence
challenge
lyons
account
brief
petitioner
count
first
amended
complaint
also
stated
claim
individual
officers
damages
thus
city
negro
males
constitute
population
accounted
deaths
resulting
use
chokeholds
addition
allegations
lyons
alleged
racial
discrimination
violation
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
deaths
occurred
prior
district
issuance
preliminary
injunction
although
time
parties
aware
december
appeals
stayed
preliminary
injunction
pending
appeal
four
additional
deaths
occurred
period
prior
grant
stay
pending
filing
disposition
petition
certiorari
rehnquist
chambers
two
deaths
occurred
thereafter
lyons
motion
preliminary
injunction
heard
affidavits
depositions
government
records
statement
officer
pascal
dionne
physical
training
unit
lapd
app
statement
officer
pascal
dionne
figures
undoubtedly
understate
frequency
use
chokeholds
since
officer
dionne
witness
city
testified
figures
compiled
include
altercations
police
officers
citizens
officer
dionne
statement
define
altercation
indicate
altercation
reports
must
filed
officer
city
maintain
record
injuries
suspects
physiological
effects
chokeholds
described
follows
griswold
expert
pathology
medical
point
view
bar
arm
control
extremely
dangerous
unpredictable
fashion
pressure
locked
forearm
across
neck
sufficient
compress
close
trachea
applied
sufficient
period
time
cause
unconsciousness
asphyxia
must
anatomical
certainty
also
result
high
risk
fractured
hyoid
bone
crushed
larynx
risk
substantial
time
unpredictable
depends
one
thing
vertical
portion
neck
forearm
pressure
exerted
another
factor
contributing
unpredictability
reaction
victim
pressure
exerted
bar
arm
control
result
laryngeal
spasm
seizure
simply
shuts
trachial
air
passage
leading
death
asphyxiation
also
must
result
transmission
brain
nerve
messages
immediate
acute
danger
death
transmission
immediately
sets
flight
flee
syndrome
wherein
body
reacts
violently
save
escape
adrenalin
output
increases
enormously
blood
oxygen
switched
muscles
strong
violent
struggle
ensues
great
extent
involuntary
medical
point
view
way
distinguish
involuntary
death
struggle
wilful
voluntary
resistance
thus
instruction
cease
applying
hold
resistance
ceases
meaningless
violent
struggle
increases
risk
permanent
injury
death
victim
reserve
may
already
state
reduction
reason
cardiac
respiratory
disease
lapd
operates
misconception
length
time
applying
hold
sole
measure
risk
simply
true
sufficient
force
applied
larynx
crushed
hyoid
fractured
death
ensuing
seconds
irreversible
laryngeal
spasm
also
occur
seconds
medical
point
view
carotid
control
extremely
dangerous
manner
least
equally
unpredictable
bar
arm
control
applied
sufficient
pressure
control
crush
carotid
sheath
bony
structure
neck
foreseeably
shutting
supply
oxygenated
blood
brain
leading
unconsciousness
approximately
seconds
however
pressure
carotid
sheaths
also
results
pressure
inadvertent
unintended
vagus
nerves
vagus
nerves
right
left
arise
brain
composed
sensory
motor
fibers
stimulation
nerves
pressure
activate
reflexes
within
vagus
system
result
immediate
heart
stoppage
cardiac
arrest
also
evidence
cardiac
arrest
result
simultaneous
pressure
vagus
nerves
regardless
intensity
duration
pressure
city
opposition
application
preliminary
injunction
cd
cal
pp
brief
opposition
motion
stay
cd
cal
preliminary
injunction
provided
city
lift
injunction
obtaining
approval
training
program
also
required
city
keep
records
uses
chokeholds
make
records
available
district
refrained
determining
precise
nature
city
policy
given
limited
nature
inquiry
preliminary
injunction
stage
brown
chote
contrary
suggestion
ante
clearly
inconsistency
allegation
paragraph
complaint
lyons
choked
without
provocation
legal
justification
excuse
allegations
city
authorizes
chokeholds
situations
officers
threatened
far
less
deadly
force
even
issue
properly
us
agree
substitute
judgment
district
one
city
training
officers
testified
officer
authorized
use
chokehold
whenever
feels
bodily
attack
made
app
testimony
indicates
officer
authorized
use
chokehold
whenever
subjectively
perceives
threat
regardless
whether
suspect
done
anything
provide
objective
basis
perception
district
finding
refuted
statement
city
policy
set
forth
lapd
manual
ante
municipal
liability
may
predicated
proof
official
custom
whether
custom
embodied
formal
policy
monell
new
york
city
dept
social
services
although
counsel
plaintiffs
suggested
oral
argument
certain
plaintiffs
exposed
illegal
conduct
past
fact
damages
sought
petitioners
specific
instances
involving
individually
named
respondents
set
forth
claim
judicial
officers
referred
absence
past
injury
repeatedly
see
plaintiff
mattis
originally
seek
damages
district
found
defendant
officers
shielded
goodfaith
immunity
pursued
prospective
relief
although
held
case
mooted
elimination
damages
claim
way
suggested
plaintiff
requests
declaratory
injunctive
relief
entertained
damages
claim
remained
viable
held
plaintiff
primary
claim
present
interest
controversy
obtain
emotional
satisfaction
ruling
son
death
wrongful
omitted
personal
stake
outcome
required
art
iii
zwickler
plaintiff
even
allege
might
run
office
merely
asserted
candidate
congress
held
mere
logical
possibility
insufficient
present
actual
controversy
lankford
gelston
en
banc
cited
approval
allee
medrano
fourth
circuit
found
standing
facts
indistinguishable
case
lankford
appeals
held
four
negro
families
subjected
illegal
house
search
entitled
seek
injunctive
relief
baltimore
police
department
policy
conducting
wholesale
searches
based
uncorroborated
anonymous
tips
even
though
plaintiffs
claim
likely
negro
residents
city
subjected
illegal
search
future
suggested
absence
damages
claim
highly
pertinent
conclusion
plaintiff
standing
noted
plaintiffs
claim
relief
state
attorney
specific
instances
misconduct
respect
particular
individuals
alleged
emphasis
added
stood
sharp
contrast
claim
relief
magistrate
judge
contain
similar
allegations
plaintiffs
seek
damages
state
attorney
see
spomer
littleton
like
claims
state
attorney
lyons
claims
city
allege
past
injury
risk
future
injury
whereas
acknowledged
significance
standing
purposes
past
injury
today
inexplicably
treats
lyons
past
injury
seeking
redress
wholly
irrelevant
standing
inquiry
us
reliance
rizzo
misplaced
another
reason
rizzo
concluded
evidence
presented
trial
failed
establish
affirmative
link
occurrence
various
incidents
police
misconduct
adoption
plan
policy
defendants
misconduct
challenged
view
result
behavior
unidentified
officials
named
defendants
rather
policy
named
defendants
city
managing
director
police
commissioner
serious
doubts
whether
case
controversy
existed
plaintiffs
defendants
contrast
lyons
clearly
established
case
controversy
city
concerning
constitutionality
city
policy
see
supra
rizzo
specifically
distinguished
cases
case
controversy
found
exist
existence
official
policy
responsible
past
threatened
constitutional
deprivations
distinguishing
hague
cio
allee
medrano
lankford
gelston
supra
irrelevant
district
severed
lyons
claim
damages
claim
injunctive
relief
ante
district
deciding
whether
issue
injunction
upholds
city
policy
constitutional
attack
ruling
res
judicata
respect
lyons
claim
damages
severance
claims
therefore
diminish
lyons
incentive
establish
unconstitutionality
policy
unnecessary
decide
whether
standing
plaintiff
alleges
past
injury
legally
redressable
depends
whether
specifically
seek
damages
see
lankford
gelston
supra
plaintiffs
seek
damages
permitted
seek
injunctive
relief
based
past
injury
see
supra
errs
asserting
lyons
standing
seek
injunctive
relief
injunction
prayed
count
reaches
suspects
unlike
lyons
offer
resistance
attempt
escape
ante
even
separate
inquiry
lyons
standing
seek
injunctive
relief
opposed
damages
appropriate
even
standing
seek
entire
injunction
requests
follow
standing
seek
injunctive
relief
even
view
lyons
presumably
standing
seek
enjoin
use
chokeholds
without
provocation
therefore
justification
reversing
judgment
entirety
reliance
precise
terms
injunction
sought
count
also
misplaced
fundamental
reason
whatever
may
said
novel
rule
separate
showing
standing
must
made
form
relief
requested
simply
wrong
assuming
scope
injunction
prayed
raises
question
standing
litigant
entitled
advance
substantive
legal
theory
entitle
relief
lyons
entitlement
relief
may
ultimately
rest
principle
municipality
may
authorize
use
chokeholds
absent
threat
deadly
force
principle
district
tentatively
embraced
issuing
preliminary
injunction
support
entire
injunction
sought
count
alternatively
lyons
entitlement
relief
may
rest
narrower
theory
lyons
prevails
appropriateness
injunction
prayed
count
depend
legal
principle
upon
district
predicates
decision
may
well
judicious
district
exercise
discretion
rest
decision
theory
support
full
scope
injunction
lyons
requests
nothing
whatsoever
lyons
standing
limited
inquiry
remedy
addresses
two
jurisdictional
concerns
provides
support
requirement
standing
separately
demonstrated
respect
particular
form
relief
sought
first
must
power
fashion
appropriate
remedy
concern
aspect
general
requirement
reflects
view
adjudication
rights
powerless
enforce
tantamount
advisory
opinion
see
aetna
life
ins
haworth
controversy
must
real
substantial
one
admitting
specific
relief
decree
conclusive
character
distinguished
opinion
advising
law
upon
hypothetical
state
facts
emphasis
added
second
must
determine
available
remedy
substantial
probability
warth
seldin
redressing
plaintiff
injury
latter
concern
merely
recasting
causal
nexus
supra
must
exist
alleged
injury
action
challenged
ensures
granting
judicial
relief
exercise
futility
see
duke
power
carolina
environmental
study
group
considerations
summarized
requirement
plaintiff
need
allege
injury
legally
redressable
jenkins
mckeithen
emphasis
added
clear
opinion
whether
district
wholly
precluded
granting
form
declaratory
injunctive
relief
even
ultimately
holds
lyons
prevail
claim
damages
city
ground
city
chokehold
policy
unconstitutional
responsible
injury
question
petition
raised
question
lyons
standing
question
petition
federal
order
constitute
substantial
interference
operation
municipal
police
department
modifies
policies
concerning
use
force
takes
control
department
training
reporting
systems
relative
particular
force
technique
course
municipalities
may
enjoined
monell
new
york
city
dept
social
services
approved
issuance
injunctions
federal
courts
state
municipal
police
departments
necessary
prevent
continued
enforcement
unconstitutional
official
policies
see
allee
medrano
hague
cio
lankford
gelston
en
banc
cited
approval
allee
supra
although
federalism
concerns
relevant
fashioning
appropriate
relief
stated
repeatedly
federal
retains
power
order
available
remedy
necessary
afford
full
relief
invasion
legal
rights
see
swann
board
education
bell
hood
explained
rizzo
goode
support
decision
barring
lyons
obtaining
injunctive
relief
case
involved
injunction
entailed
judicial
supervision
workings
municipal
police
department
simply
sort
preventive
injunction
lyons
seeks
supra